A. In February of '39 I came to Buchenwald.
Q. Who was your superior?
A. My superior at the time was Unter- or Obersturmfuehrer Reidl.
Q. What did you deal with in there -- and I mean did you ever deal with any administrative tasks that you could gain insight in there?
A. I was in charge as a construction manager. In other words, I was in charge of the construction project of the Third SS Death Head unit.
THE PRESIDENT: Slow, please.
BY DR. STEIN:
Q. What I am interested in mainly is the question if you also dealt with administrative activities.
A. I only dealt with the auditing or checking of accounts and vouchers of the correspondence with Reidl.
Q. Did you have any insight into the activities of Eirenschmalz?
A. No, not personally.
Q. Did you see that by correspondence, etc?
A. No, all I know from Reidl's hearsay, or from Reidl telling me.
Q. Do you know Kammler?
A. Yes.
Q. What do you say with reference to your statement comparing the position Eirenschmalz had between '38 and '39 and that Kammler had?
A. In my affidavit I stated -- and I explicitly stressed the point-that was carried out on a smaller scale, definitely smaller scale, just as Reidl told me at the time.
Q. You furthermore stated that the activity of Eirenschmalz also consisted, among other things, in providing funds for construction purposes of the Death Head units and for the General SS, and that he made them out to the administrative offices.
A. My knowledge on that point also comes from Reidl, and the answers resulted from a question on my part if the funds would be granted for a construction project. He told me at the time Eirenschmalz "is the one who has to approve that."
Q. What kind of construction project was it that you were talking about?
A. It was a garrison for the third SS Death Head Standarte in Thuringia. That was Eirenschmalz's activity in the WVHA.
Q. Were you ever in the WVHA?
A. No.
Q. Well, then, where do you have the knowledge from about the development of business activities in the WVHA?
A. From the organizational chart, and also from discussions and conferences which took place in the WVHA building.
Q. My question was if you were in the WVHA, whereupon you answered that you weren't.
A. What I thought you said was that I worked there.
Q. What were the contacts that you had with the WVHA, and if so, when?
A. I received my orders from the WVHA.
Q. Where were you as of the first of February, 1942.
A. I was in the Russia Middle.
Q. Do you mean the middle sector of Russia?
A. Yes.
Q. I am talking about 1942. In other words, from that period of time when the WVHA was established.
A. At the time I was in the Middle Russia.
Q. And how were those contacts with the WVHA, please?
A. The first personal contact took place in April 1942 when I went to Berlin for a conference.
Q: You told me that you received an organizational chart. Was that the only knowledge which you had concerning the business activities of the WVHA?
A: No.
Q: What further sources did you have?
A: During the conferences which took place in April 1942 I was told by Brigade-Leader Kammler with reference to the business activity of the WVHA.
Q: You just told me that you were in Russia at the time, and now you told me that you were in Berlin in conference with Kammler. Now, how in the world can you make those two things coincide?
A: I told you that in April, 1942, I went to Berlin.
Q: How long were you in Berlin?
A: I was there perhaps for a period of three days.
Q: What were the contents of that conference?
A: I couldn't tell you for sure. Part of the conference in any case dealt with the organizational chart of Amtsgruppe C of the WVHA.
Q: In your affidavit you stated that Eirenschmalz from the spring or from summer 1943, until the end of the year '43, was Kammler's deputy. Now, where did you gain that knowledge?
A: I gained that knowledge from a conference which I had in Berlin, and that was in Autumn 1942 or 1943. I couldn't give you the exact date. In any case, that was prior to that time when Standartenfuehrer Professor Dr. Schleif was Dr. Kammler's deputy. I needed the signature of Dr. Kammler very urgently. He wasn't there, and the Main Departmental chief told me that the only man "who is allowed to sign as deputy of Dr. Kammler" was the chief of office, who was the senior on the list -- at the time Standartenfuehrer Eirenschmalz.
Q: How did you know that deputization lasted until the end of 1943?
A: I know that for sure because at that time I also stated that in my affidavit that I couldn't recall exact dates because I just couldn't remember them.
It was before Standartenfuehrer Schleif came.
MR. ROBBINS: Your Honor, I am sorry but this is the first time that I have heard about this. I don't believe that the requests have reached me as I always act on them immediately. And I never as I recall it, objected to but two, and I don't think they concerned Mummenthey. Immediately after the session I am sure we can agree on the witnesses. I don't know who they are but I can't imagine that we will have any objections.
THE PRESIDENT: Apparently the applications have got sidetracked. I know they have not come to the Presiding Judge for approval.
Mr. Robbins, you will find out about it after the session today?
MR. ROBBINS: I suggest to Defense Counsel that perhaps they should not wait two or three weeks to hear about it; if they don't get an answer within two or three days they should follow it up.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, that is shifting -
MR. ROBBINS: It may very well be the fault of the Defense Information; it may be our fault, I don't know. Lots of things get lost in the building.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we do know that the Defense Counsel doesn't lose them, so it is up to somebody else to find out where they are.
Alright.
DR. STEIN: May I continue?
THE PRESIDENT: Please do.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. STEIN:
Q: Witness, I have to draw your attention again to the fact that you are under oath here and that you are only to state facts to this tribunal, facts of which you know for sure. If you don't know those things you can state here for sure, then you should state that explicitly by saying that it is just an assumption on your part, and give us the reasons why you don't know for sure so that the Tribunal is in a position to examine whether or not you are right.
First of all, give me your full name.
A: Wolfgang Grosch.
Q: When were you born?
A: On the 15th of September -
Q: Witness, you gave us two affidavits: one affidavit on the 21st of February, 1947, and an additional affidavit on the 5th of March, 1947. Do you recall that? Is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you still remember the contents of those two affidavits?
A: Yes.
Q: In spite of that I shall show you the most important point, and in particular only those points in which I am interested as the Defense counsel for Eirenschmalz. The question is, we have two periods we have to regard here. First of all, the period of time until the end of 1940, and then the period of time from the first of February, 1942, that is after the WVHA was established. You gave the following statements with reference to those periods of time. Point No. 1: Eirenschmalz was in the administrative office SS. You stated here that Eirenschmalz was in charge of the entire construction departments, and that his position was similar to that of Kammler's. First of all, I would like to ask you, witness, how do you know, and how can you gain an insight into the activities of Eirenschamalz at the time?
A: I gained this knowledge from Unter-or Obersturmfuehrer Reidl. That was during the time '38 or '39. He told me those things orally.
Q: However, from your own knowledge you can't tell us anything, can you?
A: No.
Q: You wish to say that you know that from a third party, and only from hearsay?
A: Yes.
Q: Where were you at the time -- '38 or '39?
A: In February of '39 I came to Buchenwald.
Q: Who was your superior?
A: My superior at the time was Unter- or Obersturmfuehrer Reidl.
Q: What did you deal with in there -- and I mean did you ever deal with any administrative tasks that you could gain insight in there?
A: I was in charge as a construction manager. In other words, I was in charge of the construction project of the Third SS Death Head unit.
THE PRESIDENT: Slow, please.
BY DR. STEIN:
Q: What I am interested in mainly is the question if you also dealt with administrative activities.
A: I only dealt with the auditing or checking of accounts and vouchers of the correspondence with Reidl.
Q: Did you have any insight into the activities of Eirenschmalz?
A: No, not personally.
Q: Did you see that by correspondence, etc?
A: No, all I know I know from Reidl's hearsay, or from Reidl telling me.
Q: Do you know Kammler?
A: Yes.
Q: What do you say with reference to your statement comparing the position Eirenschmalz had between '38 and '39 and that Kammler had?
A: In my affidavit I stated -- and I explicitly stressed the point -- that was carried out on a smaller scale, definitely smaller scale, just as Reidl told me at the time.
Q: You furthermore stated that the activity of Eirenschmalz also consisted, among other things, in providing funds for construction purposes of the Death Head units and for the General SS, and that he made them out to the administrative offices.
A: My knowledge on that point also comes from Reidl, and the answers resulted from a question on my part if the funds would be granted for a construction project. He told me at the time Eirenschmalz "is the ore who has to approve tha."
Q: What kind of construction project was it that you were talking about?
A: It was a garrison for the third SS Death Head Standarge in Thuringia. That was Eirenschmalz's activity in the WVHA.
Q: Were you ever in the WVHA?
A: No.
Q: Well, then, where do you have the knowledge from about the development of business activities in the WVHA?
THE PRESIDENT: Could you refer us to the affidavit that you are using in examining this witness? Is it in evidence?
DR. STEIN: Yes, indeed, your Honor. We have two affidavits here. The first affidavit is contained in Document Book No. 3, Document NO-2154, Exhibit No. 52. The other affidavit is contained in Document Book 21 of the Document Book, Document NO-2322, Exhibit 513.
THE PRESIDENT: That can't be in Book I.
DR. STEIN: 21, Your Honor, 21. I just spoke of Books No. 3 and 21. May I continue, your Honor?
THE PRESIDENT: Please.
Q Witness, do you also know if Eirenschmalz carried out the deputization for Kammler?
A No.
Q However, you stated in your affidavit that Eirenschmalz' deputy signed the mail.
A I can recall one letter which I received which Standartenfuehrer Eirenschmalz had signed.
Q When was that?
A I can't recall the date.
Q I would like to know the approximate date: What year, and what period particularly of the year, what period of time?
A Unfortunately, I can no longer recall that fact.
Q If you received that letter from Eirenschmalz, you should at least know the contents of this letter. Do you know them?
A No.
Q Can you tell us then for sure that was a letter that was signed by Eirenschmalz in his capacity as Kammler's deputy or would you say that might be some other letter which he signed in his normal activities as Chief of Office?
A The only thing I can say here is that was a letter of the Amtsgruppe, one of the letters of the Amtsgruppe.
Q In other words, a letter of the Amtsgruppe, rather than as Deputy of Kammler?
Witness, in your affidavit, unfortunately, you made the following statement -
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, you'll have to give more time between your questions and his answers. The last answer wasn't translated at all.
DR. STEIN: There was no answer, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Let's have an answer.
Q Witness, do you still recall the question which I just asked you or should I repeat?
A Please do.
Q My question was, when you received Eirenschmalz' letter which you can't recall today in what year it was written and at what month it was, didn't you know if that letter actually was signed by Eirenschmalz as Kammler's deputy or if that letter was simply a letter by Eirenschmalz as Chief of his own Amtsgruppe, or rather, as Chief of his Office C-VI?
A The letter was a letter for the Amtsgruppe. That is the only thing I can recall at the present moment.
Q By that you mean Office C-VI?
A No, I mean Amtsgruppe C.
Q You mean Amtsgruppe C? I see. And what were the contents of that letter?
AAs I told you, I can't recall that.
Q Witness, you further stated that the maintenance for all construction for buildings of the Waffen SS was under Eirenschmalz. You furthermore stated therefore, he also had to take care of the construction and maintenance for the concentration camps and I would like to ask you, Witness, is one to understand that statement to the effect that you assumed from the fact that Eirenschmalz was in charge of the maintenance of buildings for the Waffen SS that he also then had to carry out these matters for the concentration camps?
A Yes.
Q Do you have any reasons to believe that?
A Yes.
MR. ROBBINS: I wonder if we could submit copies of this affidavit to the witness, I think it would be advantageous if he had it in his hand. I don't think the translation always comes through exactly as it is written.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there a German copy available?
INTERPRETER: Your Honor, we have one here. The interpreters have two and I think we can spare one.
THE PRESIDENT: You are still using the first affidavit, 2154, is that the one you are questioning him about?
DR. STEIN: Your Honor, I took both affidavits together and right now I am only limiting the examination of this witness according to the period of time. I took the two periods, first, the activities of Eirenschmalz in the Administrative Office and the second period of time, his activity in the WVHA. Both periods are contained in the witness' affidavits.
Q Witness, do you now have the copies of the two affidavits? You have the two affidavits and now which ones do you have? Will you tell us the date of both of them?
A The one is from the 5th of March and the 20th of February.
Q Yes, that's all right. Now I am talking about that statement which was contained in your affidavit dated the 5th of March, to be exact on page No. 2. I shall read it to you and I shall quote now:
"Since the establishment of the WVHA, the defendant Eirenschmalz amongst other tasks also had the task of approving the funds for all constructions of the Waffen SS and, therefore, also, for all the constructions of the concentration camps." The question which I am addressing to you now is, does that refer, I mean that particular item which you have there, "and therefore also the construction for the the concentration camps."
Is that answer of yours to be understood to the effect that the words, "And therefore for the concentration camps" are a deduction or a conclusion on your part which actually originates in the sentence before in which you state that Eirenschmalz had to provide the funds and had the funds for the contructions of the Waffen SS or by that did you mean furthermore that you know that Eirenschmalz approved the maintenance of the concentration camps?
A May I make a statement as to that. In the Spring of 1940 I in my capacity as Construction Manager in Buchenwald wrote as application to the Administrative Office of the concentration camp with reference to the maintenance of the buildings. I had to check the amounts. That was the reason why I assumed that all the constructions of the Waffen SS and those of the concentration camps were paid by the maintenance funds of Office C-VI.
Q Witness, you just got into the wrong year. That is you just mentioned in the Spring of 1940, I, etc. etc., and I would like to point out to you, Witness, that Office C-VI, and to be exact, even the the WVHA, were only established in 1942. Therefore, that conclusion stating in 1940 was in now way correct and cannot coincide with Eirenschmalz' activity in the WVHA. Now then, can you give us an explanation for 1940?
A Well, I can't give you anything about 1942, because in December, 1941, I was transferred to the Russian Middle Sector and ever since then I didn't come back to Germany until the capitulation.
Q Then I shall ask you how is it possible that you said in your affidavit dated the 5th of March, 1947 that you stated certain facts about things you simply couldn't know?
AAt that time I agreed with my examiner that the three main offices, the Economic Office, SS Main Office, Budget and Construction, and the WVHA were considered the same or could at least be called the same, although the organizational charts differed with each one of those agencies.
Q In other words, you wish to refute your statement. You want to waive your statement in your affidavit?
A On the basis of the dates which you just stated, Defense Counsel, which dates I didn't know at my examination and therefore I only answered according to the best of my knowledge and belief, I can only say with reference to 1942, during which time I was no longer in Germany, I just can't stick to my affidavits.
Q In this connection, I would like to speak about the second affidavit which you wrote. That is the affidavit dated the 20th of February, 1947. No, I think I wanted the other one. Let's see now. Yes.
Q. Let's speak about the first one again. In your affidavit dated the 5th of March 1947 you stated furthermore, and I quote, "If therefore, gas chambers or crematories or any other concentration camp installations needed a repair or maintenance, then it was known to Eirenschmalz and that through the accounts which he had to check and approve for payment." Here again you are speaking of a period of time which can only be actually true as of the 1st of February 1942 because prior to that time the WVHA had not been established.
Now, let me just finish my sentence before you go on. I should like to ask you again, how was it that you gave such a statement? In particularly, what were your points from which you started? What were the points that actually led you to see how things developed when checking the accounts?
A. I knew from the time prior to 1941 that all accounts concerning building maintenance had to be sent to Berlin. However, I did state while I was examined and told my examiner that, considering the enormous amount of vouchers and accounts which came in, it was impossible for Eirenschmalz to know every one of those accounts because he had a large staff of checkers and auditers.
Q. May I interrupt you? Did you know at all where those final accounts concerning this maintenance were sent to?
A. At that time when I was in Germany they were all sent to Office C VI.
Q. Witness, you're still getting mixed up in those years. You just said, "At my time when I was in Germany they were taken care of by Office C VI." Now, I want to draw your attention to the fact again that WVHA was only established the 1st of February 1942 and that therefore you were no longer in Germany.
A. Yes, that's right. I wasn't in Germany then.
Q. Then give us another explanation with reference to this sentence. What do you know about the point that Eirenschmalz could gain an insight into the repair work carried out on gas chambers or crematories from the vouchers.
A. Then I should like to ask you what year you are talking about.
Q. I shall repeat. I am talking about the period of time from the 1st of February 1942 on.
A. Well, then I can't give you any information.
Q. Then I must ask you the same question again. How was it possible that on the 5th of March 1947 you made such a statement in your affidavit?
A. For the simple reason I got all the years mixed up.
Q. Witness, do you waive both statements of your affidavits, particularly those statements contained in the affidavit which are erroneous?
A. On the basis of the fact that the years have changed--well I believe that I have to refute those statements.
DR. VON STEIN: Thank you, your Honors. No further questions. Now that the witness has just said that he refutes those statements I think I am through. Oh, just one more question, please, your Honor. Just one question more.
BY DR. VON STEIN:
Q. Witness, do you know if Eirenschmalz built the barracks in Thuringia or, rather, if he had to approve them; or do you think that also is a mistake on your part?
A. As far as Riedl told me that, yes.
Q. Well, Witness, what can you tell us from your own knowledge? Apparently nothing.
A. I explicitly stated that I had never been to Eirenschmalz's agency, nor did I ever receive any direct orders from Eirenschmalz.
Q. From your affidavit, of course I couldn't understand all these statements which you made today.
A. Yes, but they're in the record.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. Witness, what position did you hold in February 1942?
A. I didn't understand the question. Would you repeat, please?
Q. What position did you hold in February 1942?
A. I was construction inspector, Russia, Medium Sector.
Q. In that position to whom were you subordinate in the WVHA?
A. I was subordinate to the chief of office himself and personally, Dr. Kammler.
Q. When were you placed in this position as Bauinspektor? Russia?
A. That was in December 1941.
Q. You remained in that position until when?
A. Until March 1944.
Q. During that time from December 1941 to March 1944, did you have any conversations with Kammler?
A. Yes, approximately every six months.
Q. Did you discuss the organization of the WVHA at any time with Kammler?
A. I didn't quite understand that.
Q. Did you ever at any time discuss the organization of the WVHA, the organization of Amtsgruppe C, with Kammler?
A. No, I just touched upon those things. The organization was discussed early in 1942, in April, as I have told you before. After that we just discussed the additions in the organization chart. Before then the construction inspectorates in Russia were informed in writing about those changes.
Q. You knew at that time, in February 1942, that Eirenschmalz was chief of C VI, did you not?
A. Yes, indeed. We had been informed in writing about those things, that is, the printed organizational chart.
Q. Can you tell us from your knowledge from the correspondence, from the organization plan, from the conversations that you had with construction officials, what tasks Eirenschmalz carried out in C VI? In other words, what function did C VI perform?
A. C VI, very simply, was in charge of checking and approving the funds for maintenance and also the entire auditing of all the various construction agencies.
Q. Did he audit your funds?
A. Yes, indeed.
Q. Did you have any other contacts with C VI?
A. No.
Q. Tell us, if you will, in as much detail as you can just what contacts you did have with C VI.
A. The only close contacts which I had were the conferences concerning accounting and checking of accounts, which conferences I had with Eirenschmalz's deputies and Eirenschmalz himself, every time I went to Berlin. That was every six months or so.
Q. Was it on that assumption that you made the statement that Eirenschmalz was in charge of checking and auditing and making funds available for the concentration camps? I'm trying to find out if you had any knowledge of that statement or if it is just an assumption.
A. It was just an assumption on my part on the basis of the facts explained before.
Q. Did you have any knowledge of concentration camps?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. You didn't know how funds were made available or how accounts were checked in concentration camps?
A. In 1942--I couldn't tell you for sure.
Q. Did you have any knowledge at any time of these matters?
A. As I stated before, I only knew about 1939, 1940, where a certain amount was placed at the disposal of the concentration camp Buchenwald for the construction of the kitchen.
As of 1939 according to Riedl's statement certain construction was necessary for the concentration camp of Buchenwald. Generally speaking, however, it had been completed. A little later Riedl told me that no more construction would be carried out or would be permitted to be carried out for the concentration camps because there was a lack of funds. Nothing except the kitchen was to be changed--it had been constructed wrong when the framework was being set up, and therefore had to be changed. It is then that I was told by Riedl--well, the approximate words were, "Eirenschmalz has still to approve those funds." That was in 1939.
Q. Do you know what position Eirenschmalz held at that time?
A. No, I didn't know for sure, nor can I make any statement to that effect because at that time I was in Berlin for only a very short period of time; and I only had conferences with Riedl. He still lived at the Geissbergstrasse at that time.
Q. Did you tell the interrogator when you were making these statements that any of them were assumptions?
A. Yes, indeed.
Q. Witness, I have here the transcript of your interrogation. As a matter of fact, I will let you look at it. I must tell you that there is nothing in this interrogation that indicates that these statements were made as assumptions. Rather, it appears that they were stated from your own knowledge. I want to tell you this, Witness-this is a very serious matter.
Weren't you told when you were signing these affidavits that they were going to be used in court, that men's lives might hang in the balance and that the prosecution in Nuernberg wanted to make certain only justice is done and that no one should hang who isn't guilty? That was told to you, wasn't it? You were put under oath, weren't you?
A. Yes, indeed. I was under oath and it was the reason why I signed because it says at the end of the affidavit "according to the best of my knowledge and belief".
Q. At that time it was to the best of your knowledge and belief, is that right?
A. Yes, indeed.
Q. You were given an opportunity to read the affidavit and make changes and in fact you did make changes as the affidavit shows, in your hand. Is that correct?
A. Well, I made certain changes in one of those affidavits and I added some other things.
Q. It's in your own handwriting, isn't it?
A. Yes.
Q. And you signed at the bottom of each of those pages?
A. Yes.
Q. And you had an opportunity to read it over after it was typed up and before you signed it?
A. Yes, as I stated before, I read the whole thing through. There was quite a bit of hurry there and the examiner had some sort of discussion with one of the guards there and they were all in a hurry and I had to leave and I added in every one of those statements that those were assumptions on my part and, above all, I wasn't quite sure about the difference in years of the WVHA Office Construction and Budget and the SS Administrative Office. I didn't have an exact recollection of all of those facts.
MR. ROBBINS: Your Honor, I will submit in evidence the transcript of the interrogation of this witness that was made at the time he signed the affidavit.
BY JUDGE PHILLIPS:
Q. Witness, did I understand you to mean that you made the statement in this affidavit or the two affidavits but that you were not certain as to the years in which these facts took place?
A. Yes, indeed. That's correct. I wasn't quite sure about the years, and I told that to the examining official.
Q. But the facts as contained in the affidavit, not taking into consideration the years, are true, is that so?
A. They deal with 1938 to 1940; to be sure all of that period it included under one.
Q. And what you state took place at that time, is it true?
A. Yes, in various periods of time. I would have to answer those questions if they are asked me individually.
Q. Now, you were in Russia from about the 1st of 1942 until 1944, you say?
A. I didn't get that. Will you repeat, please?
Q. I understood you to say that you went to Russia in December 1941 and you stayed in Russia until sometime in 1944 - in March, I think - is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And that while you were in Russia you visited the offices of the WVHA about every six months?
A. Yes.
Q. And that while you were in Berlin you had conversations with Kammler and with subordinates of C-6 and with Eirenschmalz. Now, while you were in Berlin and during these conversations, what did Eirenschmalz tell you about the work?
A. Well, you mean something in connection with the auditing?
Q. The auditing of C-6 or whatever C-6 was doing?
A. Well, during that conversation at the time or in those conversations which I had with C-6 I only discussed the auditing and the setting up of accounts, all of the accounts for all of the construction departments which were subordinate to me personally.
Q. Now, when was this Kammler told you that Eirenschmalz was his deputy?
A. Kammler didn't tell me that. As I have stated before, an SS fuehrer or leader, I don't recall his name any more, when I needed one of Kammler's signatures, told me only Eirenschmalz as the superior office of this has the right to sign for Kammler. However, that was prior to the time when Professor Dr. Schleif was Kammler's deputy. He was a Standartenfuehrer.
Q. Was this while you were in Russia or before you went to Russia?
A. As far as I know I was already in Russia at the time.
Q. And that was a statement made to you when you were back in Berlin visiting the WVHA from Russia?
A. Yes.
Q. And that was made in one of the offices of the WVHA in Berlin?
A. Yes, indeed.
Q. Now, when was it that you say that you saw Eirenschmalz signature to a communication and he signed as deputy of Kammler?
A. As I stated before, that I can't recall the exact date nor can I recall the year.
Q. Were you in Russia then or was that before you went to Russia?
A. Well, now, let's see. As far as I can recall, it was during that period when I was in Russia.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: All right.
BY JUDGE MUSMANNO:
Q. Witness, I understand that the prime fault in these affidavits is that the dates are not correct, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. But generally the substance is true as to certain functions and operations?
A. Well, yes, the dates of the affidavits are all mixed up.