THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, the Tribunal is about to go into recess. I see no possible reason why counsel for the defendant should not submit these photographs to counsel for the Prosecution. I feel compelled to direct that counsel show these photographs to the Prosecution. I see no reason that they should not.
The Tribunal now will be in recess for a few moments.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel may proceed.
BY DR. STEINBAUER:
Q Professor, before the recess we said that the ingestion of even small quantities of fresh water influences the subjective and objective condition of the subject. Now, the question - from the tables of weights that have been presented, can it be ascertained whether the subjects have drunk fresh water?
A That is certainly possible, since the loss of weight must occur with a redundance of sodium nitrate and the weight is not lost if fresh water is drunk.
Q Ignoring the question of the state of the blood, the content of nitrogen, etc. A witness here mentioned a certain incident that occurred, a screaming spasm, a tetanic spasm; do you regard that incident as dangerous?
A No.
Q Why not?
A Screaming spasms occur in cases of hysterical persons. This was not tetanus. This was a tetanoid condition which occurs like the cramps in cholera, and the increase in muscle irritability in the sea-water experiments. This is entirely unimportant. That it was not true tetanus can be seen from the fact that the most important symptoms of tetanus were missing.
Q Then, summing up, I should like to ask you, is it correct when I say that the experiments made very high demands especially on the will-power of the experimental subjects?
A Yes, you can say that.
Q. In carrying out the same experiment in a hospital, would it also have been necessary to keep the experimental subjects segregated and under strict control?
A. It would have been even more necessary. It takes a great strength of will to subject oneself to thirst.
Q. Was it medically justified for Beiglboeck to continue the experiment after it was discovered by analysis that the person had secretly drunk water?
A. The experiment should really have been begun again.
Q. Now, to exclude any possibility of doubt, your answer applied to people who have carried out the experiment the way they should and have drunk only sea water?
A. Yes, that is so.
Q. Now, does this experiment involve special pain or torture for the subject?
A. That would be an exaggerated statement, but thirst is a torment. I draw your attention to the ancient myths of Tantalus and Sisyphus. Of course, it is a torment not to be able to drink and to dream about drinking, but my men said it wasn't really so bad that it could be called torture.
Q. Now. let me ask you, to sum up, what about fatalities in these experiments? Are they impossible or not?
A. They are entirely impossible.
Q. Do you consider a lasting injury to health possible or impossible?
A. That is just as impossible as fatalities.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, will you instruct the witness not to answer your question until the interpreters have fully completed interpreting your question?
BY DR. STEINBAUER:
Q. Professor, I ask you to answer in such a way as to permit the interpreters to have finished translating the question.
Now, I have one last question to put to you.
If fatalities and serious injury to health are assumed as a hypothetical possibility, then I want to ask you whether you, as a physician, embrace the point of view that arranging and executing such experiments are offenses against humanity.
A. If I did, I would not have carried out the experiments on my own son and on my students. There can be no question herein of inhumanity or of brutality, as little as in the case of therapeutic hunger and thirst cures, which I like to carry out. In view of the good food given to the experimental subjects, I should like to mention that one of the women whom I treated in this way had the pitiful weight of 51.7 kilograms and lost three kilograms during the experiment.
DR. STEINBAUER: Mr. President, during the recess I gave the prosecutor photostats and photographs of the experimental subjects so far as I have them. I shall show these, if the Tribunal wishes, to the Tribunal, but I should prefer to submit the originals, at least, to the Tribunal in the course of my case, which has suffered anyhow because the expert came first and not last. At that time I shall give them exhibit numbers.
THE PRESIDENT: The photographs may be submitted to the Tribunal later in the course of the examination.
DR. STEINBAUER: No further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Any questions to be propounded to this witness by any other defense counsel?
DR. FLEMMING (Defense counsel for the defendant Mrugowsky): Mr. President, I ask permission to ask the expert witness four questions regarding the circulation of the blood.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel then desires to make this witness his own witness for this purpose?
DR. FLEMMING: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, proceed.
BY DR. FLEMMING:
Q. Is it true that after typhus there is frequently a weakening in the circulation of the blood?
A. Yes.
Q. Can blood-letting in such a case have a good therapeutic effect?
A. One can't answer that in general. It depends on the specific case. In general, if the circulation is weak, one avoids blood-letting.
Q. In the case of convalescence after typhus, do you consider that blood-letting to an extent of 400 cc in order to make typhus serum do you consider that is permissible?
A. Yes, we do that to get serum, because that blood can later be replaced, either by transfusion or by some liquid or by food. In general, the body can well stand such blood-letting.
Q. And a last question. So far as you know and assume, can bloodletting to the extent of 400 cc in a person convalescing from typhus, who is in an average good state of health, bring about death?
A. I cannot imagine that it could.
Q. Thank you. No further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Any other questions to propound to the witness by any other defense counsel?
There being none, the prosecution may cross-examine.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. MC HANEY:
Q. Professor, you are prepared to testify to this Tribunal, as an expert, that the withdrawal of 400 cc of blood from a person convalescing from typhus and who, we shall assume, is in a weakened condition is perfectly permissible and would be recommended by you?
A. I consider that permissible for the purpose of getting serum if one is in a position to compensate for the loss.
Q. And suppose there was no compensation by way of blood transfusion?
A. In that case sufficient additional nourishment and liquid or even an injection of sodium nitrate solution will suffice.
At any rate, there would always be some way of compensating for a rather unimportant blood-letting of 400 cc.
Q. Would you, as an expert, recommend the withdrawal of 400 cc of blood from a typhus patient, without compensation?
A. That depends on just what sort of food he requires.
Q. Well, let's suppose he is a concentration camp inmate and he is receiving 1500 calories a day. Would you recommend that 400 cc of blood be withdrawn from that patient, suffering from typhus, without any compensation by way of food or otherwise?
A. I do not believe that would do him much harm.
Q. Would you recommend it?
A. No, I can't say that I would.
Q. Do you think that with 1500 calories per day and with no compensation by way of injections or blood transfusions the withdrawal of 400 cc of blood would not weaken that patient?
A. Of course it would weaken him, but he would recover from it.
Q. How do you know he would recover?
A. We have so many blood donors who do not receive more calories than that. Previously, it was customary that the person who donated blood received some compensation, but later this compensation became smaller and smaller, and the number of calories which they actually received - not just on paper - also became smaller and smaller. Consequently, it happens very frequently that they donate blood without being thereby injured.
Q. Well, but these blood donors were not suffering from typhus, were they, doctor?
A. No, but we also like to take blood from persons sick with typhus because we want that for serum. This we do not do at the moment because we have no typhus today. However, when we did have it, we did take blood from persons convalescing from typhus.
Q. Did you ever have any typhus patients under your care?
A. Yes, of course.
Q. Did you ever withdraw any blood from them as they were convalescing to make serum with?
A. Not I, but my assistants did.
Q. Under what conditions was that done? How much did you withdraw?
A. I can't tell you that today. It was also 400 cc, I believe.
Q. And how many calories were they receiving?
A. I can't tell you. At least, in the hospital it was more than outside. Taking blood from persons isn't looked on by us as so tragic a matter.
Q. What stage of recovery was this patient in from whom you directed that blood be withdrawn? Had he recovered completely from typhus?
A. I can't say that, because all that was done by my assistants. The wouldn't have chosen for this anyone who had suffered particularly serious case of typhus.
Q. In other words, a person who had a very severe case of typhus would not be used for the withdrawal of blood, is that right?
A. That is a medical instinct.
Q. Did you compensate these patients from whom you directed that blood be withdrawn by blood transfusions or by further feeding?
A. I can't tell you that now whether we did that. That was too long ago.
Q. But you would have recommended that as good practice, would you?
A. Yes, I would have told my assistants that, of course-
Q. Do you regard the defendant Schaefer as an expert on seawater problems?
A. I believe he knows enough about that problem.
Q. Are you familiar with the name Professor A. C. Ivy?
A. Yes, I believe he has concerned himself with these problems, too.
Q. Well, have you read any papers by him, or are you acquainted with his reputation in medical circles?
A. Not very well, nor can I remember whether among the many things I have read on sea-water there was a paper by Ivy.
Q. Can you testify whether Dr. Ivy is regarded as an expert on sea-water questions?
A. I know nothing about that.
Q. On what precisely is your testimony with respect to the experiments by Biegelboeck based?
A. On the records and the descriptions that Biegelbock made of the experiments.
Q. Precisely what records have you seen on these experiments?
A. The records that the defense counsel had yesterday or today in his hand.
Q. Doctor, I will have passed up to you a set of records which are numbered from one to 44 in red pencil, and I ask you, did you have those records before you and did you make a study of them?
A. Yes, I had these records, and I asked one of my collaborators who took part in these experiments to read through these records and to make excerpts from them. He happens to be here also.
Q. Who was this collaborator?
A. On of my assistants by the name of Werner. He is at the time among the audience.
Q. You said something about his having participated in experiments; you don't mean the Dachau experiments, do you?
A. No. In experiments that I carried out with my students.
Q. Did you personally examine these records at all?
A. I saw them, but I didn't study every one of them. I left that up to the young man.
Q. And what did the young man do?
A. He gave me a very exhaustive report on them.
Q. In what form was his report; what did he have to tell you?
A. I should prefer to show you the report itself.
Q. Do you have it with you?
A. Not at the moment, but I do have it in my belongings. During noon recess I could fetch it for you.
Q. Your testimony, then, is based upon a summary made by your assistant, is that correct?
A. Yes, that is so.
Q. Now what other records were made available to you upon which your testimony is based here?
A. The charts that were filled out in pencil with figures.
Q. I'll have passed up to you a paper-bound book with the name "Schuster" written in pencil on the front of it, and down below in indelible pencil two words which I cannot decipher; I will ask you to read them into the record when the booklet is passed to you; was that booklet made available to you?
A. No, at least I have not studied it.
Q. You have never seen that book before?
A. I don't believe so. Perhaps it was given to me at the same time, but there are too many statistics and figures in here. I haven't looked through them all. This is a laboratory book. The two words on the book are "gastric juice, milimeter paper", and this is no doubt a record used in compiling the original report. It is a so-called laboratory book.
Q. But whether or not the book was given to you, at least you are clear that you made no study of the book, is that right?
A. Yes, that is so.
Q. And you don't know whether it was turned over to your assistant?
A. That I don't know.
Q. In any event, he presented you no digest of facts based upon that book, did he?
A. No.
Q. I pass you now Beigelboeck Exhibit No. 36, which has not yet been offered. This is in fact an English summary, but I think perhaps the witness might be able to testify about whether or not this was made available to him.
A. Yes, this I have seen.
Q. Did you personally make any study of that?
A. Yes, I looked at that personally.
Q. What does that record purport to show?
A. This shows the changes that took place in the body weight. It is broken down into loss of water, loss of body weight, percentage of the body loss, and so forth.
Q. Did you turn that over to your assistant, and did he make a summary of that record?
A. Yes, he also reported on this, but I myself looked at this very carefully also.
Q. That shows only the weight changes, is that right?
A. By and large, yes. But I said there are all sorts of theoretical calculations here about loss of water, the water retained, the probable absorption of fluids, and so forth.
Q. Now, I think you also said you saw some pictures; this has been marked as Biegelooeck Exhibit No. 34.
A. Yes, I have seen all these too.
Q. In what form did you see those pictures, did you see the originals or did you see photostatic copies, such as those?
A. I saw them in this form.
Q. Then you never saw the backs of these pictures, did you?
A. No.
Q. You don't know thether on the backs of these original pictures the names of the experimental subjects appeared, do you?
A. No, I don't.
Q. Will you look at the photograph on the page marked number 5 there? You will find in ink a Roman V on one of the sets of pictures. Do you observe the picture where the young man is lying in bed, apparently with a tourniquet around his arm, and in the lower left-hand part of the picture a hypodermic syringe?
A. Yes, I see that.
Q. Have you been informed that these pictures are pictures of the experimental subjects during the course of the experiments?
A. I assumed so; moreover, the experiments were concluded by injections, in the thirst experiments with sodium nitrate solution in the sea-water experiments with sugar solution, by intravenous injection which immediately improves the condition.
Q. Upon what is your opinion based that these are pictures of the sea-water experimental subjects?
A. All of the pictures or just the one with the syringe?
Q. All of them.
A. I assume so, because the defense counsel put them to me as such.
Q. Dr. Steinbauer told you that is what they were, is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, this picture which I have called your attention to on the sheet marked No. 5, would you say that this picture shows a man who apparently has had somewhat of an unpleasant time of it, who is in some pain, or who was in some pain at the time this picture was made?
A. Whether he was in pain or not, I don't know. At any rate he seems to have suffered some effects from the experiments.
Q. Well, for the benefit of the Tribunal, you would say that his facial expression in this picture indicates that he is suffering some pain, wouldn't you, Professor?
A. I should not say that, no. He looks as if the experiment had had some effects on him, he looks worn out and exhausted.
Q. How many experimental subjects can you say were used in these experiments, based upon the study of the records which were made available to you; can you make any statement about the number of subjects used?
A. As far as I know there were 44 subjects.
Q. And upon what is that statement based?
A. On the reports that I received on the experiments.
Q. The written reports?
A. Yes.
Q. Will you look on page 4 of this series of pictures; do you see the picture in the lower right-hand corner?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you find a number written on this man's chest shown in this picture?
A. I think I see the number 4.
Q. Don't you find a number in front of the four, Professor?
A. Yes, but it is very unclear, it could be a one, and the total number would then have been 14.
Q. Don't you find a rather sharp curlicue at the bottom of this figure which you want to read as one, which might indicate to you that it was a six, and that the full number is 64?
A. I could not read that as a 64. If I am going to take that little curlicue into consideration, I should take that as a zero.
Q. Suppose you turn to page six; do you see the experimental subject who is lying on the bed in the lower middle picture?
A. Yes.
Q. Would you say that this experimental subject appears to be in robust health?
A. No, I should say that he is emaciated, as can be clearly see.
Q. Well, you don't know whether that was the result of the experiment he underwent or whether he was chosen in that condition to begin with, do you Doctor?
A. That I don't know.
Q. Now, were these the only records made available to you -- the series of individual reports which I passed up, the weight chart and the pictures?
A. I also saw a collection of records written in pencil.
Q. Do you know where they are now?
A. I assume that the defense counsel has them.
Q. What did these records show?
A. They also contained a large number of statistics on gastric juice, loss of weight, and all sorts of clinical findings -- the number of red blood corpuscles, etc.
Q. And did you personally study those records?
A. I saw them but did not study them.
Q. They were given to your assistant?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, were there any other records that you got which we haven't heard about, on which your testimony here is based?
A. I cannot say at the moment.
Q. You would have to confer with --
A. I believe that the defense had reports by Becker-Freyseng and by Beiglboeck?
A. These were reports on the whole development of the question.
Q. Well, Professor, what sort of reports were they? We have not seen them, you know, and we would like to know on what you are basing your opinion before this Tribunal.
A. Descriptions of the whole course that the matter took regarding the conference, how the decision was reached, how the experiments were planned, and then Beiglboeck's report on his own experiments on himself, which is a very careful description and corresponds exactly to what my subjects experienced when they carried out experiments on themselves.
Q. Did you read and study these experiments carried out by Becker-Freyseng and Beiglboeck?
A. Of course.
Q. And they influenced your testimony before this Tribunal; you relied on them in making your testimony here?
A. From these I had an idea of the situation as a whole, in order to form my own opinion or I performed experiments myself.
Q. And your testimony here is based in part upon the reports made by Becker-Freyseng and Beiglboeck; that is true, isn't it Doctor?
A. Yes.
Q. And these records made by Becker-Freyseng and Beiglboeck were not contemporaneous records of these experiments, were they Professor?
A. I don't believe so.
Q. They were, rather, essays or reports which they have written up since their arrest and incarceration; isn't that true, Professor?
A. That is very possible.
Q. How old a man is this assistant of yours, Professor?
A. Twenty-six.
Q. Twenty-six years old?
A. Twenty-seven.
Q. Twenty-seven years old; has he studied medicine?
A. Of course.
Q. Where did he study?
A. Heidelberg.
Q. Herr Professor, I will ask you to testify from your own memory, and if defense counsel wish to put your assistant on the stand, they are privileged to do so; but I am interested primarily in knowing what you know about your assistant.
Now, you did not know he studied at Heidelberg until he told you just now?
A. I have 40 to 50 young men at the clinic, and it is impossible for me to know of each one where he studied, but I made his acquaintance at the clinic. He is a very industrious and intelligent person and for that reason I asked him to do this work and take some work off my shoulders.
Q. How long has he been working with you?
A. More than a year.
Q. Working with you about a year, and since that time you have conducted these sea-water experiments yourself?
A. We carried them out shortly before Mardi Gras.
Q. Of 1947?
A. Yes, this year.
Q. How did you happen to carry out these experiments; were you requested to do so by defense counsel?
A. No, I had been asked very often to interest myself in this matter, and I myself was interested to see myself, the effect of seawater on the experimental subjects. This was interesting to me because I already had considerable experience in the field of hunger and thirst.
Q. Were you approached at all with respect to this case before the time you started those seawater experiments?
A. Yes, that is why I started to interest myself in the matter, because I was asked to appear here as a witness, but I carried out these experiments entirely spontaneously, without outside interference and on my own interest.
Q. But the fact that you wore approached to come here and testify influenced your decision to carry out these experiments, is that right?
A. Of course, of course.
Q. And did you make any effort to have these experiments coincide with the conditions which you were told existed in the Dachau experiments
A. Yes, we made only one distinction in this, namely, that the experimental subjects received roughly 1,600 calories a day, because they were not to interrupt their work. To be sure, as the experiment went on they ate less and less of the 1,600 calories, because the thirst made them lose their appetite.
Q. You experimented on five men?
A. Yes.
Q. Before we go on to that experiment, I would like to go back to the records a little bit; when did you first get these records?
A. Which records?
Q. The records which purport to be records on the experiments of Beiglboeck in Dachau?
A. You will have to ask Dr. Steinbauer when he sent me those records, I don't know.
Q. You don't know how long they were in your possession?
A. No.
Q. Can't you say approximately; one month, sixty days, ninety days?
A. Perhaps one month.
Q When did you return them?
A I brought them with me.
Q Then you returned them yesterday?
A That is right.
Q Did you get them from Dr. Steinbauer?
A Yes.
Q And you returned them to Dr. Steinbauer?
A Yes.
Q Did you make any changes in these records?
A No, no.
Q But you yourself aren't very familiar with them, are you?
A Not very, no.
Q Can you state whether the records which I have just passed up to you, that is to say, those records numbered from 1 to 44 in red pencil, can you say whether those records bore the name of the experimental subject at the top of the page?
A I didn't interest myself in that.
Q I pass you up a numbered sheet picked at random from this group; it is marked No. 2. I will ask you if above the word "name", it does not appear that a name written in pencil has been erased?
A That seems possible.
Q Do you mean to say that is so? That the name has been erased, isn't that what you mean to say?
A No, I wouldn't say it is possible. It looks as if a name had been erased. One can still see traces of it.
Q And you didn't effect that erasure yourself, did you, Professor?
A No, no.
Q Do you know whether your assistant did?
A I think that is quite out of the question.
Q I will ask that that particular sheet be passed up to the Tribunal and I will remark that a number of other sheets are in the same condition.
We will have a careful study made of them and make a report at the proper time on that problem.
Have you ever seen a full list of the names of the experimental subjects?
A No.
Q Now, I take it you have no personal knowledge about the Dachau experiments with sea water conducted by Beiglboeck?
A No, I wasn't present, if that is what you mean by personal knowledge.
Q And you had no associates who participated in them and reported to you about them either, did you?
A No.
Q Your sole knowledge about those experiments is based upon these records which we have gone over and what you were told by Dr. Beiblboeck and Dr. Becker-Freyseng? Is that right?
A Yes.
Q Now how many experimental subjects did you use in your experiments?
A Five of them.
Q And you say that they were volunteers, your assistants, is that right?
A Yes, they were all doctors, volunteers, and, as I said, included also my youngest son, who also happens to be here.
Q And precisely what happened during these experiments?
A These persons were assembled in one room, received the same amount of salt each and pretty much continued their work. They drank 300 cc of sea water and one of them drank 1000, and they stuck pretty close to the provisions set down for the experiment.
Q You say four of them drank 500 cc of sea water per day and the fifth one drank 1000 cubic centimeters of sea water?
A The fifth drank on one day, I think, on the last day I think he drank an additional 500 cc, because he was very thirsty.
Q When did you start the experiments?
A On the Monday before the beginning of Lent.
Q And how long did they run?
AAs I said, four, because of the carnival season, broke off the experiment after four days and one of them stuck it out for six.
Q Well, you spoke of four days, do you know how many hours they were under the experiments?
A Five times twenty-four in general and the other one six times twenty four.
Q Well, I misunderstood you, or else your testimony has changed; you said four of the students stayed on the experiments for four days and one went for six days. Is that right?
A No, four did it for five days, four broke off at the end of the fifth day, and one stayed until the end of the sixth day.
Q And you are prepared to testify it was five times twentyfour, is that right, 70 hours?
A I would have to check on that for sure in the record, whether it was five times twenty four or four times twenty-four, or sixteen or eighteen. Those things didn't seem very important to me. I was interested primarily in seeing how greatly the persons suffered under the experiments, but the man who did it for six days, did do it for six times twenty-four hours. However, I don't want to make a statement for certain under oath regarding the number of hours.
Q Well this little experiment conducted by you, as I take it, had as its purpose to find out how much a man suffers, is that right?
A Yes.
Q You didn't know that before you conducted this experiment, is that right?
A I assumed that they would be very thirsty but I wanted to see what the subjective sensations or feelings of the experimental subjects were. What was the most important to me was to know can these experiments be characterized, as cruel or inhumane or brutal, and are they experiments which lead to a pretty strong sense of discomfort, namely, thirst, but do not do any damage to health, that is what I wanted to know.