Furthermore, this document was submitted so that the court may be in a position to check as to whether or not the assertion of the defendants is correct that only a small percentage of the sabotage acts and surprise attacks was retaliated by so-called reprisal measures. On page 4 of this first document in Geitner Document Book IV, your Honors will find a statistic concerning the German and Allied casualties which occurred in the period mentioned -- that is, from the 16th of June 1942 be the 15th of November 1942.
This compilation for the period mentioned, that is for about ten months, results in a total of 2,891 dead, 4,040 wounded German soldiers and 4,892 Missing. We, if your Honors please, assert that this last figure, that is 4,892 missing German soldiers consists almost exclusively of soldiers who are dead. These 4,892 German soldiers disappeared without leaving any trace, they never returned to their unit, they did not come home and the defendants are convinced that the band members murdered them. This then was document No. 81, Geitner 81, which was presented under exhibit No. 66.
This brings me to the next document Geitner 82, which is contained on page 6 and following and this will be offered under Geitner exhibit No. 67. This document No. 82 at page 6 of Geitner document book 4, together with the subsequent documents up to No. 105, that is on pages 6 through 56 of Geitner document book 4 forms a consecutive entity. From the heading you can see that those again are copies from the war diary of the commanding general and commander in Serbia from July, 1942 until May, 1944. These again are copies from documents, which were received from Washington. That is copies from documents which undoubtedly were compiled during the war during the period mentioned and we feel there can be no doubt about their authenticity and probative value. From these entries in the war diary, the defendant von Geitner tried to prove that not only the part of his commander, but also on the part of the chief of staff von Geitner everything was done in Serbia to protect the civilian population wherever possible from the hardships of war and from the activities of the partisans. Everything was done to mitigate their suffering and to prevent famine. Furthermore General von Geitner wants to prove through these documents -- from document No. 82 through 105 -that he made use of every available opportunity to effect a decrease and modernization of reprisal measures, although he was not competent for this problem and finally these documents prove, in General von Geitner's opinion, which is why I submit them, that he waged continually a severe battle against the Higher SS and police leader Meizner and against Obergruppenfuehrer Neuhausen.
He did this in order to achieve a uniform and peaceful administration.
I only want to read a few brief excerpts from these documents, but I would feel obliged if the Tribunal wherever possible would take judicial notice of the whole of these documents, so that the Court may understand General von Geitner's efforts and the whole policy in his administrative activities.
In document No. 82, Geitner exhibit 67, we find first of all on page 6 under 14 July 1942, the following entry. It concerns the deportation of captured band members into prisoner of war camps. I shall read the entry:
"The Commander decided that the four Chetnik officers...." then follow the names, "Are to be sent to a prison camp in Germany. They are strongly suspected of having murdered the Commander of their battalion, Major Ignatovic."
The defendant points out that actually there was an order from Hitler that people of that sort were to be shot after Court Martial, but he and his Commander maintained a different point of view and accidentally this entry happens to be an example for this deviating opinion of General von Geitner and his commander.
On this same page, if I may draw the attention of the Tribunal to this, we have an entry of 21 July 1942, that is on page 6 of document book 82, which says:
"Envoy Benzler with the chief..." I might interpolate here, chief means chief of staff and that was von Geitner, the defendant von Geitner. To turn to the entry again: "...Further discussion points: press conference, military and civilian propaganda..."Now the most important sentence: "The return trip of Serbian prisoners of war from Germany."
The defendant von Geitner, in submitting this passage, wants to prove that he personally interested himself in this return transport of Serbian prisoners of war from Germany although he was not responsible for this particular problem.
In the next document, which is document Geitner 83 on page 8 of Geitner document book 4 and which will become Geitner exhibit No. 68, I would like to draw the attention of the Tribunal in particular to the entry under the date of 4 August 1942, page 8, Geitner document book 4, document 83, Geitner 68. This entry shows that the defendant concerned himself with the protection of the population against excesses. In this he wants to point to the assertion of the prosecution which is entirely wrong and which gives a picture that the defendant had nothing else to do than to initiate the shooting of hostages. To ready the entry, it says:
"Oberintendanturrat Seelinger sees the Chief". (This was the defendant von Geitner). "Discussion about request of Bulgarians that troops be fed by rebel villages as punishment."
And now the opinion of General von Geitner which he states here and I quote:
"Measure doubtful, because with unlimited application Bulgarians would be living off Serbia. Decision after conference with Gen. Hinghofer: Such reprisal measures require permission of Commanding General and Commander of Serbia."
The defendant, in submitting this passage, wants to prove that he wanted to keep the reprisal measures away from the tasks of the Bulgarians in order to avoid injustice.
The next paragraph, again under date of 4 August, is of interest concerning the attitude held by the defendant von Geitner and I would like to read this paragraph:
"Re: report that the Bulgarians captured 3 Englishmen and shot two of them, the chief......." Whom we know is the defendant von Geitner, "directs the Deutscher Vereindungsoffizier, German Liaison Officer, that in such cases prisoners should under no circumstances be shot."
The defendant maintains that here again it can be seen how he acted and how he observed the rules of International Law and how chivalrous his attitude was.
The next passage, which deals with 5 August 1942, contains a statement of a similar type. Here the defendant von Geitner enters in the war diary:
"General Hinghofer decides, as deputy commanding general, that Major Glisic and the Chetnik officers arrested with him are not to be given forced labor after their examination, but are to be sent to a German prisoner of war camp."
The defendant, in submitting this quotation, wants to prove to the Tribunal how he endeavored to observe the provisions of International law and how he concerned himself with a decent treatment of prisoners exceeding the scope of his duties. I recommend the further entires of this document to the judicial notice of the Tribunal. I don't want to read any more of them, they are all in about the same manner.
From Document 84 on page 11, which will be submitted under Geitner exhibit 69, I repeat Geitner document 84, page 11, Geitner document book 4, Geitner exhibit 69, in this document I would like to draw the attention of the Tribunal first of all to the entry under the date of 2 September, 1942. This entry refers to applications, the improvement of organization and administration in Serbia. I shall read:
"Chief..." that is Geitner, "Reports to Commander," the commander at that time was General Bader, "Suggestions: 3. Reorganizations of military administration. Elimination of the co-existence of similar agencies which get their orders from Berlin. Clarification of the relationship between police and military offices. " Your Honor, the defendant attached importance to this entry and to the Tribunal gaining knowledge of this entry, because it is not a singular instance, but if you read through the documents No. 82 to 105, that is the entries of his war diary, you will find in every document similar entries, that is entries, which are to show that the defendant von Geitner waged a constant battle -
JUDGE CARTER: The Tribunal will be in recess until the call of the Marshal.
(Due to mechanical difficulties a recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Court is again in session.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: You may proceed. Dr. Sauter.
DR. SAUTER: If your Honors please, I would like for a brief moment to refer back to Document No. 81. That is the first document in Geitner Document Book IV "28328/7," et cetera. Those figures with "28" are figures put by American officers on the documents when photostating them. This American office puts a number on every document so that later on they find their way around and those are the numbers which are contained in the last column on the left.
The numbers which were given by German officers to the document can be found in the last but one column under the heading, "Appendix"; for instance, in the first entry on page 2 it says, "Appendix 35," and the next says, "Appendix 58, " et cetera. Those are German numbers. The very last one -- that is the very last column -- gives the number by the American photostating Agency.
That was what I wanted to add to the presentation of this document. I shall continue where I was interrupted just now. I was dealing with the entry of the 2nd of September 1942 and I said that this entry under the date of 2 September 1942 is being presented by the defendant von Geitner in order to show that again and again he endeavored to improve the organization of administration. He tried to eliminate the coexistance of similar agencies. That is, he wanted to restrict the activity of the Higher SS and Police Leader as much as possible.
The next entry falls into the same line; that is, the entry also is contained on page 11 towards the middle where it says: "Chief sends teletype Enclosure 3." "Chief" also means the defendant Geitner. "Chief sends teletype to Army Commander Southeast (see enclosure). Report to General Hinghofer that the volunteer unit D-3 is starving. Chief decides to do this in consideration of the inability of the Serbian government to guarantee food supplies for the volunteers."
This goes to prove efforts made by the defendant von Geitner to take care of the volunteers.
Then the entry of the 8th of September 1942 reads:
"Various decrees of the Reichsfuehrer SS attempting to increase the authority of the Higher SS and Political Officers in Serbia at the expense of the Commanding General."
The defendant von Geitner wants to prove by submitting this passage that in his agency one fought all the time to eliminate the excesses committed by the Higher SS and Police Leader.
The next entry dated the 11th of September 1942 is also contained on page 11 and this proved the care taken for the population. The defendant wants to show that he at least did not think of any plan of extermination. I shall quote the entry from the 11th of September 1942:
"The privately owned Serbian hospital Vracar is not to be expropriated in consideration of the prominent work of the owners as surgeons."
A similar entry can be found on the 12th of September 1942 which I shall skip.
On page 12 under the 27th of September 1942 we have an entry which reads:
"The chief" --- that is General von Geitner --- "requests the German general in Agram to prevent the Serb slaughterer Tomic from becoming active now in Bjelovar as agent of Eugen Kvaternik."
This entry has, of course, not been made for this trial here but it is in line with the opinion of those days and the defendant wants to show that at that time he interested himself for the Serbian population where ever he could.
The next document, Geitner 85 in Geitner Document Book IV will be submitted under Geitner Exhibit No. 70. I repeat -- Document 85, Document Book IV, Geitner Exhibit 70. On page 13 we have an entry dated the 9th of October 1942. I quote:
"Chief gives Army Chief following information by phone for report for Brigadier General Warlimont: 1. Speedier carrying out of the plan submitted for the unification of the power of command in Serbia."
This again is a conviction to show the efforts of the defendant von Geitner for the improvement of organization in the interests of the civilian population. General Warlimont who is mentioned here was, as is well known, a high ranking officer in the OKW. He was a collaborator of General Jodl.
The next entry is dated 10 October 1943, and it reads: "On the basis of a confidential agency's report (U.) in which Draga Mihailovic calls for attacks on individual German members of the Wehrmacht and small detachments, an order is issued concerning precautionary measures against enemy attacks."
The defendant tells me that particularly from such entries one can see how he endeavored to take preventative measures against attacks so that afterwards one wouldn't have to take reprisal measures.
The next entry is dated the 11th of October 1942. This is also on page 13 of Geitner Document Book 4. This entry again shows the efforts of the defendant Geitner for improvement of organization. I don't want to read that particular excerpt.
On page 13 under the date of 15 October 1942 we have a entry saying: "Order to Field Intelligence Staff Officer (Ic) to have Vojvode Gordic detained as a prisoner of war."
The defendant von Geitner in submitting this wants to show that he did not treat these prisoners in the way that Hitler and the OKW demanded them to be treated ---- that is to have them put up against a wall and shot -- but that instead he treated them as prisoners of war although they have no claim to this status.
The next entry is dated 17 October 1942 and it shows the intervening of the Commander in Serbia and, therefore, also of the defendant von Geitner directed against excesses committed by the Bulgarians. Towards the end of the entry it is stated:
"Chief Wehrmacht Commander Southeast forwards 7 questions of the Fuehrer concerning the attack on the Lisa antimony plant."
This again is a conviction for the correctness of the statements made by the defendant von Geitner, that Hitler personally demanded explanations in some instances whether reprisal measures had actually been ordered and carried out.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: Dr. Sauter, just as a matter of interest, just what kind of a plant was that attacked? That is term that we seem to be unfamiliar with.
DR. SAUTER: To the best of my knowledge, it is a chemical plant. At the moment I am not quite sure what antimony is used for but from conversations with others I heard that for the supply of the civilian population this antimony plabt was of considerable importance.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: General Geitner seems to know. You might ask him and then repeat it to us.
DR. SAUTER: Yes, your Honor. Just a moment, please.
DEFENDANT von GEITNER: Antimony is a metal which hardly exists in Europe, it being used to harden lead -- yes, to harden lead -- for instance, soldering metal, et cetera.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: Thank you.
DR. SAUTER: This hardening of lead, as I just hear, is very necessary for a number of industries: for instance, for the motor car industry, so that the bearings where the shaft run should be hardened.
MR. FULKERSON: Your Honor, it is used for making bearings; any kind of bearing that has lead in it generally also has some antimony.
DR. SAUTER: That is what I meant. I thank you.
I would like now to continue with page 13 and in particular I want to stress the last entry. I beg your pardon; I mean page 14 and on this page I would like to draw attention to the first entry under date of 20 October 1942 which reads:
"Phone call Army Strategic and Tactical Planning Staff Officer at Chief's office concerning attack on Lisa antimony plant. Responsibility to be ascertained on basis of Fuehrer order."
That is the same plant as mentioned in the earlier entry. This shows that, because of a certain sabotage act which accidently reached Hitler's knowledge, there were two phone calls: What happened in retaliation, what reprisal measures were carried out, et cetera.
I would now like to turn to the next document which is Document 86 on page 15 of Geitner Document Book IV and this will be submitted under exhibit number Geitner 71. Of particular importance is the entry of 4 November 1942 on page 15 which says:
"Chief rejects request by Croatian Liaison officer, Captain Andric, that former Police Chief of Semlin, Redl, who has fled to Serbia, be handed over to the croats."
This seems to be a proof for the firm attitude shown by the defendant von Geitner towards requests which he believed he had to reject from his innermost feelings.
The next one is dated 5 November 1942 and this again shows the activities of the Chief of Staff: that is, Geitner who, for instance, commissioned the Chief Military Administrative Councillor Ranze to investigate the grain collection in the region around Topola and, I quote: "to what extent the population is able to supply its won needs after giving up these amounts."
This happens to be a proof how the alleged plan of Geitners to exterminate and starve the Serbian population looked in actual fact.
The next entry again is typical for the attitude shown by the generals in Southeast and I quote: "Commanding General has made decision that proceedings should not be taken against families of arrested persons."
The General in Serbia and his Chief of Staff apparently dissociated themselves from Hitler's ideas; namely, that on the basis of the order concerning the liability of the next of kin proceedings should be taken against families of arrested persons.
The next paragraph to which I would like to draw attention is one dated 15 of November 1942 and this deals with the already discussed problem of improvement of organization, unified leadership, fighting of the corps, existence of agencies, et cetera.
The entry of 18 November 1942 is on page 15 of the English document book. It says:
"Captain Karcher, Chief Quartermaster in charge of prisoners of war, reports to the Commander that no explanation was given him concerning the deported individuals Tribodjanin and Djaric, suspected of being followers of Draja Mihailovic who have now, however, escaped from the train in Zagreb."
This again is a report by which the defendant would like to show that he interested himself for Draja Mihailovic suspects so that these people simply would not be put up against a wall and shot but instead be treated as prisoners of war and transported to prisoner of war camps. The defendant asserts that just because of such an instance he came into difficulties because it became apparent through the escape of two people that they had been treated as prisoners of war.
The entry contained on the next page, page 60, dated 22 November 1942 shows the protest of the defendant von Geitner against excesses of the Bulgarians. The next entry of 25 November again deals with the transport of partisans as prisoners of war. In stead of simply shooting them, it says in this entry?
"Request" -- which is the request made by the Chief to the Commander -- "for introduction of 2nd prisoner of war transport."
This brings me to the next document which is Document 87 on page 18. This will become Geitner Exhibit No. 72. It is Geitner Document No. 87 on page 18 in the Geitner Document Book IV and it will become Geitner Exhibit 72.
The entry under the date 11 December 1942 on this page 18 shows the care for refugees taken by the defendant as, for instance, he looked after 1500 Serbian refugee children.
The entry of 19 December 1942 reads: "Commander goes on leave and is represented by Commander of 714th Infantry Division, Major General Dippold, in routine business by Chief."
The defendant wants to show through presenting this entry that what he stated on his examination is correct which is the same as was stated by General Foertsch and that as that the Commander was represented while on leave, not by the Chief of Staff, but instead by the ranking troop commander in the area.
The next entry refers to the well known Mladenovac incident which is dealt with in Document 969, Exhibit 237 in Document Book XV ** of the prosecution. This surprise attack in Mladenovac resulted in reprisal measures at the time as is known and this entry in the war diary shows as confirmation of the correctness of statements made by Geitner -- namely, that the reprisal measure taken then were ordered not by Geitner because the Commander didn't happen to be present but instead by General Dippold who deputized for General Bader. The entry reads:
"As representative of the Commander, General Dippold approves 50 shootings for 2 German officers wounded in attack in Mladenovac by Bosnian Communists."
The next entry deals with the same instance. It is dated 25 December 1942 and is contained on page 160 of Geitner Document Book IV. I quote:
"General Dippold approves the shooting of 25 Communists captured in reprisal for SS guards wounded in an attack in Krusovac."
The following entries go to prove welfare measures taken by General von Geitner for the Serbian workers. Amongst these I particularly like to draw attention to the entry of 31 December 1942 on page 18 and the entry of 5 January 1943 on page 19. The defendant von Geitner made use of every available opportunity to draw the attention of competent authorities to the needy situation of the Serbian population and Serbian workers.
I would now like to draw attention of the Court to 1 January 1943 which says and I quote:
"Decision: No hostages are to be taken from the district of Kos. Mitrovica since no cases of sabotage, etc. have occurred in this district up to now."
This entry is contained on Page 19 of Geitner Document Book 4. The defendant, in submitting this entry, wants to show that the commander with whom he is supposed to be co-responsible in this connection made every effort to be correct in his treatment of hostage problems. The next entry which I would like to read, the last entry contained on Page 19 of Geitner Document Book 4, is dated 30 January 1943. " 1 Oral report to Commander: On new arrangements for proceedings in connection with reprisal measures." If Your Honors please, this entry seems to me to be of particular importance for the evaluation of the position and responsibility of the defendant von Geitner. In his examination here, he has stated that he, as chief of staff -
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: We will take our morning recess at this time.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: You may proceed.
DR. SAUTER: I stopped at document 88, which is Exhibit No. 73, and it is on Page 19 of the English document book. I led your attention to the 30th of January 1943, where it says, "01 oral report to Commander: On new arrangements for proceedings in connection with reprisal measures." The significance of this entry for the defendant von Geitner is in the following, in his personal examination he said that with reprisal measures he had nothing to do, and that he was not competent for these measures. This was the result of the jurisdiction of the authorities, and he also said for the reprisal measures there was an officer, a special officer, an administrative officer, who was Dr. Bode, and in this case, who was in the staff of the commanding officer and who was called 01.
Now, here we see accidentally in these documents which have arrived from Washington an entry which confirms this statement, that is, not the chief of staff reported to the supreme commander concerning reprisal measures, but this 01. The next document is 89, on Page 20. It has the exhibit number 74. Here we see, apart from a few miscellaneous entries about medical care, for instance, the entry of the 10th of February 1943, "Revocation of the reprisal order for destruction of Krusevac Aleksandrovac telephone line, since it involves an ordinary theft of copper wire." Here again we see that not arbitrary reprisal measures were taken, and that it was regarded as absolutely certain to rescind such reprisal measures if their unjustifiability was proven. In the entry of 15 February 1943, and of 17 February 1943, also on Page 20 of the English document book, it says, on the 15th of February, "Chief flies to conference of chiefs with Commander in Chief for South-East in Salonika," and the entry on the 17th, two days later, "Chief reports to Commander upon return concerning conference of chiefs in Salonika."
From the quotation, it can not be recognized for what purpose this document has been submitted. The purpose, however, becomes clear from comparison with the document in the Prosecution Document Book 24 on Page 115, NOKW 1755, Exhibit 537. This document which I quote has been submitted by the Prosecution, because on the 16th of February 1943, under that date, it contains the following entry, which has been read here by the Prosecution, and I quote from this quotation, this is Document 1755, Exhibit 537, the entry of 16 February 1943, "The civilians who have been arrested after the murder of General Hensen are not to be deported for work because they are mainly innocent people concerned. As reprisal prisoners, the 400 Communists are to be shot who are now in the Camp Belgrade. According orders will be passed on to the commander of the 704th Infantry Division and to the supreme commander of the Security Police." That is the end of my quotation from this document NOKW 1755. Your Honors, this entry of 16th of February 1943 has been submitted by the Prosecution here in order to prove that the defendant Geitner was in some way or other connected with reprisal measures, took an active part in the shooting of these 400 Communists. Now, to our suprise, we see that the Prosecution deemed it correct not to mention the entry which was preceding this immediately, the entry of 15 February and the entry of 17 February, which follows, and not to submit this at all. It becomes evident from this entry, and this is why the defendant Gietner wants it quoted here, it is clear, as I say, that on the 16th of February 1943 he wasn't even present in Belgrade, but he was in Salonika. Von Geitner explained to me, and told me that he cannot understand why he should be charged with this document of 16 February, although the Prosecution saw from these quoted documents here that he was not presents.
I now come to the next entry, the entry of the 26th of February 1943, on Page 21 of Geitner Document Book IV. "Commander forbids SD counter-bands to appear in German uniform. Operations are to be stopped. Rule: Everything which increases unrest must be avoided."
The Defendant sees in this report a contribution towards the correctness and accuracy of his statement that the Supreme Commander, in agreement with him, did not confirm but actually forbade actions which were against International Law as, far instance, here the counter-action of operations of counter-bands in German uniform.
The next document is Document No. 90, on Page 22. It will receive Exhibit No. 75. It is again an excerpt from the War Diaries which have arrived here from Washington. The first few entries show the care Geitner and his Supreme Commander took for the population and the refugees. They make this quite evident. Furthermore, they also show his interest in combating black marketing, theft of harvest crops, etc. and measures against the seizure of food stuffs, etc. On the 19th of March 1943, on Page 22, you see an entry concerning dismissal of the Serbian district supervisor because of difficulties concerning the shipment of 18,000 tons of wheat, which the Defendant Geitner wanted to obtain for the population. Then, there are entries concerning the care of refugee camps; measures against Bulgarian incidents, riots, etc.; and entries which show the basic attitude of the Defendant von Geitner in a very characteristic manner. For instance, under the 31st of March 1943, "Commander approves return of 11 Serbian reserve offices from prisoner of war camp," to be free and to enter Serbia.
The next document is Document No. 91, on Page 24, which will receive Exhibit No. 76. It deals with ethnic struggles which went on between the Serbian and other population groups. Then, entries concerning attempts of the Supreme Commander of Serbia and his Chief of Staff to maintain the German troops in strong positions in order to save the population and not to have to carry out reprisal measures.
For instance, the entry of the 26th of April 1943-- and I quote: "Chief of Staff; Telephone conversation with Chief of Staff of Army Group. The Chief calls further weakening of German forces in Serbia dangerous. Chief of Staff of Army replies, Commanding General in Serbia has to make do forces at his disposal, if necessary limiting to recurring the Danube security, the main lines and Bor."
Then, the entry about the constant struggle with the Higher SS and Police Leader.
Now, I come to Document No. 92. This is a document sent from Washington, and it is on Page 25, and it will become Exhibit No. 77. Again it displays the straggle of Geitner and his Supreme Commander against ill conditions in his own ranks and files, and the care taken for the population. For instance, on the 14th of May 1943, on Page 25 -- and I quote: "Discussions about food situation with Administration Chief Keyser, Plenipotentiary General for Economics, Department Chi Boenner, Administration and Chief of Staff. Government has taken over the supply for the towns. Commander orders that assistance should be given, if necessary."
It says that the measures were taken so that in an emergency case the population would have drawn on rations of the Army, allegedly as the Prosecution says, in order to starve the population. An entry on Page 26, dated the 25th of May, at the top of the page concerns discussions between the Defendant Geitner and a number of officials, and the Defendant says: "Exchange of PW's for Serbian organizations to be approved, excepting active officers." The Defendant wants to prove with this that he, all the time, tried to have PW's released. He attaches particular value to this because now we see in Germany how much a people is to suffer when PW's are not being released.