Q Now, this first letter in these series of letters refers to a letter of 12 November wherein Heyde sent to you 300 questionnaires for your expert opinion. Now, he apparently sent those on the 12 November and you are returning them on the 19 November. Then you will see the next letter, Dr. Pfannmueller, is 22 November wherein you are returning 258 questionnaires and the third letter is the 23 November and you are returning 300 questionnaires. The fourth letter is the 26 November and you are returning 300 more questionnaires. And, so on through this entire list you are returning these questionnaires which you have given an opinion on up to the date of 1 December 1940. And then you jump to 13 April 1941. But, up to 1 December 1940, that is from the 12 November, this document indicates that you had between those dates the opportunity to expertize 2058 questionnaires. Now, what I am anxious to know, is how long it would have taken you, as I asked you before, to evaluate one questionnaire because it is obvious from this document, Doctor, that from the period from 12 November to, we will say, the 17 December you had the opportunity to expertize and did expertize 2058 questionnaires. Now, if you had been working ten hours a day on questionnaires you would have been able to do about 121 questionnaires per day, that is, if you took five minutes on each questionnaire -- now, would that be a true picture?
A I don't understand your final question.
Q Would that be a true picture - what I am presenting to you for your consideration - the length of time?
A No. I, as a doctor I regret I cannot follow this legalistic tend of thought. From these numbers it cannot be seen at all what would be expertized, where and what the cases were. At the beginning it could have been cases that could have been easily expertized easily and rapidly. These numbers may include lots of cases that I never worked on at all. I could have sent the whole batch back without working on them and I ask your pardon but here I am a doctor confronted with a lawyer and our points of view are completely divergent. You cannot calculate the length of time in working on these questionnaires.
In German law, that is penal procedure, you can find questionnaires that are as long as six weeks in questionable cases that come up before the Court. And after six weeks you can from those come to a conclusion and, if this actually comes to me I would then ask again for several weeks more to expertize this particular case. Sometimes, on the other hand, it takes eight to ten days to expertize questionnaires. As I say, it all depends on the contents of the questionnaire. As I said before, we simply aren't talking the same language. I regret that.
Q Well, now, Doctor, what I am trying to ascertain from this document is whether or not you expertized over 2000 questionnaires during this period of time. It appears to me quite obvious that from the 12 November to the 1st of December you had the opportunity to expertize over 2000 questionnaires and in fact you state in your letters in each instance that you are returning to Heyde a certain number of questionnaires which you have already examined. Now, then, if during a period from 12 November, that is the first date when these questionnaires were shipped to you from Berlin, and I presume it took a day or two for the questionnaires to get to your institute, from that date to 1 December, which is approximately 20 days, now in that period of 20 days it seems evident to me here that you had the opportunity to expertize over 2000 questionnaires. Now, can' t you see how important it is to a layman like myself and the Tribunal to have you explain to us just what length of time is necessary for a psychiatrist, and a man with your experience, to study one of these questionnaires in order to determine whether or not this should be a plus case or a minus case. Do you understand the import of my questioning, the reason for it, now?
A I already told you repeatedly - I can't lay down an average length of time to work on any one questionnaire and I don't understand your mathematics here because I had to concern myself with the contents of the questionnaire.
Q Now, Doctor, let us go to the question of children - the Reich Committee. Now, when did you first receive information and when did you just first become familiar with the Reich Committee for Hereditary and Constitutionally Severe Diseases?
A That must have been around April 1941. I see that from Document Book 17; page 7. This is the outline of the duties for the nurses in nursing homes. I can't tell you the precise date when it was. It was after a meeting in the Ministry of Interior when I was told to establish a branch of this Reich Committee in my institute.
Q Well, now was it your opinion -
A Please?
Q Was it your opinion that the Reich Committee for Hereditary and Constitutionally Severe Diseases was linked up in any manner with the Euthanasia program?
A No. I repudiate any connection between the Euthanasia Program and the Reich Committee. The two things had nothing to do with each other nor do I know of any intermediate connection with the Reich Working Union. The Reich Ministry of the Interior was the office that determined to what extent the Reich Committee as such; what it was to be composed of. I don't know. That Euthanasia had anything to do with that I know nothing about. I know a couple of doctors there but whether they had anything to do with that I don't know.
Q Q Did you ever hear the name Viktor Brack associated with the Reich Committee for Hereditary and Constitutionally Severe Diseases?
A NO, I know that for sure.
QQhy I ask you that; doctor; in Document NO-253, which is a chart drawn by the defendant Viktor Brack he stated therein: "I, Viktor Hermann Brack, having been duly sworn hereby declare that I was Oberdienstleiter, Chief of Department 2 in the Chancellery of the leader of the National Socialist Party, headed by Reichsleiter Philipp Bouhler. In this office I knew exactly all and was entrusted with the organization's Euthanasia program, and the Reich Committee for Hereditary and Constitutionally 12 Severe Diseases". And in parentheses (approval for operations on newly born babies not worthy of life indicated in red spotted line on the chart.
And he further states "I have carefully studied this plan, etc."
Now, the defendant Brack has outlined in this chart that his organization by the dotted lines was associated with the Reich Committee for Constitutionally Severe Disease and this action with the children. Well, now I am interested in knowing whether or not you had the occasion to have learned of Viktor Brack's association with this program, that is, with the program of the Reich Committee in as much as I recall that you mentioned the name Dr. Hefelmann and on this chart drawn by Viktor Brack he indicates Dr. Hefelmann to be the head of a division under the Chancellery of the Fuehrer. Do you understand what I am pointing out, Doctor?
A I don't know that document that you have there before you nor do I know what Brack's testimony was, but as to whether I ever knew that Dr. Brack was active in the Reich Committee is something that is entirely unknown to me, absolutely unknown. The name was never named to me in that connection.
Q Doctor, would you kindly look over that chart which was drawn by the Defendant Brack, and you will see the dotted lines around the blocks wherein his name is contained, and the names of Bouhler, Hofelmann, etc., and that dotted lino continues over the top of the chart over to Karl Brandt's and through to Linden, the Ministry of the Interior, and then the outside blocks on the extreme left-hand side of the chart give the organizational set-up of the Reich Committee. Now, this was drawn for us by the Defendant Brack himself, and you will notice the oath by the Defendant Brack in German in the left-hand corner. Now, will you kindly study that and sec whether or not this refreshes your recollection to any extent?
A I never saw this chart before. I only know that the Reich Committee had something to do with the Reich Ministry of the Interior. I see these lines that show that connection, but I never saw this organizational set-up before. I am always under the impression that you believe I took part in organizing these things. I had nothing to do with all these matters.
Q Well now, did you associate the name Hefelmann with the Reich Committee, or did I misunderstand you earlier today?
A No. Hefelmann I associated with the Reich Committee, but I don't know anything about his activities in the Reich Working Union. I don't know what his functions were.
I simply know that Hefelmann - that is, this is my opinion - I believe he was in the Reich Committee at the beginning and signed for it, but I don't know.
Q Thank you. Now, Doctor, in April, 1941, you first heard of this Reich Committee. Now, when did the enterprise develop?
A Probably that is when I heard about it, yes.
Q When did the enterprise develop to the extent that the authorities in Berlin, that is the state through the Ministry of Interior, granted the permission that children suffering an incurable disease, children deemed to be in such a condition, that it would be only worthy to accord them a mercy death? When did that start to function, that is the actual according of mercy deaths to children in this category?
A That was a conference. I received from the Reich Committee, which I never heard of before, knowledge of a conference in the Reich Ministry of the Interior. I was asked to attend this conference. That was in the Ministry of the Interior under the chairmanship of Ministerial Director Schulze, as far as I can recall, and I believe also the deputy of the President of the Upper Bavarian District Association was there. At any rate I was called to this conference. There were present besides those two I just mentioned, well, maybe Von Hegener was there, or Hefelmann, one of these two anyway, I don't know, and Dr. Wenzler. I know that Dr. Wenzler, who was a member of the Board of Directors of the Union of Hospitals for Sick Children, was told by the Reich Committee to take care of the registration of all these sick children. First of all such a station was to be set up in the Childrens' Clinic in Munich. This, I believe, was turned down because of lack of space and because they had enough work to do there anyway.
Then they hit on the idea that not only surgical cases of physical deformation were involved but also because mental cases were involved, as I say, they hit on the idea of setting up a department in the children's house at Eglfing-Haar at the expense of the Reich Committee, and this department was to take care of these children. I made space available, and I was given a doctor by the Children's Clinic. I had to send, this doctor to Berlin and he came back with authorization as to just what measures were to be used and things were to be done, like the term of observation or the details about the treatment, all sorts of things, what the vitamin treatment was to be, what the operative treatment was to be, what sort of occupational therapy was to be used, and so forth. These cases were those where the child could be expected to live only for a very short length of time, and it was those who were to be put to sleep somehow.
Q You mentioned the name Von Hegener. Could you spell that for the record, please?
A H-a-e-g--- H-e-g-e-n-e-r, Von Hegener.
Q Von Hegener played a big role in this Reich Committee, did he?
A That I don't know. I only know that he sent me the authorization.
Q On Friday you stated that after this Reich Committee was established and state authority was granted of given for this purpose that in your institute you had several children who you deemed to be in such a condition that they should be accorded a mercy death. Now, how many such children did you doom to be in that condition in your own institute?
A That I can not tell you. Children from the institutions and nursing home at Neu-Oetting, Schoenbrunn, etc., all of these children I took over along with the nurses. Now, how many of them were fit I don't know, but the great majority of them were terribly ill. I have never seen children as sick as all that, but just how many there were, that I am sorry I can not tell you.
Q Can you tell us, Doctor, this is of considerable interest to me, as to what form would the euthanasia take, that is, how would you be able to accord these children a mercy death without too much suffering, etc.? what did you use? Were there certain requirements outlined by the state and the Reich Committee, or was that left up to the discretion of each doctor? Can you enlighten us on that, Doctor?
A That was left to the discretion of the physician himself obviously. The doctor who came from Berlin certainly had a policy laid down by Berlin, and in my institution luminal was used, I believe. I believe I once said veronal was given but this is wrong, it was only luminal.
Q How much luminal would be required to accord one of these terribly sick persons a mercy death?
A Please?
Q How much luminal would it require?
A The situation here is exactly as with the question of time involved, it varied greatly. A hydrocephalic can take dose after dose of luminal. The maximum daily dose as set down by law, that dose was, under certain circumstances, not sufficient, and, on the other hand, it could happen in the case of an idiot with a stronger developed heart activity, he is capable of taking more than that dose of luminal.
You just have to give the child enough luminal so that after a few days he just quietly goes to sleep, and I must emphasize this is not a matter of poisoning. The child simply dies of a certain congestion in the lungs, it does not die of poisoning as I said once before, and an interference with circulation in the lungs. I have seen this work myself, and if there is anything such as putting a person to sleep gently then this is certainly it to accord a mercy death.
Q Now, do you have to apply more luminal to a person that is older? For instance, would it require more luminal with a person one year of age or ten years of age, or is that a factor at all, Doctor?
A The maximum doses are arranged according to age. It is prescribed that for children up to a certain age we give a dose of luminal which is one-third as small as in the case of adults. These doses are prescribed these maximum doses and vary greatly and are always being revised.
Q Well now, these children in your institute that were in such a dreadful condition, did you use your own discretion as to whether or not they should be given luminal or did you have to fill out a questionnaire and have that sent to the Ministry, or was it solely up to yourself?
A The questionnaires had nothing to do with giving the child luminal and putting it to sleep.
Q No, I am trying to determine whether or not questionnaires were also used by the Reich Committee as well as by the euthanasia program. I am not confusing the two, Doctor. I am merely attempting to find out whether or not a child could be given luminal so as to relieve him from his pain by merely the decision of yourself or another physician of mother institute, or was it necessary to have the opinion of some other psychiatrist or expert?
A The way things worked was quite different. I did not make the final decision. The child was sent, or was announced in Berlin through the questionnaire, then as I found out these questionnaires were worked on by experts. I don't know how many nor who they were, I only know that Dr. Wenzler was one of these final exports, and what the procedure of expertising was in detail I do not know. I did not have anything to do with it. Then on the basis of the questionnaire a decision was made in Berlin and an authorization was sent back to the institute saying that within the framework of the directives of the Reich Committee the child should be accorded the treatment and then the child was treated accordingly. Despite this authorization from higher up I could still, if I was of a different opinion, namely that the child was not a case for treatment, or to b more exact, a case to be put to sleep, I could nevertheless if such was the case still refuse to follow the authorization and send the questionnaire back. Then after watching and observing the child for a long time with special personnel, two nurses, and then I had the child continually observed by my pediatrician and ascertain exactly what the case is, that the case histories were worked out most meticulously, because there also was a scientific purpose in the procedure, particularly in the case of our feeble mindness and exigenous and indigenous problems and we discussed this case with all the personnel concerning once more, then finally I could together with my pediatrician, say now "the case can be treated," and then the date for the treatment was determined on. Then I received notice when the treatment began and the relatives were informed not about the treatment, but that they should visit the child.
Q Now, when the children were set aside for euthanasia did you then
A Please?
Q When you decided that children should be subjected to euthanasia to relieve them from their suffering, did you then notify the parents or guardian of the children concerned?
A Yes, they were told ahead of time by my departmental physician.
Q They were told before you applied the euthanasia?
A Oh, yes. We told the relatives that it would be expedient to visit the child because the child was sick and the relatives did come. In the beginning of luminal treatment the child wakes up from time to time until the final cumutative effect of luminal sets in.
Q Did you instruct the parents and guardian that you were going to administer luminal treatment to the child?
A No, no, that was a top secret matter.
MR. HARDY: I have no further questions to the witness, Your Honor.
DR. PELKMANN: Mr. President, before this session is recessed may I request that Dr. Schaeffer be excused from attending the session this afternoon, and tomorrow morning, since he is not concerned in the matter now under discussion, for the preparation of his case.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, you are attorney for defendant Schaeffer and you desire to consult with him this afternoon concerning the preparation of his case?
DR. PELKMANN: And tomorrow also, please.
THE PRESIDENT: Defendant Schaeffer's case will soon be called for trial. Upon request of his counsel defendant Schaeffer will be excused from attendance before the Tribunal this afternoon and tomorrow morning, in order that his counsel may consult with him for the preparation of his case.
Before proceeding with the further examination of this witness I would ask counsel for defendant Brack if he desires to examine this witness any further?
DR. FROESCHMANN: Mr. President, I had intended to conduct a rather extensive redirect examination.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Before opening the redirect the Tribunal will take a noon recess, and will recess until 1:30.
(Thereupon the noon recess was taken.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The Tribunal reconvened at 1330 hours, 12 May 1947.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for the defendant may re-examine the witness.
HERMANN PFANNMUELLER - Resumed REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. FROESCHMANN (Counsel for the Defendant Brack):
Q Witness, in the cross-examination by the prosecutor you essentially repeated, all the statements that you had made during the direct examination, only in a few points could your answer perhaps be clarified to avoid any errors, and it is these points upon which I should like to question you now. First of all, a personal question Doctor, you, yourself, are a neurologist.
A Yes.
Q And consequently, know the term "prison psychosis" from science. Is it true that you, witness, found yourself in such a state in Frankfurt on the Main?
A No, I did not have a prison psychosis any longer in Frankfurt, as far as I remember, it was the beginning of October until almost a year ago now. This prison psychosis was terrible, and I wouldn't want my worst enemy to go through what I experienced.
Q Doctor, I do not want to know the condition, I simply want to know when you had this prison psychosis. It seems to have been 1945-46.
A There were the acute symptoms hallucinations and illusions, condition of mental clarity, but not complete, and then I was in a transition positive personality, and in Frankfort it became worse again.
Q Doctor, I am interested in this connection in only one further question. Does this prison psychosis still have an effect on you now, particularly in regards to dates?
A My memory has become considerably weakened since I was ill, and perhaps even before that time, because of all the conditions of arrest and removal from my work.
I don't know; but there are many things that I can't remember at all and many things that I can only remember partly.
Q Doctor, I ask this question only because the prosecutor at the beginning of his cross-examination, submitted various things to you that you had said in Frankfort to the American interrogator or the German investigating official, and because the impartial observer must gain the impression that what you said in Frankfort does not agree with what you said during your direct examination.
A During the interrogation here, before I went into Franfort, I was in worse condition. Suddenly being locked up was a terrible experience for me, and I believe I can say that I had signs of hallucinations. I was not aware of any difference.
Q Doctor, it is my impression that you made visible efforts to speak the absolute truth?
A I think I can say that.
Q And did so in all the questions that the prosecutor asked you. Let me now turn to the matters that I should like to discuss with you myself. The first subject is the following. You spoke of the how Top Secret matters were treated. Do you know that it was a general rule in Germany that administrative officers, Wehrmacht officers, etc., had specific orders, according to which the so-called top secret matters were to be handled only by people who were specifically authorized to.
A Yes, that was the case even before the war when my personnel were drafted into the army. I myself was obligated. I put the papers into the safe myself.
Q Can you also say that on the basis of this order authorized people were obligated by a handshake and were informed of the previsions of German law, that if they failed to maintain secrecy they would be subject to severe penalty and to the death during wartime.
A Yes, I know that when the mobilization orders came out I myself was obligated to secrecy by a handshake by my superior authority, and I was told that there were severe penalties and perhaps even the death penalty.
Q. Then this obligation to was a general secrecy measure in the interest of the security of the German Reich?
A. I assume so, as the oath of office of the civil servant is the basis of his function.
Q. Now, the second subject I should like to breach. The Prosecutor has charged you on the basis of Document No. 1313 in Document Book 17, page 6 of the English Document Book. This is the letter that Dr. Hoelzel sent to you?
A. It is on page 4.
Q. Yes, page 4. It is dated 28 August 1940. I am now interested only in the date. I would like to discuss this letter with you briefly. Do you have the book before you now?
A. No, I handed it in.
MR. HARDY: May it please Your Honor, Defense Counsel has stated erroneously that the Prosecution has charged this witness with some activities. I don't know what he is referring to, in connection with this document. I merely put the document to the witness for an explanation, I haven't charged the witness with anything, to my knowledge, and I wish that to be clarified.
DR. FROESCHMANN: Mr. President, I quite agree with the Prosecution, but I do believe it will help the Tribunal if I did ask one question regarding this letter.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel may propound the question.
BY DR. FROESCHMANN:
Q. In this letter on page 4 I shall hand you the document. "What has endered to me the worn in the Children's House was not the scientific interest, but the physician's urge, amidst our often fruitless labor, to help and at least to improve many of our cases here. The psychological evaluation, and the curative and pedagogic influence were always much closer to my heart than anatomical curiosities, no matter how interesting they were.
And so it comes about that, although I am sure that I can preserve my full objectivity in giving expert opinions, I feel myself somehow tied emotionally to the children as their medical guardian."
Doctor, my question to you is, it can be seen from this letter of Hoelzel that at that time you wanted to commission him with the direction of this children's home, so that he could apply new therapeutical methods there?
A. I cannot deny that possibility, but it is also possible that at the time the first questionnaires were given out for the registration of these children, I don't remember.
Q. Thank you. The third question. At the conclusion of your testimony, it was said that you, witness, did not ask the consent of the parents of the children who were to be subjected to Euthanasia?
A. No, that was not done.
Q. Now my question is, do you know that the consent of the parents for admission to the Children's Home and thus to the possibility of Euthanasia had to be given to the Amtsarzt?
A. I know that the Amtsarzt could send the children to the institution on the basis of the questionnaire. I also know that the children could be accepted only with the consent of the parents. The child simply came to me, I did not ask the parent's consent either. They were sent by the Amtsarzt or by the family; but I don't know what the parents were told about the treatment given to the Children.
Q. This morning you said, in answer to a question by the Prosecutor which had to do with the collection of Jewish mental patients in your institution and their later transfer to Poland; do you remember that?
A. Yes.
Q. I put to you now Document No. 1135, an excerpt of which is contained in Document Book 14, Page 25. This is the collection of the transport lists, which had to be shown to the director of the mental institute by the transport company whenever there was a transport and the patients who were listed were compared with the list given the institution. Now please take a look at this list and tell me what you know about the accompanying letters from the transport company, how does it begin?
A. "In accordance with the decision of the state ministry of the Interior, I have upon order of the Reich Association of mental Institutions, Reichsarbeitsgemeinschaft, and as responsible chief of the General Patients Transport Company G.m.b.H., taken charge of the transfer of the patients enumerated in the list below to a Reich institution." I don't know the letter.
Q. You do know this letter, don't you?
A. No, I never saw it.
Q. Your administrative officer saw it, is that what you mean?
A. No, we did not fill that out, we never saw it.
Q. You don't understand my question. If a transport train reached your institution and fetched away patients, you had previously received some sort of a notice to prepare for the transport a certain number of patients; isn't that so?
A. No, the method was a little different. I was given transport lists; these lists said that the patients were to be picked up on such and such a day by the General Patient Transport Company.
Q. And then the leader of this transport filled out this certification that you just read?
A. I don't know, I merely had him give me a confirmation that he had taken such and such patients.
Q. And it says here, "In accordance with the decision of the State Ministry of the Interior, I have, upon order of the Reich Association of Mental Institutions."
A. I don't see that. No, this is signed by the commissioner.
Q. But in the confirmation itself, it says, "In accordance with the decision of the State Ministry of the Interior and upon order of the Reich Association of Mental Institutions;" I lay particular weight upon those two words. Now, if you will turn a few pages over where I stuck the little slip of paper, this is a list of the Jewish patients who were taken away on 10 September 1940, is there an accompanying letter?
A. No, there is no accompanying letter, no, no.
Q. Please examine the document carefully.
A. Oh, yes, here it is; on page 13, you mean.
Q. Now, when adult incurably insane persons were fetched was there not a printed form that was used?
A. No, this paper -- the patients were taken by me today, leader of the transport, Eglfing-Haar and the date --- that is by me, because I told the man I wanted a receipt for the patients, otherwise he would not have given me any.
Q. Now, from this document please note; that regarding all other incurably insane persons there were form lists of transports which were printed; you find transport lists six, seven, eight, etc.
A. I don't believe I filled them out, I don't know.
Q. I don't believe you did either. I simply want to ask you, and this is the point of my whole series of questions; in the transport of 20 September, 1940, in this document I have shown you, this list of the Jewish patients; was this list also contained in the printed form or was it made up especially by you?
A. I am sorry, I did not understand your question.
Q. In the document I have just out to you, the list of the Jewish patients, of 20 September 1940....?
A. The 23rd you mean?
Q. No, the 20th.
A. The 20th? On page 18 it says 23.
Q. Well, never mind the date, at least its September 1940. Let's go on. Now, I will ask you again. Is this list on a printed form list for transports, or is this list of the Jewish patients something that you yourself prepared on a special paper?
A. No, that is the list which I was given, it is a transport list giving the names and their dates of birth.
Q. And who wrote this transport list?
A. I received it from the transport company as far as I know. I don't know exactly how it was in the transfer of the Jews, but in any case the transport company brought the list. It probably came from the ministry in Munich; I don't know.
Q. If I understand you correctly, you said five minutes ago that you saw to it that you got such a list so you would have something in your hands by way of a receipt?
A No, no, that is a misunderstanding. I got a receipt, a certificate on a copy of the transport list. The man in charge of the transport had a list, and I had earlier received a list of the patients who were going to be picked up, and on the list which I had received, on the carbon copy of it, I had the man give me a certificate that he had taken these patients. That is how it happened.
Q Then this morning you said also that you were told that these patients were taken to Poland?
A The man in charge of the transport told me that, I believe.
Q Am I wrong in saying that on Friday morning you said that these Jewish mental patients were to be sent to a Bavarian Jewish institution?
A I can't remember saying that they went to a Bavarian institution, but a Jewish Institution, an institute for Jewish insane patients, but I don't remember exactly.
Q Do you know, Doctor, that one of the Jewish women named on this list died in Schelm, according to your own report?
A No. When I got a book or a collection of documents, from you, I found something in there about death notice in Schelm. I can't remember the name? Schelm.
Q Now, another question. When was the second meeting in Berlin in which you took part?
A The meeting of experts?
Q The second meeting.
A I don't know Doctor. With the best intentions, I can't remember. I have said so repeatedly, but it was about I think, a few months, perhaps three months, later. I don't know exactly.
Q In connections with this meeting, you were then asked to take up your activities that is how it was.
Q Doctor, you have repeatedly said, that it was in your ideas at the first meeting that this was to be a total registration of all insane persons for the purpose of transferring them separate mental institutions; is that so?