Q. You said that this operation was being carried out by the police troops. Were any other troops engaged in it?
A. There were not only police troops. There were also troops of the infantry divisions stationed in Ruma in these detachments.
Q. The same infantry division that was commanded by this General von Behr that you mentioned a while ago?
A. Yes, the same commander.
Q. Now you say this operation ended. Why did it end? Why was it stopped?
A. The operation suddenly came to an end because Cossack units suddenly appeared in the area.
Q. Well, what was the next commitment of the police troops, after the end of this Operation Ferdinand?
A. When the Cossacks arrived, the entire forces stationed around Ruma, that is Wehrmacht and police, were subordinated to the Cossack Division.
Q. Did you say subordinated?
A. Yes.
Q. What was the next operation that the police troops engaged in?
A. This operation was followed by the Operation Arnim.
Q. And would you repeat again what units took part in this Operation Arnim?
A. Troops taking part in Operation Arnim were forces from the police at regimental strength.
Q. And what other troops, if any?
A. Well, the Cossacks, and then units of the division which was stationed in Ruma.
Q. Who was in command of the operation?
A. The operation was commanded by Brigadier General von Pannwitz.
Q. How, and from whom, did the police troops get their assignment to this Operation?
A. General von Panwitz gave the assignment to the police troops.
Q. Now, how were these various units that you have described, that is to say, the Cossack Division and this reserve infantry division and this police regiment--how were they deployed? How were they situated with reference to each other as the operation progressed?
A. The aim of the Operation Arnim was, the mopping up of the Fruska-Gora, as well as the terrain north and south of this mountain range. North and south of the mountain range the Cossacks went into action, and over and away from the mountain range the police regiment advanced.
Q. Now, during this operation, what was the chain of command, so far as the police troops were concerned?
A. The assembly order was given through the Divisional Headquarters. During the course of the operation the police regiment was subordinate to one Cossack Brigade and received assignment orders from this Cossack Brigade.
Q What role -- do you happen to know what corps area this took place in?
A I don't know the number of the corps but the corps staff was stationed as far as I know, in Vukovar.
Q Were you ever there at the corps staff?
A Yes, I was. I was ordered to the corps staff, and this was before the Operation "Arnim" started.
Q What was the purpose of your being ordered to the corps staff?
A I was ordered to the staff with the Ia of the division in Ruma and with the Ia of the Cossack Division in order to regulate the authorizations for command and subordination.
JUDGE BURKE: Can you give us the volume and page number of the exhibit to which reference is made by the witness? Can you give us the page and volume number of the exhibit referred to by the witness?
MR. FULKERSON: You mean the document describing this operation "Arnim."
JUDGE BURKE: Well, whatever the subject matter for which this is cross examination.
MR. FULKERSON: If your Honor please, this witness did not make an affidavit for the defendants. This is strictly a rebuttal witness brought here by the Prosecution.
JUDGE BURKE: Thank you.
Q Who met you when you arrived at the corps staff?
A The Chief of Staff gave us the necessary directions.
Q Did you happen to meet the Commanding General of the corps?
A We reported to a General.
Q Do you remember who he was?
A The meeting was a very fleeting one. After four years I really can't remember the name.
Q Now, after you returned to Ruma, after your meeting at the corps staff, how were you informed as to the whereabouts of the police troops in the course of this operation?
A The divisional headquarters of the Cossack Division informed us of that by sending us the orders of the Cossack Division.
Q Who furnished the ammunition to the police troops during this operation?
A The ammunition was furnished from a munitions depot in Belgrade.
Q Well, was that a police ammunition depot or what?
A That was a Wehrmacht depot.
DR. GAWLIK (Counsel for defendant Dehner): Your Honor, I object because the whole examination so far has been concerned with the Operation "Arnim." I would like the Prosecution to tell me which assertion of the defense with regard to the Operation "Arnim" is to be refuted by the testimony of this witness?
MR. FULKERSON: I hope to show by this witness, as I attempted to show by General Bach-Zelewski, how close and harmoniously the Wehrmacht and the police troops worked together. For that purpose I am asking the witness questions about this specific Operation "Arnim" but I further intend to try to show that this was by no means an unusual situation, but that the close liaison which existed between the police troops and the Wehrmacht during this particular operation was not unique or unusual but that it existed the whole time he was down there, and that what was unusual, was when the police troops themselves, without the cooperation of the army, carried out an operation.
DR. GAWLIK: Your Honors, then I object to this examination because the statements are cumulative. The Prosecution has submitted this himself, and he just wants to prove again what the witness Bach-Zelewski has previously proved - presumably proved and this is cumulative and for this reason I object to the examination of this witness.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: The objection will be overruled.
DR. FRITSCH (Counsel for defendant Rendulic): Your Honors, I object for another additional reason. Mr. Fulkerson has just stated that he wants to prove a close cooperation between the police and the troops. As far as this concerns anything which might have to do with joint operations, this has never been disputed.
I would like to be shown where my client, General Rendulic, maintained dis-harmony in this direction?
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: Overruled.
Q Who furnished the transport for the police during this operation for the police troops.
A Transport came through Wehrmacht the transport headquarters in Belgrade.
Q Where did you get your food and other supplies -- the police troops, I mean?
A Food was placed at our disposal by the division in Ruma.
Q Which division?
A Through that division which was stationed in Ruma, I don't know the number of this division.
Q You mean this reserve infantry division?
A Yes. The same division which was stationed in Ruma and which also placed troops at our disposal during the Operation "Ferdinand."
Q How long did you stay in Croatia.
AAltogether I was seven months in Croatia.
Q Did you have this same job as Chief of Staff the whole time?
A Yes, I was Chief of the Operational Staff from October 1943 until April 1944.
Q Now, during that time how often would you say the police troops were subordinated to army units in similar operations?
A During the seven months I was in Croatia I only know of one single operation, a larger police operation in which the command from the very beginning until the end was in the hands of the police. As a rule, it was like this: because of the relatively small number of forces which the police had, weaker police units at the time were subordinated to the stronger Wehrmacht units.
Q What was this one operation which you say the police troops carried out independently?
A That was an operation in February 1944 in the Drau Plain which was to protect the migration of ethnic German minorities.
Q Now, could the police troops in Croatia act on their own or was it necessary for them first to obtain the approval of the army in order to carry out an independent operation?
A The German regular police on its own initiative -
DR. GAWLIK (Counsel for defendant Dehner): Your Honors, I object to this question because it is a leading question. The Prosecution should have asked, "How could the police troops act?" but if he puts the question as he did, then it is quite clear what the witness will answer. The witness could recognize quite clearly what answer the prosecutor required.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: Overruled.
Q Would you answer the question?
A The German regular police on its own initiative could not undertake any operation independently, as regards the planning orders and execution. All the operations planned by the police or which were to be carried out by the police had first of all to obtain the approval of the competent Wehrmacht agency. This could also be seen from the subordination relationship of Gruppenfuehrer Kammerhofer.
Q To whom was he subordinate?
A Gruppenfuehrer Kammerhofer was the representative with the Plenipotentiary German general in Zagreb.
Q Are you a prisoner now?
A No, I am not a prisoner.
MR. FULKERSON: I will ask this question again because I don't believe the witness understood it.
Q Are you a free man now or are you a prisoner?
A I am a civilian internee.
Q How did you happen to be here in Nurnberg?
A On the 9th of May 1945 I became an American prisoner of war. On the 1st of July 1946 I became a civilian internee of the Regensburg camp. In November last year my release proceedings were started under the OMGUS regulations, since I was not a member of the organizations pronounced criminal by the IMT in Nurnberg, and I am no longer politically incriminated through my nominal membership of the former NSDAP since the beginning of May 1933.
According to the actual facts, my release as a political internee should have taken place Christmas 1947, but instead on the 16th of December I was brought here to the prison and, therefore, I am enjoying some disadvantages although innocent and these disadvantages also extend to my family which is in great distress.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: The Tribunal will be in recess for fifteen minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Courtroom please be seated.
The Tribunal is again in session.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: You may proceed.
DIRECT EXAMINATION Witness-Korn BY MR. FULKERSON:
Q. You say you came here to Nurnberg on the 15th of December-from where?
THE INTERPRETER: Will you please repeat?
Q. You say you came here from where on the 15th of December to Nurnberg?
A. I came from the Regensburg internment camp.
Q. And you say that at the time you were transferred to Nurnberg you were scheduled to be released in four days?
A. No. I did say that the OMGUS release procedure, as far as I was concerned, had been introduced since November of last year.
Q. After you got here to Nurnberg on the 15th of December who talked to you?
A. Nobody. I was interrogated for the first time in January.
Q. Who first--what were you--were you interviewed by any lawyer before I talked to you?
A. Yes. The Counsel for General Dehner questioned me in January.
Q. Did he take an affidavit from you or anything?
A. I have executed no affidavits.
Q. Were you asked to execute one?
A. I was unable to comment on the questions I was required to answer.
Q. And then you were interviewed afterwards by nobody until I talked to you?
A. No.
Q. Did you know who requested you to be transferred here?
A. No, I was not told that.
MR. FULKERSON: That is all.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: Re-direct examination?
CROSS EXAMINATION BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q. Gawlik, counsel for General Dehner. Witness, when did the prosecution first interview you?
A. August 1947-
Q. I am not interested in that--the first time in this year?
A. It was on the 13th of January.
Q. Were documents submitted to you on that occasion?
A. Documents were available. I refused to inspect these documents.
Q. Why did you refuse to look at the documents?
A. I didn't wish to be confused.
Q. At these interviews, were names of operations communicated to you, operations which were brought up in this case?
A. No, no.
Q. At these interviews, were the names of operations mentioned to you?
A. No.
Q. Did you hear them here for the first time since your assignment and commitment in Croatia?
A. These operations Ferdinand and Arnim were personally known to me.
Q. I mean were they discussed in the interviews?
A. Already in August? Yes.
Q. In January?
A. Yes, again.
Q. Were these names mentioned to you?
A. Yes, Ferdinand and Arnim were discussed.
Q. Who mentioned these names for the first time--did you or were these names first mentioned to you by your interrogator?
A. I believe that I mentioned them for the first time. I touched upon the designations. It was me.
Q. Do you recall today the dates? Upon what knowledge do your statements referring to the dates today rest?
A. I cannot give the dates of days, but I can recall the dates of months. When in October-
Q. Thank you, I don't want to know any more just now. At the interview of the prosecution,--how many interviews did you have?
A. You mean in this year? One interview.
Q. How long did this interview last?
A. I no longer have a watch so I don't know.
Q. One hour? Two hours?
A. At least one hour. That much is certain.
Q. Could it have been longer?
A. It may have been an hour-and-a-half or an hour and forty-five minutes.
Q. Were dates mentioned to you in these interviews?
A. I myself mentioned the dates. I stated when I came to Croatia, what I was doing in October in Syrmia, and that my activity in Croatia finished in April.
Q. I mean were the dates of the individual operations mentioned named to you?
A. No.
Q. You then referred to Kammerhofer. You were on Kammerhofer's staff. Is that correct?
A. I belonged to the staff of the Commander of the Regular Police, as Chief of the Operational Staff, and as such I was detailed to the then Gruppenfuehrer Kammerhofer.
Q. What activity did you have in the staff of Kammerhofer?
A. I myself did not belong to the staff of Gruppenfuehrer Kemmerhofer. I was assigned by the Commander of the Regular Police, as chief of the operational staff with Kammerhofer for the issuance of orders for operations concerning the combatting of bands.
Q. How long were you detailed on that assignment?
A. I was assigned from October 1943 till April 1944.
Q. What designations did Kammerhofer have?
A. Kammerhofer was the representative of the Reichsfuehrer SS for Croatia with the Plenipotentiary German General in Croatia.
Court No. V, Case No. VII.
Q Are you of the opinion that Kammerhofer ought to know better what title he had while in Croatia? Yes or No?
A Kammerhofer ought to know better than I do.
Q Then in order to impeach the credibility of this witness, I submit from my document book VI, the affidavit -
MR. FULKERSON: Your Honor, I want to object before we go any further on this. I believe that I know what Dr. Gawlik is going to do. He proposes to use an affidavit of Kammerhofer that he has never put in evidence. Now if he does that, of course we are going to be deprived at this late date of having a chance of putting Kammerhofer up there on the witness stand and cross-examine him and I object to his using this for any purpose--impeachment or anything else. This is not a prior contradictory statement made by this witness; this is an excerpt taken from an affidavit of someone else, an affidavit which has never been put in evidence.
DR. GAWLIK: May I comment on this, if it please the Tribunal? I believe that as defense counsel, it ought to be left to me how I conduct my defense and at what time I submit my evidence. The prosecution is doing it in exactly the same way.
May I comment on this? This morning in order to impeach the credibility of Prince von Holstein, an affidavit was submitted which my colleague, Dr. Sauter had withdrawn.
MR. FULKERSON: Sure and this was made by the man who was on the witness stand too.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: Just a moment, please. The objection will be overruled--sustained, I am sorry.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q Witness, do you wish to maintain on oath that Kammerhofer did have the title you stated or is it correct that he had the following designation: Representative of the Reichsfuehrer SS and Chief of the German Police.......
MR. FULKERSON: I object to this. He is merely doing indirectly Court No. V, Case No. VII.
what he was prevented from doing directly by the last ruling of the Court. He is reading the affidavit.
DR. GAWLIK: If it please the Tribunal, I did not submit this affidavit but I adhered to the rules of the Court.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: Objection sustained.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q Witness, what operations are known to you?
A Could you please re-state the question?
Q What operations in Croatia carried out in 1943 are known to you?
A Operations of the Wehrmacht, of the Police?
Q All operations. Do you know the Operation Cornflower?
A The Operation Cornflower is not known to me.
Q Do you know when this operation was carried out?
A Operation Cornflower is not known to me.
Q When was the Operation Ferdinand carried out?
A Operation Ferdinand began about the middle of September 1943. The final stage of Operation Ferdinand was witnessed by me.
Q Who carried out Operation Ferdinand?
A Operation Ferdinand was under the direction of the then Gruppenfuehrer Kammerhofer.
Q Do you know when Operation Arnim took place?
A Operation Arnim began about the middle of October 1943.
Q Do you know how long the Operation Arnim took?
A Operation Arnim finished towards the end of October 1943.
Q I shall now submit to you the War Diary of the LXIXth Army Corps. Will you please read the entry under the 14th of October 1943 and the 16th of October 1943?
A "Thursday, 14th of October, Operation Arnim started today and reached, this afternoon, without enemy contact the line it was intended to take. Fransujek was also bombed by airplanes in the afternoon and taken by the troops without a fight."
Court No. V, Case No. VII.
Q Will you now please read the entry under the 16th of October?
MR. FULKERSON: I'd like Dr. Gawlik to let me know the Exhibit number of this. I presume it was introduced as a prosecution exhibit?
DR. GAWLIK: The War Diary was introduced by me as Document Dehner 16, Exhibit No. 10.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q Witness, will you please read the entry under the 16th of October?
A "Saturday, 16th of October, 1943. Overall situation unchanged. Considerable activity..."
Q Please only read anything having reference to Operation Arnim.
A "Operation Arnim finished as of today."
Q Witness, stop. Witness, do you wish to correct your statements bearing on Operation Arnim?
A Sir-
Q Please answer my question yes or no.
A No.
Q Witness, you then talked about the relationship of subordination between the police and the Wehrmacht. Is it correct that the police in Croatia also carried out operations independently?
A Yes, that is correct, but everything in agreement with the competent agency of the Wehrmacht.
Q Who issued the order for the carrying-out of these operations?
A In the seven months of my presence in Croatia, only one major operation of the police was initiated. In this operation from the beginning to the end, the leadership was in the hands of the German regular police.
Q Witness, is it known to you that Col. Handl on the 13th of Court No. V, Case No. VII.
September 1943 carried out a police operation in Syrmia, an independent operation? Please answer yes or no.
A The question cannot be answered that way.
Q Witness, is this operation known to you?
A This can only refer to Operation Ferdinand which was under the direction of the then Gruppenfuehrer Kammerhofer.
Q Witness, did it happen in 1943, that the police without an agreement with the Wehrmacht--apart from that one operation you mentioned, that the police did carry out operations without agreement with the Wehrmacht?
MR. FULKERSON: I don't want to be obstreperous but the witness has been asked that question I think twice by me and once by Dr. Gawlik and he has answered that during the seven months he was there it only happened once.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: Overruled.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
A Would you please put that question again?
Q Do you know that the police, apart from the two operations mentioned by you, that the police carried out other independent operations in Croatia in 1943? Yes or no?
A No.
Q Witness, in that case, I shall submit to you the entry of 21st of October, 1943, in the War Diary already mentioned, in order to refresh your recollection.
A "Thursday, 21st of October, 1943---"
MR. FULKERSON: Will you please wait until the interpreters find the English translation?
DR. GAWLIK: It is the 21st of October.
INTERPRETER WEBER: Will you please read that again.
A. I do not have it now. (Document handed to witness.) "Thursday 21 October 1943. Corps Headquarters, requests the representative of the Reichsfuehrer SS for Croatia, carry out all police operations in agreement with the Wehrmacht. 4 enclosures."
Q. Witness, will you now please read the entry of the 11th of November 1943?
A. "The police operation is to be considered as a failure since the bandits held their own in spite of their losses. It must be urged that the police should carry out major operations only in agreement with the Wehrmacht." Sir, now would you please tell me what operation is concerned here?
Q. How, Witness, will you read the entry under the 25th of November?
At the very bottom - last paragraph.
A. "Thursday, 25 November 1943. The Corps headquarters requests via Panzer Army II, -- that the delegate of the Reichsfuehrer SS for Croatia will be ordered that all police operation be executed only after contacting the local commanders of the Wehrmacht."
Q. Witness, do you still wish to maintain your statement that the police in Croatia only carried out two independent operations? Answer Yes or No.
A. The question cannot be answered Yes or No in the way it has been phrased.
Q. But, witness, you will be able to tell me whether you still maintain the statements previously made by you that the police in Croatia only carried out two independent operations? You can answer Yes or No.
A. I was talking about Major operations. By the term "major operations" I understand operations carried out by more than one regiment, one operational staff was responsible for such operations; but as far as any defensive operations which were locally restricted and which were in the charge of one police area commander were concerned, I an not informed on these matters.
But they were minor operations.
Q. Do you know, witness, that the police carried out minor operations independently?
A. As far as a police base was attacked, it was a matter of course that the police, defended their base.
Q. And who had the executive power in this case?
A. If a police base was attacked, the senior police leader had the task to do everything necessary for the defense.
Q. What do you understand by the term "operation"?
A. An operation is a planned -- that is, an operation planned over a period of time which aimed at a specific purpose.
Q. Witness, I do not understand you. Excuse me for interrupting you. "An operation is an operation"? That I don't understand.
A. Well, perhaps I didn't express myself properly.
Q. What do you understand by the term operation?
A. Perhaps I should repeat it, by an operation I understand an action an organization which pursuer a definite objective.
Q. The objective of attacking the bands?
A. I don't know.
Q. In order to attack the bands?
A. It need not concern an attack against the bands. It may also have another objective. For instance, securing the harvest, or protection of the resettlement of ethnic German minorities.
Q. But also raids against bands?
A. Attacks against bands; they were also included.
Q. Do I understand you rightly that operations carried out by units below regiment strength were carried out by the police independently, is that correct?
A. No, that is not correct either.
Q. But, witness, you just told me that. Just a minute ago you stated that minor operations below regiment strength could be carried out independently by the police?
A. I said that I personally only witnessed one operation which was carried out by formations above the strength of a regiment. I further said that minor operations which had been ordered by one police area commanders constituting some kind of defensive measures are not personally known to me. I was not subordinate to the police area commanders but I was Chief of the Operational Staff, attached to Gruppenfuehrer Kammerhofer. I only know about major operations. Minor operations which were carried out by companies or battalions were not my concern. I don't know.
Q. Witness, you can't make any statements regarding them then?
A. No, I can't.
Q. Everything you said in the direct examination does then not refer to such minor operations?
A. That is correct. I can only make statements regarding major operations in which I participated. I am not referring to minor operations. Such I do not know.
Q. Perhaps you can answer my last question. Everything you stated here regarding the relationship between police and Wehrmacht does not refer to any minor, small scale operations of which you had no knowledge, is that correct? Please tell me first Yes or No.
A. Will you please put the question again?
Q. All your statements which you made here in direct examination regarding the relationship between police and Wehrmacht do not refer to the execution of small-scale, so-called minor operations of the police?
A. No.
Q. That is right, isn't it?
A. Yes, certainly.
Q. And, therefore, you have no comprehensive knowledge of all operations carried out in Croatia, is that correct?
A. I only know the police troops not the local police.
Q. Perhaps you will answer my question. Is it correct that you had no comprehensive knowledge of all operations carried out by the police in Croatia?
A. No.
Q. Is that correct?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. And, therefore, you cannot evaluate in general the relationship between police and Wehrmacht in Croatia?
A. I can only talk about the police troops, but not about the local police.
Q. Thank you.
JUDGE CARTER: Any further cross examination? Any redirect?
MR. FULKERSON: I think not, your Honor.
JUDGE GARTER: Any questions by the Tribunal?
JUDGE BURKE: I have no questions.
JUDGE CARTER: The witness will be excused. (Witness excused).
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Your Honor, may the Marshal be instructed to call the witness David Bernstein.
JUDGE CARTER: The Marshal will call the witness.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: The testimony of this witness, if your Honors please, refers to the affidavit in Geitner Book No. 6, on page 110. It is Exhibit 172 in evidence on behalf of Geitner. And also to the oral testimony of the witness Dr. Heinrich Bub. Particularly that portion of the English transcript which begins on page 4752. Dr. Bub was also a witness on behalf of the defendant Geitner.
DAVID B. BERNSTEIN, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
JUDGE CARTER: The witness will raise his hand and be sworn:
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give on trial will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
THE WITNESS: I do.
JUDGE CARTER: You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:Q. Will you state your full name, please?
A. My name is David B. Bernstein.
Q. You will have to give a short pause, Mr. Bernstein, between my question and your answer so that it can be translated into German.
A. All right.
Q. When were you born and where?
A. March 20, 1897, New York City, New York.