The defendants were, as enemies of the people, charged of having had pillaged railroad cars to a larger or lesser degree. The indictment and the report had been received by the Special Court only a few days before the beginning of the trial as far as I know, perhaps on the preceding Thursday or Friday. At any rate up to that time none of the defendants had received the indictments. I heard by chance at the office that President Cuhorst intended to deal with this case during an official trip in the following week and that he had mentioned something to the effect, that in the future he would sentence to death every railroad pilferer, since some little time ago his own trunk together with the contents had been stolen from the train and that for that reason he considered necessary a death sentence against the two main culprits of the Abt case."
MR. LA FOLLETTE: Prosecution offers in evidence as Prosecution Exhibit 213, Document NG-464.
MR. PRESIDENT: It will be received in evidence.
I turn now to page 31 of the English book which is page 40-41 of the German document NG 570. When offered it will be exhibit 214. I read from the top of page 31; which is on page 40 of the German:
I, Alfred Frey, former Amtsgerichtsrat, declare on oath:
I was born on 12 September 1900 at Strassbourg. I now go down to the next paragraph:
"Cuhorst passed the second law state exam about the same time as I did. I thus knew him already at that time. When Cuhorst was later , after the so-called assumption of power, at the age of about 33 or 34, promoted from Local Judge to President of the Senate, this was an uncommon event. It was generally realised that this was due to Cuhorst's early membership with the NSDAP.
I now turn to page 32 of the English book which is probably near the bottom of page 40 of the German. The sentence which commences in English as follows:
About March 1942 Cuhorst tried such a case against Kettlitz and Co. Cuhorst then wanted absolutely to insist on the death sentence demanded by the prosecutor. In consequence, immediately at the beginning of the deliberations regarding the sentence, sharp arguments ensued especially between Cuhorst and the then assessor, Landgerichtsrat Wagner. Finally, after deliberations lasting several hours, Cuhorst's strong resistance was overruled by me and Landgerichtsrat Wagner and only a prison sentence was passed upon Kettlitz.
When I returned soon after from my leave, Landgerichtsrat Wagner had been transferred from the Special Court.
I now go to the bottom of page 32 which is probably near the bottom of page 41 of the German.
Cuhorst was a fanaticla National Socialist who in all circumstances used the Special Court as a means for achieving the National Socialist aims, especially the war aims.
The Prosecution now offers Prosecution's Exhibit 214 in evidence, which was document NG 570.
THE PRESIDENT: It will be received in evidence.
MR. LaFOLLETTE: I turn now to NG 569, page 34 in the English book; page 42-44 of the German book. It will be, if accepted, Prosecution's exhibit 215.
I, Hermann Bheuchlen, Chief Public Prosecutor, was born at Esslingen on 26 February 1883, am single, evangelic and reside at Stuttgart-O, Landhausstrasse 90. Since 1919, I was employed at the Public Prosecutor's Office Stuttgart and acted as deputy of the chief of the office and chief of department after my appointment to Chief Public Prosecutor on 1 May 1938. Cases which came under the jurisdiction of the special court were also dealt with by my department. I was a member of the NSDAP since 1 May 1933 and am therefore suspended from office since August 1945.
About the personality and activity of the President of the Senate Hermann Cuhorst, I furnish, upon request, the following statements and certify in lieu of oath that my statements are correct.
I now go down to the paragraph either at the bottom of page 42 or the top of 43 in the German. It is in the fourth paragraph in the English book, page 34 and read a sentence:
"In General, he was practically unprepared for the trials of the Special Court which he presided over. He based the proceedings merely an the indictment."
The Prosecution offers in evidence Prosecution's exhibit 215, which is document NG 569.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MR. LaFOLLETTE: I turn to document NG 568, on page 36 of the English book, which is page 45-46 of the German. The document, if admitted, will be exhibit 216.
I, Erwin Eckert, retired District Court judge, Stuttgart, Olgastr. 140, hereby declare under oath:
I was born in Stuttgart on 5 April 1897. I completed my studies at Tuebingen University in 1921 and passed the final bar examination in Stuttgart, in March 1924. I worked as Assistant Judge and Prosecutor until 1935. From then on I was active in the District Court and the Special Court in Stuttgart.
Eventually I was appointed presiding District Court Judge. I have been a member of the NSDAP since 1933. I knew the Presiding Judge of the Special Court, Herman Cuhorst for many years. He was on old Party member and a fanatic National-Socialist. His way of conducting trials was not at all that of a respectable judge. He used to treat defendants, defense counsels and witnesses badly. He usually did not respect the defense counsels' opinion, since he considered Counsels as a necessary evil. Attorneys were hardly permitted a word, and any request to produce evidence was considered a delay in the trial. During trials he constantly insulted the "candidates of death" and in general rapidly conducted a session to obtain a verdict as quickly as possible. He conducted trials on the basis of the written indictment, and nobody could dissuade him from the prejudice he had formed even in serious cases.
The severity of the war emergency laws perfectly suited Cuhorst's political approach to justice.
I offer into evidence Prosecution's exhibit 216, which is document 568.
THE PRESIDENT: It will be received in evidence.
Document NG 463, which will be when introduced, Prosecution's exhibit 217, is on page 39 of the English book, and occupies pages 47 to 51 of the German book.
DR. BRIEGER: I object against the submission of this document on the part of lawyer Diesem. It is not a document which would be valued in evidence, and as such it would have no weight before the Tribunal. It is not an affidavit. It was not taken under oath. It is signed. There is no evidence for any formulation of an oath. It begins with: "As far as I can remember Cuhorst was," and-so-forth. The document is only signed but it is not sworn to.
Considering the fact that during the last few hours the prosecution has only submitted affidavits, I gather from that, that at any rate, a document submitted would have to fulfill the requirements of an affidavit such as it was held all the time during these proceedings.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: If Your Honors please, whatever this is, I don't believe it's of enough value to fight ever, and I would rather withdraw it than submit to a ruling on that. I simply withdraw the previous document.
I turn to Document NG-487, which is on Page 43 of the English Book and 52 to 53 of the German Book. If offered and accepted, it will be Prosecution's Exhibit 217.
"I, Karl Dorer, retired prosecutor, hereby declare under oath, to have acted as prosecutor at the Special Court since December 1941. I was a member of the NSDAP since 1937 and member of the SA since 1933. The president of the Special Court of Stuttgart was Hermann Cuhorst."
I now drop down in the English text of about eight or nine lines. It would still be on Page 52 of the German, and I begin:
"In the case of Wolf, who had been condemned to death on account of a crime against the war economy regulation, Cuhorst did not allow the defendant to produce all the evidence necessary for his defense. One also had the impression of Cuhorst, that he had already decided the result of the hearing before its conclusion."
The prosecution offers as Prosecution Exhibit No. 217. Document NG-487.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: Document NG-488 at Page 44 of the English Document Book will be, when offered, Prosecution's Exhibit 218. It's at Pages 54 to 55 of the German Book.
"I, Max Hegele, presiding officer of a chamber at the Landgericht retired, born on January 2, 1885, at Schwenningen / Neckar, declare under oath:
"I was a judge at the Special Court in Stuttgart from February 1 1942 to November 30, 1944.
In several hearings I was also presiding officer.
"The president of the Special Court and of the higher criminal court at that time, Hermann Cuhorst, was an autocratic man, who is essentially responsible for the bad reputation of the Special Court. Generally, his cases were very short and when it seemingly was at the expense of thoroughness, Cuhorst showed the intentions to end a case once it had started as fast as possible. Objections and requests of the defense often did not please him. The defendants themselves were addressed by him in a sharp manner and the fear of the defendant may be explained by the fact that at the start of the case he gave the German salute in typical national-socialistic manner and audibly clicked his heels. He debated the basis of the indictment and did not bother about the documents in the case."
I now drop down about four lines in the English text, still on Page 55 of the German, and I read:
"In serious cases where death sentence was wanted, Cuhorst told t the prosecution that this was a plain case which in the sense of law must be punished to the utmost."
The prosecution offers as Prosecution's Exhibit No. 218, Document NG-488.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: I turn to Page 45 of the English Book, and what is Document No. NG-419 -- end since my friend, Dr. Brieger advances, I withdraw offering the document.
Mr. King will carry on perhaps. It's a little too early, I think, for a recess. I believe the last number was 216 is that correct?
SECRETARY-GENERAL: Yes, sir.
MR. KING: We invite the Court to turn to Document Book "I". Turning first to Page 1 in Document Book 3-1, the prosecution introduces Document NG-522, which when offered, will become Exhibit 219. It's a letter dated Munich 16 December 1941, and there are head notes on it which I will not read.
It is to the Public Prosecutor's office with the district court Nuernberg-Fuerth.
"Nuernberg Subject:
MEIER, Franz Xaver, born on 3 Aug. 1912 in Chamerau for crimes according to the decree against public enemies.
Relative to: Your file No. 1a Sg 908/41.
The State Minister and Reich Defense Commissioner is of the opinion that capital punishment is indicated in the MEIER case.
I request you to take notice.
(signature) Freiherr v EBERSTEIN SS-Obergruppenfuehrer and General of the Police."
The Prosecution offers as Exhibit 219, the Document NG-522.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MR. KING: May we turn now to Page 2 in the English Document Book, and also Page 2 of the German Document Book, and the prosecution, as its next exhibit 220, introduces the Document NG-671. That is a letter dated Berlin 19 February 1944. It's addressed to the Reich Minister of Justice. The copy which will be submitted as an exhibit to the Secretary-General bears the initial of Klemm. be begin reading under the heading "Situation Report."
"A. High treason and Undermining of Military Morale within the Reich Territory (except for the Protectorate).
1. General:
During the time covered by this report, no observations were made which could cause me to change my evaluation of the situation from that given in my previous report of 8 Oct. 1943. Especially the investigation reports received here since then, concerning preparation for high treason, revealed no new clues that the adherents of various political opinions inimical to the state - who undoubtedly exist now as ever in not inconsiderable numbers -- have joined to a considerable extent in local or even super-local organizations beyond occasional conversational exchanges of ideas oh possibly loose formations of groups.
On the other hand, though reserve is called for, it has to be taken into consideration that above all in the circles of the former Communist Party members, many are still today ready to enter into new organizational relationships under a schooled and determined leadership."
We turn now to the next page at the top of Page 3 in both the English and German text, and read:
"In accordance with the expectation expressed already in my previous report of 8 October 1943 the number of in coining reports on investigations concerning undermining of military morale has again increased considerably. At present the daily average amounts to about 25 cases. Since in addition numerous investigations which are not handled by special proceedings; and which could not yet be concluded are pending. I am forced at present, due to the pressure of business in my office and the further difficulties caused by the affects of the terror raids, to make more extensive use of my right of transfer. However, in the interest of a uniform jurisdiction the indictments will principally be served before the people's Court in all cases where
a) the undermining activity involves members of the Wehrmacht,
b) greater significance is ascribed to the statements of the accused because of his position in public life or in the economy,
c) the accused has become known as an enemy of the state on principle or a systematic instigator either according to his personality or because of the nature of his offense,
d) the personality of the accused in connection with the nature of his offense or the effect he strived for seems to point to special treatment,
e) the offender belongs to the clergy."
We turn now to page 4 in the English text, the bottom of Page 3 in the German. What we will read now comes under the general heading:
"Special Proceedings." We read the first line in the proceedings under the heading: "aO Communist Party of Germany (KPD)."
"The German miner Zielaske, who after his arrest, died in the custody of the police, had emigrated to the Soviet Union in 1932 and later took part in the Spanish Civil War as a volunteer."
We skip now to the paragraph on the bottom of the page in the English Book, Page 4, and at the top of the page in the German Book on Page 4; under the heading: "C) European Union."
"The "European Union" (10 J 1095/43) is a catch-all organization founded by Berlin intellectuals which was supposed to gather and school all suitable persons for the establishment of a "Socialist Europe free from National Socialism" with a decided tendency toward Soviet Russia, a plan which was to be realized after the soon expected and desired collapse of the Reich. Under the leadership of Dr. phil. habil. Havemann, University lecturer, Dr. med. habil. Grosskurth, Oberarzt, architect Richter and dentist Hentsch, all of whom have already been sentenced to death as major offenders, this group consisting of about 45 members who have meanwhile been arrested and who were occupied with the writing and publishing of pamphlets and the holding discussions in which communist ideas were predominantly represented and above all the readiness for every kind of treason was expressed. Actually, for this purpose contact was made with French civilian workers and Ukrainians, and the attempt was even made to establish direct contact with the Soviet Intelligence Service. Among the members, the following should be mentioned: the department chief cf the "Tobis Film", Dr. Hatschek, who had already worked for the Soviet Intelligence Service before, the retired Government Vice-President, Dr. Hartke, and the director of the Linger Works Niesen. Furthermore, a German Oberarzt and a Ukrainian lady doctor, a German lawyer, a French licensed engineer as well as a Czech chemist belonged to the group."
We turn now to the top of Page 8 in the English test, the top of Page 6 in the German text, and read under the heading of: "Alsace."
"Several Members of Women's Labor Service from Alsace, employed within Germany proper for War Auxiliary Service, expressed in correspondence among themselves, and to relatives in Alsace, in the late summer of 1943? their anti-German sentiments, their hope for a reunion with France, and their joy about the Anglo-American invasion cf Italy."
We turn now to the bottom of Page 9 in the English text, under the heading: "E. Careless Treason," -- or, I think it could be translated: "Treason by Negligence."
"In general, there is nothing to add to the statements in my previous report of 8 October 1943. In view of the serious danger to the German conduct of the war, resulting especially from the violation of the duty to safeguard secrets, in accordance with Articles 90d and 90e of the German Penal Code, the threats of legal punishment must be described as insufficient."
That is all from this document we wish to read at this time, except to point out that on the bottom of Page 10 in the English, and 8 in the German, there appears the signature "Lautz." We, therefore, offer as Prosecution's Exhibit 220, the Document NG-671.
DR. GRUBE: Counsel for the defendant Lautz. May it please the Tribunal, I do not have the intention to object against this document. However, I should only like to point out one mistake where the text is not in accordance with the original; that is a paragraph which has not been read here. The paragraph is "C". Intentional High Treason and Espionage." It's on Page 6 of the German Document Book. At the end of this paragraph, there is, in the German text, the following sentence: "Of the 24 arrested persons, 22 belong to the Polish Volksturm." (Polish nationality). That is wrong. It should be "Polish origin." But I just found out in the English test, it is in accordance with the German original.
MR. KING: I think perhaps this is another one of those matters that can be straightened cut by this ex-office committee when it begins functioning.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MR. KING: We turn now to Page 12 in the English Book, to the Document NG-652. I regret that I do not have the page number in the German beok before me. This is the sworn affidavit of Dr. Franz Gres."
"I, Dr. Franz Gres, District Judge, retired, Amberg, Schweiggerstrasse I, declare herewith under oath:
"I was born on 2 February 1908 in Darmstadt. After receiving my Bachelor's degree, I studied law and graduated December 1933 in Darmstadt, and passed the state examination. I worked as an assistant Judge at various courts in Hessen, until I was appointed District Judge in Amberg, on 1 December 1937. There I remained until June, 1942, i. e. until I was ordered to leave for the Nuernberg Special Court."
We skip the following paragraph and begin with the next paragraph which reads:
"Dr. Rothaug was Presiding Judge when I came to the Special Court. I got to know Dr. Rothaug from the very beginning as a malicious man without character, who was afraid of nothing. He was the most dreaded and the most hated man in the Palace of Justice. We, his assistants, feared and hated him too, although we could not openly express such hatred. He also was the best informed, top man. He continually gave us his orders and instructions, making believe that he had received them from higher instances. As a high official of the SD or Security Service and of the NSR, which was the National Socialist Lawyer's League, he was continually in touch with the highest political dignitaries. He informed us to a certain extent of conferences he had held with them. Dr. Rothaug had many enemies; many people fought against him. However, he know how to have his own way due to his brutal manners and intrigues and thanks to his excellent political contacts; he also know how to practice his dreaded methods. One could even say he used terror and kept us, his assistants, under pressure.
"The sessions at which Dr. Rothaug presided can to some extent be called political show trials. He often gave long politican lectures in connection with a particular case, dealing with the war situation, the food situation and other topics which were meant for the audience, i. e.. for the public. He was unmoved by any of our objections. He repeatedly gave such lectures also to his collaborators and we called them his "gramophone records."
"Dr. Rothaug was anything but an impartial judge. He was mostly prejudiced against the defendant before he went to the trial. He demonstrated this outwardly by marking some cases with red exclamation marks in the trial calender, when he was determined, to end these cases with a death sentence even before the trial began. He showed his prejudice quite openly, too, during sessions, as well as in front of the two Assistant Judges. More than once he used to say in front of defendants: "be shall put your head before your feet." Such and similar phrases were current. He was often mean, spiteful and cynical towards defendants."
We drop down now, skipping the next paragraph and beginning with the paragraph which reads:
"I would like to mention the Grasser case, in order to elucidate particularly Rothaug's unbelievably harsh verdicts. This case still deeply impresses me. Rothaug sentenced Grasser to death on 2 July 1942. It was one of my first trials in which I participated as Assistant judge, and I remember that Grasser, a former communist functionary, was accused of a malicious political act. While working in an armament factory (Siemens Schuckert), he made some malicious remarks, such as air attacks on cities are of strategic importance because victims in war factories could no longer pursue their work. He also said before the Russo-German war that Russia and the United States would eventually win the war. He doubted the effective power of German night fighters which were unable to take off without gasoline. Grasser also was of the opinion that a former sportsman, who for political reasons had flown to France, had done the right thing. Then Grasser was c charged to have compared the attempt on the Fuehrer's life in November 1939 with the Reichstag Fire. He said that communists had been wrongly accused of both crimes. The defendant weakened the accusations very much, and even the Public Prosecutor was of the opinion that his case had to be treated less severly, because political opponents had made the charges. The defendant made a good impression during the trial which Rothaug raised to a big political affair. Grasser, who during the whole trial knew what it was all about, answered Rothaug's spiteful questions rather clearly and courageously.
"Consequently Rothaug worked himself into a tremendous rage, thus sealing the defendant's fate in advance. During the deliberations of the verdict we Assistant Judges could not agree with Rothaug's wish to judge the case according to the "Law against public enemies"."Rothaug poured out the wildest insults against us, the Assistant Judges.
He made us understand that our interpretation was incorrect and that his opinion had to be accepted. As we could not be convinced at first, the deliberations of the verdict were prolonged. That's why daring these discussions the presiding judge of the court of Appeal, Doebig, entered the conference room taking part in the deliberations. He was of our opinion that Paragraph 4 of the law against public enemies could not be applied in this case. Rothaug raged anew after Doebig had loft the room. He let it be known that he as Presiding Judge was responsible for the verdict. There was nothing else for us to do but to obey his wishes. Grasser was executed."
We turn now to the last full paragraph on page 17 in the English text. It is also the last full paragraph in the affidavit.
"Finally I would like to mention that Rothaug never passed the documents on to us to study them before a trial. On the contrary, he said this was not necessary as he always read the documents and knew exactly their contents. From this I realized that Rothaug merely tolerated us as his stooges. He therefore was in a position to keep us under preassure in his diabolical way. Rothaug was decidedly a bloodthirsty judge, known far beyond Nuernberg's borders. He was chiefly responsible for the bad reputation of the Special Court of Nuernberg."
That is signed Dr. Franz Gros, District Judge, retired.
We now offer the document NG 652 as Prosecution Exhibit 221.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MR. KING: We turn now to Page 18 in the English text and Page 13 in the German text. The prosecution introduces as what will become when formally offered Exhibit 222, the Document NG 738, which is an affidavit of one Dr. Robert Ostermeier.
"I, Dr. Robert Ostermeier, Higher Local Court Judge in retirement, Nuernberg, Thurnerstr. 32, hereby state in lieu of oath:"
We turn to page 19 in the English text, the first full paragraph there which begins:
"To both the prosecution and the associate judges, Rothaug expressed these views he held, in his usual domineoring manner which did not break any contradiction. Anyone who would raise objections contrary to Rothaug's views incurred the danger of getting into a sharp dispute with him, and in those cases he left no stone unturned to make the person impossible in the official and political fields. We knew the great influence Rothaug had with the Department of Justice and with the Nazi Party. I recall at the outbreak of the war, Rothaug who surely know that not only I but also the other judges at the Special Court did our job there only against our will, pointed out to me that we should not think we could leave our work now, and he made me understand that this would be equivalent to desertion. Also, he once showed me a secret decision according to which the decisions made by judges could also be made subject of disciplinary action. From this decision, it became apparent that under certain conditions a judge of whom it was clearly seen that he had acted against the spirit of national socialist principles, could be discharged. I also know that Rothaug's connections and position really would have enabled him to make a judge so impossible that he would be removed from office and subjected to political retaliation measures."
We turn now to the top of the following page, page 20 in the English text, which is the bottom of Page 15 and the top of Page 15 in the German text. Beginning with the sentence in the English:
"I recall that on one occasion he made threats concerning a prosecution counsel who during the main court session wanted to make a motion different from the one Rothaug considered right. Amongst other cases, I had a dispute with him at the end of 1939 on the legal appreciation of a case, and in the course of this dispute Rothaug shouted and I myself also spoke in a rather loud voice. It was a case of passing on leaflets which had been dropped by enemy aircraft. He rejected my view, which would have meant a milder judgment in some and acquittals in other unimportant cases, and from then on the severer clause, which was Article 85 of the Penal Code, was applied to such cases. It is an important factor that in this case Rothaug did not want to know anything about the decision by the Reich Supreme Court, which was contrary to his views. During the consultation Rothaug expressed his views right from the beginning without a legal and factual report on the case by the judges, which would have been the customary procedure. Rothaug almost always discussed the motion with the prosecution counsel before the court session started and before the motion was made."
We turn now to Page 21 in the English, and it is very near the top of Page 17 in the German. The Paragraph begins "As far as Rothaug's collaboration in the SD is concerned, I know that he repeatedly received the visit of the SD collaborator, junior judge Elkar.
From occasional remarks, I know that with Elkar who wanted to get information on the development of justice, Rothaug discussed questions of legislation, verdicts, and also questions of staff policy. By this connection Rothaug gathered important information which he himself used to exert pressure on the associate judges by referring to the conceptions of the Supreme Leadership of State and Party, conceptions against which no objections could be raised. Rothaug used all his connections unscrupulously in order to have his wishes executed."
We turn now to the bottom of Page 25 of the English text and the top of Page 23 in the German:
"The case against Englbauer was a case of a 19 year old youngster who was indicted and condemned only on circumstantial evidence. He was indicted of having taken advantage of the obscuration to attack a woman and to rob her of her pay. In this connection it is important to point out the fact that, because of her being insane the woman had been in an asylum for two months. Furthermore, Rothaug stated in the verdict that Englbauer had waited for the Liebl women in order to attack her. There was no confession by Englbauer with regard to this admission. However, Rothaug was of the opinion that one could not put it beyond Englbauer, that therefore the criminal act had been committed intentionally. Insofar as a serious case, as defined by Art. 2, was assumed, this was done on Rothaug's express demand. From the beginning he had promoted this conception in order to obtain a death sentence. In this case it is important to point out that defense counsel in his plea asked that Art.
2 not be applied because the crime had not been committed within the area of obscuration. Rothaug did not accept this argument. He expressed the view that the possibility of using the obscuration in order to reach and leave the location of the crime were sufficient for him to apply Art. 2 of the blackout crime decree. Rothaug furthermore expressed the opinion that in spite of his youth Englbauer should be sentenced to death, to serve as a warning example. Seen from a purely humane angle this was a hard sentence but Rothaug would not let himself be influenced by any extenuating circumstances."
That statement is signed by Dr. Robert Ostermeier, Superior Judge at Local Court in retirement.
The prosecution offers as Exhibit 222 the Document NG-738.
TEE PRESIDENT : It will be received in evidence.
MR. KING: We turn now to page 28 in the English text, which is page 24 in the German text. We introduce at this time the Document NG-661 which, when formally offered in evidence , will become Exhibit 223.
"Dr. Martin Dorfmueller, former Public Prosecutor, at present clerk, born on 9 December 1904 in Rheinhausen-Niederrhein, now residing at Wetzler, Laufdorferweg 19, main residence and address of wife: Rhein hauscn-Hechemmerich, Bertastrasse 11.
"On 1 September 1937 I was appointed Public prosecutor at Nuernberg where I handled ordinary penal matters. I was drafted into the army on 26 August 1939. In August 1940 I classified as indispensable and, in September 1940, took up my work in Nuernberg again. At the end of 1940 I was told by the Chief Public Prosecutor that I had to take over a department dealing with Special Court penal matters. I refused giving the reason that I did not wish to deal with political matters and could not, in particular, collaborate with Landgerichtsdirektor Dr. Rothaug. This refusal was respected at first. A few months later, however, I was officially ordered by the General Public Prosecutor Dr. Bems to take over a department dealing with Special Court Matters."
I drop down on the same page --
DR. KOESSL (Counsel for Defendant Rothaug): May it please the Tribunal, I object to the presentation and the reading of this document because it does not appear to be in the form of an affidavit. It does not appear to be taken as an affidavit, and it contains simply a statement without following the required form.
MR. KING: Your Honors, the prosecution is not offering it as an affidavit.
The prosecution offers it as a signed statement of the individual, Martin Dorfmueller.
THE PRESIDENT: Is this a captured document?
MR. KING: No, this is not a captured document.
THE PRESIDENT: That is its origin?
MR. KING: So far as I recollect, the origin is a request from the prosecution that the individual Dorfmueller make suck a statement. It was not, however, made under oath.
JUDGE BRAND: It does not appear to comply with Rule 21.
MR. KING: At the moment I do not have that rule before me.
JUDGE BRAND: It relates to procedure for obtaining written statements in lieu of oath.
MR. KING: His Honor is quite, right. I agree that it does not comply with that.
THE PRESIDENT: You withdraw the statement then?
MR. KING: If that is the ruling of the Court we at this time withdraw the Document NG-661 and reserve the right to resubmit it.
We turn now to page 47 in the English text, which is approximately the bottom or the middle of page 48 in the German. He introduce at this time the Document NG-697 which will become, when formally offered in evidence, the prosecution's exhibit 225.
"Affidavit: I, Dr. Ernst Escher, of Fuerth, Rudolf Breitscheidestrasse 8, on being questioned declare the following oath: I was born on 22 February 1897, studied in Wuerzburg, then after completing my time as Referendar spent two years in the service of the State and have been a qualified lawyer since 1926. Since 1929 I have been resident in Fuerth and have worked at the Nuernberg-Fuerth Courts."
We omit reading the next paragraph and begin with the foll owing paragraph which reads: