A. First of all I would like to mention that on the first order the date 5th Nov. is, -- this should really be the 5th of January. General Bader was on leave. His deputy at the beginning of January 1943 was the Commander of 704th Division, Major General Juppe.
Q. Perhaps you would spell the name?
A. J-u-p-p-e. Major General Juppe took up an office Pocarevac and retained it there. Then there came two reprisal applications from the administrative sub-area headquarters 809. General Juppe was orally told about these reprisal applications. I don't know who made it. Whether I did it I really don't know any more. He decided that these reprisal applications were to be approved and ordered along these lines. Since he was about 40 to 50 kilometers away I, on his behalf, singed the orders, and also in the orders I stated that Major General Juppe had approved the applications of the sub-area administrative headquarters.
Q. According to your opinion, in this case , did you take over special criminal liability by signing this order on behalf of the deputy commander?
A. No.
Q. Not according to your personal opinion?
A. No.
Q. And are these all the same orders about which General Felber as a witness in his examination on 13 August 1947 has already spoken?
A. Yes.
DR. SAUTER: With regard to this point, Your Honor, I will now read from Geitner Exhibit 6, Document Book I, for Geitner , from Document 8, page 15 and onwards. Figure 3 is on page 19 of the English, page 17 of the German. This is an affidavit of former Chief of General Staff, Franz Halder, dated July 25, 1947, and duly sworn to and certified. In figure 3, General Halder states.
with regard to the two reprisal orders which are being dealt with here:
"3. The order of the Commanding General and Commander in Serbia, section I a. No. 19/43 of 5 November 1943 does according to German understanding not represent a command of the Chief of Staff, but the office routine announcement of a decision made by the Deputy of the Commanding General. To do that the Chief of Staff not only had a right, but it was his duty, whenever the urgency of the matter forbade the awaiting of a handwritten signature by the Deputy of the Commanding General. According to the opinion prevalent within the German Army it is the responsibility of the chief of staff to draw up such a command so that it clearly expresses the decision made by the commander or, if such a decision could not be obtained in a particular case, it atleast conforms with the basic conception of the commander." I don't need to read any more, but I would just like to state here. Your Honor, that in this affidavit of General Helder the date of the order is stated as being the 5th of November 1943, just as it is stated in the copy of the document. It should really be the 5 January. The mistake in the copy was probably taken from General Halder's affidavit, because I sent him this copy at the time, so that he could make his comments about it. This fact can be seen from the number which General Halder gives, which is No. 1-A, 19/43.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there to be some stipulation as to this change --
MR. RAPP: Your Honor, if you please, the assistant Secretary General has the original of this particular document and if I could look through it sometime during the day; if it turns out as Dr. Sauter claims then there is no reason for us not to acceed this point.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. We will call it to your attention later on in the day.
Q. Witness, have you still got this document there?
A. Yes.
Q. Will you please turn up the page because I want to ask you a few questions about these orders. Document Book 10, page 11, of the English and German; have you got it?
A.Yes.
Q. Please tell us in which form was it expressed in this order, that it is an order by your commander, and not an order of the Chief of Staff General Geitner, how was this visible to the German officer, in the document itself, I mean?
A. In the one document, it states: "The deputy commanding General Major General Juppe, has approved the application of District Headquarters Leskovac of 29 December 1942 to shoot to death 35 hostages." Then the second document states, "The Deputy Commanding General, Major General Juppe, has ordered..."
Q. Witness, keep the document for a minute. Can the fact that this is an order of the Commander and not an order by the chief of staff Geitner; also be seen from the heading of the letter and from the signature?
MR. RAPP: Your Honor, I object to this line of questions. I think Dr. Sauter should ask the witness a question and not suggest the answers to him.
THE PRESIDENT: I think Dr. Sauter you should watch and avoid asking leading questions. In this particular case, it will be overruled, BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. Witness, I first of all ask you quite generally whether from the letter it could be seen and I mean the contents of the letter, look at the external form of the letter and tell us how it can be seen from this whether it is an order of the commander or whether it is an order of the chief of the general staff?
A. At the top of the letter it states, "Commanding General and 6 Commander in Serbia," and it is signed for the commanding general and commander in Serbia, Chief of General Staff. These kind of orders which were made in this way were never orders by the chief of staff, but they were orders for which the commanding general bore the responsibility.
Q. Witness, then according to the usual rules in the German Army how would the heading of the letter have been and how would the signature have been if this had been a personal order by the chief of staff Geitner first of all the heading?
A. If it had been a personal order by the chief of staff, then at the top of the letter it would have said, "Commanding General and Commander Serbia, The Chief of the General Staff and then the signature would simply have read Geitner without the addition of for the commanding general/"
Q. Witness and now I come to another document which concerns the Mladenovac affair. That is the case in which a Communist woman in Serbia shot and killed two German officers. This is a document book 9, document book 9, German page 124, English page 117. It is NOKW 969, exhibit 237. Have you got document book 9, Herr von Geitner?
A. Yes.
Q. Then please turn to page 124, NOKW 969, page 117 of the English, is that the right page?
A. Yes.
Q. First of all tell the Tribunal please what the affair was. about at that time?
A. From a report of the 704th Division, it became clear, I don't know to whom the report was sent, whether it went to the D-C or 1-A, at any rate I learned from this report that on the afternoon of 29 December 1942 in Mladenovac an attack was made on the staff of the batallion stationed there, that is the 724th regiment. The battalion commander was with his adjutant and his doctor on their way home. Suddenly shots rang out from the immediate neighborhood and left and right from the officers two officers fell down. A woman ran out, she was the one who had made the attack. She was followed among others by a former Cetnik leader, but she fired at the persuers and killed the Cetnik leader. Finally she threw herself down somewhere and shot herself to death.
Q. Witness, who was the commander at that time?
A. At this time the commander was Brig. Gen. or Major General Diepold
Q. And then what was reported to the deputy commander about this incident and then what did ho order?
A. In the meantime I was told that documents were found on the woman and among them was a letter stated, "I only wanted to snow you to prove to you that I am not a coward. I have fulfilled my commission." I then asked that this material should be submitted.
Q. Just a moment, what you have just told us previously, that was the contents of a letter?
A. Yes.
Q. And now you are continuing with what you said?
A. Yes, I asked for the submission of the material and that was brought in from Mladenovac with the translation or it was translated by us, I don't know. Then it could be clearly seen from this that the woman was the tool of the Communists in Mladenovac in this affair. In the meantime the application of the 704th Division had come in with regard to the shooting of fifty Communists from Mladenovac. This fact was brought to the knowledge of Major General Diepold. I don't know where he had his staff headquarters but I think it was in Syrmia, yes possibly I think in Sremska Mitrovica.
Q. What sort of a district is this?
A. It is just north of the Save river, the district north of Belgrade, west of the Danube and north of the Save. I think his staff headquarters was there but I don't know.
Q. Witness, can you please tell us why in this case any kind of retaliation order was issued at all by the deputy commander, although the culprit was known.
A. The commander was told about the matter and was told about everything that happened, including the contents of this letter. Thereupon Major General Diepold decided that the proposal of the 704th Division should be approved.
Q. Witness, can you please tell me the reason why Major General Diepold asked as deputy commander ordered the shooting of other people. Just a moment, I remember that formerly a reprisao measure did not come into the question if the culprit had been determined and in this case the culprit was known.
A. It was quite clear from the letter that this woman had been instigated to do it and had acted under a certain pressure.
Q. Witness, what did you have to do with this affair?
A. It is a matter of course that the chief of staff hears about such occurrences which take place in the area of the deputy commander and reports about it.
Q. And thereupon the commander issued the reprisal order?
A. Yes, thereupon the commander issued the order. The fact that the gave the order can be seen from the war diary.
Q. From the war diary; which war diary?
A. From the war diary of the commanding general, and commander, the entry of 24 or 25 December.
Q. The 24th, 25 and 26th of December. Witness, the reprisal order, which is to be found in the war diary is also signed by you. The heading in the letter of 25 December, 1942 states again and I quote: "Commanding General and Commander in Serbia, Department 1-A, No. 650/42." That is the heading of the document and the signature is: "For the Commanding General and Commander in Serbia, the Chief of the General Staff von Geltner." That is the literally quoted signature. How did it happen that you yourself signed this reprisal order?
A. The deputy commander gave the order for the execution of the application of the 704th Division and since he was not present he ordered that the order was to be issued by me.
Q. Herr von Geitner in document 969, NOKW exhibit237, document book 10, page 130 of the German and page 117 of the English. This Document contains and extract from the diary of the 704th Infantry Division, an extract of 25 December 1942 that was the day after the attack. The attack itself took place on Christmas Eve and according to this document, the doctor who was shot at that time, Dr. Engelhard died and the 704th Infantry Division therefore applied for the shooting of 25 additional hostages from the district of Mladenovac. In this application of the division there is an audition, which I would like to read to you, the addition is that "The execution will be carried out by the SD in Belgrade."
What do you know about that, about the application and about the addition?
A. The application again, came to Major General Diepold and was approved by him with the addition that the order was to be issued by the office. Why this execution was to be carried out by the SD in Belgrade and not in Mladenovac, I can only explain by the fact that in Mladenovac there were no longer any Communist reprisal prisoners, but there were possibly some in Belgrade. Therefore that was why the execution was ordered to take place in Belgrade.
Q. And why at that time did the deputy commander order the shooting of an additional 25 hostages in Belgrade; what happened in the meantime to cause him to take this step?
A. According to the provisions fixed by General Bader for one severely wounded German soldier, 25 Serbs were to be shot but for one killed German soldier, 50 and since for the two officers and one Cetnick leader, altogether fifty were shot. Diepold ordered that now for the shooting to death of the doctor, who died a few hours after the attack, a further 25 reprisal prisoners were to be shot.
Q. Witness, the second officer who was shot by the woman was a Lt. Koenig; can you tell us what happened with regard to him relative to his recovery.
A. According to the war diary of the 104th Rifle Division, which had arisen from the 704th Rifle Division, this Lt. Koenig in June or May, I think in May of 1943 died of his wounds in Vienna. If I remember correctly he had a shot in the spine. The 104th Rifle Division thereupon again asked for the shooting of 25 reprisal prisoners because of the fact that now this officer was also dead.
As far as I know this application was not approved. I can say it was not approved, but I, myself, on the 1st of June 1943 was not in Belgrade but I certainly cannot imagine that General Bader would subsequently approve of that action.
Q. These facts can also be seen from a document, which I would like to mention in this connection. This is in document book 12, page 3 of the English. Page 7 of the German. This is NOKW 1013, Exhibit No. 286. This is an extract from the diary of the 104th Rifle Division which arose from the 704th Riffle Division.
Witness, I would now like to show you another document with which you are also charged by the prosecution. Document book 9, page 16 in the German and page 12 in the English document book 9, Document 1335, exhibit 218; have you got this document?
A. Yes.
Q. What can you say about this document, only as far as you have not already said anything about it?
A. An application from Croatia with regard to reprisal measures because of a murdered Volksdeutscher and it was answered to the effect by the 1-A that this could not take place without discussions with the Croatia authorities. The competent person was the police president in Ruma. I did not remember this matter at all, probably it can be traced back to a comment of my commander.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, we will take our morning recess at this time.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is now in recess until 1115.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
MR. RAPP: Your Honors, I am referring to defense document No. 8, Exhibit 6. I have now meanwhile inspected the original of this document and the English translation of this original seems to be correct so I believe that if Dr. Sauter has any alterations at this time they can only be done through a supplement affidavit or it has to be left as it is by the affiant. It merely indicates the time, November 1943. It does not say "5 January 1943."
THE PRESIDENT: The number of the document, though, corresponds with the January document, doesn't it?
MR. RAPP: It does correspond, your Honor, but I am just wondering whether or not the affiant wanted to say this. It does raise some question of doubt and I want to be sure that the affiant gets a chance to correct it. I wouldn't want to call him here for cross examination for this particular error if it is an error but I do think it ought to be straightened out one way or the other.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed.
DR. SAUTER: I shall come back to this point later on after I have looked at the photostatic copy. I am sure there must be a mistake. It should read "5 January" but I shall prove it later.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q Witness, we looked just now at Document 1335 in Book XIX on page ly of the German, on page 12 of the English. Will you please look at this document once more and particularly the entry of 25 August 1942 and would you please tell us whether you happen to find therein a confirmation of what you have told the Tribunal just now concerning your efforts to improve hygienic conditions in the Semlin camp. It is the entry of 25 August 1942. Have you got it?
A Yes, I do.
Q Perhaps, you could read what the entry says and it will be self explanatory.
A "Chief confers with Adjutant IV-b" --May I explain, IV-b is the Senior Medical Officer -- Stabsarzt Winkler" about sanitary conditions in the Semlin Concentration Camp where a daily death rate up to 100 prevails. The Croatian Government, in spite of promising to evacuate and feed the inmates, has not yet done anything."
All this conforms -
Q Just a minute, witness. Is that the end of the quotation?
A Yes, it is.
Q Now, will you please tell us first, witness, from where it is a quotation? Is it part of an order or a report?
A It is a quotation from the War Diary.
Q Of what formation?
A Of the Commanding General and Commander in Serbia.
Q And you see therein a confirmation, you just started to say?
A Yes, I see therein a confirmation of the fact that conditions were reported to me and I felt myself compelled to do something for their improvement at once.
Q Witness, I should now like to submit another document to you and this is contained in Document Book IX on page 18 and page 14 of the English. It is Document NOKW-1127 and it is exhibit 219. It is an order dated 21 August 1942 and a teletype letter of the 30th of August 1942. Can you tell us anything further about this document in your defense?
A The first is an order by the Commanding General and Commander Serbia signed as a Deputy by Major General Hinghofer and it deals among other things with the treatment of the population in the Fruska-Gora operation. It says under paragraph 7-c that the male insurgent Serbian population between the ages of 17 and 50 are to be arrested and to be brought to the Semlin reception camp insofar as they are not needed to bring in the harvest.
The second letter, the teletype letter, which defense counsel has just referred to of 13 August 1943 has the following background. The Commander in Chief of the 12th Army and Armed Forces Commander Southeast, General Loehr, happened to be in Belgrade in those days.
He had gone out to fighting group Broowsky, a unit which mopped up in the FruskaGora area. When General Loehr returned to Belgrade he issued the order that, first of all, any alien elements to the locality were to be regarede as partisan suspects and to be done away with. The Operational Department submitted the draft of this order to me which read: "The Commander in Chief had ordered that among those arrested first of all those who do not belong to the locality are to be regarded as partisan suspects and are to be done away with." That we understood by that was to transport them to Semlin, as is contained in paragraph 7-c of the previous order. In that order I corrected with my own hand the following in the last sentence. Originally the sentence read: "Non-residents of the locality are to be regarded as those people who lately have moved in from a different region." I added, "without a plausable reason."
Q Witness, in this document there is an equivocal expression. I mean the term "to be done away with"--"beswitigen." What was the term "to do away with" supposed to mean? Perhaps you will read the sentence first and then give us your explanation.
A "The Commander in Chief has directed that of those arrested first of all those who do not belong to the locality are to be regarded as partisan suspects and are to be done away with."
Q That is how it reads is it?
A Yes, it is. As I said before, by "doing away with" I understand a treatment as is contained in Paragraph 7-c of the previous order for the insurgent male population, namely, to transport them to the reception camp at Semlin.
Q Herr von Geitner, yesterday in a different connection we discussed Document NOKW-1722, which is Exhibit 228, contained in Document Book IX, on Page 65 of the German text and Page 51 of the English text. You gave us the background of that document. Can you tell us anything about the document itself--what it contains which might be of importance? That sort of a document is it?
A It is an excerpt from the War Diary, and it deals with a number of items. First, there is a reference to a conference of Chiefs of Staff in Salonika with the Armed Forces Commander Southeast. I made brief notes about that in order to submit them to my own Commander. And these notes were added to the War Diary. At the conference a directive issued by the OKW was made known. There the OKW took the point of view that certain punishable deeds committed by the non-German population in the Serbian area were not punished sufficiently severely. What was expected was a more severe procedure. I submitted this to my Commander in Chief for his information, who was the supreme judicial authority, and I myself had no influence on the matter. Whether the Commander in Chief did anything I do not think.
Q Witness, now I want to show you a document in Document Book IX, on Page 93 of the German and Page 61 of the English. This is Document NOKW-1156, and it is Exhibit 229.
In this document there is a reference to extermination measures, and the population was running away to the woods because of them. Can you tell the Court from where the document originates and whether it applied to the Serbian area?
A This document is a description of conditions among the Communist insurgents in Yugoslavia. It originated with the Commanding General and Commander Serbia, and it was delt with in Department I-c, and it was meant for the information of General Lueters, who in those days was to take over the Command of German troops in Croatia. I regret and deplore the fact that the document has been submitted in these rigorous extracts. According to the original document, it first refers briefly to Serbia and then to Croatia. The expression "Sphere of extermination and retaliation measures" refers to conditions in Croatia. This becomes clear from a passage which is unhappily not contained in this previous extract. These extermination measures refer to the extermination measures by the Croatian Ustashas against the Serbians in Bosnia.
Q Do you mean to say that this document had nothing to do with the German troops, and particularly with the troops of the Commander Serbia?
A Extermination measures did not refer to the troops under the Commander Serbia, nor did they refer to the German troops in Croatia which were not under him.
Q In Document Book X there is another document which is also alleged to incriminate you. It is Document Book X, Page 18 in the German text and Page 25 in the English text. This is Document 899, Exhibit 250. Will you please tell the Court what you, Herr von Geitner, had to do with the document and the matters with which it deals?
A I was on leave on 19 January and, therefore, I have nothing to do with the first letter of 20th January, however there is also a letter contained of 25th December 1942, directed to Prime Minister Nedic. Prime Minister Nedic had asked General Bader that under certain conditions he might be entrusted with the carrying out of retaliation measures if he should come across insurgents who attacked members of the Serbian Government.
This demand was expressed by Nedic in a personal talk with General Bader. Before General Bader went on leave he had ordered me to write a brief letter to the Prime Minister to the effect that he agreed. That is the history of this letter. And, of course, I complied with the order.
Q In the same document book---Document Book X--there is on Page 39-unfortunately I don't know what page it is in the English Document Book. Just a moment. It is on Page 50 in the English. In the document book is contained Document 1029, which is Exhibit 258, From this document it becomes clear...
MR. RAPP: Your Honors, if Dr. Sauter is referring to Exhibit 258, it is listed as NOKW-1027, not NOKW-1029.
THE PRESIDENT: I believe Mr. Rapp is correct in that statement, Dr. Sauter.
DR. SAUTER: I beg your pardon; it's quite true. I wish to correct it. It is Document NOKW-1027, Exhibit 258, in Document Book X.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q From this document, Herr von Geitner, it becomes clear that General Bader ordered, for the murder of four German soldiers, that 400 Communists be shot. Can you tell us how it came about that General Bader employed the large ratio of 1 to 100 in this particular case?
A. This affair was connected with the murder and plunder of the Commander of a regiment in the 704th Division, by the name of Colonel Kensel, together with three people who accompanied him in the neighborhood of Ucara. The incident occurred on 15 February, as far as I know. I can remember the matter only dimly. The rest I know from the document. On this day it is possible that I heard of the incident but only very furtively, because before noon I had to fly to Salonika, and I had to go via Sarajevo, where I changed the aircraft, and I flew from Ucara to Salonika for a conference of chiefs of Staff with the Armed Forces Commander Southeast. The order for this measure came from General Bader, apparently after a lengthy conference with the Commander of the 704th Division on the 16th of February, on a day when I was in Salonika. On the 17th of February I flew back and reported to General Bader about the conference in Salonika. I suppose that it was on that occasion or perhaps a bit later that he told me about this measure. He was very excited that day and deeply indignant about this renewed attack on officers of the 724th Regiment, particularly about the act that the Regimental Commander who was a particularly capable man and had been a victim of the attack. And General Bader was also indignant about the way in which this incident had been carried out and the way in which the corpses were found. He told me he had made up his mind in this case to take strong measures in order, once and for all, to stop the activating of what was known as the "Simic" band at the time, a gang of brutal characters who made constant unrest in the Southeast Taurus area. I was very surprised about this, and I told him this, but he said that in this case he simply had to make a strong example.
Q. Witness, are you sure that the day which you have indicated is correct? You said before the order had been issued on the 16th of January.
A. Yes, quite sure.
Q. I only say this lest there be a misunderstanding, The announcement and proclamation by the Commanding General contained in Document NOKW-1027, which you have just quoted, is dated the 19th of February 1943, but the order itself, as far as you remember, was dated the 16th of February?
A. I did not remember the actual days. All I know is that this occurred when I was in Salonika. This becomes clear from the War Diary.
Q. Witness, this was undoubtedly a particularly strong order on the part of General Bader. Can you, from your own observation tell the Court whether this stringent order by General Bader has any effect on the population?
A. In the neighborhood South of Pocarevac things became more quiet, which becomes clear also from a report given by the 704th Division.
Q. Witness, on frequent occasions you have referred to the general retaliation order by General Bader, dated the 28th of February 1943. It is contained in a document book 8 Page 77 of the German and Page 100 of the English version. It is Document NOKW-382, Exhibit 263. Also, you have referred to the order concerning the establishment of retaliation camps of the same day, which is contained in Document NOKW-1336, Exhibit 262, in Document Book X, on page 75 of the German text and Page 99 of the English text. Do you have anything to say about this order in order to clarify your own position?
A. I was on leave by the end of January or the beginning of February. When I returned I learned that the Commander in Chief had told his expert, who was
COURT V CASE VII
working on retaliation problems, to have the orders for retaliation measures, which were generally applicable, redrawn up. This is also confirmed by the War Diary in an entry of 30th January 1942 when OI (1st A.A.C.) reports orally about the reformulation of the order. When I returned, and on one of the first days after I had returned, perhaps about the 25th, General Bader talked with me about this draft for the order. I spoke with him for a long time that day, and I availed myself of the opportunity to suggest moderation, particularly as regards the ratio for retaliation as laid down here. General Bader deliberated on this, but then he told me that, as in January and February, incidents had increased considerably, and particularly things like the murder of Colonel Hensel and the constant attacks on Serbian burgermeisters did not make it possible for him to have any changes made. He issued this order in his capacity as the holder of executive power. I had to let matters rest with General Bader's decision, particularly as the executive power was in his hands. I did not initiate this order.
Q. Witness, then there is a letter signed by you in Document Book XI, on page 26 of the German and Page 34 of the English version. This is Document 1395, Exhibit 271,
A. What Page did you say?
Q. It is Page 26 of the German Document Book. English page 34.
A. Oh, yes.
Q. Have you got it, Witness?
A. Yes.
Q. Herr von Geitner, you've found it haven't you?
A. I have.
Q. This is an order dated the 2nd of April, directed to Administrative sub-area Headquarters 610 *** ****.
and comments are made for the disarming of Frontier posts. What can you tell us about that? What responsibility arose therefrom for you? I mean concerning your person.
A. The whole business is a letter directed to Administrative sub-area Headquarters 610, in whose area the incident had occurred for which the man in charge of the customs border guard suggested retaliation by apprehending people and burning down houses. This Administrative sub-area headquarters was solely competent to suggest a measure. It had, therefore, to give its comment first ab out the whole business.