THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: May I continue with my examination of this witness?
BY DR. WANDSCHNEIDER:
Q Witness, in the course of this trial the personality of Letz, Dr. Rothenberger's assistant, has played a part. Do you know him well and can you characterize him in brief?
A Letz was one of my best friends. He is an upright, truthful man, an intelligent man. He is a man who has insight into character of people, and that is think is important here, from the point of view of his political views he is moderate. He was appointed to Berlin as Chief of the Personnel Department, and those of us who knew him welcomed that, because we believed that the personnel policy of the Ministry had thereby been placed in the best and most reasonable hands. I believe that also those gentlemen who had not known Letz before later on arrived at the same opinion which we held from the beginning.
Q Witness, can you make some general statements as to the reaction among the public prosecutors and judges whom you knew to Rothenberger's appointment to be Under-Secretary?
AAs I have stated here before, at that time I was in the Wehrmacht and I was abroad. At that time I wrote to Rothenberger and told him I was very pleased because I hoped that now he would wage our old struggle against the Gestapo from his new post better and with more emphasis. I believe that at least among the Hamburg jurists my hope was shared.
Q We will not discuss the reform plans any longer. They have been discussed here in sufficient detail. All I wish to stress is that in the view of Dr. Rothenberger the independent personality of the judge was the center of the reform plans, or rather, to put it more cautiously, the endeavor to reach that goal. Can you con firm that in this general form without referring to any details?
--
A Yes.
Q -- Can you confirm that this was Dr. Rothenberger's main endeavor?
A Yes.
Q Now I want to turn to some concrete cases, and I would like to ask you, Dr. Drescher, whether Dr. Rothenberger protected old Party members if they had made themselves guilty of some offense? Can you give us your views, and can you recall any individual cases as to Dr. Rothenberger's attitude?
A One cannot say that Dr. Rothenberger protected old Party members. Like myself, Dr. Rothenberger was out to proceed in penal cases without any regard for the person concerned. Both of us together repeatedly called on the Gauleiter and discussed such difficult cases. Later on I very frequently called on the Gauleiter by myself. We always reached an understanding with Kauffman, and as far as I know, the Party never interfered with the interests of the Administration of Justice in Hamburg. In that respect we were very well off. As for individual cases
Q Can you remember any such cases?
A Yes, I have remembered one case. A Jew by the name of Mangold, had filed denunciations with Herr Eiffe who will be called as a witness later on and who was the Hamburg representative in Berlin, denunciations -against a Party member of some years' standing -- that man's name was Dr. Fauth - for defrauding insurance money, and, I believe, for a patent fraud. That case had gone via the Hamburg representative and the Reichsstatthalter in Hamburg; and via Rothenberger , and finally had reached me through official channels, and the proceedings took place, although Party circles put up considerable opposition. That man Fauth was sentenced . That is all I can remember at the moment.
Q Thank you, that is enough. Now a last question, witness. Can you tell us something about Dr. Rothenberger's relationship with Frank and Freisler, what he said about those two?
A Rothenberger had no opinion, either of Frank or of Freisler. I believe that clashes between them did occur. At any rate, I do know that Rothenberger was always running the two down, and I did the same.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: Thank you. I have no further questions.
DR. THIELE-FREDERSDORF ( Counsel for the defendant Joel): May it please the Court, I would ask you to permit me to address a few questions to the witness.
BY DR. THIELE-FREDERSDORF:
Q Dr. Drescher, during the years from 1933 to 1939 did you have an opportunity to form an opinion of Dr. Joel's work at the Prussian Ministry of Justice and later on at the Reich Ministry of Justice so that you are able to give your judgment on it?
AAs for Joel's work at the Prussian Ministry of Justice, I know nothing about it. I only made his acquaintance after the centralization of the Administration of Justice. He was in the central prosecution office, whose task it was to investigate difficult cases on the spot, that is to say, out in the province. That office in the Ministry had to deal with the more important penal cases which had to be reported to that office. It was in that connection that I made the acquaintance of Herr Joel. I liked his natural manner, and every time when I was in Berlin I called on him.
We became friends. I know that he encountered great difficulties with various Gauleiters and also with Under-Secretary Freisler. He always defended himself against interference from the Party, in spite of those difficulties. Those difficulties went so far that his position was frequently jeopardized. But I asked him in all circumstances to try to remain on his post in order to do good to the cause. My acquaintance with him continued until approximately the middle of 1939. After that time I only saw him briefly at the conference in the autumn of 1942, which I have already mentioned.
Q Dr. Drescher, may I ask you to give us a brief explanation as to why Dr. Joel, in his work at the Central Prosecution Office, encountered so many difficulties with the eminent Party personalities? You said that at the Central Prosecution Office, Dr. Joel had to deal with particularly important cases which the local prosecution office had to report to the Ministry. Would you tell us why those cases were so important that the Ministry dealt with them?
AA little earlier on, I described the happy and satisfactory conditions that existed in Hamburg, but unfortunately it was not like that everywhere, and the local offices very frequently had things made difficult for them by the Kreisleiter and Gauleiter, so that the Ministry protected them and supported them by either having the Central Prosecution offices at Berlin taking over the case altogether or by at least sending Joel and his colleagues to the spot.
Q Thank you. I have no further questions for this witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Any other direct examination? It appears that there is none. You may cross examine.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. KING:
Q Dr. Drescher, may I clear up one part of your testimony - which perhaps may be my fault - but I didn't understand it too clearly.
You say you were called up in 1939, and I understood you to say that you remained continuously in service until 1943. Now is my understanding correct?
A Yes.
Q And than what position did you hold after 1943?
AAt the end of May of the beginning of June 1943. I returned to my old position as General Public Prosecutor at Hamburg.
Q And you maintained that position until the end of the war - until the capituation - did you?
A No. On the 16 of August 1943, I was arrested. I was in office only for about six weeks.
Q I see.
AAnd for a fortnight out of that time - I think it was for eight days - I was in Copenhagen on an official trip.
Q How the action which resulted in your arrest, which you have gone into in some detail, how long did that detain you? What was the total length of time? Were you freed of whatever charges that were brought against you? When were you freed of that?
A I was not freed. On the 16 of August 1943 I was arrested.
Q Yes.
AAnd I remained under arrest, first for a fortnight in Hamburg, and the rest of the time in Berlin at the RSHA in Prinz Albrecht Strasse. I was discharged when the trial in Leipzig opened. That was held on the 27th and 28th of October 1943.
Q As a result of that trial you were sentenced to four months?
A Yes.
Q And you got out of prison, or wherever you were incarcerated, then sometime in the middle of 1944?
A No. I didn't serve the term. The sentence was four months' imprisonment, and I have to add that two months of that term I had served through my detention pending trial.
But when I returned to Berlin, Herr Letz told me that there was no question of my having to serve my term. The fact that I had been sentenced seemed to be enough for Herr Himmler.
Q How did Mr. Letz fix that up so that you didn't have to serve your sentence? Did he ever talk to you about that?
A No.
Q He just told you that it was all right, that you could disregard the sentence, that you wouldn't have to serve it?
A He told me - now what was it? - "You need not worry. We do not intend to execute the sentence."
Q Was Letz in charge of any penal division so that he was in a position to say on his own account what sentences would or would not be served?
A No, no. Herr Letz had nothing to do with that. I regarded that as a friendly way of his telling me his opinion.
Q And you never learned then what the reasons were why you did not have to serve your sentence?
A No.
Q Now what is your subsequent history after the trial of Leipzig, and after you returned to Berlin, and Mr. Letz told you that it was all right, you didn't have to serve your sentence? What did you do after that?
A I then made an application for my transfer to the status of waiting period.
Q Excuse me, Dr. Drescher. I do not understand what is meant by the term "waiting period." Would you explain that for me, please?
A In the case of a number of political officials and in that of general and senior public prosecutors, under the German Civil Service Law, there was the possibility, if conflicts had arisen with the superior authority, or in cases like my own, that the officials concerned were relieved of their office while their salaries were paid out to 75 per cent until further notice.
That does not mean that the person concerned has been retired. But as far as I can recollect, the time of that status of waiting period was, I believe, limited to six months, and it was open to the civil servant concerned to ask for pensioning. That is what I did.
Q In other words, you asked to be given a permanent pension, and eventually that permanent pension came through?
A Yes, yes, on first of June 1944.
3 And you're still receiving that pension, or you were rather, until the capitulation?
A Yes, and beyond that. My pension was stopped at the end of 1945. My proceedings before the Denazification Court pardon me, before the Denazification Committee is still pending. I have not yet been given a decision.
Q Yes. Just one more question on this trial. The offense which you were charged with was actually committed by you in Hamburg, was it not?
A Yes.
Q Yes, and you were tried in Leipzig, were you not?
A Yes.
Q What is the explanation of that?
A I have to revert to my arrest. I was told by the Gestapo officials in Berlin that Himmler originally demanded that I was to be kept in prison until the last of those communists who had been discharged by mistake had been caught again. Then as far as I know, negotiations started on the Thierack and Himmler level, and Himmler then demanded that if I got out of police arrest, the Administration of Justice would arrest me. Naturally, that was refused because it was merely an offense, at the best, and a legal reason for the issuance by a judge of an arrest warrant could not be found, because the facts had been established and there was no suspicion of an attempt to escape. Finally, they agreed -- that is what I was told--that the matters was to be brought before the special penal senate of the Reich Supreme Court. There was a law saying that a case of any particular significance, instead of being tried by the judge of local competence, had to be tried before the special penal senate of the Reich Supreme Court, under the President of the Reich Supreme Court, and that happened.
Q I take it that you knew that Mr. Letz fairly well, did you not?
A Yes, very well.
Q Let's see, he was a member of the SA, was he not, on Dr. Rothenberger's recommendation?
A Letz was a member of the SS.
Q Yes, of the SS.
A Yes.
Q You were legal adviser to the SA, were you not?
A I think that I misunderstood the gentleman. I understood him to ask about Letz. Letz was a member of the SS.
Q Yes. Now, I am asking about you.
A Yes.
Q You were legal adviser to the SA, were you not?
A Yes.
Q And how long did you act as legal adviser to the SA?
AActually from approximately 1937 until the middle of 1939. Then, I joined the Wehrmacht, and when I retuned very soon the matter of my arrest occured.
Q Yes.
AAnd from that moment onwards, in effect, I was out of things.
Q Yes, I understand. Now, I want to go back briefly to that day in August, 1943, when you were arrested. You testified that Dr. Rothenberger called the Gauleader in Hamburg from Berlin and -
A No.
AAm I incorrect in that? If that is incorrect, what did happen?
A Rothenberger was in Hamm, in Westphalia, when Joel was introduced to his office as general public prosecutor. He was rung up there from Berlin and he from Hamm rang up Hamburg.
Q Then, I will make that incorrection. Dr. Rothenberger called the Gauleader of Hamburg from Hamm where he was making a speech in honor of Dr. Joel's appointment; and the Gauleader then in Hamburg arranged to have you transferred from the jail to a suite in the Four Seasons Hotel; is that right?
A I was not in jail, but the Gestapo having been bombed out too; had provisional quarters in a villa, Rotenbauchaussee. In that villa there were some of the offices, as well as some rooms which were equipped with field beds for Gestapo officials who had also been bombed out of their homes, and who had no home. It was in one of those rooms that I spent the first night, together with public prosecutor Vogel who had inadvertently carried cut those mistaken discharges; and, during that first night I was awakened and an official told me that the Gauleiter suggested to me that I move into the Hotel Four Seasons.
Q Do you recall that Gauleiter's name at the moment?-- At that time?
A In Hamburg?
Q Yes.
A Kauffmann, naturally.
Q And in the middle of the first night you moved to the Four Seasons Hotel where you had more comfortable quarters?
A No. No, I had asked that official whether that permission to move into the Four Seasons Hotel extended to Herr Vogel as well. He said he knew nothing about him. Then, I said I am going to say here too. At noon next day I asked the head if the Gestapo in Hamburg whether that offer still held good and also applied to Vogel, and, if it did in that case, I would be pleased to accept, and would undertake not to leave the Four Seasons Hotel without permission -- and not use the telephone either. I assumed that it was a case of custodia honesta, honorable custody, and that is what was done.
Q Yes. Now, you testified that in October, 1942 you were recalled from the service to attend a meeting of court presidents.
A Yes.
Q Is that right? Is the date right?
A Yes.
Q Where was that meeting held?
A That meeting was held in October, 1942, at the Ministry of Justice in Wilhelmstrasse, where those meetings were always held.
Q What did you say in connection with Copenhagen earlier. Did I misunderstood you?
A I was in Copenhagen on duty with the armed forces.
Q You came from Copenhagen to the meeting in Berlin?
A Yes.
Q Yes. You have known Dr. Rothenberger now for about twenty seven years, haven't you?
A No.
Q Didn't you say you met him in 1920 first?
A Yes, it was in the 20's.
Q But not in 1920?
A It was in the 1920's that I made his acquaintance on one occasion. We had a talk of perhaps five minutes. Rothenberger didn't even remember that in 1933; when he called me to him he said, we had never met before. I said, oh, yes we have had one talk; that was all.
Q Dr. Drescher, in the past few hours have you talked with Dr. Wandschneider about the general subject of concentration camps in Hamburg?
A We had a general conversation.
Q What did you decide to say as a result of that general conversation?
A I have been here in Nuernberg new for seven days and naturally we have talked about all sorts of things, and we have also discussed the question of concentration camps, Neueugamme, there was also a concentration camp at Fuhlsbuettel. What is it you want to know?
Q I thought I made that clear in my question. I asked you what, as a result of your conversations with Dr. Wandschneider, you decided to say in connection with concentration camps.
A Weol, I told him what concentration camps we had in the surroundings; that is what he asked me about.
Q I am sorry; go ahead.
A I never went to one of the Hamburg concentration camps.
Q How many concentration camps were there around Hamburg?
AAs far as I know there was only Neuengamme. That was the only concentration camp proper, but I don't know when that was established. I believe that was during the war while I was away, and besides, the police had a police prison in Hamburg in a street called Bei Den Huetten. That was always called briefly the Huetten Prison. Prisoners were delivered there against whom proceedings were instituted and there they stayed until they were brought before the judge. That prison was found to small in 1933. Therefore, the police approached the Administration of Justice. In those days I had nothing to do with the prisons. That was only after the centralization.
Q What days are these of which you speak? You say: "In those days I had nothing to do with them."
A Until the centralization, from 1933 until the centralization of the Administration of Justice I had nothing to do with prisons. During that time, between 1933 and 1934, I believe it was, the police rented at the big prison of Fuhlsbuettel one block from the Administration of Justice. It was the women's prison. That was to be the extension of the Huetten Prison. The Administration of Justice had nothing to do with the prisoners who were held in that block, with the only exception of the food which was brought over against payment from the big kitchen. It was the police who paid, the administration of Justice for that food. Later I heard that concentration camp inmates were moved into that police prison at Fuhlsbuettel. For example, persons after the 30 July 1934, as I have been told, were soon after discharged.-
Q Excuse me one moment. What was the name of that official?
A What official are you referring to?
Q The individual discharged.
A He was not an official. People had been brought to this prison who were under suspicion of having taken part in the Rochm Putsch and those people were discharged afterwards. That was the state of affairs which I found when the administration of Justice was centralized and when the Administration of prisons came under my direction. I tried with due emphasis to get the police out of that block because I needed it for my own purposes.
Q I don't want to cut short any necessary explanation in answer to my question. I think, however, that what you have said already answers part of it and what you are saying now goes far beyond the explanation that I wanted. Can you tell me about the Neuengamme Concentration Game? How far from Hamburg was it located and did you knew about that?
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: One moment, please. May it please the Court, I object to this question from the Prosecutor. Until now I thought it right to allow the witness to answer, but I think that his questioning now exceeds the subject of direct examination to such an extent that even with the greatest tolerance I cannot concede it as being justified.
THE PRESIDENT: The objection is overruled.
BY MR. KING:
Q Would you tell me about the Neueugamme Concentration Camp?
A I never was there. I do not know when it was established. As I mentioned before, I assume that it was established during the war. I had no connection with it either in my official capacity nor as a private citizen.
Q That is sufficient for mo unless you feel it necessary to add more. Did Dr. Wandschneider yesterday or today indicate to you the general nature of the discussion we had yesterday -- Dr. Rothenberger and I -- about a certain affair which involved concentration camps in and around Hamburg?
A Yes
Q You already know the facts but I will repeat them and I want to ask you several specific questions concerning them and I want to be sure that you understand them. You know, of course, the individuals Streckenbach and Kauffmann. You know Streckenbach, do you?
A Yes, I know Strenckenbach.
Q And you said you knew Kauffmann, and of course you know Dr. Rothenberger?
A Just a moment. Who is Koch?
Q Kauffmann.
A Kauffmann, yes, yes.
Q Now, do you knew anything about and do you recall any facts about brutalities which resulted in murder of concentration camp inmates in Neueugamme or perhaps in other concentration camps in the Hamburg area which came to your attention while you were attorneygeneral in Hamburg?
A No, nothing.
Q You never heard of any abuses whatsoever while you were attorneygeneral or before or afterwards which occured in concentration camps in the Hamburg area?
A No.
Q Nothing ever came to your attention?
THE PRESIDENT: He has answered the question. You will have to accept his answer.
A I never heard anything about it in my official capacity. Privately I hear very little about it because people were afraid to discuss things with a person in an official position, which perhaps might result in unpleasant consequences to them. I heard about the interior of concentration camps for the first time when I sat in Prinz Albrecht Strasse in Berlin and the police officials, Gestapo people, one of whom was in my room day and night, told me something about it.
THE PRESIDENT: He has answered your question. Proceed more rapidly, Mr. King.
We are wasting time this afternoon.
MR. KING: I am satisfied with the answer.
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead and ask another question.
BY MR. KING:
Q Do you remember a report submitted to you on concentration camps abuses which was written by one Dr. Stegemann?
A Dr. Stegemann?
Q I will spell it : S-T-E-G-E-M-A-N-N-.
A No, I don't remember. May I see it?
Q I am asking you if you remember the report.
A No.
Q You don't recall in Dr. Rothenberger's presence tearing that report up and throwing it in the wastebasket?
A No.
MR. KING: The Prosecution has no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Drescher, I should like to ask you a question or two.
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q What office were you holding when you caused the release of the prisoners which later caused you some difficulties?
AAt that time I was the public prosecutor general in Hamburg.
Q And, very briefly, what procedure did you fellow in causing their release? I mean did you issue an order that they should be released?
A Yes.
Q You made the order?
A Yes.
Q Did you have to consult with any other officials before making the order?
A No, I could not do that.
Q Thank you. Another point: You said that Rothenberger and you discussed cases of misconduct of the police with the gauleiter.
You and he went together, you said, and discussed cases with the Gauleiter.
A No, I did not say that. We did discuss some cases, penal cases; misconduct, no.
Q What kind of cases did you discuss with the Gauleiter in connection with Dr. Rothenberger?
A Those were cases, for example, where a party functionary was being blamed with having committed a punishable offense.
Naturally, the Gauleiter was interested in that because they were old friends of his and he wanted to know what was the matter. We told him.
Q It was misconduct by party members that was the subject of your discussions?
A To clear up things may I say misconduct in this case is the same thing as punishable offense, --or am I wrong, Your Honor?
Q Did you discuss with the Gauleiter cases in which party members had been charged with doing something which was against the law?
A Yes.
Q Did those cases come up in court afterwards?
A Oh, yes.
Q I have only one other question. In referring to the defendant, Dr. Klemm, you said that he investigated difficult cases in the provinces. Would you tell me over what area -- I don't mean Klemm--Joel investigated difficult cases in the provinces, over what area did he make those investigations in person?
A It extended over the whole of Germany, Joel was together with another gentleman that is until 1939.
Q Was it Altreich only?
A Yes. I don't know anything beyond that. I wasn't there after that.
THE PRESIDENT: That is all I wanted to know.
RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. WANDSCHNEIDER:
Q May I address two questions to the witness on re-direct examination?
Dr. Drescher, you said under cross examination that you did not serve your term. Is it not correct to say that if the two months were counted you did serve it in part?
A Yes, what I should have said was the remaining sentence.
Q You further stated that you discharged those prisoners by mistake; that only referred to the Communists, didn't it?
A Yes, only Communists.
Q The others you released for humane reasons?
A Yes, about 400.
Q When your friend Letz told you he was of the opinion that you would not have to serve the remainder of the term, did you think what wanted to express by not serving the remainder was for those humane reasons?
A I believe that if Himmler had not interfered the administration of justice on it's own initiative would never have introduced proceedings against me.
Disciplinary proceedings as first was done could have been instituted against me for I had to assume the responsibility for such accidents which had occurred in my area but I do not believe that the administration of justice on it's own initiative would have instituted penal proceedings against me. There was no reason to do that.
Q Thank you. May it please the Court, I have no further question;
THE PRESIDENT: The witness is excused.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: I am now calling the witness, Eiffe and I would ask you to permit me to examine him.
BY JUDGE BLAIR:
Hold up your right hand and be sworn.
I swear by God the Almighty and Omniscient that I will speak the pure truth and "will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. WANDSCHNEIDER:
Q Witness, will you tell the Court please when you were born and your personal data?
A My name is Peter Ernst Eiffe. I was born on the 28 August 1898 in Hamburg.
Q Would you say what positions you held from 1933 until the collapse and what your occupations are today.
A On the 18th of March 1933 at the decision of the Senate of Hamburg I was appointed to Berlin as Hamburg Minister. In 1932 I decided to join the party. My membership dates from June 1933. In Berlin it was my task as the Hamburg minister delegate with the Reich Government to represent the interests of Hamburg. When the Reichrat was dissolved in February 1934 I was given the official designation "Senate Advisor", "Senate Syndikus", and I became a Hamburg civil servant.
From that day onwards I dealt with purely economic tasks. In particular it was my job to represent the interests of the overseas trade in Berlin.
Q Since when have you known Dr. Rothenberger?
AA few days after my appointment I made Dr. Rothenberger's acquaintance in Berlin. I had not seen him before but I knew that he was a jurist of repute. I liked him at once on account of the fact that he was so learned and on account of the fact that his general knowledge and education was very good, and I am making special mention of this because I felt comforted when I saw that Reichsstatthalter Kauffmann was placing men in important posts of whom one could tell immediately they were of certain stature and who possessed the necessary professional qualifications.
Q Witness, during the war you were a soldier, were you not?
A I was a soldier from the first to the last day of the first and last world wars.
Q Therefore, you did not have much opportunity to form an opinion on Dr. Rothenberger in Berlin?
A You mean in his capacity as under-secretary?
Q Yes, as under-secretary in Berlin?
A No, I did not have that opportunity in Berlin.
Q Therefore, I would ask you to tell us only about the few things about which you know concerning the period of office as undersecretary. Can you tell us something about the reasons which brought about Dr. Rothenberger's appointment to Berlin?
A When Dr. Rothenberger was appointed to the office of undersecretary, I heard of it through the newspapers. I was a naval officer at that time and I was stationed in Norway. Shortly afterwards I was on leave in Berlin. Accidentally I met Gauleiter Kauffmann and spoke to him. What I said to him was more or less literally this: Do you believe that the Thierack-Rothenberger team is a fortunate one?
I asked that question because I knew that Thierack was a fanatic party man while Rothenberger had emphasized repeatedly to me that only professional qualifications could make a judge a judge and that the independence of the judge constituted the foundation of each constitutional state. The Gauleiter said in reply, more or less literally this: Yes, I think it is a good team for just as I sent you to Berlin to counter-act the stupid ideas of autocracy and to act as a balancing agent, so I also believe Dr. Rothenberger will succeed in doing the same. That, is all I know about it.
Q May I in this connection ask you, witness, did Herr Kaufmann, did he welcome Rothenberger's appointment to Berlin or did he welcome Rothenberger's cooperation with Thierack?
A What he welcomed was the fact that Rothenberger would become under-secretary and would collaborate with Thierack.
Q Do you mean to say that under Thierack he would have the opportunity to carry out his plans?
A Yes.
Q What was your view on Thierack's personality of that time?
A I did not know Thierack well enough to form an opinion about his personality. I never talked to him personally. I saw him once or twice, for example on the podium at the May celebrations. He struck me and my wife too as an unpleasant person.
Q You cannot say any more?
A No, I cannot say any more.
Q Thank you, witness. In the evidence submitted here a part was played by Dr. Rothenberger's attitude in the case of charges against the old party members. Can you tell us about a concrete case with which Dr. Rothenberger dealt?
A I happen to be able to tell you about such a case for I was involved in it.