I think he is familiar with the method to be followed in asking questions.
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honor, I remember quite distinctly that the Prosecution, when submitting this document, maintained that this inquiry was addressed to the defendant Field Marshall List. If the Prosecution maintains this then, I must be allowed to question the person concerned regarding this matter.
JUDGE BURKE: In the interest of brevety, Dr. Laternser, you may proceed.
A The Chief of Staff would not direct an inquiry in this form to his superior officer. He addressed his inquiry to the 1-C, as I have already said, in order to get some clarity about these matters.
Q In Exhibit 22, which is in English Document Book 1, page 76, and in the German Document Book 1, page 55, this is a report of the Chief of the Security Police of the Security Service, and this report says that 32 communists, jews and band members have been shot. Did this report ever come to your knowledge?
A This report is not known to me, because this is from the office of the Chief of Security Police in Berlin and was not received by my office.
Q From Exhibit 23 in the English Document Book 1, page 80 and the German Document Book 1, page 58, we see that 52 communists and no jews were shot, what do you know about this?
A I don't know this detail.
Q I am now turning to Exhibit 39 of the English Document book 2, on page 10, and in the German Document Book 2 on page 6 -- English Document Book 2, page 10 -- this exhibit 39 shows that Col.
von Stockhausen on the 10th of August, because of an attack on German Police Forces ordered the shooting to death of 81 Serbs, from the neighborhood by Serbian gendarmes, according to this report, is supposed to have led to a ministerial crisis; did this case become known to you?
A The case would not have come to my knowledge at that time, because at that time, the 10th of August, I was absent. I was absent from 23 July to the 23 of August.
Q Was this incident reported to you after your return from leave?
A I could not say that now. Today, I cannot recall it.
Q I would like to draw the attention of the Tribunal to the fact that this case is further dealt with in Exhibit 40-A. In the English Document Book 2, page 20. Now, I turn to Exhibit 31, Exhibit 31 may be found in the English Document Book 1, page 111, and in the German Document Book 1, on page 86. From Exhibit 31 it follows that on the occasion of an incident the Zagreb, apart from 98, an additional 85, and another number which is not exactly known, of insurgents were shot. At that time who was commanding in Croatia?
A Croatia was an independent state. It was not subordinate to me.
Q Who possessed executive power in Croatia?
A The head of the State.
Q Why was this incident reported to the Wehrmacht commander southeast?
A On the part of the Plenipotentiary Commanding General in Agram, for information purposes.
Q. We now come to exhibit 39 which may be found in the English document book 2 on page 8 and in the German document book 2 on pages 11 and 12. In this exhibit we see that after an attack near Skela an, officer and a sergeant major were found dead, and three other sergeant majors were missing; in the report follows the reprisals which were taken, and I should like to ask you, Field Marshal, did you have any knowledge of that case at that time?
A. No, that took place in the middle of my leave on the 14th of August.
Q. The witness Kiessel asserts in the document, which the prosecution has submitted under No. 100-B 27 that this action Skela took place on the orders or with the express consent of the Chief of Staff; could General Foertsch issue such an order?
A. No.
Q. Did your yourself issue an order in this matter?
A. I could not do that because I did not know of this incident.
Q. I should like to point out the Tribunal that the same case is dealt with cumulatively in the following exhibits, in exhibit 59 English document book 2, pages 91 and 92, the German document book 2, page 74, further in exhibit 127 of the English document book 5, wage 33, the German document book 5 page 37; exhibit 128 of the English document book 5, page 132, German document book 5, page 87 and in exhibit 527 of the English document book 24, page 11 and the German document book 24, page 8. The case appears altogether five times.
We will now turn to exhibit 40, which is on page 20 of the English document book 2 on page 18. From this exhibit 40 we see that on 2nd September 20 Communists were shot for three German.
soldiers killed. Was this case reported to you; it is a case which took place near Rtanj, I will Spell it R-t-a-n-j?
A. I have only to repeat that it is no longer possible for me to tell you what were the individual reports which I received at that time. Today I cannot recall this incident, even though at that time I may have received it.
Q. I am now turning to exhibit 114-C. This is a supplement at the end of the 3rd document book in the English document book, and in volume 3 of the German edition on page 113. From this exhibit we see that on 19 September in Uzice that 154 band-members were shot there; during this case did you issue any orders?
A. No.
Q. What do you know about this case?
A. No details.
Q. I should like to draw the attention of the court of the fact that the same case is further dealt with in exhibit 45, English document book 2, page 42 and the German document book, 2, page 35. It is dealt with the third time in the English document book 24, page 28 and in the German document book 24 on page 21.
I will now turn to exhibit 61, which can be found in the English document book 2 on page 103, the German document book 2 on page 82. From exhibit 61 you see that the order of the plenipotentiary general Serbia of 23 September was sent to the Wehrmacht Commander Southeast for information purposes; do you know this order?
A. I don t know. If it had been sent to me for an acknowledgement I must have initialed it at that time.
Q. Let us assume that you received it; what could you have done then?
A. This is a teletype of the Plenipotentiary Commanding General addressed to the 342nd Division. This teletype was sent for information purposes to various offices.
I must assume that it reached them in the written form since the action which was ordered for the 23rd was arranged for the 24th. If I had received this order I could not longer have intervened.
Q Where was the Chief of Staff, General Foertsch at that time?
A. Foertsch was at that time on leave.
Q. Who was his deputy?
A. Colonel Kuebler.
Q. How were you informed about things at that time?
A. As I learned later, in an insufficient manner.
Q. With whom did you discuss this?
A. With my Chief of Staff after his return from Belgrade.
Q. From exhibit 115...I would like to be excused for a moment. I want to find out the English page numbers.
THE PRESIDENT. Very well.
BY DR. LATERNSER:
Q. From page 115, volume 4, page 6, in the German, volume 4 on page 6, it follows, from a report from the 342nd Infantry division addressed to the Plenipotentiary Commanding General in Serbia, that in the course of a mopping up action 830 men were shot and 8,400 were arrested; were reports of such a nature known to you.
A. That is possible, even if I don't remember then today.
Q. Now, supposing that such a report was made known to you what would you think when you received such a message?
A. This was an extensive operation. I was also of the opinion that the lesses took plane during the actual fighting. I assume that the people were actually killed in combat or were franc tireurs who were shot by a summary court martial.
Q. Why shot by a summary court martial?
A. Just because they were franc tireurs or guerillas, had taken part in the fighting, or had been caught with a weapon in their hands.
Q. What did the German regulations state regarding the treatment of guerillas?
A. After the Guerilla order of the year 1939, guerillas could be shot during the actual fighting, or if they had taken part in the fighting with weapons, or if they had been captured carrying weapons.
Q. You say by summary court martial; what does this mean - a summary court martial?
A. A summary court martial can be convened by the regimental commander and comprises one officer and two associate soldiers, enlisted men of any ranks.
Q. I now turn to exhibit 62 in the English document book 2, we find it on page 107, in the German book 2 on page 85. In this exhibit we see an order of the Plenipotentiary Commanding General of Serbia for an evacuation of the Save Bend; did this order come to your knowledge?
A. No.
Q. In connection with this evacuation of the Save Bend; did you issue any order?
A. No, General Boehme had the general order from me to conduct the action and was completely independent in this respect.
Q. We now come to the case of Crabovac. This incident is dealt with in Exhibit 107 of the English document book 3, pages 103 to 118 in the German document book 3, pages 76 to 78; can you recall this case?
A. Yes.
Q. It follows from this exhibit that you ordered the investigation of this incident on the 6th of October; why did you issue such an order?
MR. DENNEY: I suggest that the witness testify and not Dr. Laternser. The witness was there, Dr. Laternser was not. He knows how to answer questions and tell us what he did, or didn't do.
JUDGE BURKE: The Tribunal will attempt to distinguish between the testimony of Dr. Laternser and the witness. You may proceed.
BY DR. LATERNSER:
Q. Why did you issue the order for the investigation of this incident on the 6th of October?
A. A report by a sergeant major was submitted to me. It is unusual that such a report without giving the attitude and view of the intermediate officer, reaches the supreme commander. We will have to assume therefore that the senior signals officer had submitted his report to the chief of staff and that the chief of staff had passed it on to me. The senior signals officer had probably done that in order to justify himself regarding the frequent reproaches directed at him because of the failure of the lines of communication. At the same time he probably asked that the army should take care that more extensive security measures were taken.
Q. What was the importance of the telephone communications in the Balkans?
A. The importance is of a decisive nature as the area was very large and communications were bad. As such the troop units were separately disposed, had long lines of communication and in the case of a crisis they must have the possibility to support each other.
Q. When was a case of sabotage on telephonic communication lines especially effective?
A. Especially, of course, when there was tense situation and when unrest appeared here and there.
Q. Why did you now direct that an investigation of this case should take place; why were you of the opinion that in the case in question wrong measures had been taken?
A. From the report it is clear that the troubles in communications were of a considerable nature. About 100 telegraph or telephone poles had been cut down or sawed down and a number of kilometers of wire had been cut off. In the Balkans this is, of course of great importance, because there was no subterranean cables there and because of the great distance and bad roads and then because of the small forces available the repair of such cuts took considerable time. From the report I gained the impression that in this case they had dealt with it only in a superficial manner and the person should be arrested for a time until a further clarification took place.
Q. Now General Boehme reported to you in his letter of the 13th of October that he ordered every fifth house to be burned down; did you receive this message?
A. I could no longer receive this message because it was only written on the 13th, it was sent by letter and because on the 15th I was no longer in office.
Q. And finally in the Crabovac case, General Boehme reported on the 20th of October that the village of Crabovac was burnt down and 73 residents were shot because the troops had been shot at from this village; did you receive this message or did you obtain any knowledge of its contents?
A. For the reasons already mentioned, I could not know of it.
Q. We now turn to Exhibit 78, that is the case Topola of the Signals regiment exhibit 78, which may be found in the English document book 3 on page 1 and also in German document book 3 on page 1. Before I put a few questions regarding this case to the witness, I should like to draw the attention of the Court to the fact that this case is dealt with eleven times.
I want briefly to give you the page numbers in the English document books. It appears again in exhibit 79, volume 3, page 3; in exhibit 80, volume 3, page 4, in exhibit 81, volume 3, page 11; in exhibit 82, volume 3, page 16; in exhibit 113, volume 3, the supplement at the end of the volume ; then in volume 4 on page 93 and exhibit 122; then exhibit 124; volume 4, page 153.
MR. DENNEY: Can you give the page numbers and the volumes a little slower? We find it difficult to keep up with Dr. Laternser. I would appreciate it if he would give them a little slower.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I think that you --
DR. LATERNSER: Yes, of course.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I simplified the matter myself. I'm simply noting the exhibit numbers and will follow with the rest later.
DR. LATERNSER: Volume 4, page 93, Exhibit 122. Your Honor, only to mention the number of the exhibit would not suffice because they are usually a rather voluminous number of reports.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: You may follow your own procedure.
DR. LATERNSER: Exhibit 124, volume 4, page 143 , Exhibit 127, volume 5, page 56; Exhibit 128, volume 5, page 117; and Exhibit 527, volume 24, page 38.
BY DR. LATERNSER:
Q. We see from Exhibit 78, volume 3, page 1 of both document books -- that on the second of October between Belgrade and Obrenovac, 21 soldiers, German soldiers, were murdered in a cruel manner by communist bands. When did you learn of this report?
A. The first report addressed to the Wehrmacht Commander Southeast is dated the 9th of October, 1941. On that day, I was in Crete and I returned on the 11th of October, and so the earliest I can have learned of this incident was on the 11th of October in the evening.
Q. What were the connections between the Army staff and yourself during your presence in Crete?
A. I had no connections with the staff during that time.
Q. How were you informed after you returned from official trips?
A. The chief of staff reported to me about everything that had happened in the meantime. During an absence of four days, that amounted of course to quite a number of things, so that the individual incident did not gain so much prominence as if it had been reported separately.
Q. Do you remember to have learned of this case at that time?
A. I remember this case rather obscurely.
Q. In Exhibit 80, the prosecution -- that is Exhibit 80, volume 3 of the English text and pages 4 to 10 ; volume 3, pages 3 to 8 in the German text. The prosecution has submitted a report regarding the shooting by way of reprisal. Did you gain any knowledge of this report?
A. No, the report was received by the Army High Commander on the 15th of October, and it was addressed not to the Armed Forces Commander Southeast but to the Army High Command 12. And the sender was the second battallion of the Army Signals Regiment 521. That means that in this case it was directed to the office in the staff of Army High Command 12 to which the second battalion of the Army Signals Regiment 521 was subordinate. That was the army signals Officer. But even if the report had been immediately dispatched to me, I could not have received it, because from that day onwards, I was no longer acting in my official capacity.
Q. I have just been told that "Nachrichtenfuehrer" was translated as the "intelligence" -- that is not the correct translation. It is not the person who collects news but who is responsible for the technical transmission of news. That is, the person who is responsible for having telephonic communications established.
THE INTERPRETER: The correct translation for "Nachrichtenfuehrer" I see, is staff signal communication officer.
Q. Do you know whether, in this case, actually 2,000 persons were shot?
A. I do not know that. I can only draw the conclusion from this report and this report says that a number of slightly over 400 were shot. A conclusive report on the part of a unit I did not find here.
Q. We now turn to Exhibit 83. We find this in the English document book 3, page 18, in the German document book 3, page 15.
That is the case of Kraljovo. What did you learn about this incident, at that time?
A. I did not learn anything about this incident.
Q. Why not?
A. These attacks took place between the 14th and 17th of October at a time during which I was no longer active in my official capacity.
Q. When were you operated on ?
A. October 17 .
Q. When did you go to bed?
A. On the 15th.
Q. Now regarding Exhibit 84 which contains the case of Valjovo, that is in the English document book 3, page 22, and German document book 3, page 19. What do you know about this incident?
A. I can only repeat what I said before, nothing. It took place even later than the other incident mentioned.
Q. Now as regards Exhibit 87, which we find on page 32 of the English document book 3 and the German book 3 on page 26, this is the case Cragujevac regarding which we had here a witness of the prosecution. Was this incident reported to you?
A. No, it couldn't be reported to me because it took place between the 19th and the 21st of October when I was absent.
Q. Now a few individual cases concerning Greece. In Exhibit 111; English document book 3, page 142; German document book 3, page 97, in this exhibit an operation is mentioned against eight localities which I need not enumerate separately. Was this incident reported to you?
A. I can no longer tell whether this happened or not. If so, then this incident would not have been very conspicuous to me. Apparently this is a case of a fight with bandits.
Q. In the same exhibit on page 141 of the English document book and page 96 of the German, a mopping up operation in five localities is mentioned, during the course of which 27 Greeks were shot during resistance or in fighting. What do you know about this incident?
A. That incident too I cannot remember; according to the report it is beyond question a fight against bands.
Q. The next three incidents in the same exhibit I can summarize in one question I am sure. This is a case on page 90-- I correct myself -- on page 144 of the English document book against the villages Amokatokerzillio and on the 19th and 20th of October against further localities near Evangelistria and on the 23rd of October against two further localities, among others Celli. What is you attitude to these three incidents?
A. I can only say here that I could not gain any knowledge of those three incidents.
Q. The prosecution has submitted Exhibit 59, which we find on page 79 of the English document book 2 and in the German document book 2 on page 63. From this exhibit 59, we see that in connection with the finding of explosives, 10, Communists and 3 Jews were shot. Were you informed of this incident at that time?
A. I can't tell you today whether I received this message or not. If I received it, I had to assume that the sentence and the execution took place because of the attacks against the occupation power, after a summary court martial or as a reprisal, but not because of racial reasons.
Q. In the same exhibit on page 79 of the German, and page-I am sorry I am not in a position to name the English pages. No, I correct myself -- on page 98 of the English. This contains a report to the Wehrmacht Commander Southeast from which it follows that parts of the male Jewish population in Belgrade were sent to a transit camp near Belgrade. Were you informed about these intentions before they took place?
A. No.
Q. Did you obtain knowledge of this report?
A. I cannot remember it.
Q. I am now returning to Exhibit 64 in English document book 2, page 117; in the German document book on page 91. This exhibit contains a report of the Plenipotentiary Commanding General Serbia addressed to the Wehrmacht Commander Southeast dated the 26th of September, and it follows from this report that in Smederovo and the neighborhood Jews were arrested and, as stated in the report, they were arrested as instigators of the revolt. Did you obtain knowledge of this report?
A. This too, I cannot say today whether I received it or not. If I had received it-- I would have to draw the conclusion from this report that the arrest took place exclusively because these were the instigators of the revolt.
Q. I now turn to Exhibit No. 127 in the English document book 5. We find it on page 27, and in the German document book 5 on page 34. According to this report, as a reprisal measure for a surprise attack against a German motor car on the 29th of July, a hundred Jews were to be shot. Do you know whether this shooting took place?
A. I beg your pardon, I don't have this report before me.
Q. It is on page 33 of the German document book 5.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: What page in the English document book?
DR. LATERNSER: In the English document book on page 27. I am told that it is on page 39. I beg your pardon.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: You have been correctly informed.
BY DR. LATERNSER:
Q. What date does this report bear?
A. It bears the date of the 27th of July.
Q. Where were you on the 27th of July.
A. In Vienna.
Q. Do you know whether this shooting was carried out?
A. No.
Q. We find -- and now this finishes my concluding questions. I want to deal first with Exhibit 100-B 27. This is a supplement to the third English document book and we find it behind, after page 78 and in the German document book 3 as a supplement behind page 57. This Exhibit is a statement by Kiessel which was made on the 24th of March, 1947, in Belgrade.
MR. DENNEY: Your Honors, I believe that exhibit we put in a separate folder.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I don't find it in mine.
MR. DENNEY: Well, if your Honors recall, we put them -- we took the Yugoslav exhibit and put them in a separate folder and kept them separate from book 3 because I don't think they fit in that book. The Yugoslav report, pictures, the tiessel affidavit, various newspaper clippings.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: They referred to as 100-B-item 27?
MR. DENNEY: If Your Honors recall, there Is 100-B, then 100B 1, etc. This part is 100-B 27.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Very well.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: If you'll pass that for the time being we'll request the messenger to secure a copy for Judge Wennerstrum and a copy from my office. I think Judge Carter has his. Judge Carter?
JUDGE CARDER: Yes.
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honors, may I be allowed to suggest that this be completed during the recess, and then we can continue after the recces.
JUDGE BURKE : It is the thought of the Tribunal that we will continue until 11:30, and then adjourn until after the noon. Is it possible without interrupting the continuity of your examination to proceed with some other matters at this time until the document books are brought in by the messenger?
DR. LATERNSER: Yes
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: If you'll pause at this moment, Dr. Laternser, because of the necessity of the adjustment -- not an error, but a readjustment because of the additional length of time to make the film continue until 11:30. So, if you will discontinue (Pause) until the Tribunal notifies you?
Your may proceed, Dr. Laternser.
BY DR. LATERNSER:
This Exhibit 100-B 27 is a statement by Kiessel, which he made in Belgrade. Who was Kiessel?
A. As far as I can see now from the documents he belonged to the staff of War Administrative Chief.
Q. In which capacity?
A. He worked on administrative matters -- police matters.
Q. What were his further functions subsequently?
A. From the press I learned later on that he was one of the chief prosecutors of the conspirators of the 29th of July.
Q. Kiessel says on Page 21 that the Military Commander Serbia, a few days after the 29th of April, was subordinate to the AOK-12. Is that correct?
JUDGE WENNERSTRUM: Pardon me, which document is Page 21?
DR. LATERNSER: That is the first page of Document 100 B-27. which is numbered 21 at the bottom of this document. I assume that the same page number is found in the English text.
JUDGE WENNERSTRUM: The first page is numbered 24.
MR. DENNEY: If Your Honors please, the reason for the difference in the pagination, the figure 21 appears at the bottom of Dr. Laternser's copy in the German and 24 at the top of the English. The document if Your Honors recall, originally was in Serbian -- Yugoslav, and when it was translated into the German and English the pagination was different. That's the reason for it.
BY DR. LATERNSER:
Q. The matter to which I refer is on the first page of this extract from the record of the interrogation. I asked whether it was correct if Kiessel says that the Military Commander Serbia a few days after the 24th of April was subordinate to Army High Command 12.
A. No.
Q. Kiessel goes on to say on the next page that a police battalion was subordinate to the operational department instead of Thurner and was, therefore, misused. What do you know about that?
A. The Chief of Staff reproted to me at that time that the Military Commander Serbia had telephoned whether this police battalion could be subordinated to the Command Staff by him, whereupon I answered him. that the Military Commander might act in the way he deemed suitable. It was quite convenient for us because in this manner this police battalion was not delivered into the hands of Thurner who had the intention of trying to build up a sort of body guard for himself.
Q. Kiessel continues on the 4th page of the extract that it was typical of the conditions that you, during your first visit in Serbia, landed at Nish, and that you first asked for Bader and not for the Military Commander. How did that come about?
A. I did not land at Nish. I arrived by train in Nish, and the line from Salonika to Belgrade goes via Nish. It was, therefore, understandable that I first went to Nish. There I was received by General Bader who was at the same time the deputy of the Commander Serbia. The Commander Serbia had been prevented by an air-craft accident to come to Nish. Otherwise he certainly would have been present.
Q. In the next paragraph Kiessel maintains this: Contrary to the report of Field Marshal List, dated 23rd of August 1741, in Belgrade, the OKH has, after Nedic was made Premier in September, 1941, sent GeneralBomehme with a staff, of one Mountain troops, which were in Greece, to Belgrade with the order to quell the rising. Is that correct in the way Kiessel represents it here?
A. No, it's quite impossible that on the 23rd of August I could have made such an utterance, because a t that time I had just returned from my leave, and I found completely changed conditions in Belgrade. And the thought that Boehme could have been appointed Plenipotentiary General in Serbia was not considered at that time at all.
Q. Kiessel further states that reprisal measures took place between the 28th of June and the 20th of July, 1941, because of an attack on a grandstand. He says that these reprisals which had been ordered had been ordered by General von Schroeder with your consent. What do you say to that?
A. I have never talked to Schroeder either by word of mouth or by telephone.
Q. Finally Kiessel says in his statement that the Chief of Staff Gravenhorst with the Commander Serbia maintained that he had the power and the authority to take ten reprisal hostages for one victim on the German side. What do you know about that?
A. I've never given such authority.
Q. You know that the prosecution also charges you with the responsibility for the Commissar Order which is in Exhibit 13 and Exhibit 14. We find it in the English Document Book I on page 49 and in the German document book on page 34.
JUDGE CARTER: Which document book?
DR. LATERNSER: Document Book I, page 49.
BY DR. LATERNSER:
Q. Did you receive this Commissar Order?
A. No.
Q. Do you know whether the Commissar Order was distributed in the Southeast?
A. No.
Q. Is one case known to you in which the Commissar Order was applied in the Southeast?
A. No.
Q. We now come to the concluding questions. When did you conclude your activities in the Balkans?
A. It was the 15th of October 1941.
Q. What was your illness then?
A. I had an appendicitis operation.
Q. And when did you go into the hospital?
A. On the 16th of October.
Q. You said before that you were operated on on the 17th of October.
A. Yes.
Q. Who was your deputy for the initial period?
A. On the 18th of October the OKW appointed General Kunze as my deputy, but he only arrived on the 26th of October in Athens.
Q. When did he take over the duties of your office?
A. On the 27th of October.
Q. Who managed matters in the meantime?
A. What the arrangement was in detail is not known to me.
Q. During your sickness did you have any official connection with the Staff of the Army High Command 12, or the Armed Forces Commander Southeast?
A. I had no official connection.
Q. Was your illness so serious that you could not be bothered with official matters?
A. Yes. General Kunze, too, could not come to me at once because my state of health did not allow this at the time of his arrival.
Q. How long did you remain in the hospital?
A. Until the 6th of December 1941.
Q. And where were you in the hospital?
A.. In Sismanoglion, in the immediate neighborhood of Athens.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: The Tribunal will stand adjourned until two o'clock this afternoon.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 1400 hours.)