DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: I have no further questions, Mr. Fenstermacher.
RECROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:
Q General Felmy, how many of these sentences have you signed in your capacity as commander of the 68th Corps?
A What sentences? What kind of sentences do you mean?
Q Sentences such as the one you signed with respect to Mr. Finger, Mr. Finger's indictment.
A I can't tell you that with any amount of certainty. I only know that in June 1944, in the IV. Battalion of the 999th Division, which was also stationed in the Elis area, six death sentences were carried out. There again was a military court procedure preceding the verdict. I passed it on to the army group and the army group confirmed it. Those are the two more severe cases which I recall but I cannot tell you by memory whether there were more such verdicts pronounced. It is quite possible that there were.
Q How much time did you spend going over these various indictments and results before you signed them?
A The judge advocate reported the incident to me orally and if I was in agreement, and after I had looked through the files and made inquiries of him, I passed on the verdict to the army group with the request of a confirmation -- or I suggested an amendment.
Q How long would all that work take: your conferences with your Oberkriegsgerichtsrat, and your looking over the files?
A That would depend on the severity of the case, if it was quite clearly proved by testimony or not. I can't really tell you now. It might have been an hour; it might have been more or less.
Q Suppose you give us the names of some of the other sentences you approved of. You seem to recall Mr. Finger's name. Suppose you give us some of the others.
A No, I recall neither Mr. Finger's name -- I only heard of that yesterday through his testimony -- nor could I from memory give you the names of other subjects of indictments.
The 995th units were not the only ones involved here. There were other units involved here, there was the Corps Signal Departments, for instance, and there was also one death sentence requested and executed.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Mr. Fenstermacher, I think we have spent enough time on this subject.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Just one more question, your Honor.
Q General Felmy, isn't it true that there were prison sentences against any member of the 999th Division those sentences were served by remaining in the division?
A No, that was different in different instances. There could be a period of probation and I am surprised that in this particular case with fifteen years penitentiary there was a suspension of the sentence in actual fact because that was usually only done when a small prison sentence was pronounced; but, as I say, you are asking me too much because I haven't got the files here and I can't give you any details. Suspension of sentence occurred frequently, whether in all cases, I cannot tell you.
Q It could not have been a suspension but the service of the fifteen years was considered being served as long as he was a member of the division, You don't think the latter could be true?
A No, no I don't think so.
Q That is all.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Any further questions on the part of defense counsel: If not, the witness will stand and be excused.
Dr. Mueller-Torgow, you may proceed.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: If it please the Tribunal, in order to conclude my case, I would like to observe in this connection that I have already concluded my presentation of documents and I do not intend to present any Greek documents.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: That, therefore, indicates that you have rested your case on behalf of General Felmy.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: Yes, your Honor.
MR. RAPP: I would just like to inquire whether or not the defense counsel had made this decision at the time that the Language Division was to be asked to translate that portion which the Court permitted him to have translated and when he notified the Language Division that he would not present these documents in Court.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Was there some request on the part of defense counsel to make a response to the suggestion of Mr. Rapp, Dr. Mueller-Torgow?
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: If it please the Tribunal, I repeat that at the time I concluded the presentation of my documents and I specifically said so and that I passed no further documents on to the Translation Division, especially none of the Greek documents.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: That is what I understood you to say. What are you referring to, Mr. Rapp?
MR. RAPP: I was under the impression, your Honor, that at that time -- I am obviously mistaken -
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: That can happen to anyone.
MR. RAPP: The defense counsel said that he was going to go ahead with these newspapers as far as they pertained to that part which the Court would permit.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: That was only with reference to the properly authenticated orders.
MR. RAPP: That is right. That is right. Then I wondered whether he had done anything after that time so that the Translation Division didn't do the thing in vain. That was my question. I wanted to find out.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: In any event, the answer then is closed.
MR. RAPP: Very well.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Very well. Dr. Weissgerber?
DR. WEISSGERBER (Counsel for defendant Speidel): If it please the Tribunal, in conclusion of my evidence on behalf of General Speidel, I intend to present as last document for General Speidel a number of brief excerpts such as were contained in Greek newspapers during the period of occupation.
I have adhered to the ruling of the Court and and have altogether submitted six official announcements of German authorities and these were translated. I now intend to introduce these official announcements as the last document on behalf of General Speidel.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Do you have the copies?
Court No. V, Case No. VII.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: You may proceed, Dr. Weissgerber.
DR. WEISSGERBER: I offer document Speidel Number 84 as Speidel Exhibit Number 67.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: 67?
DR. WEISSGERBER: Yes, 67. I may anticipate that in the translation there appears before every individual announcement a brief summary of the contents. That was no intention on my part. It was done without my instruction by the Translation Division because of the following facts: --
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I think that the Tribunal will understand that and you may proceed with the offering -- with the introduction of the Exhibit.
DR. WEISSGERBER: The first announcement is one made by the Military Commander for Greece concerning the result of the investigation of the prisoners in the Italian military prison. These men were later dismissed by order of General Speidel.
The second announcement has the same contents and refers to another dismissal of prisoners.
MR. FULKERSON: Before we go any further, I would like to point out to the Tribunal that as far as it appears from the English copy that we have here it is impossible for anyone to tell where these things were published, what -- or anything else about them. There is -- there seems to be no certificate on them.
DR. WEISSBERGER: In this connection, I would like to state that my colleague, Dr. Mueller Torgow, some time ago made a motion to the Tribunal for permission of obtaining Greek newspapers.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: We are familiar with the motion as made by Dr. Mueller-Torgow and of He ruling of the Tribunal. The date and place of issue apparently are, Mr. Fulkerson, will be found on the lower lefthand corner of each of the documents. The first one is, Athens, 21 September 1943, and the others correspondingly so.
MR. FULKERSON: That is true, your Honor. I see the reference you make here, but it still doesn't show, as far as I can tell, what it came from ----
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Do you wish --- It is then your wish to have Dr. Weissgerber to go into the details of the original of the instruments?
MR. FULKERSON: Well, it is only this, if your Honor please: I think there should be a little more identification about what these various excerpts came from and especially since we never saw this until now.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Very well, Dr. Weissgerber, could you give a brief historical outline of the documents to be presented?
DR. WEISSGERBER: According to the ruling of the Court, the obtaining of the Greek Newspapers by the Defense Information Center was possible. From these Greek newspapers I have, according to the order of the Court, had a part on the official announcements of German authorities extracted and I passed these excerpts on to the Translation Division. The announcements appeared in Greek newspapers in Athens at the time of the German occupation. I don't suppose the Prosecution will assure that these announcements such as I present their here have been particularly manufactured for the use before this Tribunal. The announcements all originate in the newspaper which at that time appeared in Athens, Eleftron Vina. Therefore, we always have the abbreviation "EV" before the date.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Proceed.
MR. FULKERSON: I know that the Tribunal is anxious to finish this afternoon, but I think that the -- we at least should be entitled to as much as the Defense would be entitled to, and it is all too clear to me what would happen to us if we had attempted to put in a document with no more identification than this on it, if your Honor please.
Here are a series of what purport to be clippings from newspapers. "EV" is marked on some of them; nothing is marked on some of the others. Here are various references to "page 58 of the Greek original." I don't know what original he is talking about.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Would you care to peruse the original documents?
MR. FULKERSON: Yes, sir.
DR. WEISSGERBER: If your Honor please, I can in this case submit no more than those excerpts from the Greek newspapers.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Mr. Fulkerson has a right to identify -- to examine the originals from which you made the copies.
MR. FULKERSON: If your Honor please, you can't tell from this what they come from. "From the original excerpts." This is simply a newspaper clipping, but from what newspaper or when, it is impossible for anyone to tell.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I submit that it be submitted for the probative value of the newspaper clipping then.
You may continue, Dr. Weissgerber.
DR. WEISSGERBER: The second announcement also deals with the pardon of 106 prisoners who had been convicted by Italian military courts.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I recall, Dr. Weissgerber, that when Mr. Fenstermacher offered the rather voluminous document at the close of a busy day covering the Greek situation, at the suggestion of the Tribunal we assumed that we perhaps would find time to read it in the solitude of our offices and if you would extent us the same courtesy with respect to the Greek newspaper clippings, we would consider them all at that time for such probative value as the Tribunal may feel they have, if any.
MR. FULKERSON: Well, if Your Honors please --
DR. WEISSGERBER: Yes, your Honor, I am in full agreement with that suggestion and I will submit the documents without reading them in detail.
MR. FULKERSON: While your Honors are weighing the probative value of these in the solitude of your offices, I would like you to keep in mind that the last clipping is on August 24, 1944, which is after the defendant left Greece.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I am sure that the Tribunal will take that into account in the balancing of the scales in this matter, you may trust that the balance will not be found wanting.
You may proceed.
DR. WEISSBERGER: That, if your Honor please, brings me to the end of my evidence for General Speidel. The case is resting.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: You rest your case for the defendant Speidel?
DR. WEISSBERGER: Yes, Your Honor, I rest my case.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Are there any further matters in this connection to be brought to the attention of the Tribunal by either the Prosecution or the Defense Counsel. That will have ---I am sorry. Did you have something, Dr. Weissberger, to offer before we have the witness returned?
DR. WEISSBERGER: No, if it please your Honor, I have nothing further to submit.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Dr. Tipp.
DR. TIPP: If it please the Tribunal, if I am being allowed to speak in behalf of my colleague, Dr. Gawlik, he has still one or two documents to introduce. I can not be certain about this, but I believe it is so, and I would like to inform the Tribunal so that the rights of my colleague. Dr. Gawlik, may not be impaired in any way. To the best of my knowledge, his assistant who was here has already left to inform Dr. Gawlik.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Very well.
If the Marshal will advise the witness now here to appear before the Tribunal.
(HANS FELBER a witness, was recalled.)
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: The witness has been sworn. He may take his place.
It was originally my intention to interrogate the witness, General Felber, on some points that I conceive to be of some importance, but due to the severance of Field Marshall von Weichs from the case, I see it no longer necessary to pursue that intention. However, my associate, Judge Carter, desires to ask the witness a few questions.
Judge Carter.
EXAMINATION BY THE COURT HANS FELBER BY JUDGE CARTER
Q. General, you recall testifying here in August?
A. Yes, your Honor.
Q. I believe you told us at that time how many years you had served in the German Army?
A. Yes, your Honor.
Q. How many?
A. 40 years.
Q. That was the training that you bad before you became an active officer?
A. I went to high school and the first two years of college passed matriculation.
Q. Now, I really referred to military training, General.
A. Before I entered the Army as an officer, or, rather as officer candidate, I had no military training. Then from 1908 onwards I was trained in troops and in the General Staff.
Q But you had experience in both world wars?
A Yes, Your Honor.
Q You have been somewhat familiar with the international law as it applies to the conduct of military warfare?
A Yes, Your Honor.
Q And you are familiar with - generally at least - with the terms of the Hague Convention of 1907?
A Yes, Your Honor.
Q General, can you tell me in what manner an enemy soldier who meets all the requirements of the Convention can be made a prisoner of war?
A He can be made a prisoner of war if, while carrying out his service under arms as a regular soldier and during combat, he comes into the captivity of the enemy.
Q Is it your thought that physical control of the soldier is necessary to his being made a prisoner of war?
A Yes, it is my opinion.
Q And I assume from that that it is your opinion also that a regular soldier can not become a prisoner of war by any constructive process?
A I am not quite certain whether I have understood that question correctly. I don't know whether I understood the meaning of the question properly.
Q All right. Let me put it another way. Can he become a prisoner of war without him knowing it himself?
A I wouldn't assume that that is possible. He ought to have been informed of the situation sufficiently to know when he is a prisoner of war.
Q Very well. Now, what was the position you held in Serbia?
A I was in charge of the office of the Military Commander Southeast, who was in the same time Military Commander for Serbia.
Q And I am correct in assuming that you succeeded General Bader?
A That is correct, Your Honor.
Q And he in turn succeeded General Boehme?
A Yes, Your Honor.
Q Now, when you were commissioned to serve in that capacity, did you receive a new commission or did you just assume it under the same terms that your predecessor had served in the command?
A I can't state that with certainty, because I didn't talk to my predecessor when I took over office. As far as I was concerned, my appointment as Military Commander was a great surprise to me.
Q I believe you told us that, in your opinion, Serbia was wholly occupied during the time that you were there by the German Army. Is that correct?
A Yes, Your Honor.
Q And were you the highest Wehrmacht Commander in the territory?
A Yes, Your Honor.
Q I assume that you have made some investigation as to the duties of an occupant to the population and the duties of the population toward the occupant?
A Yes, Your Honor.
Q Whose duty was it while you were down there to -
A I didn't understand the first part of your question. Could you please repeat it?
Q Well, I didn't finish my question, General. I am sorry. Who was responsible for preventing crime and controlling criminal elements in Serbia while you were there?
A Criminal elements were to be controlled by the Police authorities and by the Higher SS and Police Leader. His name was Meyszener.
Q Supposing the elements got out of hand and they couldn't handle them, whose primarily responsibility was it?
A In the final analysis it was the task of the Military Commander that is, of the troops.
Q And you mean yourself in that respect?
A Yes, Your Honor.
Q And you, of course, were subject to the orders of the - of your superior who at the time was Field Marshal von Weichs?
A The authority of command was not sufficiently clearly provided. Generally I would receive my orders from the OKW, from the Quartermaster General's Department in the OKW.
Q Let me put it this way. But from the standpoint of control in the area, the primary responsibility rested on the highest Military Commander within the territory. Is that correct?
A Yes, Your Honor.
Q In your capacity as the Commanding General of occupied territory, did I understand then that in the final analysis it would be your duty to control even SD, SS, or any other element that might be labeled a criminal element?
A We did not have the right to control the authorities of the Higher SS and Police Leader and his police authorities. We were not authorized to control these functions. There was an order by the Fuehrer according to which even in the operational areas the Reich Fuehrer of the SS, Himmler, had special tasks, by direct order of the Fuehrer, which he on his own responsibility had to carry out. That was an order which, to the best of my recollection, existed already at the beginning of the Russian campaign and was issued at that time by the OKW. In this opinion I took over in fall of 1943 my office, that is, with the express instruction not to intervene with the police tasks of the Higher SS and Police Leader.
Q I understand that you had several different channels of command from Berlin. Is that right? And you had to contend with both
A Yes, Your Honor.
Q But in the final analysis the obligations of the population to the occupant and the occupant to the population had to be settled by the Commanding General of the territory; is that right?
A Yes, Your Honor. Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE CARTER: No further questions.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Presiding Judge for this Tribunal, do you have any questions to ask?
THE PRESIDENT: I do not.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Do members of the Defense Counsel wish to interrogate the witness?
DR. LATERNSER: If the Tribunal please, I have a few questions. General, you don't need your earphones.
RECROSS EXAMINATION HANS FELBER BY DR. LATERNSER:
Q General, first of all, a preliminary question. What nonmilitary agencies exercised authority in your area?
A There was principally the agency - or, let me put it that way, the most important authority had -
Q General, I would like to make it very brief in order not to claim too much time - too much of the time of the Tribunal. What I asked you was: What non-military agencies exercised authority of any kind in your area?
A There was mainly the Plenipotentiary German Envoy; that was Neubacher.
Q Go on.
A Then there was the Police, which was a non-military agency, then in Belgrade a number of individual detachments of Rosenberg, and a number of cultural associations. Then there was the Plenipotentiary of the Four Year Plan. And I believe those are the most important ones.
Q Wasn't the SD also active in that area?
A I count the SD amongst the police units.
Q To what organization of a political nature did the members of the SD belong?
A In my opinion, they were members of the Staff of the Higher SS and Police Leader.
Q Very well, that is the organizational unit which you mentioned just now.
What I mean is, quite generally, to what political organization did the members of the SD belong? What I mean is, what kind of uniforms, did they wear?
A They wore the usual uniform of the SS with insignia, to the best of my knowledge, of the SD.
Q I would like to know from how, and very briefly at that, in what relation - or, let's put it that way: What authorities did a Commanding General of an area have towards the members of the SD or other SS agencies which were not a part of the Waffen SS?
Q The authority of the Commanding General toward the agencies which you mentioned just now were almost zero.
Q Would you have had a possibility under the circumstances prevailing at that time to - let's leave out the Waffen SS for the moment -give any binding order to an SS agency?
A No.
DR. LATERNSER: I have no further questions.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Very well. Any further questions?
DR. FRITSCH: If the Tribunal please, I have a very few questions.
RECROSS EXAMINATION HANS FELBER BY DR. FRITSCH:
Q. General, you gave answer to His Honor before concerning the fact of how a men becomes a prisoner of war. When the German Armed Forces capitualted in May 1945, were you and, in fact, all members of the Armed Forces prisoners of war?
A. In my opinion, not. I myself became a prisoner of war voluntarily on the 12th of May. I believe the capitulation actually took place on the 7th or on the 8th. It is quite correct that I have to clarify a statement which I made previously, that in spite of a general surrender one does not necessarily have to feel oneself to be a prisoner of war.
Q. Do you believe, General, that an individual soldier has to be physically caught to become a prisoner of war.
A. You mean, so to speak, put one's hand on his shoulder just like one arrests a man usually.
Q. Yes.
A. I don't think that applies.
Q. When do you believe now that, if a surrender takes place, the individual soldier does become a prisoner of war?
A. Seen from a purely formal point of view, I presume at the moment when the capitulation is being signed.
DR. FRITSCH: Thank you, that suffices.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Dr. Sauter.
DR. SAUTER: Dr. Sauter, on behalf of the defendant von Geitner.
RECROSS EXAMINATION HANS FELBER BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. I would like to connect my question with the last point which was discussed. What you told us now, is that just an opinion which you feel to be yours, or did you say what you said on the basis of some legal studies?
A. Concerning the concepts of becoming a prisoner of war, I have so far never read anything in writing, I must admit that. It is just an opinion which I feel to be mine, more or less, if you want to call it that way.
Q. As a rule, to the best of my information, a whole Army capitulates -- that is, a Commander-in-Chief capitulates for the elements subordinated to them.
A. It doesn't have to be an Army; it can be a unit of troops.
Q. Have you ever stopped to think about it, General Felber, particularly at the time when you were stationed in the Balkans, if such an Army capitulates, when does the individual soldier actually become a prisoner of war? Or did you at the time never stop to think about this problem at all?
A. At that time these questions played a decisive part in the Balkans, but still I had other ideas which occupied my mind more, since I participated in the campaign in Russia.
Q. During the training which officers and particularly general staff officers, have to go through in the German Army, were these legal questions dealt with in great detail?
A. No. I myself was an instructor in the War Academy for five years, and concerning these topics, to the best of my knowledge, and recollection, there were no discussions at all, except at one time by a Judge Advocate during special instruction.
Q. Now, General Felber, I have one other question to ask you which refers to Serbia. I would like to clarify one particular point in that connection. Is the Fuehrer Directive 48 still in your memory?
A. I cannot give you the contents exactly today. I only knew that it did exist.
Q. In order to refresh your memory, General, I would like to tell you the following: This Fuehrer Directive 48 is to have contained a provision according to which the Higher SS and Police Leader in Serbia was subordinate to the Military Commander.
MR. RAPP: Your Honor, heretofore, I believe, we followed the procedure if we cared to, to refresh the witness' memory, by having him study the document himself. I have no objection if Dr. Sauter wants to do that. However, to get Dr. Sauter's interpretation as a fact before the witness, I object to.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I am inclined to think the objection is well taken. Dr. Sauter, if you wish to interrogate the witness with respect to a written document, it should be made available to him, or the quotation from it should be, such as to raise no doubt as to its accuracy.
DR. SAUTER: The Witness received the Fuehrer Directive 48 in Serbia. He says that he recalls the Fuehrer Directive as such. The only thing he doesn't know, if I understood him correctly, is what was contained in Fuehrer Directive Number 48. I haven't got this document handy at the moment, but I can't ask him in any other way that in the way I did. That is, by briefly telling him the contents which we assert to exist and ask him under oath whether that is correct.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: In the interest of expediency, you may proceed.
Q. Then, perhaps I ought to put the question in the following way: Witness, was there a Fuehrer Directive for Serbia according to which the Higher SS and Police Leader in Serbia was formally subordinated to the Military Commander for Serbia?
A. I can only recollect that the Higher SS and Police Leader was subordinated only concerning his own person and military tasks. I can further recall that the end of this Fuehrer Directive Number 48, I believe, was that through this instruction all other instructions were rescinded.
I also remember that shortly after taking over my office down there,-that is, at the beginning of October 1943, or even earlier, perhaps,--I had to discover that when I pointed out to the Higher SS and Police Leader the existence of this Fuehrer Directive Number 48, he transmitted a communication to me through the channel via Himmler and Keitel to the effect that in the area of the Higher SS and police Leader a former Fuehrer Directive existed with particular permissions and concessions to the Police, and that this was valid now as before. To my intense surprise I was informed, by way of a kind of reprimand that I was to--that I had to follow the demands of the Higher SS and Police Leader implicitly.
Q. You, as Military Commander, had to follow the demands of the Higher SS and Police Leader? That is what you said?
A. And that the Fuehrer Directive Number 48, which I had received and which really should have been my guide, was now described to me as though it was not completely valid and could not be regarded as being completely valid.
Q. General, now one last question. How did that take effect in actual practice? Did actually the Higher SS and Police Leader subordinate himself to you or did he in actual fact not become subordinate to you?
A. Quite doubtlessly and clearly he subordinated himself only concerning his own person and only where pure military tasks were concerned. And, furthermore, he objected in the most stringent manner if in any way we intervened with his police interests.
Q. This Higher SS and Police Leader -- I believe his name was Meyszuer--did he tell you, when you had such disputes from, which agency he received his orders?
A. He again and again stressed that his channel was the one through Himmler, and in the very beginning he threatened me with going to see Himmler during the next few days, from which fact we could very clearly conclude that this utterance was an open threat, and it was meant to have the effect of a threat on us.
DR. SAUTER: I have no further questions to put, your Honor.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Very well. Are there further questions on the part of the Defense Counsel? If not, are there any further questions by the Prosecution?
REDIRECT EXAMINATION HANS FELBER BY MR. FENSTERMACHER:
Q. General Felber, did I understand you correctly when you said the Higher SS and Police Leader would subordinate himself to you for carrying out military tasks but he would not subordinate himself to you with respect to police tasks?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. Would he ever subordinate himself to you for the carrying out of reprisal measures--by that I mean the execution of hostages in retaliation for German losses?
A. In that connection he did not have to subordinate himself to anybody because this was a task which was assigned to him from Himmler.
Q. Did Meyszuer execute hostages on his own initiative or would he execute hostages only when you told him to?
A. Well, I can say that as a rule he adhered to the last mentioned procedure. But I did learn in 1943, before I took over office, that in one case-
Q. Let's not go into what happened before your time. In other words, when you told Meissner to carry out the execution of hostages, he did so?
A. Yes, that's right.
Q. You had full power to order him to carry out the execution of hostages?
A. Yes.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: That is all.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Are there further questions?
DR. WEISSGERBER: Dr.Weissgerber for General Speidel.
RECROSS EXAMINATION HANS FELBER BY DR. WEISSGERBER:
Q. General, were the competencies and command authorities of the Military Commander of Greece similar to those of the Military Commander of Serbia? Were they identical?
A. Concerning the Service instructions, to the extent of which I remember them today, they were identical. That is, the tasks for the Military Commander in Greece were the same as the tasks for the Military Commander in Serbia.
Q. During your first examination you testified that there was a considerable difference, inasmuch as you were a tactical leader and the Military Commander for Greece was not. Is that correct?
A. Yes, it is.