DR. GAWLIK: If the Tribunal please, the last report may be found in Document Book Rendulic Supplementary Volume 1 on page 71 of the English. May I add that the reports are complete in the German Document Book, but they are not complete in the English version. There in Rendulic Document Book the document is complete which in the Prosecution's Document Book 16 as NOKW-658 is in complete, but in order not to give the Translation Department too much work, I desisted from including this document again in its complete form in my own document book.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q Can you tell us who carried out this reprisal measure?
A Here again it is highly likely that the reprisal measure was not carried out by German troops, but was carried out by Croat authorities, and the Division merely reported what had happened in their area.
Q I shall now hand you the teletype letter of 23 December 1943 which is Document NOKW-658, Exhibit 375, in Volume XVI on page 36 of the English and 88 of the German. Was the shooting reported on 23 December of 25 persons then suspects and hostages ordered by you?
A No.
Q Can you give us any reasons?
A That period of time I was on leave.
Q Can you tell us who carried out that measure?
A I do not know, but I assume that again it was carried out by Croat agencies who as a matter of principle and on their own volition carried out reprisal measures.
Q Who ordered that hostages be seized in Croatia?
AAs I said before probably the Croat authorities.
Q And who arrested the hostages?
A Most likely Croat police.
Q Did the Corps have hostage camps of its own?
A No, they did not.
Q Did the troop units under you have hostage camps?
A Not as far as I know.
Q I shall now hand you the letter of 15 January 1944 which is Document NOKW-705 which is Exhibit 378 contained in Volume 16 on page 44 of the English, 96 of the German. Does that document contradict what you have said so far?
A No. This very document shows that repeatedly I forbade units under my command to arrest hostages on their own. They had to address themselves through Croat authorities who after all were competent for these things.
Q Does this document show that hostages were arrested by military departments?
A The document has reference to police and military departments. The hostages, because of whom this report of 18 December 1943 was made, were probably arrested by the police department. The Croat authorities frequently did not make very clear distinctions between police and Wehrmacht; unless I am very much mistaken this case was cleared up in that respect, namely that the police did it.
Q I shall now hand you the daily report by the inspector of the Railway Security Guard of 3 December 1943, which is Document NOKW-073, Exhibit 373, contained in Volume 15 on page 75 of the English and 102 of the German text. Is this a report by the LXIX Reserve Corps?
A No.
Q Was the report addressed to the LXIX Corps?
A No.
Q Did you gain knowledge of this report?
A No, it is a report which is not addressed to the Corps.
Q Wasn't the inspector of the Railway Security Guards subordinate to the LXIX Corps?
A No, he was not.
Q Was the reprisal measure carried out by the units of the LXIX Army Corps?
A No.
Q Who carried it out?
A The reprisal measure as the report says was ordered by the Croat State Commissioner for Railway Security.
Q In other words, what does this document show us?
A What I said time and again that any attacks against railway lines were not retaliated by German troops, but by Croat agencies.
Q Can you tell us whether this even occurred in the area of the XXIX Reserve Corps at all?
A From the daily report one cannot see that this occurred in the Corps area. No place is named, and I do not know what actually happened.
DR. GAWLIK: This brings me to the end of analyzing Count I of the indictment. Now, I shall deal with the next Count, the arrest of hostages.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q In this connection I should like to hand you first from Document Book 14, a document which is on page 73 of the English and page 52 of the German. The number is NOKW-143, and the Exhibit number is 346. Did you sign this teletype letter?
A No.
Q Does it bear your initials?
A No.
Q Can you tell us who made the correction in handwriting of the typewritten text?
A I couldn't tell you.
Q. Did you have knowledge of this teletype letter at the time?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Did you order that this woman teacher in Kapola be arrested?
A. No.
Q. Who ordered this arrest?
A. I should assume that it was the Croat units to whom the company belonged, because the Croatian Captain who had deserted wanted the company to desert as well. The Croatian unit informed the division of this as a special occurrence, which had occurred in the area of the division.
Q. What do you know about the arrest of this woman teacher in Kapola?
A. This woman teacher, as far as I know, had after her husband escaped, become the contact person between his company, which was to be enduced to desert to the partisans as well. She was suspected of carrying secret intelligence concerning the Croat units and deliver them to the partisans.
Q. Was the woman teacher arrested for what her husband had done, do you mean?
A. No.
Q. Was she shot or hanged?
A. No.
Q. What do you know about her later fate and measures taken against the woman teacher in Kapola?
A. The partisans offered to exchange her for two German N.C.O.'s. The Croatian company concerned was soon afterwards transferred to Zagreb, thus any reason for the arrest of the woman teacher was removed. She was therefore released.
Q. Now, let us discuss another case from document N.O.K.W. 658, which is exhibit 375 in volume 16 on page 8 of the English and 18 of the German text, the teletype letter of 25 September 1943 and I draw your attention to the arrest of 84 persons arrested, reported under paragraph II. Did you sign this teletype letter?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Did you know about the teletype letter at the time?
A. No.
Q. Can you tell us why?
A. I was on leave at the time.
Q. Did you order that these people be arrested?
A. No.
Q. Can you tell us who ordered that these people be arrested?
A. I assume SS Gruppenfuehrer Kammerhofer or one of his commanding officers, because he was in charge of this operation.
Q. Were you informed of the arrests?
A. No.
Q. Can you tell us why these persons were arrested by Gruppenfuehrer Kammerhofer or any other police officers?
A. I assume because they were suspected of belonging to the bands.
Q. Can you tell us what happened to them?
A. I assume that those who were innocent and in whose case it could not be proven that they belonged to the bands, they were released, the others were handed over to the Croat agencies.
Q. Now let me draw your attention to the report contained under 11c, concerning measures taken against 100 persons suspected of being members of the bands. They were taken to Brod, did you order that measure?
A No.
Q Did you know anything about it all?
A No, that was impossible because I was on leave. It is the sane report.
Q Can you tell us why those persons were arrested?
A They were under suspicion of belonging to the bands.
Q Can you tell us what happened to them?
A I assume that their cases were to be investigated in Brod, as the report said guilty persons were handed over to the Croatians and the others released.
Q To discuss another case now, I will hand you the teletype letter of 29 October 1943 on page 12 of the English in volume 16 and page 30 of the German text. This is document NOKW 658, exhibit 375 and I draw your attention to the arrest reported under IIb of 100 hostages. Did you sign that teletype letter?
A No.
Q Did you have any knowledge of this document, which the prosecution has submitted?
A I don't think so and certainly not this part of it.
Q Can you tell us why?
A The document does not show my initials. In other words I most probably have not seen it.
Q Did you order that these 100 hostages be arrested?
A No.
Q Do you know what happened to them?
A I don't
Q Then I shall hand you the teletype letter of 16 October 1943, contained in volume lb on page 16 of the English and page 39 of the German text. This is document NOKW 658, exhibit 375 and I draw your attention to the arrests reported under 11-c of the majority of the population of the villages of Paklencia and Vocavica. Can you tell us whether this report is in accordance with the facts?
A The correctness of these statements report becomes clear from the extract of the war diary of the LXIX Corps for the period between 13 July 1943 and 31 December 1943. Under the date of 17 October 1943 there is the following entry and that seems to me to be the correct thing, 187th Reserve Division reports reprisal measures carried out for the surprise attack on Novska with the arrest of 27 male hostages between the ages of 50 and 60 years, one third of whom were the railway station personnel in Novska, where it was proven that they belonged to the bands and the villages of Paklencia and Vocarica were burned down.
Q What is your explanation for the discrepancy in the statements in the teletype letter of 16 October contained in Document NOKW 658, exhibit 375 on page 16 of volume 16 and what the war diary says, which is in document 648, exhibit 374 in volume 16 on page 2 of the English and page 5 of the German?
A The teletype letter quite obviously exaggerated the whole affair, perhaps in order to emphasize the severity of the counter measures. In the war diary everything is reduced to 27 members of the bands who were taken as hostages.
Q What can we see from this discrepancy?
A The discrepancy shows that statements in teletype letters, particularly where reprisal measures are concerned, are not always reliable 100%?
Q Can you tell us what happened to those 27 male hostages?
A I assume that they were handed over to the Croat authorities.
Q Did you order their arrest?
A No.
JUDGE BURKE: At this point, Dr. Gawlik, we well take our noon recess.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is in recess until 1:30 o'clock.
(A recess was taken until 11:30 Hours.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 18 December 1947.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: You may proceed.
ERNST DEHNER - Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY DR. GAWLIK (Counsel for defendant Dehner):
Q. General, before the recess we were talking about document NOKW-658, Exhibit 375, in Document Book XVI, page 16 of the English and page 39 of the German. This was the teletype dated the 16th of October 1943, and in connection with this we were discussing the entries in the war diary, Prosecution Document 648, Exhibit 374, in Document Book XVI, page 2 of the English and page 5 of the German.
We were talking about the seizure of 27 male hostages. Can you comment on the question, General, of what happened to these 27 male hostages?
A. These 27 male hostages were in any case given over to the Croat agencies.
Q. Did you order the seizure of the hostages, General?
A. No.
Q. Can you state who ordered this measure?
A. No, I cannot do this today.
Q. Did you know anything about this measure before it was carried out?
A. No, nothing at all.
Q. Can you tell us why the population from these villages was seized?
A. These were two notorious band strong point which participated repeatedly in acts of sabotage against the main railway line and in surprise raids. Membership of the bands was definitely established.
Q. Can you state what might have happened to these people?
A. In any case they were screened and those against whom no band membership could be proved, were released. The others, I assume, were handed over to the Croat agencies.
Q. I come to another case. Now, I will show you the document, teletype dated the 3rd of November 1943, Document NOKW-507, Exhibit 358, in Document Book XIV, page 112 of the English and page 88 of the German.
What is this document about?
A. In any case, it's a copy.
Q. Is it a certified copy?
A. No, it is not a certified copy and there is also no reference number on it.
Q. Did you know this document submitted by the prosecution when you were a Commanding General?
A. No.
Q. Can you make any comment about the correctness of this copy?
A. According to the document submitted, it is the copy of a teletype, - a teletype dated the 3rd of November 1943, and underneath it states, "Daily report for the 4th of November." That is impossible, and this document is also very unreliable, because it bears no signature or initial or any other mark of this kind.
DR. GAWLIK: Here, in addition, your Honors, I would like to state that these are not mistakes in the mimeographed documents, but the mistakes are in the photostatic copy submitted. The document books are copied correctly.
Q. I would now like to draw your attention to the facts under figure 2-a which reports the seizures of hostages. Did you order the seizure of those hostages?
A. No, I did not order this.
Q. Before these hostages were seized did you know about the intended measure?
A. No, I received no knowledge of this.
Q. Was Regiment No. 150 subordinate to the 187th Reserve Division?
A. I can't say this today with any certainty. It could also have been a Croat troop unit.
Q. On the basis of the teletype can you state why the hostages were seized?
A. In any case there was here again the suspicion of band membership. Jamina, here on the map, was a notorious band strong point and German troops had frequently been fired on from this place.
Q. On the basis of the document submitted, can you state what happened to these people?
A. I can't say today with absolute certainty. I assume here, too, that these people were screened as to their band membership and the innocent were released and those people who belonged to the bands were handed over to the Croat agencies.
Q. I now come to another case. I show you from Document Book XV pages 77, 78 of the English, page 103 of the German, Document NOKW-073, Exhibit 373. I would like to point out, first of all, that this is not the teletype of the 15th of December 1943 as stated on page 77 and page 78 of the English and on page 103 of the German. According to the photostatic copy submitted the seizure of the 220 hostages is contained in a teletype of the 8th of December 1943, and insofar as this is concerned the copies contained in the English and German document books are incorrect.
Did you sign the document submitted?
A. No, I did not sign it.
Q. Can you comment on the question about whether you had any knowledge of the events contained the document dated the 8th of December 1943?
A. No, this is impossible for the one reason that this is an army report which went on to higher quarters, and because the corresponding corps report is missing.
Q. Did you order the seizure of the 220 hostages?
A. No.
Q. Can you tell us whether you had any knowledge of the seizure of these hostages?
A. No
Q. I now come to another case. I show you the daily report dated the 24th of August 1943, Document NOKW-1758, Exhibit No. 559, Document Book XXIV, page 251 of the English and page 184 of the German.
Did you, as Commanding General receive knowledge of the document submitted?
A. No, I received no knowledge about it at all.
Q. Can you comment on the question as to who seized the hostages?
A. It was probably for an attack on gendarmarie in Kacma. For this hostages were seized. I assume that the Croat gendarmerie who were stationed in the locality of Kacma seized these hostages.
Q. Was the Croat gendarmerie subordinate to you?
A. The Croat gendarmerie was subordinate to the Croat government.
Q. The seizure of 40 men as hostages by the Croat 1st Mountain Brigade is mentioned as reprisal for a surprise raid. Was the Croat 1st Mountain Division subordinate to the 173rd Reserve Division?
A. No, it was not subordinate.
Q. To whom was this Croat 1st Mountain Division subordinate?
A. It was subordinate to the Croat Ministry for Armed Power.
Q. Why, then, were the measures carried out by the Croat 1st Mountain Brigade reported by the 187th Reserve Division?
A. Because this Croat Mountain Brigade was quartered in the area of the 187th Reserve Division and because this division had to report everything which took place in its area.
Q. I will now show you Document NOKW-1746, Exhibit No. 562, Document Book XXV, page 25 in the English, page 21 in the German. Did you give an order for the suggested seizure of hostages contained in this document?
A. The seizure of hostages is mentioned in the last paragraph of this communication of the 187th Reserve Division to the corps headquarters of the 69th Reserve Corps. Therefore, I did not give the order for this seizure of hostages.
Q. Were these hostages seized?
A. I don't know and I don't think so either. If they were supposed to have been seized -- and in any case as was usual they would have been seized by the Croat authorities -- the letter of the Divisional Commander concerns an inquiry about the transfer of a reinforced battalion of another division to Duprava, and the last paragraph merely speaks about the fact that the population in the villages around Duprava are supposed to be house partisans up 80%, and he thinks it necessary for the seizure of hostages to take place. This does not by any means mean that the seizure really took place. What the result of this inquiry was, I really cannot say today.
Q. This brings us to the end of the subject, "Seizure of hostages." I just have one more question to present with regard to the first part.
General, I show you Document NOKW-1551, Exhibit No. 458, Document Book XX, page 2 of the English and page 2 of the German. This is a report of the OKH dated the 16th of March 1944.
While you were in charge of the 69th Reserve Corps did you receive any knowledge of this teletype?
A. No, this was impossible because this is a report of the OKH, and because the corresponding corps or perhaps army report is missing.
Q. Was the measure set down in this teletype ordered by you?
A. No.
Q. Can you state who ordered and who carried this measure out?
A. I do not know the incident at all but I assume that the measure against these 26 bandits was not ordered by an agency subordinate to me, and was also not carried out by a troop unit subordinate to me. This measure, as was usual, was probably ordered and carried out by the Croat agencies, and this also is not in contradiction of any order because in the meantime the well known Army Group order dated the 22nd of December 1943 had come into effect, according to which the order and execution is to be carried out by the Croat government or its representatives. I would also like to supplement this report insofar as, in the diaries which came from Washington, I found that through this mine blasting near Garcin there were not only, as it states here in the OKH report 22 own losses, but in addition i officer and 27 men were wounded because of this sabotage act.
Q. The order mentioned by General Dehner, the Army Group order, is to be found in Document NOKW-172, Exhibit No. 379 in Document Book XVI, page 49 of the English.
This brings me to the end of Count No. I of the indictment. I now come to Count II of the indictment, "Plundering and Destruction," and we will deal, first of all with Count 9-e of the indictment. The prosecution has charged you in the indictment under Count 9-e with the fact that approximately on December 1943 troops of the 173rd Reserve Division under the command of the jurisdiction of the 69th Reserve Corps during the operation Kommerhofer set on fire two Croat villages. The prosecution submitted here as evidence the daily report dated the 24th of September 1943, Document NOKW-658, Exhibit 375, in Document Book XV, page 7 of the German and page 16 of the English.
Is this teletype signed by you?
A. No, this is again a teletype bearing no signature. Might I please have the photostatic copy?
Q. Does this teletype bear any kind of initial by you?
A. No, the teletype bear*s no initials at all.
Q. How do you understand this report, General?
A. The report is set down in the photostatic copy as quite incomprehensible.
Q. Which words are struck out in this report?
A. Struck out are the words, "recruited" and "villages on fire." Those are the words struck out.
Q What can be seen from the fact that the words you mentioned are struck out?
A I assume that the localities were not set on fire if the words are struck out.
Q These measures took place in the course of the Operation Kammerhofer. Who was SS Gruppenfuehrer Kammerhofer?
A He was the representative of the Reichfuehrer SS and Chief of Police with the Croat government.
Q Which agencies were subordinate to Kammerhofer?
A The so-called Police Sector Leaders in Croatia.
Q From whom did Hammerhofer receive his orders?
AAs I have already mentioned a few times, Kammerhofer received his orders from Reichfuehrer Himmler.
Q Was SS Gruppenfuehrer Kammerhofer subordinate to the 173rd Reserve Division?
A No.
Q Did you give orders to Kammerhofer for execution of the measures contained in the daily report of the 24th of September 1943 -- under figure 2a?
A No.
Q Can you give us any further details about this?
A No. At that time I was on leave and from this fact alone I could not have given the order. In addition, Kammerhofer was not subordinate to the Corps so that my deputy could not have given him the order either.
Q To prove that the police in Croatia did not execute the measures and operations under the orders or responsibility of military agencies on orders of the representative of the Reichfuehrer SS Himmler, I would like to draw the attention of the Tribunal to Document Book Dehner No. II* page 31 of the English and page 31 of the German, to the Document Dehner No. 16, which I have already submitted, Exhibit Dehner No. 10, dated the 13th of September 1943 in which it states:
"Colonel Handl, Commander of the Regular Police in Zagreb, undertakes on orders of the representative of the Reichfuehrer SS an operation in Syrmia which is mainly directed against the Fruska-Gora, in order to mop up bands in this area."
And now I come to Count 9-g of the Indictment. With regard to this the prosecution has submitted as evidence the daily report dated the 16th of October 1943. This is Document No. NOKW-658, Exhibit No. 375, Document Book XVI, page 16 of the English and page 39 of the German. I will show you this daily report.
Is this teletype dated the 16th of October 1943 signed by you, or does it bear your initial?
A No, we have already had this report before when we were talking about the seizure of hostages.
Q Did you order the burning down of the villages of Paklenica and Vocarica?
A No.
Q Can you tell us who ordered the burning down and who carried it out?
A I assume that it was carried out by the Croat police, because reprisal measures were undertaken in principle by the Croat police.
Q Did you have previous knowledge of this intended measure?
A No.
Q Would you have been able to prevent this measure?
A This would have been impossible.
Q I now submit to you the daily report dated the 9th of October 1943 from Document NOKW-658, Exhibit 375, Document Book XVI, page 12 in the German and page 30 of the English.
Is this teletype dated the 9th of October 1943 signed by you or does it boar your initial?
A It neither bears a signature nor an initial.
Q Figure 2-b of this teletype dated the 9th of October 1943 reported about the localities of Paklenica and Vocarica, the village were evacuated and burned down.
Is this daily report dated the 16th of October 1943 a repetition of the daily report of the 9th of October 1943?
A No, the two reports are different, one from the 9th and one from the 16th.
Q Can you tell us a little more detail about this?
A The report of the 9th of October concerns a surprise raid on the main railway lino near Novska; while the report of the 16th of October concerns a surprise raid by bands on the village of Novaka which occurred on the 15th of October.
Q What does that show?
AAccording to these two reports, the same two localities were completely burned down twice within 7 days for two separate events, one an attack on the railway lino and one an attack on the village. This is impossible. It can again be seen from this that the daily reports in many cases were very unreliable, and that very often reprisal measures were reported which in reality were not carried out. It is also doubtful whether the villages of Paklenica and Vocarica were ever burned down at all.
Q What is mentioned about the localities of Paklenica and Vocarica in the war diary of the corps under the date of the 17th of October 1943?
A What page, please?
Q "The 187th Reserve Division reports in its diary entry for the 17th of October reprisal measure for a surprise raid on Novska after seizure of 27 male hostages aged 50 to 60 years, one quarter of them railway staff from Novska whose band membership was proved, the evacuation of the population, and the villages of Paklenica and Vocarica burned down."
Q. On the basis of the documents submitted--Document NOKW-658; that if the Daily Report for the 9th of October; and Document NOKW-658, the Daily Report for the 16th of October; and Document NOKW-648, the War Diary entry of the Corps under the 17th of October 1943--can you tell us why these two village could have been burned down, if they were burned down at all?
A. These two villages (POINTING TO THE WALL NAP BEHIND THE WETNESS STAND) which were in the neighborhood of the important main railway line-approximately in this district here on the map--were notorious band strong points. From here the attack on the railway and the attack on the village of Novska were planned. The population were definitely members of the bands, and the destruction of these villages was a military necessity, if at was carried out at all. They were a band nests. The report, which is enclosed with the entry an the War Diary, was unfortunately not submitted her* This would prove what I have just said.
Q. I now come to Count 9-h of the Indictment. The Prosecution has stated, in connection with this, that on or about the 15th of November 1943 troops of the 187th Reserve Division, under the command and jurisdiction of the LXIXth Reserve Corps, burned down the village of Jamina. A document stating that a measure of this kind was carried out on approximately the 15th of November has not bee submitted by the Prosecution. In evidence for this point were submitted the Daily Report of the 7th of November 1943--Document NOKW-075, Exhibit No. 358, Document Book XIV, Page 107 of the English and Page 90 of the German; also, the teletype dated the 7th of November, 1943, Document NOKW-658, Exhibit No. 375, Document Book XVI, Page 25 of the English, and Page 59 of the German. I will show you these two documents. Is the text of the documents the same?
A. The text of the documents is the same. It is the same Daily Report. The one is an excerpt from the other.
Q. I would like to draw the attention of the Tribunal to the fact t** in this case also one document has been presented under two exhibit numbers Was the village of Jamina completely burned down?
A. No. According to the text of the Daily Report, only part of it destroyed.
The village itself was still standing, according to all appearances, in December 1943-- that is the next month -- as can be seen from a report of the Corps.
Q. This is the Daily Report of the Corps, dated the 23rd of December 1943. It is Document NOKW-658, Exhibit No. 375, Document Book XVI, Page 36 of the English and Page 88 of the German, under Paragraph 3-a.
Did you issue an order for the partial burning down of the village of Jamina?
A. No.
Q. Before this measure was carried out, were you informed about it?
A. No, I was not previously informed about it.
Q. Could you have prevented the measure, if the village was destroyed at all or even partially destroyed?
A. No, that was impossible. I could not have prevented it.
Q. Can you tell us anything about who carried out the destruction of the village, if it was destroyed at all?
A. I assume, as I have repeatedly stated, that it was probably carried out by the Croat police because these kinds of reprisal measures were carried out on principle by the Croat police.
Q. Can you tell us the reasons why a partial destruction of the village could have taken place?
A. The village was a strong point of the bands. It was a band hiding place, and it was a rallying point of the partisans who from here, as I mentioned already at the beginning organized the crossing of the Save, when in Syrmia, that is in the northern part, (POINTING) things began to get too hot for them. Jamina is near the Save, and they crossed over into the Majevica Mountains. This can be seen from a Daily Report of the Corps. In the village itself there were munition and arms depots. The village itself was very difficult to reach. It was situated in a large wooded area. The destruction of this village, if it took place, was a military necessity. It was an urgent need.
Q. The Daily Reports mentioned by General Dehner, are the Daily Reports dated the 6th of November 1943, Document NOKW-658, Exhibit No. 375, Document Book XVI, Page 24 of the English and Page 57 of the German.
Also, the Daily Report dated the 15th of November 1943, Document NOKW-658, Exhibit No. 375, Document Book XVI, Page 23 of the English and Page 55 of the German, Paragraph 2-a.
I now come to Count 9-i of the Indictment. I will show you Document NOKW-658, Exhibit No. 375, Document Book XVI, Page 30 of the English and Page 72 of the German. This is a Daily Report of the Corps Headquarters of the LXIXth Reserve Corps to the Second Panzer Army, dated the 27th of November 1943.
Did you sign this document?
A. No, this is one of the usual teletype reports which were not signed by me.
Q. Is the document signed at all?
A. No.
Q. Can you tell us whether you received knowledge of the document?
A. I did not sign the document, I did not initial it, since on princi*** I initialled every document which I saw. I can therefore assume with certainty that I did not see this document.
Q. In addition I will show you Document NOKW-049, Exhibit No. 376, in Document Book XIV, Page 110 of the English and Page 85 of the German. May I repeat--Document NOKW-049, Exhibit No. 376, Document Book XIV, Page 110 of the English and Page 85 of the German.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Exhibit No. 376? It is not in Document Book XIV, but it is in Document Book XVI. It should be Document Book XVI on page 37 of the English.
DR. GAWLIK: General, which document book is it please?
WITNESS DEHNER: It is Document Book XIV, Exhibit No. 356.
DR. GAWLIK: I'm sorry, Your Honor.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: That's quite all right.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Are these two documents NOKW-658 and NOKW-049 identical?
A. The two documents are identical. The one document is a literal copy of the Daily Report, an excerpt.
Q. Did you order the burning down of the village of Grgurevci?
A. No, I did not order it. The burning down of the village of Grgurevci (G-R-G-U-R-E-V-C-I) is also not mentioned in the War Diary.
Q. Did you know about this measure before it took place--that is, the burning down of the village?
A. No.
Q. Can you tell us whether troops of the 173rd Reserve Division subordinate to you burned down the village?
A. Since a surprise attack on the police had taken place in Grgurevci, as is shown by the new War Diary from Washington, I am convinced that the destruction was carried out by the police. The police were not subordinate to me; they carried out their operations independently. Usually they informed us about reprisal measures which had been completed. It could also easily have been the Croat police who carried out this measure, because the carrying out of these kind of reprisal measures were, on principle, carried out by the Croat police.
Q. Can you tell us what the reasons could have been for the burning down of this village by the police?
A. The seven preceding Daily Reports are, unfortunately, missing so that the actual reason cannot be determined. The village was a well-known band strong point in the Fruska-Gora, that is in this district here (POINTING). The village was fortified with pill-boxes, and from here the bands made repeated attacks against the most important road, Ruma-Erdevic.