THE PRESIDENT: He said that Otto, because of his position, might make trouble for him. What did he mean by that?
BY DR. PRIBILLA:
Q. What did you mean by that?
A. Well, when I met Otto in Munich - I happened to run into him on the street - and he told me then that he was working for CIC and had been employed as an agent by them. Otto told me that our Stabscharfuehrer Rinner had been arrested in his, in Otto's, presence in a village.
Q. Is that what you meant by "Otto's position"?
A. Yes, because Sauer believed that from Otto's position he might get into trouble later on.
DR. PRIBILLA: Thank you very much. I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Cross examination, Mr. Robbins?
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. Witness, were you a member of the Allgemeine-SS?
A. Yes.
Q. When did you join?
A. I joined the Allgemeine-SS on 9 November 1938. I was transferred from the Hitler Youth to the SS.
Q. When did you join the Hitler Youth?
A. I joined the Hitler Youth in 1932.
Q. You joined the Hitler Youth in 1932 and the Allgemeine SS in 1938, and you say you only come within category III of the denazification law?
A. The prosecution put me into that category, yes.
THE PRESIDENT: What is category III, Mr. Robbins?
MR. ROBBINS: It is the so-called "followers". Lesser offenders.
THE WITNESS: Group III is the lesser offenders. Followers would be Group IV.
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. When did you join the Nazi Party?
A. I joined the Party on 9 November 1938, when I was transferred to the Allgemeine-SS, and until I was called up in 1939 I was a candidate for the Party.
Q. You don't come under the Christmas amnesty then, do you?
A. I was heavily wounded in the war, seventy percent, and as such I fall under the Christmas amnesty. How this is legally connected with the denazification law I do not know, because I do not know that law so well. All I know is that the public prosecutor who interviewed me told me that he would have made me part of Group III, which becomes clear from the indictment, and as I am injured seventy percent, I can fall under the Christmas amnesty, provided the president of the court will so decide.
Q. You tell us that you never at any time saw any Jews working for the Viking Division?
A. No, I never saw any Jews working for the Viking Division.
Q. Did you see any Jews working for the SS, any part of the SS?
A. No, I have not seen that either.
Q. Did you see Tschentscher and Fanslau at Sclotzow?
A. I remember Sclotzow. But I have not seen there -- that is the place with the citadel, isn't it?
Q. Yes.
A. I remember the place, yes.
Q. Do you remember that that was around the first, second, third, and fourth of July 1941?
A. I don't recall the dates. All I know is that it was right at the beginning of the Russian campaign. The actual dates I cannot recall.
Q. Did you see any dead civilians in Sclotzow?
A. No, I didn't see them. People said later that a mass grave was supposed to have been in the citadel, of Ukranians and German nationals.
Q. I'm not talking about that. I mean civilians who had recently been killed.
A. No, I didn't see that.
Q. Did you walk around in the streets in Sclotzow?
A. No.
Q. How long were you in Sclotzow?
A. We passed through Sclotzow. I was in my vehicle and my vehicle was always in the middle of the company. I myself was a driver and I could never leave my vehicle. When we stopped for a moment, we could go on at any moment without any notice, so I was always with my vehicle.
Q. Excuse me. How long a period of time were yon in the area of Sclotzow?
A. I would assume, roughly, not very long, but I am not quite sure because in the village of Sclotzow we did not take up any accommodations at all, and all I remember is that we passed through the village in our vans, on our advance. I know nothing about any accommodations, billets, or a stay of any period of time.
Q. How long were you in Tarnopol?
A. We were in Tarnopol for several days. I can't tell you how many days. We were outside Tarnopol, about three kilometers outside the town, in a barracks or something like that.
Q. You did not hear while you were in Tarnopol about any civilians being mistreated or killed?
A. Throughout my presence with the supply battalions, I heard of only one case by hearsay, wherein some killing was talked about. That was a place in front of Sclotzow. It was in the Sclotzow-Tarnopol area. The prosecution explained it to me at the time, and Otto led me to this with some precise statements. It must have been the village of Bogdanowka. There we heard that a member of the battalion had shot one or two Jews. I don't know quite how many. This was alleged, and we heard about it in our advance. How much of this was true, whether he had done it, and so forth, we never knew. So many rumors circulated during the advance: One said that we were going to be sent home. The next said, better food. The third one, better PX goods, and suddenly a rumor like that came up. We really didn't believe these statements that were based on hearsay only.
Q. Who, according to the story, was supposed to have shot the Jews?
A. I heard only the name of Senn mentioned. Whether he was alone or whether anybody else was supposed to have been present I don't know. I told this to the prosecution at the time. All I knew was the name of Senn in this connection. I did not hear about any other names or persons.
Q. And that is the only instance that you ever heard of Jews or civilians being mistreated by the SS?
A. Yes, that is the only incident which came to my notice and which I know, and that is only on hearsay.
Q. And you never heard of any criminal activities of the SS of any kind, did you?
A. No, as long as I was with the unit -- certainly nothing before, and as long as I was on active service I never heard anything about that. What I know today is only what I have heard since the capitulation and collapse, in the newspapers, but when I was a member of the SS myself with the unit, I never heard anything at all.
Q. If it were shown here in your testimony that you did have knowledge of the criminal activities of the SS, that would have a bearing on your denazification trial, would it not?
A. I did not quite follow the first part of your question.
Q. If it were show by your testimony here in this courtroom that you did have knowledge of the criminal acts of the SS--
THE PRESIDENT: I think the form of your question is confusing. If you did testify here--- Try it that way.
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. If you should testify here, witness, that you did have knowledge of the criminal acts of the SS, that would have a bearing on the result of your denazification proceedings, which are now pending, is that not true?
A. No, that is not true. I believe that it would not be harmful if I had only known something about these things because I, as an NCO and Unterscharfuehrer, could not have prevented these things. And I therefore do not believe that it would be harmful to me, and I do not say that I know nothing for that reason.
I say that I know nothing because I really never heard anything about this.
Q. Were you asked by the public prosecutor if you heard of criminal acts of the SS, about crimes in the concentration camps, about the executions of Jews, and so forth?
A. No, he did not. This was not an oral interrogation. Under Group III of the denazification law, the trial is held in writing, and I therefore have not discussed anything personally with the public prosecutor. I met him only once when he put a few questions to me about certain documents, including my past as a war injured person. He did not ask me about such matters.
DR. PRIBILLA: May it please the Court, I would, like to make an objection to this interrogation. I believe that the witness has said everything he can say about this, and I think he should not be put into a position where he is under duress, up to a point, because the trial, of course, is very much on his mind.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, you brought the subject up, Dr. Pribilla. I think the Prosecution has the right to inquire into it if you had, to the same extent that you did. I think you are through, Mr. Robbins, anyway, aren't you?
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. Did you hear of the Einsatzgruppen while you were in Russia or Poland?
A. No, I never heard anything about that.
Q. When is the first time that you heard about Einsatzgruppen?
A. When I was interrogated by the Prosecution.
Q. Here in this building?
A. Yes.
Q. And did you see anything of SD men while you were with the Viking Division?
A. Yes, I saw SD men, but never with our unit, nor in its immediate vicinity. In some cases I saw them two or three hundred kilometers behind the front when we went there in order to pick up our supplies, in the Army depot, and whenever the vehicles of the company were not sufficient, I had to take other vehicles along, and there, far back in the rear, we saw these SD men.
Q. Do you recall about what month it was or the location that you saw these SD men?
A. No, I don't remember locations or dates in this connection.
Q. It was September 1941, was it not?
A. I am unable to tell you. I don't think so, because, before September 1941 we were very near--that is to say, we had not penetrated very deep into Russia yet, and for that reason, I don't think that SD groups had been formed yet.
Certainly, not with us in the unit, but later on I saw isolated SD men, not Einsatzgruppen, when we were deep in the Ukraine, the Caucasus, and near Rostow, and there it was that we had to go back to pick up the supplies, because the advance had gone on so quickly. I think also when I returned back to Germany I saw SD men in the stations which we passed, Rostow, for instance.
Q. And you testify that all of that happened after September 1941 and that you did not see SS men before September?
THE PRESIDENT: SD men.
MR. ROBBINS: SD men.
A. I couldn't say that. I did not say that I did not see anybody or that nobody existed. All I know is that prior to that time, whether it was 1 September or 1 October or a few days prior to that,-- I don't know, but all I know is that in the first period of the Russian campaign I saw nobody, because I did not have the opportunity, because I as a paymaster, was with the company all the time, and did not go back to the rear.
Q. It is true, is it not, that Otto went to Munich before he testified here to locate you for the purpose of confirming the testimony which he was going to give?
A. No, the matter with Otto was different. As I said, I ran into him in the street in Munich quite by chance, on some little side street.
Q. I just wanted to find out if you knew that Otto went to Munich to locate you.
A. No, I did not know that. He told me that later on.
Q. He told you that?
A. Yes.
Q. It is true, is it not, that you told both Otto and Sauer the things that you have testified here in Court before they testified here?
A. Yes, Otto and I were together before I was interrogated by the prosecution, and Otto told me on that occasion that a man called Jackal, who was then with the butchers' company, had already testified to everything I could, and that I could easily say anything, that everything was known of what had happened.
BY MR. WOLFE:
Q. Witness, you said just now that Fanslau had been in charge of the supply battalion?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. How did you know that?
A. Well, that was quite generally known in the company, as something quite obvious. From the moment the supply battalion was formed, which at that time consisted of three independent companies--the supply column the butchers company and the bakers company, although I think the butchers company was only a platton at the time--these units were first of all under the commanding officer of the company, and then immediately under the administrative officer of the division, who at that time was Fanslau. Later on, it was formed into what was known as the supply battalion, and then we heard that the officer in charge of the battalion and the administrative officer of the division would also be Fanslau.
Q. What was Tschentscher's position?
A. Tschentscher was in charge of the first company of the supply column.
Q. Did he have another position as well?
A. Not that I know of. He was the man in charge of the supply battalion, such as Obersturmbannfuehrer Braunagl was in charger of the bakers' column and somebody else in charge of the butchers' company.
Q. Was Tschentscher at any time deputy commander of the battalion?
A. I don't recall an order of this sort. Nothing was every made known about that. All I know was that Fanslau was frequently absent from the supply battalion. He went to the divisional staff or to another regiment in order to take care of some business, and during that absence, I believe, that Tschentscher looked after the official business of the supply column, but I did not have a chance to find out all about the details here.
All I know was that he looked after order and discipline in that period of time.
Q. You said you had a dispute with Tschentscher. You also said, I believe, that you avoided seeing Tschentscher as much as you could.
A. Yes.
Q. You also said that you were almost always in Tschentscher's vicinity. You were next to his office. You could observe everything he did?
A. Yes.
Q. How can you reconcile those statements?
A. Well, when I had this incident with Tschentscher, I knew that he was after me, that he didn't like me or did not like me any more, and so I avoided as much as I could being in his vicinity, but at the same time my work as the paymaster of the company, and the man who looked after the supplies for the company---It was simply obvious that I had to go there where my office was allocated. I was simply told, "You go in there with your stuff," and that was usually next to Tschentscher's office.
Q. Witness, you told us that you engaged about three Russian prisoners of war in the kitchen, if I have understood you correctly.
A. Yes. We had a few Russians with the company. What their legal status was, I don't know. We were simply told that they were prisoners of war. Perhaps they were deserters even. Perhaps they were even Russians who had simply joined the company and worked for the I-platoon, carried water for the company, and so on.
Q. You said also that one prisoner of war, a man called Assis, liked to pretend that he had just been shot and also liked having his leg pulled.
A. The prisoner of war Assis--at least I think he was a prisoner of war--was an extremely cheerful person.
Ha was a snail bloke, and he liked these things. He would start boxing when he ran into somebody. He tried somehow or other to call people's attention. And when one said, Assis go away, then he would say, shoot me.
Q. Tell me, who did the "shooting", as you called it?
A. Oh, that depended on who happened to be around and who talked to him.
Q. But anyway, they were SS men?
A. Yes, they were comrades of the company.
Q. Tell me, witness, did you any tire tell Sauer that Tschentscher had shot at your car and you had to jump off?
A. No. I don't understand your question even. I discussed this matter with Sauer, yes.
Q. Did you tell Sauer at any time that you could recall that a shot had hit your car and that you had had to jump off?
A. No. I did not tell Sauer that. On the contrary, I said to Sauer that this is not true.
MR. WOLFE: I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Any further examination by Defense Counsel?
Very well, the witness may be excused, and we'll resune at 1:45.
THE MARSHALL: The Tribunal will recess until 0145.
(The Tribunal recessed until 0145 hours.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The Tribunal reconvened at 1345 hours.)
TEE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
FELIX STEINER, a witness, took the stand and testify as follows:
THE PRESIDENT: Witness will you stand and raise your right hand and repeat after me?
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.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. von STAKELBERG:
Q Witness, I believe it will be better if you take your earphones off because I am speaking German.
A Yes, I can hear you very well.
Q Would you, please, tell the Tribunal your full name?
A My name is Felix Steiner. I was born on the 33rd of May, 1896. I am unmarried and I am of the Protestant religion.
Q What rank did you have in the Waffen-SS at the end?
A I was a General in the Waffen-SS and a Commanding General.
Q What position did you have at the beginning of the Russian campaign?
A I was a Major General and a divisional commander of the armored division, "Viking".
Q General, would you, please, speak a little more slowly and, above all, will you just wait one moment between your answer and my question so that the interpreters will be able to follow up along with us.
General, do you know the defendants Fanslau and Tschentscher?
A Yes, I know Fanslau and I also know Tschentscher.
Q What rank and what position did the defendant, Fanslau, occupy at the outbreak of the Russian campaign?
A Obersturmbanhfuehrer. Franslau was the divisional administrative officer of the division.
Q And the defendant Tschentscher?
A Sturmbannfuehrer Tschentscher was in charge of the food office.
Q You can certainly still recall the first few days of the advance?
A Yes.
Q When did the division "Viking" enter campaign operations?
A The division "Viking" was part of an armored corps whose task it was to advance as quickly as possible to the south of the big road to Kiew toward the Dnjepr. There it was to complete the encirclement of the Russian forces between the Dnjepr and the old Russian border.
Q You said that the division "Viking" was part of an armored corps?
A Yes.
Q Was this an SS armored corps?
A No. This was the 14th Armored Corps of the Wehrmacht.
Q Of the army?
A It was a combined corps, the 9th Armored Division and the SC Armored Division, "Viking".
Q Can you till approximately describe to us the route of the advance? When approximately did you enter combat?
A The break-through over the Bug River was carried out by infantry divisions while the armored forces were still on the other side of the Bug River waiting there in preparation for the attack. After the infantry units had carried out the break-through, in particular on the road towards Luck and near Lemberg, the armored units were brought into operation so that they could carry out the operation of engaging the enemy in combat. The armored units according to a certain distance of these break--through spots were engaged in combat with Russian armored reserves. Severe armored battles took place here near Luck, and other armored tank battles took place in the vicinity of Tarnopol. The 14th Armored Corps, first of all, was south of the road to Luck and it had an engagement there. There it came through Lemberg, Szlotzow, Tarnopol, Broskurow, Zhitomir, Biala Zierkew. It just kept its advance along this route, and the SS Armored infantry division "Viking" during the advance was the second division of the corps.
That is to say, at the head of the corps there was an armored division and behind it there followed, the SS armored infantry division "Viking".
After Biala Zierkow the division was subordinated to another armored corps. This was the Third Armored Corps. This Third Armored Corps then advanced directly to the Dnjepr and from the north to the south it advanced on Dnjepr-Propetrowsk where it established a bridgehead over the Dnjepr. Then the division "Viking" was located at this bridgehead together with other divisions. That is the route which the division "Viking" took along this combat sector.
Q The speed of the advance as I can assume it from your words apparently was very great.
A The speed of the advance was extremely great and the divisions were only halted whenever some engagement existed with the enemy.
Q Now what happened to the rear echelon troops? Did they always follow up directly behind you or was there, I might say, a certain vacuum?
A The units which followed behind us were the infantry units which had forced the crossing of the Bug River. Naturally they were on foot and they arrived much later at the frontal sector. However, these troop units were engaged farther to the south because on the north and flank of this entire big army the fast units were actually operating.
Q Well, you belonged to a combat unit and the infantry probably was also considered as being part of the combat units. When did the occupation army arrive?
A The occupation army came a considerable time later. Within four weeks the units had reached the Dnjepr. Between the Bug and the Dnjepr there is in my opinion, a distance of five hundred kilometers. That includes almost the entire Ukraine.
Q. General, now I must ask you something about the discipline of your units. We have heard testimony here about the fact that the spearheads of the advancing German units assembled Jews, tortured Jews and that they shot and murdered Jews.
Can you tell us anything about that?
A Mr. Attorney, that is entirely out of the question. This is entirely out of the question because of the speed of our advance which did not leave the troops the necessary time even in order to have itself supplied, and, secondly, it is completely impossible because of the strict orders which were issued and which were known to every man. It was the order that any excess toward any parts of the population would bring about court martial proceedings. The regimental commanders were precisely informed about this and it was their duty to strictly comply with these very clear and energetic orders down to the lowest unit, down to the last man under this command. This was done, and I have no doubt whatsoever that this order was complied with in the strictest sense.
Q Was not there an order by the OKW that excesses toward the civilian population in Russia would not be punished?
A There was such an order. I know of this order. This order was issued before the advance of the German forces into the Russian territory, and announced to the divisional commanders. This order, however, had an amendment. Excesses toward the civilian population are not allowed to be punished provided they do not constitute severe dangers for the discipline of the troops. Every responsible and reasonable troop commander, however, had to tell himself naturally that a simple enlisted man or an officer should never be allowed to commit arbitrary acts of any kind or to tolerate them. I consequently maintained the point of view that in every case discipline and order were threatened if any arbitrary acts were not to be punished. Consequently, I did not carry out this order. I reported my opinion to the Commanding General, with reference to the dangers with regard to discipline which this order might harbor and I acted accordingly toward my unit. I gave the appropriate orders.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Which Commanding General do you refer to the corps commander or the army commander?
THE WITNESS: The Commanding General of the 14th Armored Corps was the General of the Infantry, von Wiedersheim. The army commander was "Generaloberst" von Kleist.
BY DR. von STAKELBERG:
Q General, where was the supply battalion in the course of your advance?
A The supply battalion followed up behind the combat units. It was approximately the interval of a march with vehicles so that the troops could send supply vehicles to obtain the food and the distance could be covered within one single day. A separation of the supply units from the combat units was impossible because it was part of the supplying and actually of the life of the troops.
Q Therefore, you say that the supply battalion followed behind you and that they were always within reach of you?
A It had to be within a certain distance.
Q And how was the contact of the supply battalion toward the units to the rear?
A The supply goods were sent to the troops by means of the next higher unit, that is to say, the army. The corps itself did not have any bigger supply units. Therefore, from the rear echelon vehicle columns would go towards the front so that the supply goods could be furnished or the army would at a central place establish an army food depot.
Q Therefore, the supply battalion itself did not have any contact with the rear army echelons?
A The supply battalion did not have any business whatsoever in the rear area of the army, but it was in the area of operations.
Q: Evidence has been submitted here to the effect that a relatively short distance behind you in various locations, for instance in Zclozow and Tarnopol, executions of Jews took place to a large extent by so called Einsatzgruppen. The reason was given that these were reprisals because of the shootings of naturalized Poles and Ukraines by the Russians whenever they evacuated an area, Did you hear anything about that at the time?
A: The Einsatzgruppen were police authorities, according to what I heard here and what I heard in this trial last year, and I have heard several long statements about it. At the time in the armored units the Einsatzgruppen did not even make their appearance, because it was impossible, according to the state of affairs at the time that in a combat unit there should be a police force.
Q: At the time did you obtain any knowledge about these shootings of Jews?
A: When we marched through Tarnopol I heard by way of rumor that the Ukrainian autnome forces had committed excesses. As I fundamentally did not like these things, and here again I can remember one Incident which happened during the Polish campaign -- here within an armored division an individual excess had taken place and in this case in the sharpest possible manner I publically intervened so that this individual was punished much more severely than was usual. At the time he received 15 years in jail. In a larger circle it was stated that a much more severe punishment should be meted out here. I have therefore, condemned such excesses to the utmost and when I heard this rumor, I immediately had an investigation started as to whether any man in my unit had even been in the vicinity of the place where these excesses took place.
I also received the report that nobody of the unit which could be considered at all had been located in the City of Tarnopol because this combat unit was at the main protective line outside of the city and they had advanced towards the front and consequently they had not even entered the city.
Q: How long did you stay at Tarnopol with your unit?
A: One day and a half.
Q: One day and a half or half a day?
A: One half a day. The troops move in directly behind the armored division which had already passed through Tarnopol. This was only a very small fraction of my division. It was only one battalion. This battalion belonged to the protective line at the southeastern edge of Tarnopol.
Q: General, you have just told us about several excesses which were severly punished during the campaign in Poland. Do you know of any excesses within your own units?
A: Yes, naturally, excesses occurred. In a unit of 20,000 men it can hardly be avoided even if the sharpest orders are issued.
Q: Did you Intervene against such excess?
A: Yes, in the most rigid manner which was prescribed by law.
Q: Can you recall any individual cases?
A: Yes, I believe I can give you some individual cases. I can recall, for example, three cases, typical cases, which have remained in my memory. In one case an excess had occurred. It was committed by a non-commissioned officer of the 5th artillery Regiment. He had committed this excess toward a Russian peasant.
A dispute arose at a road and some struggle broke out there. They beat each other up and the peasant then was beaten up so severely by the soldier that he died. I then told the Regimental Commander that fundamentally in such a case I demanded the severest penalty which was prescribed by law. I told him that I considered this necessary in this case. The Regimental Commander then gave me some long statements about the personality of the person who had perpetrated the deed and he tried to excuse him for having committed this deed. However, I refuted his point of view. The man afterwards was tried by a court-martial and a severe penalty was imposed on him. I want to give you another case. A deserter who was located between Dnjeprepetrowsk and the Mios, in my opinion, in the vicinity of Dnjepropetrowsk and Pawlograd and who had stayed there for many months, was caught there, together with another man, after he had terrorized the population in an almost Incredible manner. He had plundered them out completely, looted them. When this man was caught in February, I believe at the Mios, he was tried by court-martial and he was given 15 to 20 years in jail. This was a particularly significant and most severe case. It was extremely embarrassing to me. This case had already been dealt with by court-martial in Dnjepropetrowsk before and here one of the perpetrators of the deed was sentenced to death.
Q: Can the man who was sentenced in February 1942, -could the name of this deserter have been Otto?
A: It is extremely difficult for me to give you one of the names of 20,000 people today. I don't know that. In any case, this was the only instance of the kind in the division. It was the only case when in that winter a death penalty was requested and recommended by the court-martial board, which, of course, remained so precisely in my memory.
Q: Do you know of any excesses in the supply battalion which had been committed by an Oberscharfuehrer Sirt at Zhitomir?
A: No.
Q: Do you know whether the supply battalion employed Jews?
A: I consider that to be completely impossible.
Q: And why?
A: This supply battalion was located -- it was constantly on the move and it followed the troops which were rapidly advancing at the same speed. This unit did not have any more extended stays which would have been the prerequisites for employment of any native of any localities. This did not occur at all, unless it happened when the division was engaged in the severe fighting at Taraschka. This lasted for approximately one week. However, for a supply unit it was impossible to stay at any one locality for any long period of time. In my opinion, the unit was excellently equipped with machinery and therefore it did not even need any employees to work for it.
Q: It has also been stated here that immediately after the first combat unit entered Tarnopol, posters were hung up which told the Jews to report and to turn in their valuables.
A: The combat unit did not have any orders of that kind. They did not have any of such tasks or tasks of a similar nature. I have not seen anything of that sort. Furthermore, it is completely out of the question that the combat units should have occupied themselves with anything of a local nature.
The combat units were either engaged in combat or they were on the route, were marching along. One must not forget that this advance through the Ukraine occurred at an extraordinarily quick rate of speed and that the decision was dependent on the fact that the fast units should come in touch with the rear of the enemy.
Q: It is well known that later on -- I don't know when, that then Jews had to wear a certain star or a certain arm band, or something of that nature. Was this ordered by your troops?
A: It is completely out of the question. The combat troops, as I have already said before, were engaged in a combat and they were confronted by the enemy with whom they were in full contact during the battle. These combat units did not have any task whatsoever to fulfill in the rear. These units did not have any territory towards the rear either where they could have taken such a measure. Furthermore, I think it is very poor taste to identify Jews in any particular manner, which is something which I told my officers and men already in 1937 and 1938.
Q: And you can prove that, you said?
A: Yes, certainly, I can prove that through witnesses. That is an opinion which fundamentally was shared by the officers.
Q: It has further been stated here that in the battle against the partisans in the East, murders and atrocities had also occurred at that time. Was there any battle carried on against partisans?
A: In the entire Ukraine up to the year 1942, in the spring of that year, in my opinion, there was no struggle against the partisans at all.