apparently, for the satisfaction of the Tribunal and as far as the records are concerned, I think it shows that the Tribunal never received that letter. You may do as you see fit, though.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I would like to recall the witness to put the record entirely in order, if your Honors please.
DR. LATERNSER: May it please the Tribunal, this is not a topic for rebuttal.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: It is just to clarify, Dr. Laternser, one of your usual unfounded insinuations.
WILLY FINGER - Resumed CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:
Q Mr. Finger, I would like to show you this document and ask you to identify it, please.
A Yes, that is my letter.
Q It is in your handwriting and your signature.
A Yes, it is.
Q To whom did you address that letter?
A I addressed this letter, as is written thereon, to the Evidence Division, Nurnberg.
Q Was that the address also on the envelope of the letter?
A The same address was also on the envelope.
Q Is that the first letter you ever wrote to any authorities here in Nurnberg?
A Certainly, that was the first letter which I sent here.
Q Did you get a reply to that letter?
A I did receive a reply to this letter.
Q And by whom was the reply to your letter signed?
A This letter bore the signature of Mr. Kauffmann.
Q Did you have additional communications with Mr. Kauffmann after that time?
A We exchanged a few more letters and then I was once near Court No. V, Case No. VII.
Nurnberg; it was when I was in Regensburg. I communicated that fact to Mr. Kauffmann. Mr. Kauffmann told me to call on him.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I think that clarifies the matter for the record, your Honors.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness may be excused.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: If your Honors please, the Prosecution would now like to offer an additional rebuttal document. I just want to recall that during the cross examination of the defendant Speidel there was discussion of the relationship between the military commander in Serbia, General Felber, and the higher police and SS leader in Serbia, Meyssner, and there was discussed with General Speidel the matter of Felber giving orders to the higher SS and police leader in Serbia for the carrying out of reprisal measures.
At that time the defendant Speidel stated that the subordination -- that is, the relationship between himself as military commander Greece and the Higher SS and Police leader in Greece -was something contrary to the ordinary type of subordination of police leaders.
That statement of his appears on page 7783 of the English transcript.
In the course of the further cross examination he stated that in effect the relationship between Felber and Meyssner in Serbia was different from the relationship between himself and Schimana in Greece.
In Weichs Document Book No. I, which, of course, was not offered or received into evidence, there is, as Weichs Document No. 671, service instructions for the military commander Southeast dated 7 October 1943.
THE PRESIDENT: Pardon me, Mr. Fenstermacher; we will take our afternoon recess at this time.
Court No. V, Case No. VII.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will be in recess until fifteenfifteen.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: All persons in the Courtroom, be seated, please.
The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. LATERNSER: If it please the Tribunal, briefly before the recess I heard to my intense surprise that the Prosecution is using a Document Book which I compiled in my capacity as Defense Counsel for Field Marshall von Weichs, submitted, but did not use. By referring to the rule which the Prosecution upheld when distributing documents which they later didn't use and which they asked to be given back to them, I would like to make the same request -- that is, to hand the book back and not use any of it in evidence.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Your Honor, the document in question is one of the documents which came from Washington and was made available to the Defense. I didn't know about it until the other day, when I happened to be glancing through the Defense Document Books. I take it, however, that the Document itself is entirely in order, because it is included in Weichs Document Book Number 1. In the first page in this Document Book is a certificate by Dr. Laternser that the documents contained in the Document Book are true copies of the original. I see, therefore, no objection to offering the document into evidence.
DR. LATERNSER: If the Tribunal please, where this document originated from, I can not state at the moment, much as I would like to. At any rate, the Prosecution is not entitled to use documents now which I have not used and I ask for the Document Book to be returned to me from the Prosecution since the same was done in similar cases, and we have in all cases handed it back to them and returned it to them, and we ask that the Prosecution return to us the Document Book in question.
THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Dr. Laternser is a little bit too late. Now that I have seen the documents, I take it that the various -- these various documents have been with the Translation Section in order to be translated, the document was at one time in existence, and I take it also that by virtue of the certificate which Dr. Laternser has attached to the Document Book that the two or three mimeographed sheets in the Document Book are exact and complete translations of the original document.
Just because Dr. Laternser happened to find the document out of the batch of documents that came from Washington, I submit, has nothing to do with whether he is the only one entitled to use it.
DR. LATERNSER: That was purely an allegation by Mr. Fenstermacher that I found this document among the Washington documents. That is merely his assertion. I can not make any statement to that effect now. I could only do that if I would be allowed to look into that; then I can say whether it is an original document which was prepared in Washington or not. I think that if we observe the rule which the Prosecution asks us to observe, then they will have to return the Document Book back to me, and the material included in it. At this moment -
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Well, I assume that Dr. Laternser would not be asked to certify that document if the original is not in existence. It was at one time in existence, I am sure, but if it has become lost, then I certainly maintain that he would be allowed to offer it in evidence on behalf of his certificate.
DR. LATERNSER: If the Tribunal please, I don't think the original got lost. I think the exhibit exists. That is also an assertion by Mr. Fenstermacher.
THE PRESIDING JUDGE: Have you got the actual exhibit, Dr. Laternser? The exhibit which is the basis for Weichs Document Number 671?
DR. LATERNSER: I assume for certain that I have the original exhibit, but I see no cause to hand it to the Prosecution. But that is even going one step further than what I asked. I merely asked that the Prosecution observe the same procedure that we have been asked to observe in turn. That is, to hand back those documents which the Prosecution have not used but distributed to us, and I insist that the same procedure be observed by the Prosecution as is observed by us.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: If Your Honors please, this is a very important piece of evidence in connection with the acts committed by the defendant Speidel and I see no reason why it shouldn't be offered in evidence in the interest of truth, no matter who happened to find it or get original possession of it first.
DR. LATERNSER: I presume that the Prosecution has in the hands a number of -- a great number of very important documents for us, the existence of which is not known to us. I ask the Prosecution to observe the same towards us that they ask us to observe towards them. I therefore ask them to hand back to me that particular document book.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Your Honor --
THE PRESIDENT: Just a minute, please. Somewhere along this circuitous route there must be a stopping place. Now, I take it that both you gentlemen have to a reasonable extent expressed yourselves on the matter.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: I just have one more thing to add, your Honor. There is a remedy. In the event the prosecution has some documents which the Defense would like to have possession of, and I assume there is a parallel remedy for us. I found that remedy two days when I called the Defense Information Center and inquired about this document and I learned then that a procedure had been withdrawn. I learned then that the matter had been taken up with Dr. Laternser and he made a reply to the effect that either he didn't know where it was or he didn't want to give it up. That is a vague recollection that I have of the answer I got from the Defense Information Center. Now, I would ask then that the Court grant the application on behalf of the prosecution to make Dr. Laternser give us the original document. But, because there was a certificate of Dr. Laternser in this Document Book which contains this document, I assumed that it would not be necessary and there would not be any quarrel about the mimeographed pieces of paper being a true translation of the original document.
DR. LATERNSER: If your Honor please, may I add something? Of course, I have been asked, and to that extent Mr. Fenstermacher is correct-I have been asked if I did put a document at the disposal of the Prosecution.
My answer, of course, was to deny that. After all, as Defense Counsel, it is not my task to hand over material to the Prosecution. I shall only do that if a ruling to that effect exists. I refuse now, as then, to hand over any document, and I am asking for the documents to be returned to us.
THE PRESIDING JUDGE: I think that both of you gentlemen have expressed yourselves sufficiently, and to give the court an opportunity to rule at this time would not be out of place. No piece of evidence, if it is competent, is the sole possession of any one individual, of either the Prosecution or the Defense. The Tribunal is interested in getting to the truth of those matters which are before this Tribunal. If there is any question as to this copy, some procedure may be necessary in order to obtain it -- in order to obtain the original. The document, in such form as it may be presented, will be considered by the Tribunal, and the objection as made by Dr. Laternser will be overruled. As to whether or not the copy will be admitted will be a matter which will be taken up next, if necessary.
DR. WEISGERBER: Dr. Weisgerber for General Speidel.
If the Tribunal please, I also object against the introduction of a copy of a document, the copy of which is contained in Weichs Document Book I. I believe I have a claim to see at least a photostat of that document. Up till now, that has been the procedure and I see no cause why in this particular case that rule should not be observed. The reason given by Mr. Fenstermacher that the copy as contained in Document Book Weichs I which has not been submitted, has been certified by Dr. Laternser. This indication is by no means sufficient. In many instances we have had the experience that on photostat and original documents there were extremely important notes in handwriting or initial which the copies as contained in the Document Books did not show.
THE PRESIDENT: Your objection will be sustained, Dr. Weisgerber. Dr. Laternser, do you know where the document is?
Did you understand my question?
DR. LATERNSER: Yes, your Honor. Yes, I know where the document is.
THE PRESIDENT: Could you present it to the Tribunal? And would you?
DR. LATERNSER: If the Court orders me to do so, then I shall do it.
THE PRESIDENT: The court request you to do it.
Dr. LATERNSER: If your Honors please, it is a difficult situation in which I find myself. Voluntarily as Defense Counsel I can never hand any material to the Prosecution which incriminates any one of the defendants. In that case I would violate the duties of Defense Counsel. That is my point.
THE PRESIDENT: In order to protect you, Dr. Laternser, that you are not violating any professional obligation on your part, I will change the nature of my statement and make it as the order of the Tribunal.
DR. LATERNSER: Yes, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: I was endeavoring to couch my words in a manner which would not seem arbitrary.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: May I offer this document now, your Honor, or would it be better to wait until Dr. Laternser actually brings it in?
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Weisgerber has made an objection which has been sustained as to the copy. If you will present -- if you will get the document, Dr. Laternser, if you don't have it here.
Well, if you will get it, please.
If we could pass on to some other matter while we are waiting for it, please.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Yes, your Honor. The Prosecution has made two additional lists which I hope will not be objected to, because they are simply an index to the transcript, the English transcript, with respect to the dates on which certain of the Prosecution witnesses have testified and the page in the transcript; and the second list is the page on which witnesses ordered on behalf of the Defense testified and the corresponding page in the English transcript. These lists are not in evidence. They are simply for the convenience of the Tribunal in finding material in the transcript. The first list we offer is a list of the Prosecution witnesses, the date on which they appeared, and the corresponding page in the transcript. For purposes of identification, they should be marked Exhibit 675. The second list is with respect to witnesses which appeared on behalf of the Defense, the date on which they appeared, and the corresponding page of the transcript. This list should be marked Exhibit 676.
THE PRESIDENT: May I inquire as to whether or not a similar document is -- I take it from what I observed now that a similar document is being furnished the Defense Counsel with reference to the German transcript?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: No, your Honor, we didn't feel it incumbent on us to index the transcript for them. We only did it for the convenience of ourselves and the Tribunal with respect to the English transcript.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
MR. FULKERSON: I would like to request the Tribunal to call the Affiant Hans von Selchow, who is, I believe, here now.
This affiant's affidavit appears in Dehner Document Book V, page 73, as Document Number 27. I believe it was also introduced as Exhibit 27, wasn't it, Dr. Gawlik?
HANS VON SELCHOW, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
THE PRESIDENT: The witness will raise his right hand and be sworn.
I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
THE PRESIDENT: You may be seated.
Will you repeat again the page, document, and exhibit?
MR. FULKERSON: It is Dehner Document Book V, Exhibit 27, and Document 27, on page 73.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. FULKERSON:
Q. Please give your name, birth date and birthplace.
A. Hans Harold von Selchow, born in Leobschuetz, Upper Silesia, on the 17th of April 1894.
Q. What is your profession, please, sir?
A. I was a farmer.
Q. What did you do during the war?
A. At the beginning of the war I was IIa with a Division and later I was with Army Busch; then in Brussels with an Administrative SubArea Headquarters; and later on I was in Zagreb with the German Plenipotentiary General.
Q. According to your affidavit, I notice you say you were the Chief of Staff with the German Plenipotentiary General for Croatia is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. What did this Staff do, Colonel?
A. It was an Intermediate Staff and transmitted all requests and orders which came from the Kommando Agencies to be passed on to the Croatian Government.
Q. Did you have any troops under you?
A. No.
Q. Did you have any direct authority over any of the German authorities in Croatia?
A. May I once again ask you -- May I once again ask you to please repeat the question?
Q. Did this Staff exercise any direct authority over any of the German authorities in Croatia?
A. No.
Q. It was strictly a liaison agency, was it?
A. Yes, strictly a liaison agency.
Q. When the German Wehrmacht, for example, or some other German agency wanted to pass on information to the Croatians, it was done through your staff?
A. Generally, yes.
Q. And vice versa?
A. Yes, vice versa, also.
Q.- You say that Croatia was a sovereign state. What do you understand is meant by the term "sovereign state"?
A.- An independent state with governmental authority and at the head of the government a leader of the state with several ministries at his disposal.
Q.- Do you know, Colonel, when this sovereign state came into existence?
A.- To the best of my knowledge, it was in 1941 or 1942.
Q.- Before or after Croatia was occupied by the German troops?
A.- After.
Q.- Did the German troops ever leave Croatia the whole time you were there?
A.- I didn't understand what you meant by your question.
Q.- Was Croatia occupied by the German troops the whole time you were down there?
A.- Yes, it was.
Q.- When did the Croatian state cease to exist?
A.- Yes.
Q.- I am sorry, have you understood the question?
A.- I understood whether the Croatian state continued to exist and I said yes.
Q.- I said when?
A.- Oh, you mean when? It has not yet discontinued to exist.
Q.- This independent state of Croatia -- in your opinion -- is still continuing?
A.- Yes.
Q.- Now you say here that German forces were not allowed to carry out requisitionings in Croatia. What did you mean by that, -- requisitionings of material or requisitions of manpower or what?
A.- The German armed forces had no authority of their own in that state.
It depended on the Croatian government which had to give its approval and consent to all requests made by the German armed forces.
Q.- Then the German armed forces did not have authority to seize people and impress them as forced laborers?
A.- No.
Q.- Well, did they ever do it in spite of their lack of authority?
A.- I can't say that.
Q.- Did you ever get any complaints from the Croatian authorities that sort of thing was being done?
A.- Not to the best of my knowledge.
Q.- Well, if such a complaint had been made, wouldn't it have been passed through your staff? Wasn't that the proper agency for such a complaint to go to before it was given to the German army commanders?
A.- Only partially because with the German command agencies there were liaison officers of the Croatian government who had the same right. That is, they could pass on requests of the German armed forces to the Croatian government.
Q.- But when the Croatian government itself made a complaint that the German troops were doing something that displeased the Croatian government wouldn't that in all likelihood go through your office?
A.- That would have passed through our agency.
Q.- I want you to look at Document NOKW-1418 which will be handed to you in just a minute. It is in Book XVI, page 97 of the English and 143 of the German. Have you ever seen that before? Now, for the benefit of those members of the Tribunal who don't have their document book, this document begins:
"The Croatian government complains about the compulsory transfer in opposition to treaty regulations of male and female members of the population taken in band warfare, band suspects, or deserters, to employment in the Reich. Such measures are to be stopped immediately, etc...."
Do you recall any such complaints, Colonel?
A.- No.
Q.- Were you Chief of Staff of the Plenipotentiary General for Croatia at the time this instrument was dated -- the 20th of June, 1944?
A.- Yes.
DR. GAWLIK: If Your Honors please, I would like to point out an error in translation. It is constantly translated German General Plenipotentiary and it should be German Plenipotentiary General -- in order to put the record straight, the German record.
THE PRESIDENT: Any question as to this change in translation?
MR. FULKERSON: No, Sir.
BY MR. FULKERSON:
Q.- Wouldn't in the ordinary course of affairs, the way that business was run in Croatia, from what you have described, wouldn't the 15th Mountain Corps ordinarily have received such a complaint as this from your office? Isn't that the source? Or isn't that the funnel through which such complaints would have been distributed to the various army units?
A.- The agency of the German Plenipotentiary General had nothing to do with the deportation of any indigenous inhabitants. Whether these orders did in that case reach the German Plenipotentiary General, I do not think.
Q.- No, well I am not accusing the staff of the German Plenipotentiary of being the agency for deporting forced laborers, but I am asking if it wouldn't have been the agency to which a complaint of this kind made by the Croatian government would have been addressed?
A.- No, I don't believe it was the competent agency; to the best of my knowledge, the deportation of labor forces was not carried out by any military agencies. It was carried out to the best of my knowledge by a civilian agency which had its seat in Zagreb but which I personally never contacted there.
Q.- Well, wasn't the very point of this communication that this office that you are talking about in Zagreb was not even being consulted about the matter, that people were just being shipped arbitrarily off to Germany? Wouldn't a complaint of that kind normally have been addressed to your office?
DR. GAWLIK: If Your Honors please, the witness said he doesn't know anything about it. He never heard anything about it. His agency never received any complaints. How then is the witness to answer the question last put to him? The witness has already answered the question in his preceding answer when he said he didn't know anything about it. He didn't know anything about it because no complaints were received.
THE PRESIDENT: The objection will be overruled. Let's proceed to this matter or such matters as can be definitely disposed of without argumentative questions, if possible.
BY MR. FULKERSON:
Q.- Over here in paragraph I numeral 2 of your affidavit, you say that the German forces were only able to propose the imposition of reprisal measures. What did your office have to do with reprisal measures?
A.- My agency itself had nothing whatsoever to do with the reprisal measures. The situation was that if the troops or any command agency wanted to order reprisal measures, it needed the consent of the Croatian government for this order. There were two channels open to do this. One went via the German command agency and the German Plenipotentiary General to the Croatian government, and the other channel which was the one which was in most instances used, was the one that the Croatian liaison officers with the German command agencies approached the Croatian government directly. And the answer was passed on along the same channel.
Q.- Well, when these proposals were made by the Germans, what was the attitude -- what did the Croatian government then do?
A.- I cannot remember any individual proposals. I can merely say that during the discussions which were held about that topic, the requests in those areas where there was Serbian population, were more likely to be granted there than where there was Croatian population.
Q.- In other words, your recollection is that you would get a proposal from a German armed -- from a unit of the German armed forces saying "We want to shoot 20 hostages," and you would pass this proposal on to the Croatian authorities and then they would go out and select some serbs to be used as the executees. Is that the way it worked?
A.- I didn't quite understand that. We didn't go and select any Serbs. The Croatian government was the authority which held executive powers in that state. Subsequently and consequently, this agency had to give the order for a carrying-out of any execution.
Q.- Yes, I understand that but I am trying to follow just what you said a minute ago. Here were the steps as I understood them. You correct me if I misunderstood you: You got a request from a unit of the German armed forces, or rather a proposal to shoot a certain number of hostages or at least to execute a certain number of hostages. Your Office received that proposal. That was step number one.
A.- That is how it was established.
Q.- Then the second step was that you passed on this proposal to the Croatian government.
A.- That is how it was to be.
Q.- And then you say that the Croatians would go out and select some Serbs to be executed, in order to consummate this proposal.
A.- I have not been informed concerning this third step. I only had to carry out the liaison in writing between the Croatian government and the command agencies. We did not participate in any steps concerning the carrying-out of any proposals. What happened further we were never informed of.
Q.- Well, we have discussed the request or the order, was there any receipt, that is to say after you passed on this order for 20 hostages to be shot, or whatever it was and the Croatians did it, did they then send you any receipt that 20 hostages were shot as of proposal for the 15th of March, did they do that or how do you know they carried out the proposal?
A.- No, in actual practise that never happened that we received a receipt or similar document. Our activities were concluded the moment when we had passed on what the Croatian Government wanted to the German Command agencies and vice versa.
Q.- Well, didn't the German Army take any steps to see to it that proposals of theirs were actually carried out by the Croatians?
A.- I cannot tell you that.
Q.- Now, did you ever recall that the Croatian Government flatly refused to carry out any of these proposals?
A.- I only know of one case when there was a German division's request which the Croatians tried to mitigate. To the best of my recollection that was in the instance of a Cossack Division somewhere south of Zagreb.
Q.- But that is the only individual case that you say that you can remember?
A.- Yes.
Q.- Now you stated here that the railroad between Zagreb and Belgrade was of a decisive military importance?
A.- Yes.
Q.- Do you know in the area of what Corps, what German Army Corps this railroad was located?
A.- That question is not very easy to be answered. The Corps changed. Undoubtedly the railroad was partially for certain period of time situated in the area of the XVth and LXVIIIth Reserve Corps.
Q.- Now, are you pretty familiar with the chains of command and the various units of the German Wehrmacht, Navy, Air Force, Police, S.D., etc., which were located all over Croatia?
A.- Could you please repeat again which agencies you are referring to?
A.- I meant them all, I meant all of them; were you familiar with the chains of command to which each individual outfit was ultimately responsible and what the liaison was between them?
A.- Generally speaking, I am not familiar with it.
Q.- As a matter of fact, your duties in Croatia, were such that you were almost on detached duty from the Wehrmacht, weren't you, so far as the actual troops were concerned?
A.- I am afraid I could not quite follow your question.
Q.- I said that you personally had a job of such a nature that you are almost on detached duty while you were in Croatia, is that not true?
A.- Yes, that is correct.
Q.- You weren't subordinate to any Corps?
A.- No.
Q.- Were you even subordinate to any Army?
A.- Only to the Army Group.
Q.- And you didn't have any troops subordinate to you?
A.- No.
Q.- Can you remember off-hand the names of the divisions in the Corps Area of the 69th Reserve Corps during November, 1943?
A.- No, I cannot do that anymore: It was only on the 1st of October that I took over that office. To the best of my knowledge at the time the 173rd Reserve Division was stationed there. I believe that is the only division of which I can say for certain that it was stationed there.
Q.- Well, can you remember with any more clarity what troops were in that Corps Area in February of 1944?
A.- Unless I am mistaken one of the 180th Divisions, but I don't know which one.
Q.- Do you know how then, do you know the name of the commander of the 1st Cossack Division?
A.- That was General von Pannwitz.
Q.- Now, when was General van Pannwitz' division transferred I will give you that much of a lead - from the 69th Corps to the XVth Corps?
A.- I cannot tell you that, I don't know any longer.
Q.- What were the names of the various Einsatz Commandos located in Croatia; what were the names or numbers of the units?
A.- I don't know what you mean by Einsatz commandoes, there were only corps, as far as the army was concerned, corps and divisions.
Q.- I don't know, but it was my understanding there were groups of the S.D., but if you don't know we will dismiss that subject.
Now, you state here in your affidavit that the inspector of the Railway Security Office was directly under the 2nd Panzer Army?
A.- To the best of my knowledge, that is what I said.
Q.- How many men were in the Railway Security Service in Croatia?
A.- I cannot tell you that, the line which went through all of Croatia was guarded along a great number of kilometers; how many people, how many men participated in these guard duties only the corps or division in guarding it could tell you that.
Q.- Well, as far as you know, did the troops of the 69th Corps ever patrol this vital railroad which you just mentioned awhile ago or was that done strictly by the Railroad Security Troops?
A.- No, I believe troops of the LXIXth Corps participated also.
Q.- Well, were there more troops in the LXIXth Corps or more troops in the Railway Security Service?
A.- I don't know that.
Q.- Who was the man in charge of the troops of the Railway Security Service in the area of the LXIXth Corps?
A.- I cannot tell you that, those were tactical concepts with which the agency of the German plenipotentiary general was not concerned.