- won for him the affection of the soldiers of all ages.
He was a leader having his subordinates intrinsic consent to his leadership.
So he had, by his high soldierly sense of duty and his earnest feeling of responsibility towards the men entrusted to him, reached the highest goal attainable at all for a military leader.
There are two more documents, that is Document 61, Exhibit 62 on pages 57 and 58 in Document Book 3, -- I beg your pardon, it is Document Book 2. It is an affidavit by Erich Abberger, former Brigadier General, dated the 28th of July, 1947. He states that he had been intimately acquainted with the Engineer Corps General Kuntze since 1928. I shall omit the first paragraph and proceed with the fourth paragraph.
Abberger says:
Ambition was never the spur of his actions--"
MR. FULKERSON: I object. This has already been introduced in evidence in Document Book 1, page 30.
DR. MENZEL: The objection has been cleared. The document was previously mentioned, but it was not really submitted, previously.
I shall repeat this passage:
"Ambition was never the spur of his actions; on the contrary, on two occasions, known to me, he was prepared to give up his professional career on account of his inner convictions."
I shall now proceed from the bottom:
"He always emphasized that the International Law should be respected. I remember on the occasion of a map exercise in 1929, when I touched on some of those problems, that Kuntze stressed their importance for the officers at that discussion."
Now the last paragraph on page 58, page two of the document:
In summing up all those reasons it seems to mo illogical and not creditable that, in an interim period, his character should have become subject to any temporary change, during which time he deliberately, or by tolerating them, should have committed any offences against either the international war laws or humanity.
The last document will be Document 62, on pages 59 to 65, to be Exhibit 63. It is an affidavit by Dr. Greiffenberg, from Santa Monica, California, in the U.S.A.
MR. FULKERSON: I object to this on the grounds that it shows that the affiant only knew the defendants here in question up until 1938, and that is a little bit before the period we are concerned with.
DR. MENZEL: That is correct. It is quite correct that the affiant only knew Kuntze until '38. The affiant is a Jew and was to testify as to the attitude displayed by Kuntze toward the Jews, the time is after 1933, - that is after Hitler's advent of power, as the Prosecution asserted that Kuntze was hostile towards the Jews, there must be an opportunity of showing his attitude towards the Jews and toward Judaism, and that is to be done by a correspondence which I need not read.
The correspondence extends from 1933 to 1938, until the immigration of the affiant. The acquaintance was merely ruptured by the emigration of the affiant.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: We will receive it for what it is worth.
DR. MENZEL: I need not read much of this document. Page 59 contains the affidavit. The affiant requests that the letters be returned to him because he attaches importance to preserving the correspondence. It is followed on page 61 and following by the correspondence, on page 62, a letter from 1933; on page 63, a letter dated 1934; on page 64, a letter dated 1938. On page 65 there is a letter also dated 1938.
One must have known the conditions in Germany at the time in order to appreciate what such a correspondence really meant.
That was Exhibit 63.
In concluding I should like to read from Document Book 3, Document 76, on pages 36 and 37. General Kuntze, during his examination had already made statements on his official trips, even if ho could recall the official trips, he had made, he wanted to ascertain the precise dates. That is Document Book 3, page 36. He wanted to be sure of the dates but was unable to do so when being examined, as at the time the material from. Washington had only just arrived, and was, not yet available to the defense. Meanwhile, he has seen those documents and found that the data in the documents confirmed his recollection, and in this affidavit he has now specified his official trips.
I think it would be simpler under the circumstances to receive the affidavit without reading it.
MR. FULKERSON: I object to this, if Your Honors please. This defendant, has already testified and boon given a full opportunity to explain all of this. The documents to which Dr. Menzel refers are neither past recollection nor present recollection refreshed. I cannot think of any possible theory upon which, after having looked over a mass of documents which someone else compiled, he can then -
THE PRESIDENT: How do you know someone else compiled them?
MR. FULKERSON: If Your Honor pleases, if there are the documents from Washington, I assume General Kuntze did not write them all himself.
Is that true? Did General Kuntze take these dates from documents he had written himself?
DR. MENZEL: The documents from Washington, of course he did not write, but from those documents he confirmed the fact that his recollection about the official trips was correct. In this connection I should like to point out that at the time of the examination of General Kuntze, the documents had not arrived from Washington. At the time in order to expedite proceedings, it was said that after the examination of Kuntze had been concluded, a supplementary information was possible.
I refer to the record. The German page is 2,554; English record 3617, in which I concluded the examination of General Kuntze by saying that at that stage of the proceedings I need no longer examine him because the documents from Washington were not available and could not have been inspected at the time.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: It seems to me, General Kuntze is here in the Courtroom, and that if the objection is made, possibly this would not be proper. If the objection was pressed I assume you would have to call him to the stand . and have him testify to them.
THE PRESIDENT: We have let others in of a similar nature.
MR. FULKERSON: I withdraw my objection. I do not wish to be technical. I just want to call this to the Court's attention.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: Very well.
DR. MENZEL: This affidavit will be Exhibit 64. I need not road it. It merely contains a record of the official trips. I merely wish to refer to a longer trip under Section 3, from 25 February to 14 March, 1942.
The last document of these three document books is Document 77, on pages 38 to 40. It is in the same volume.
(Menzel) It is based on the same fact, to-wit, that General Kuntze, during his examination, declared in a general way that a great number of documents -- incriminating documents -did not come to his knowledge.
Noe he has made an affidavit as to which documents he did not have knowledge, just for information, and this affidavit contains a record of the documents of which he had no knowledge.
This is shown by the distribution, and partly owing to the fact that they were War Diaries which were not submitted at all, and in part because they were activity reports, or reports of subordinated military agencies or reports from one such agency to the other which automatically were not submitted. I believed that it would be a help to the Tribunal if I would tabulate all of these documents in proper sequence.
It also contains records of documents before his assumption of office, as well as exhibits 590 - 593 submitted after his direct examination or cross-examination. It is merely a compilation for informational purposes which in my view will facilitate the work of the Tribunal.
May I assign Exhibit No. 65 to this compilation for informational purposes.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: We will take our afternoon recess at this time.
THE MARSHAL: This court will be in recess until 1520 hours.
(Tribunal in recess for 15 minutes)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. LATERNSER: If the Tribunal please, yesterday I had announced a witness while I was presenting my evidence. Now, I can give his name. His name is Hassold , H a s s o 1 d , from Passau and he will also be heard tomorrow afternoon. I intend to examine him at that time and the examination will not take more than an hour.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: Very well. You may proceed.
DR. MENZEL (Counsel for defendant Kuntze): Thank you, Your Honor.
If the Tribunal please, I have now finished the three document books for Kuntze and there is only the so-called Document Book IV to present at this point which, as I said initially, consists of only two document At this point the documents have been translated and I hope that the Tribunal is in the meantime in possession of the English documents. Document Book IV contains Document No. 78 on Page 1 which will be offered as Kuntze Exhibit 66. It is an affidavit given by Dr. Reger.
MR. FULKERSON: Your Honors, I would like to object to this document. We are pushing back the chronological time further and further. First we had one that covered the period from 1933 to 1938. Now we go back to one that covers the period from 1935 up to 1936.
DR. MENZEL: That is correct. This document covers a period of time before the war. It was only to describe the relation between General Kuntze as judicial authority and an army judge who worked under him, All this was to throw light on General Kuntze's attitude as judicial authority.
PRESIDING JUDGE CAREER: We will receive it.
DR. MENZEL: This then is Kuntze Exhibit 66. I don't have to read it. It deals, as I said before, with the attitude and position of General Kuntze as judicial authority.
Now follows the last document which is on page 2 of Document Book IV and this will be Kuntze Exhibit 67. The document number is 79 and the Exhibit Number is 67. It is an affidavit executed by Joachim von Woedtke and the date is 30 December 1947.
The witness, first of all, refers to his affidavit given on 3 December 1947 which is an affidavit which I have presented today already as Exhibit 46. The document contained is contained in Document Book III and the document number is 75. Exhibit 46 referred amongst other things to General Kuntze's attitude on the treatment of prisoners of war. The affiant has now supplemented his previous affidavit as follows: I read the seconds paragraph:
"I distinctly remember that General Kuntze, while on an official visit to the 61st division, voiced his opinion regarding treatment of prisoners to the Commander of this Division, particularly stressing the fact that also captured commissars were to be treated as prisoners of war."
That brings me to the end of Document Book IV. If the Tribunal please, I have now completed the presentation of my documents for General Kuntze.
DR. LATERNSER: If the Tribunal please, Dr. Sauter or will now continue. He will come in any moment. I beg your pardon for his not being here but my colleague, Dr. Weisgerber is already on his way to inform him. I suppose that Dr. Sauter assumed that Dr. Menzel's reading would take a little longer. I believe that is why he is not here now but he will arrive any minute to continue.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Laternser, I wonder if all the counsel in this case can be here tomorrow morning. Not only I, but I am sure the other members of the Tribunal, want a final check on the documents that are now in process of preparation. I was informed at noon that there were even some documents submitted yesterday and there must be a cutting off place and a time at which we will close or have a time when all the counsel will have submitted all their documents so that there will be no delay.
Will you kindly get word to all the counsel so we may check on that matter closely tomorrow morning?
DR. LATERNSER: Yes, certainly, I shall do that.
If the Tribunal please, concerning the information given to the Tribunal yesterday by the Secretary General about the handing in of documents by the defense, we have ascertained in the meantime that there must have been an error. My colleague, Dr. Tipp has not submitted his document book on the 6th of January as the information went but already on the 23rd of December. I myself have seen a receipt to that effect today.
Also my colleague, Dr. Mueller-Torgow, has submitted his last document book sometime ago. However, there were some difficulties at the time to get hold of a translator and interpreter for the modem Greek language. But for some time such a person has been found and although Dr. Mueller-Torgow has tried for some days now to get this document book back, he has so far not succeeded in doing this. I do hope, however, that he will succeed in receiving that document book by tomorrow morning.
This afternoon can yet be taken up by Dr. Sauter and tomorrow Dr. Mueller-Torgow's document book could possibly be presented if it has come back from the Translation Division, and tomorrow afternoon I would be ready to examine my two witnesses so that the time of the Tribunal will not be wasted, at least not until tomorrow afternoon.
THE PRESIDENT: I think I should state because of the comments I made yesterday that I had a conference at four-thirty yesterday afternoon with Mr. Hodges of the Translation Department and he advises me that he will see to it that there will be cooperation and that there will be attention given to this case which, being the oldest case and the one nearest completion, takes priority over other causes; and he assures me that to the extent that it is humanly possible for his department to do so that the translations will be made and will be hurried through as rapidly as possible.
Now, even with that attitude and consideration on his part, we must not abuse his pod nature and his present attitude by rushing in documents at the very last moment and expecting the impossible to be done.
DR. LATERNSER: Thank you very much, Your Honor, certainly the defense will not do that. I can only state again and again that all of us tried to the best of our abilities not to have any delay , I believe that we on our part did everything we could.
THE PRESIDENT: We appreciate that, Dr. Laternser, and it is with no thought of criticism that I make the comments but merely with the thought and the desire of hastening things along and bring a deadline somewhere in our proceedings.
DR. LATERNSER: Yes, Your Honor.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: I wonder if I might inquire from Dr. Menzel if he has completed all of his testimony now and if he has rested his case.
Dr. Menzel having indicated that he has rested, we will have the record show that in the case of General Kuntze the defense has rested.
You may proceed, Dr. Sauter.
DR. SAUTER (Counsel for the defendants von Geitner and Lanz): If the Tribunal please, I have a few more documents to present for the defendant Lanz, from Lanz Document Book VIII. I don't know whether this document book is already in the hands of the Tribunal; if not, I have brought some English copies along of this document book.
In my presentation of documents on behalf of the defendant Lanz I have mentioned towards the end that I shall submit further an announcement by the French occupation forces. This announcement is to show that reprisal measures, taking of hostages, et cetera, occurred during the activities of other occupation powers also.
In Lanz Document Book VIII under No. 132 I have submitted a copy of this announcement of the French military government. I have managed to obtain the original document such as it was posted in the room of a dentist in Birkenfeld. That is a place on the left bank of the Rhino in Germany. I hand this original which I am exhibiting here end of which there is a copy in my document book to the Secretary General as Lanz Exhibit No. 192.
MR. FULKERSON: I will have to object to the introduction of this document until there is some proper identification of the document, of its origin, how it came to be where it was when it was found, and other testimony that would prove that Dr. Sauter has just said he can prove.
The document itself without such identification, Your Honors, please, means nothing.
DR. SAUTER: It will mean something to the prosecution in a moment if the prosecution permits me to present one further document. Certainly, we considered the necessity of proving for the prosecution that this document is, of course, authentic. From people who themselves saw this document on the spot we obtained affidavits which are not contained in Lanz Document Book VIII but in another document book, X, which has not yet been submitted. It is in document book X which, as I said, is not yet in the hands of the Tribunal, as Document 200 which I may possibly read here so that the prosecution realizes it.
MR. FULKERSON: Dr. Sauter, has this affidavit been translated yet?
DR. SAUTER: No, it hasn't been translated yet.
MR. FULKERSON: Then I would like to renew my objection. I think the identification should come properly before the document itself.
DR. SAUTER: This affidavit I received the day before yesterday. Therefore, I couldn't give it to the Translation Division any earlier. It is an affidavit executed by two persons who themselves saw the document.
MR. FULKERSON: Dr. Sauter, the difficulties you have had in getting the affidavit have nothing to do with it. If you don't have the affidavit translated you cannot properly identify this placard that you have here and until it is properly identified it is not admissible in evidence and I would like to renew my objection and I would like further to object to Dr. Sauter's reading any more from this purported affidavit.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: I think probably the prosecution is correct, that some foundation as to the instrument and its publication as a proclamation should be made, Dr. Sauter, before it is properly admissible.
If we have to wait for the affidavit, we will just have to wait for it.
DR. SAUTER: Well, I could for the moment read this affidavit into the protocol. It only arrived the day before yesterday. It came from the French Zone and therefore, could not have been given the Translation Department any earlier. In a few days the Translation will be available to the Court and to the prosecution and then the prosecution and the court can agree upon whether or not this document can be admitted. There is no other way practically for me to handle this. I can't submit a document before I have received it.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: Well, I understand your difficulty and I am not criticising you for that, but it seems that if the objection is presented that the affidavit identifying the instrument should be produced first.
DR. SAUTER: If the Tribunal please, in that case I have to ask to be permitted to wait until next Tuesday before presenting the balance of my documents. Then those documents that are as yet missing can be presented; that is next Tuesday. I am prepared to wait that long. I only came here today so that we could make use of today's time.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: The Tribunal has decided to permit the introduction and reading of this exhibit and when the supporting affidavit is filed, if it is not sufficient and does not meet the requirements, we will strike the exhibit from the files if the prosecution so moves. We will do that in order to attempt to save some time.
DR. SAUTER: Yes, Your Honor, thank you. I shall then read this affidavit which will be submitted to the Tribunal later in Document Book No. X as Document 200. First of all, pending the final ruling of the Tribunal, I shall give Document 192 which I just handed to the Secretary General Exhibit Number 178.
The last document - I beg your pardon - the last exhibit number which we used for the defendant Lanz was No. 178 so this document 192 in Lanz Document Book VIII will be given Lanz Exhibit No. 179 and Lanz Document 200 which I shall read now will be given Lanz Exhibit No. 180.
That is contained in Document Book X which you will receive in a few days. It is on page 7 of that document.
MR. FULKERSON: An affidavit which has not been translated again, and again I would like to object. The ruling of the Tribunal, as I understand it, is not that untranslated, unprocessed documents can go in, but merely that he can submit this document if he likes, subject to motion to strike if it does not comply with the rules of evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: I think you can proceed with your Exhibit 179 without making any use of the affidavit and submit the affidavit when it is translated.
DR. SAUTER: Of course, I am prepared to do this, although it does not seem practical to me to separate one document from another, which together form a whole, but if the prosecution wishes it that way it will have to be done that way. Then Exhibit 179, if Your Honors please, is a poster with the heading, "General Staff of National Defense Military Mission for German Affairs. French Military Administration in Germany." On the right hand side on the top we have the designation of the French agency: "Capitaine Poyetton, Chief of Military Government, Department Birkenfeld." By the way, Birkenfeld is a town on the left bank of the Rhine in Germany. This document is headed "No. 1" and is addressed to the Landrat, Bikkenfeld. In the text it is said, among other things - I read the sixth line:
"It is not the intention of the French Government to add new suffering to what the country has suffered already; but any action, attack, sabotage or disobedience will be punished severely.
"The punitive measures being contemplated are:
"Part or wholesale evacuation of the village in question; extension of the curfew; abrogation of all permissions to leave homes; fines, internment of all healthy men; for each soldier wounded or killed 10 Germans will be executed. Any unrest will be suppressed quickly and thoroughly."
The balance will not have to be read. The document is dated "Birkenfeld, 11 July 1945." The identification for this document will be available when Document Book 10 is submitted.
The next document is an affidavit executed by one Matthias Starl. This document is in Lanz Document Book No. 8, as document 193, on page 2 of that document book. This document will be given Lanz Exhibit No. 180. The affiant Starl has duly sworn to his statements. His signature has been duly certified by the town Lindau. The affiant states initially that he was first A.D.C. with the 22nd Mountain Corps, that is with General Lanz, during the period 3 September 1943, until 14 November 1943. He goes on to say, and I read from the middle of page 2:
"In my capacity as A.D.C. with the Department I-a of the Corps General Staff of the XXIInd Mountain Corps, I had among other things the task of handling the incoming tactical reports and to compile them for forwarding to superior agencies. That is what I also did during the combats against the Italians on the islands of Cephalonia and Corfu. The occurrences and events of that time are still perfectly present to my mind since they particularly impressed me because of their peculiarity, above all since I worked for the first time and for a short period only in a corps staff.
"With regard to the Reports of Army Group E dated 24 September 1943 and 29 September 1943 concerning Cephalonia and Corfu, now submitted to me, I can declare the following: The numbers stated in the reports of Italians who were killed in action or deserted to us are only estimated and were in each case given in round figures.
"The wording killed in action and shot' in the report of the Corps General Staff to the Army Group was chosen for the very purpose of expressing to the High Command of the Armed Forces and of creating the appearance that the Fuehrer orders requiring rigorous measures to be taken against the Italians belonging to the Division Acqui had been complied with."
The Division Acqui refers to Gandin.
"In reality, however, these were combat casualties only, that means Italians who had been shot during actual fight, i.e. who had been killed in action.
"Apart from the officers shot by sentence of summary court after termination of the combats on the islands, it did not come to my knowledge that Italians had been shot outside the combat zone. For the same reasons the shooting "of General GANDIN and all officers" was noted down in the reports, although this did not correspond to the truth. By this wording which we had chosen for the reports we prevented right from the beginning a possible inquiry on the part of the High Command of the Armed Forces as to whether the Fuehrer Order" to shoot all officers" had been complied with. The report was deliberately drawn up this way in order to avoid an inquiry by the High Command of the Armed Forces and a demand that exact figures be given. In reality, however, both from Cephalenia and from Corfu a great number of Italian officers were marched off as prisoners of war together with several thousands of Italian enlisted men.
"The aforesaid Fuehrer orders, against which General LANZ had at that time immediately entered a protest, were to be destroyed upon an express order of the High Command of the Armed Forces, together with all file notes referring to it, which was done by me personally."
Then we have the affidavit and certification formula.
The next document which connects up with the preceding one is an affidavit by Kurt Hepp. It is contained in Lanz Document Book No. 8, and the document number is 194. The document is on page 4 and the following pages, and will be given Exhibit No. Lanz No. 181. This affidavit also has been duly sworn to and properly certified. The affiant lives in Goeppingen, but he came to Nurnberg in order to execute this affidavit, and that is why defense counsel was in a position to certify the affidavit. Concerning his person the affiant says: "My name is Kurt Hepp, born 7 April 1920, resident in Goeppingen," and so forth, and concerning his assignments during the war he says that during the fights against the Russians on 15 March 1945 he was seriously wounded and lost his left leg. He continues to say, "After my discharge from military service I was employed in the Goeppingen (Wuerttcmbcrg) Hospital. This is my present occupation." Ad rem the affiant makes statements concerning the Islands Kefalonia and Corfu.
"I am able to make exact statements about the events on the Island of Kefalonia, and concerning the reports by the Army Group E dated 24 September 1943, as I was at first A.D.C. and later adjutant on the staff of the then German island commander and leader of the combat group, Major von Hirschefeld.
"After I was seriously wounded for the seventh time, when I lost my left leg, I learnt in 1945 that I am the only surviving officer of the former staff of the combat group.
"II. Major von Hirschfeld was on intimate terms with the general and Hitler's chief adjutant, General Schmundt, and was in constant direct touch with him by radio, without the knowledge of his superiors. In this way, Major von Hirschfeld received on several occasions direct instructions, respectively orders, from the Armed Forces High Command and the Fuehrer's Headquarters.
"I remember very well that thus, during the fights on Kefalonia, Major von Hirschfeld as combat group commander and island commandant received a first order immediately from the Armed Forces High Command to the effect that all Italians on the island had to be executed by shooting because of mutiny. I myself have seen the radio message containing this order. As v. Hirschfeld mentally rejected this stringent order, he in turn sent off a radio message right away, directed to the Armed Forces High Command and reading as follows: "Battle on Kefalonia already finished, request order for removal of captured Italians." I personally was present when von Hirschfeldt ordered the chief radio operator to pass this message on. Following this radio message, von Hirschfeld immediately received the Armed Forces High Command reply: "According to Fuehrer order all captured Italians have to be executed by shooting under summary courts martial as insurgents and bandits." I also saw this message myself; I myself received it from the radio operator and took it to Major von Hirschfeld. I can also recall the exact wording of this radio message. These direct radio connections and the text of the radio messages were not reported by Major von Hirschfeld at that time either to his divisional commander (General von Stettner), or to the Commanding General, General Lanz, as he knew that he was not permitted as line officer to maintain such direct radio connections.
"III. Approximately two days after the first radio message was received, the then Commanding General LANZ arrived at Kefalonia by plane, in order to inform himself about the situation, and discuss matters with Major von Hirschfeld. On that occasion General Lanz told Major von Hirschfeld in my presence that he (Lanz) had recently received a Fuehrer order stating that all Italians of the Ganding Division were to be executed by shooting; however, he could not reconcile this order with his conscience as a soldier, and he had vetoed it. He (Lanz) was of opinion that only those responsible for the mutiny should be called to account. He said that he would inform von Hirschfeld about the success of his veto.
Major von Hirschfeld supported General Lanz's opinion.
When on 22 or 23 September 1943, after the conclusion of the battles on Kefalonia, General Lanz again came to the island he in formed Major von Hirschfeld that the Fuehrer order had been changed in so far that all Italian officers were to be executed by shooting, but not the enlisted men.
He added, however, that he (Lanz) intended to execute this Fuehrer order in such a manner that only after investigations had been made the officers responsible for the mutiny were to be called to account on the basis of martial law.
"IV. The high number of Italian casualties on Kefalonia is due in particular to the battles for the northern part of the island, where almost three Italian battalions were nearly completely wiped out, which had encircled one of our German battalions. The fighting there was very intensive, because the Italians offered exceedingly strong resistance in the mountainous and hilly territory, and attempted right to the end to annihilate the German battalion they had encircled.
"Concerning the Army Group E report, dated 24 September 1943, in which the term "killed in action or shot dead" is used I want to mention that during the battles on Kefalonia, which I myself witnessed, Italians were only shot in battle and with weapons in their hands.
"V. The report that Gandin and all the officers wore shot is not correct. I know definitely that a few days after the battles on Kefalonia had ended, with every prisoner of war transport -if I remember right there were 8 to 10 transports -- a number of Italian officers were shipped to Patras, aside from the Italian enlisted men. Even on the boat with which I returned to the mainland Italian prisoners were taken over, amongst them a number of officers, especially an Italian Lieutenant-Colonel who showed me his pass."
I can omit some of the following, and I shall continue where it is said:
"When our boat arrived at the Greek mainland, the Italian officers, amongst them that particular lieutenant-colonel, took off their officers' uniforms and donned ordinary enlisted men's clothing. They had already removed their epqulettes and medals right after the battle of Kefalonia, so that the officers could only be distinguished from enlisted men by their boots, trousers and belts.
"VI. After they had been captured, General Gandin and his officers were billetted in a large hotel at Argostolien, the capital of the Island of Kefalonia. On the very next day Major von Hirschfeld went there in order, as he told me, to interrogate General Gandin. He asked me to accompany him. Thus it happened that I was present when Major von Hirsch feldt interrogated General Gandin.
General Gandin knew enough German that we could talk to him; besides, there was an interpreter present. During the conversation Major von Hirschfeld asked General Gandin why he did not comply with the surrender order of his supreme commander, General Vecciarelli. General Gandin replied in the sense that he and his officers had revolted against General Vecciarellis surrender order. He (Gandin) had been sworn in on the Italian King, and he was loyal to his King to the end. During this conversation General Gandin did not mention that he had received orders to the contrary by the Italian King or Marshal Badoglio. If Candin would have made such a statement, I am sure Major von Hirschfeld would not have given orders to shoot General Gandin, but would have first submitted a report to General Lanz about it."
I am going to omit the next paragraph. At the end the affiant says: "My above-mentioned statements are the full truth. I am prepared at any time to make them under oath before a court." The statements of the affiant have been sworn to by him and the signature is properly certified.
That was Lanz Exhibit No. 181, and this brings me to the next document which is Lanz Document 195.