He was then publicly jeered at by the population and several women grabbed at his genitals. As he definitely expected his public castration and execution he succeeded by the utmost exertion to liberate himself and escape during a moment when he was not watched, At Belgrade, he reported in my presence, this experience to the Chief of the General Staff of that time.
Paragraph 3:
"During the battles in the Serbian-Bosnian area in winter 1942/43 it was repeatedly observed and reported by the 717th Infantry Division that graves of German soldiers were opened; the bodies thrown out, undressed and subsequently mutilated."
"Atrocities of the Serbs against the Croats and vice - versa" -he says on page 45 under "B-1":
"After the penetration of Bosnia by Croatian troop units and Ustasche units severe fighting and incredible atrocities against the Serbs took place. In spring 1942 approximately 1000 bodies came floating down the Drina and Save in the area of Belgrade, according to a report of the competent police and sanitation authorities. As far as could be observed, they were the bodies of Serbs who had partly been cruelly mutilated. Example: A cat had been sewn into the belly of a woman several bodies were tied together with wire -- children were tied to mothers-bodies were partly badly mutilated with terrible wounds from beatings; this produced, in its turn atrocities of the Serbs against the Croats. Religious conflicts, "Prawoslavs against Roman - Catholic Croats), based on an ancient tradition, and vendetta (murderous revenge) still increased the atrocities. Example: I do not remember the exact date, but probably February or March 1942. In the district of Bajina-Pasta on the Drina a German reconnaissance discovered the following facts in a church: The Serbs had killed two Croatian women, had cut off their breasts and placed them on the altar and stuck the two heads which were cut off, on top of the altar lights.
2) Similar atrocities occurred at a later date in the area of the 718 infantry division in the district of Sarajewo: Example:
In June 1942 one of the Ustasche companies stationed in Bosnia left this station in order to move to Zagreb. On the march through this district, this company burned several Serbian villages and murdered at that occasion the civilian population, as far as it could be found. The Bosnian districts were mainly populated by Serbs. Among others they committed thereby also the following separate atrocities: Serbian women, whom they (the company) had seized in a village, were killed in the most bestial manner, partly by cutting the throat and slicing open the belly of several of these women, after having undressed them, partly through pushing wooden wedges into their sexual organs, among these was a pregnant women. These facts of the case were established at that time by the German field rural police, which disarmed the Ustascha company at entering Sarajewa on an order of the 718 Infantry Division, placed their members under solitary arrest, and interrogated them separately. The report of the division on this incident was transmitted to the OKW through the official channel by the commanding general and commander in Serbia, under whose command the division in Croatia was still placed at that time. He requested to examine and try the case by a German court martial. On an order by HITLER the measures for examination and condemnation taken by the division, were then canceled again. He was of the opinion that by such measures for the protection of the Serbian population by the German Wehrmacht "the young government - supporting Ustasche - movement would suffer more damage than the advantage gained for the German Wehrmacht would warrant."
I shall not read from paragraph 3 which follows on page 46. It deals with the shooting of unarmed prisoners of war. The affidavit has been properly certified and sworn to. In connection therewith there is the next document which is Document 46-A, on page 47-A of Geitner Book No. II, and it is Exhibit No. 34.
This document concerns, from the War Diary of the War Operational Staff, the correctness of what Prinz Holstein has said in his previous affidavit.
I shall now come to Document No. 47 on page 48 of Document Book Geitner II. It will become Exhibit No. 35.
Documents 47 through 50, I should like to say, perhaps part of these documents and some of Document No. 51, deal with measures taken for the benefit of the civilian population in the Balkans and with matters of that type.
Document No. 47, Exhibit No. 35, which I have already mentioned: is an affidavit by the affiant Wolfgang Cartellier, who as 1st Lieutenant in the Reserve and later as Captain in the Reserve served from 1942 until the end of the war in the Balkans in Serbia. He was in the Quartermaster General Department of the Wehrmacht Operational Staff. He became very familiar with conditions there. I shall not read the details of this affidavit. It merely describes the efforts made by the German occupation troops and authorities to improve Serbian economy and the measures they took for the welfare of the Serbian civilian population.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, before you start on another document, I think this would be a good time and place to adjourn for the day and for the week. The Tribunal will now stand adjourned until October 27, 1947 at 9:30 o'clock in the morning.
Official Transcript of Military Tribunal 5, Case 7, in the matter of the United States of America against Wilhelm List et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 22 October 1947, 0930 hours, Judge Burke, presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Courtroom will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal 5.
Military Tribunal 5 is now in session. God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the Court.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshall, will you ascertain if all the defendants are present in the Courtroom?
THE MARSHAL: May it please, your Honor, all the defendants are present in the Courtroom except the defendant von Weichs, who is still in the hospital.
THE PRESIDENT: Judge Burke will preside at this day's session.
JUDGE BURKE: You may proceed, Dr. Sauter.
DR. SAUTER: May it please the Tribunal, on Friday before the recess I started on Document 47, in Document Book Geitner 2, and I had offered it as Exhibit 35.
JUDGE BURKE: Dr. Sauter, may I ask you to give reference to the document number in Document Book 2 again please?
DR. SAUTER: I am talking about document 47, Exhibit 35.
JUDGE BURKE: Thank you.
DR. SAUTER: The pages, 47 to 50, and part of page 51, dealing with the German measures of welfare for the civilian population in the Balkans and similar problems. These documents are offered in order to refute the change that the defendants had participated in a plan of extermination and enslavement of the Serbian people. Document 47 on which I had started on Friday has been given by Wolfgang Cartellieri, who says that from autumn 1942 until the end of the war he served first as a 1st Lieutenant and then as a Captain in the reserve on the quarter master department of the Operational Staff, in other words, with the OKW, and in that position he dealt mainly with economic measures concerning the Balkans. He is particularly well informed about those problems, because as becomes clear from the last sentence of his affidavit after the war he was requested by the American War Department in Washington to compile documentary material.
This affiant is a civil servant in Heidelberg, which becomes clear from the certification to the document. I snall not read the details of this affidavit. I would appreciate it if judicial notice wore taken of the affidavit. The affiant describes in Document 47 the numerous efforts on the part of the German occupation authorities, including Herr von Geitner, to protect economy and currencies in the Balkans, to prevent the threatening starvation and to supply the civilian population with the necessary supplies for their daily life. In order to save time I shall not read this voluminous document. It is an affidavit which has been properly sworn to and certified by the Notary in Heidelberg.
I shall now come to the next document, which is No. 48, and which will be Exhibit 35, in Document Book Geitner 2, on page 51.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, is that not Exhibit 36? I believe you must have misstated yourself when you said Exhibit 35.
DR. SAUTER: Thank you very much. It should be Exhibit 36. Document 48 will be Exhibit 36, on page 51 of the Document Book Geitner 2. This document has been given by a doctor, Dr. Erb, who is now professor of medicine at the German University of Marburg. It becomes clear from this document that Professor Dr. Erb served from December 1943 until the end of the war as a consultant surgeon with the Wehrmacht in Greece, and on the Balkans. Again I shall not read the details of this document book. I beg the court to take judicial notice of it. It will become clear from it what aid was given, particularly in medical matters, by the German occupying power and thus also Herr von Geitner to the civilian population there. This affidavit also is to comment on the charge that the civilian population was to be exterminated or deciminated, and the document is to show that nothing more could have been done for the population if they had been Germans. I shall then immediately start on the next document which is Document 49, which will become Exhibit 37. It is in Document Book Geitner 2 on page 54, and it is an affidavit by one Herman Ritgen again properly sworn to and duly certified. This time it is a Battalion Commander, an officer serving at the front, who in 1943 and 1944 was fighting down there and who confirms that an order had been issued by the German authorities in order to safeguard the food of the native population and to prevent any non--compliance of these orders on the part of the Germans.
Then we come to Document 50 in Document Book Geitner 2, on page 56, and it will become Exhibit 38. This comes from a German civil servant, who as a technical inspector was employed down there in 1943, and who can also confirm the good results of medical welfare for the civilian population taken on the part of the German forces. In order to save time I merely ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of the document.
The next document is Document 51 in Document Book, Geitner 2, on page 57, and it will become Exhibit 39. This again is a fairly extensive document, and I would appreciate it if the court took notice of its contents. It was given by Otto Goscher, who is now 57 years of age, who in 1944 was 2-B with the Military Command Southeast. He worked on personnel matters of the men. In paragraphs one to three of this affidavit he described efforts made by German authorities in Belgrade to supply all the civilian population, to preserve cultural life in Serbia and to revive it, and to protect Serbian property. Under paragraphs four and five he describes from his own observations the methods of warfare chosen by the Partisans. I shall read only paragraphs four and five on page 58, which read as follows:
"The underhand combat methods of our opponents, the Cetniks, and in particular the Tito-Partisans, are common knowledge. Continuous reports in this connection were received from the combat troops and occupying battalions. I personally know of two cases from my own experience, where German soldiers were ambushed, killed and left completely unclothed in a ditch on the highway. One case occurred near Brod in Croatia in the late summer of 1943, and the other near Topola (about 60 km from Belgrade) in the late summer of 1944."
"Railroad sabotaging acts started here and there in 1943 and increased to such a degree that in the autumn of 1944 there was probably not a day on which such destructions or losses were not reported in one or several places. The rebels were completely indifferent to the fact that civilian persons, too, were wounded and killed in the course of these acts.
They had, anyway, a quite different conception of the value of human life than we had. In a country where blood feuds are still the order of the day, where not only the different tribes, but also the different religious communities and social classes fight each other with the greatest violence, a human life does not count much. This fight amongst themselves was conducted with the greatest brutality. Cruelties as well as mutilations of prisoners and dead bodies were the order of the day. Horrible photographs of such things were in circulation which remained with the files of the Ic and which, having been found in the captured archives, should be known to the Prosecution as well as the incriminating material. I personally found those photos too horrid. I even don't recollect whether I would have been allowed to keep copies. I still possess a few photos of captured Tito-Partisans, from which it can be clearly seen that these opponents were not civilized troops in uniform, but just bands. If required those photos will be made available, though with reluctance."
This affidavit by Gescher has been duly sworn to and certified.
The next document No. 52, is on page 60, and I shall not offer it to the court; because the witness, Wollny, who gave the affidavit has already been heard here as a witness in this court, nor do I offer the next document No. 53, on page 62 Document Book Geitner 2, because Scheller, who has given the affidavit lives here in Nurnberg, and can therefore be examined as a witness, should this be necessary.
This next document brings to a conclusion Document Book Geitner 2.
I shall now begin with Document Book Geitner 3. This contains Documents 54 to 80. The documents in this volume deal mainly with von Geitner's personality and character, the principle and aims of his work and service to Serbia, and his attitude towards the Serbian people. As in many of these documents we have repetition. I shall merely offer many documents in this book without actually reading all the details, thus to save time.
The first document in Volume III is Document 54, and is offered as Exhibit 40. Document 54, Exhibit 40, page 1 of the Document Book III, for Geitner. This Document 54 has been given by the Dr. Toerg-Wilhelm Hammer, who is 64 years of age, and between 1942 and 1944, as he says, was the first military officer with the Commanding General and Military Commander Serbia, and in that capacity he says he had every opportunity to get to know the defendant von Geitner and observe his work. From this document I shall read the introductory remarks about von Geitner's character:
As regards the nature of his character as well as his purely human qualities, Herr V. Geitner was an outstanding personality who enjoyed general popularity not only among his soldiers, but also among the Serbian population. One of his particularly apparent traits was his absolute veracity united with a strongly marked sense of justice which he nearly pushed to the point of fanaticism. He never let himself be carried away to the extent of haughtiness. In his calm, objective manner and with his well-balanced nature he mastered even difficult situations. I never saw and cannot imagine either that this perfect gentleman ever exceeded his powers.
As an expert on the situation in Serbia, and in the Balkans, as a result of long years of experience, I had the opportunity of discussing with him officially and privately the Serbian and Croatian problems and I can say in good faith that he had recognized the high qualities of the Serbian people and for that reason already he most eagerly endeavoured to stand up for the Serbs wherever he could.
He detested the radical pro-Ustasha policy of the Zagreb ambassador-dilettante Kasche as well as the anti-Serbian one of the then SS and Police Dodder Meyszner who adopted the point of view that the Serbs must be exterminated. I remember very well that v. Geitner together with the commander, General Felber, left a party at Meyszner's before its end because the conversation carried on there about SS-methods were repulsive to him, In my opinion there can be no doubt that v. Geitner's conception and attitude must be called at least pro-Serbian if not Serbophil. Wherever there was great distress among the Serbian people v. Geitner interferred and helped to the best of his ability and allayed sufferings. Ever since I became acquainted with Herr v. Geitner I know that he was an opponent of Hitler and his vassals. During conversations carried on with him personally I had the opportunity of ascertaining his detestation of Hitler's mad policy. Thus he said already about the middle or the end of 1943: "If there are no signs and wonders, - and I do not believe in them - the war will be lost for us."
All sanitary measures taken by me for the Serbian population were first reported by me to Herr v. Geitner and approved and furthered by him as far as possible.
This is as far as I wish to read from this affidavit. The balance of the document I will not read. The affiant describes in his later statements the details of the action taken by von Geitner in Belgrade to combat epidemics, the danger of epidemics, provide food and billets for refugees, to drain swamps in order to obtain more agricultural areas, etc. On page 4 he sums up his impressions in this respect to effect, which is the sentence on the bottom of page 4, and the beginning of page 5, - "My Serbian friends and acquaintances were fully conscious of the care taken by the German Military agencies of their people and frequently enough confirmed this to me with words of gratitude.
The reasonable part of the Serbian population will, I believe never have occasion to reproach Herr von Geitner with violation of the rights of humanity."
This is as far as I shall quote.
I shall not read the balance of the document. The affiant reports therein how Herr von Geitner made efforts on behalf of Serbian hospitals, in the teeth of SS resistance, how he attempted to fight attempts made by Herr Meyssner, the SS police leader, and finally how he improved matters in the Semlin camp, although the affiant expresses that that camp was not the concern of Herr von Geitner actually, and the higher SS and Police Leader had forbidden him to enter the camp.
I shall now come to the next document No. 55, Document Book III, page 10, which will become Exhibit 41, Geitner 41. This affidavit has been duly sworn to and certified. It was given by Dr. Heinz Reuter, and it speaks about similar matters in the way of welfare for the Serbian population. The affiant, Dr. Reuter, has obtained his knowledge because he served as hygienic and medical officer from March 1943 and until October 1943 in the Balkans.
When the Tribunal will read this affidavit, they will realize that the affiant describes how Herr von Geitner in particular achieved a harmonious collaboration between German medical officers and Serbian doctors, that it was von Geitner from whom the Serbian doctors were given cars and gas for their work. Further that von Geitner achieved considerable improvement in the conditions for a number of the prisoners in camps. I would be grateful if the Court took judicial notice of these statements. I only want to read two brief paragraphs wherein the affiant says what he knows about the situation on the basis of his collaboration of many years with von Geitner and about his character. It is on page 7 of the document book under paragraph 1, affidavit by Dr. Reuter, it says:
1.) Herr v. Geitner appeared to me and many of my comrades, officers and troops, always as a prototype of the higher General Staff officer. He always was friendly, comradely, unreserved and always accessible to listen to personal requests. No one could ever notice in him any trace of self-glorification, presumption or conceit. He moved around among us with the greatest naturalness and ease. Whenever he entered my infirmary as a patient he declined all military formalities and attentions and had always a friendly, sympathetic word but also a hearty joke ready for the sick that he encountered in the infirmary.
In dealing with me as a physician he never exceeded his authority as other officers sometimes tried to do.
And then the brief sentence:
2. ) His attitude to Serbian problems was, as he made it known to me through several conversations, generous and understanding. After he left the staff in October 1944 the general opinion was that he had to leave because of his friendly attitude towards the Serbs. It was part of his generous, sensible nature that he declined unnecessary severity towards the population and tried to balance matters wherever he could.
The next document is No. 56 in von Geitner document book 3, which will be von Geitner exhibit 42. It is an affidavit given by Dr. med. Hermann Hoffmann, who from 1942 until the end of the war, served as an army group physician in the Balkans, in other words he was a medical officer with the Commander in Chief Southeast and there of course he came across Herr von Geitner. From this affidavit I only want to read a few brief paragraphs and for the rest, I ask the court that they take judicial notice of the balance of the document. This is what the witness says about Herr von Geitner himself on page 12:
General in Reserve v. Geitner is in his character an inviolable personality, symbolizing the best in soldiership. Expert knowledge and ability combined with a cordial comradeliness, an exemplary tact and a modesty which was almost too great. In numerous official conversations and in official talks I never gained the impression that Gen. v. Geitner exceeded even in the slightest degree the limits of a healthy selfconfidence or that he tried ambitiously to put himself forward. On the contrary, his great modesty rather conveyed the impression that he was meticulously anxious in no way to overstep the limits of his authority resulting from his position as Chief of Staff. If one was a guest with the Staff of the Military Commander in Serbia, one did not notice v. Geitner as "The Chief" and no outsider would have thought him to be "the first man" of the commanding Staff. His tactfully modest manner became especially apparent in his relation to superiors or comrades younger than he in years. To speak of a "desire for prestige or power" would be absurd. His iron sense of duty and his desire to be informed on all matters dealt with by the individual special divisions of his Staff led to it that apparently he had almost everything that came in before and after its processing presented to him and that he countersigned it. At any rate, I remember that almost all instructions and orders which I had sent to the directing Medical Officer in Serbia bore, after they were returned to me, the signature of Gen. v. Geitner. Among these there were many letters dealing with current affairs and medical matters, in themselves of no importance to the Chief of Staff and upon which he also has had no influence.
I mention this circumstance irrelevant in itself for the reason that from such signing of documents etc. one can deduct a responsible participation which did in no way exist. Viewed psychologycally, this detailed preoccupation with the affairs of the individual departments of his staff, was with Gen. v. Geitner on one hand the expression of his almost excessive sense of duty, and on the other hand a symptom of the inner unrest and deep worry which filled him just as much as many other officers in high position at that time and has led to a flight into work in order to compensate for this crushing mental burden.
I shall skip the next paragraph on page 14 and I shall read the paragraph after that one, which is a brief remark about the political attitude of Herr von Geitner:
From many personal conversations about military and political questions I could note that Gen. v. Geitner was in his heart bluntly opposed to the Party, its aims and methods. As every human being capable of comprehensive thinking he asan officer and economist followed the development of the situation with the greatest worry and has tried as every responsible officer as best as he could to fight the Nazi tendencies of the OKW or at least to soften them down. The latter became particularly apparent with the introduction of the National Socialist directing officers (Fuehrungsoffiziere). I know that at a table party at which I was present this topic was discussed and the opposition against this new creation called "Politroops" was unmistakable.
In his other statement the affiant then deals with the welfare measures taken by Herr von Geitner for the Serbian population and I shall appreciate it if judicial notice is taken of it. I shall merely read the final sentence of the affidavit on page 15.
On the basis of these affidavits it is my deepest inner conviction that Gen. v. Geitner is an officer of inviolable character who filled his post as Chief of Staff in a correct unobjectionable manner and who to the best of his ability tried to mitigate the hardships caused by the war. According to character the opposite of a "pusher" or "firebrand" he was, especially by his measures towards the civilian population, exclusively guided by human and objective considerations, but never by criminal motives.
This brings us to the end of the affidavit given by Dr. Hoffmann. The affidavit has been properly sworn to and duly certified.
I shall then come to document 57 on page 16 of document book 3. Von Geitner document 3 and I shall offer it as exhibit 43. This statement and affidavit has again been duly sworn to and certified. It has been given by Dr. Franz von Harling. This affiant was the third general staff officer on the staff of the Commander in Chief Southeast, Army Group F in 1943, 1944 and 1945. On the basis of his position he describes efforts made by Herr von Geitner to make up for the antagonism which existed in the country when he came to office. I need not read these statements verbatim. I shall merely read two paragraphs.
MR. RAPP: May it please Your Honor, I understand that the affiant von Harling is going to be called as a witness for another defendant before this Tribunal, I have no objection against the introduction of this affidavit at this time, but I would like to serve notice now that if the affiant von Harling should be called by defense counsel, we would like then to cross-examine von Harling in connection with this particular affidavit.
JUDGE BURKE: There can be no question of your right to do as you choose. Proceed.
DR. SAUTER: Of course, I don't know whether the affiant Harling will really be called by another defense counsel to the witness stand. The possibility exists that the affiant von Harling will not take the witness stand and we have no influence on the matter, but should the affiant von Harling really take the witness stand, then of course I entirely agree that the prosecution shall cross-examine him.
I shall continue now with document 57, of which I only want to read two brief paragraphs. The first sentence of paragraph C concerning the collective measures of retaliation on page 17. He says there:
c) If collective retaliation measures were carried out at all within the sphere of jurisdiction of the Military Commander of Serbia then this happened, to my knowledge, in no single instance as the result of an order given by Brigadier General v. Geitner. If such an order was ever issued then the responsibility for it rested either with the commander himself or with the OKH or OKW to whom the military Commander Serbia was subordinate, by no means, with the Chief of the General Staff, however, who it is known acted on principle "by order" and therefore never gave a signature as being responsible.
I beg the Court to take judicial notice of the balance of the document. The affiant therein describes the antiSerbian attitude taken by the Higher SS and Police Leader Meyssner, who continually opposed Herr von Geitner. Then the affiant gives his description of the inclination of the Balkan peoples to make revolutions and to commit cruelties. I don't think it is necessary to read all these things. I would merely like to read paragraph D on page 19 concerning the methods of warfare pursued by the partisans because here we nave the affiant's own observations.
I shall read from paragraph D on page 19, it reads as follows:
About the question of the conduct of warfare of the Titopartisans I state the following facts:
1) When the Tito-bands invaded Southern Serbia in 1944 the wounded German soldiers were in some cases tortured to death in the meanest way by Tito-women (cutting off ears, sexual organs etc.)
2) Women and children took part to a large extent in this type of warfare by the Tito-partisans.
5) The secret intelligence service between the different Tito-bands was provided essentially by women.
4) German soldiers who fell into the hands of the Titopartisans in Croatia wounded or as airmen who had been shot down were massacred. Proof of this was furnished at one time by the statements of German soldiers who had been prisoners, and, apart from that, by wireless messages of Titos that were intercepted and in which he prohibited the murdering of German soldiers taken prisoner now", i.e. after establishment of a prisoner-exchange point south of Zagreb.
5) One of the most essential characteristics of warfare conducted by the Tito-partisans was the uninterrupted sabotage activity affecting communications (roads, bridges, railways) and signal communications. There were nights in which a road was blown up more than 100 times. No special reference is needed to the fact that this conduct of ambush warfare inevitably affected the civilian population and their maintenance.
I recommend the balance of the document to the judicial notice of the Tribunal.
The next document is document 58. It is offered as exhibit 44, document 58, exhibit 44 and it is on page 21 of the document book 3 for Geitner. It is an affidavit made by Dr. Gartellieri of whom I have read an affidavit before. His affidavit states that he and the defendant von Geitner in February or March of 1943 discussed fundamental questions officially. The document shows that Herr von Geitner at that time explained the principles on which he wished the administration in Serbia to be handled. I shall read the most important parts of this because they are of special importance in order to determine von Geitner's efforts at the time.
I shall begin on page 21 in the middle of the second paragraph, it says there:
On this tour there was among others a discussion with the command in Serbia in Belgrade. There the Chief of Staff now the defendant Brigadier General Ritter von G e i t n e r, whose acquaintance I had not made until then, made detailed statements concerning the political situation in Serbia and in the Balkans in particular, which surprised me on account of their clarity and frankness and seemed so significant to me that, although they were not within my "jurisdiction", I claimed them after my return in a written report to my command headquarters as my own personal observation and opinion (without quoting the individual sources).
The most essential contents of these detailed statements were:
1. The destruction of Yugoslavia after the Balkan campaign of 1941, and above all the new boundary fixed by Germany and Italy which denied all racial questions was a basic cause of the unrest now prevailing and the promotion of bands. Ritter von Geitner referred in particular to the separation of Syrmia from Serbia, as a result of which the territory before the gates of Belgrade on the other bank of the Danube was no longer Serbian Territory.
2. The question of pacifying of the Balkan area is no military question, it can in so far as this is possible at all be solved politically only.
3. The most thorough, most orderly and finest people in the Balkans with the best moral conceptions are the Serbs. Ritter von Geitner deplored the fact that the policy pursued by Hitler had resulted in all Serbs being provoked against German so that not only the followers of Tito but those of Mihailovitse had to be combated as well.
4. As a distinct reason for the opening of guerilla warfare Ritter von Geitner cited the new Croat state with the Ustascha course supported by Germany. The Ustascha which even in Croatia could only rely on a dwindling minority of the population had conducted a vengeance campaign against the orthodox slaves killing hundreds of thousands, so that the surviving population had to flee to the mountains and was clearly compelled to indulge in band warfare.
5. Ritter von Geitner laid special stress on the fact that Tito's movement had originally few followers in Serbia and that it got the hulk of its followers as a result of the impossible German policy. With this, Ritter von Geitner referred to Tito's energetic personality which even then was generally accepted in the Balkans whilst I, after my official tour, tried to bring it to the notice of higher authorities.
6. Ritter von Geitner expressed particular anxiety about the lack of co-ordination of German organization in Serbia. Although Serbia had a German Military Administration, the latter had no say in many spheres, for three other merman Authorities there pursued independent policies namely the German Ambassador, the Plenipotentiary Deputy for the Four Years' Plan and the Higher SS - and Police Leader. Ritter von Geitner complained particularly about the despotism of the "Plenipotentiary for the Four Year Plan" and the"Higher SS and Police Leader."
I would appreciate it if the Court would take official notice of the balance of the document. I merely wish to point out that at the end the affiant speaks of his own person namely that after his release he was given the order to refer to War Department G-2 about his own character.
What the witness has said has been sworn to properly and duly certified.
The next document we come to is an affidavit given by Karl v. Baillou. This is document No. 59 in Document book 3, for Geitner, on page 25 and it will become exhibit 45. This affiant, Karl v. Baillow, was an assistant officer with the department 1-a of the Commanding General Serbia from September 1941 until February, 1943. I shall merely read paragraph 3 on page 26. It reads as follows:
3) I remember that higher offices repeatedly demanded ruthless measures against the insurgents, in accordance with orders given. In the same way, whenever there had been an ambush or an act of sabotage, the question was always asked: "What happened then?" or "What measures were taken?"
And this brings me to document No. 60 in document book von Geitner 3 on page 27 and this is offered as exhibit 46. This affidavit has been given by Dr. Fritz Gaedicke, who is now 62 years of age. At present he is a lawyer and notary. This affiant was as German judge in Serbia during the occupation. He was counsel with a court martial with the Commanding General and Commander in Serbia and this is of course where he met the defendant von Geitner. I recommend paragraph 1 to the judicial notice of the court, also paragraph 4. I will merelyread paragraphs 2,3, and 5. Paragraph 2 on page 27 reads as follows:
2) In private life I had very close connections with Herr v. Geitner. We ate all our meals together in the mess of the Military Commander, where only six officers ate, besides the Commander. I was never aware, here, that Herr v. Geitner was opposed to the Serbs. He never expressed himself in an arrogant way about the Serbs and never advocated permanent domination of the Serbs or other countries.
In paragraph 3 on page 28, it says:
3) Many official matters were brought up in this little circle of members at the Commander is table. Here everybody including Herr v. Geitner, often sharply criticized the execution of the reprisal measures which had been ordered by higher agencies. Herr v. Geitner never stood up for terrorizing and exterminating the Serbian population. He was never a firebrand. Rather, he attempted, so far as was possible, to act in a reconcillatory, alleviating and softening manner.
And in paragraph 5 the affiant says:
5) Herr v. Geitner also was respected by Serbian government circles. Germans who had lived for years in Serbia and had close connections with the Serbs have assured me of this.
5034.