For example, in a conference with reference to the affairs of OSTI held on February 13, 1943 (Ex.61), at which Pohl, Loerner, Volk and Hohberg were present, a series of questions was propounded which Loerner helped answer. The questions were preceded by the statement that the Jewish manpower in the Government General was to be used for armament production. Then the question is asked:
"bust this mandate be regarded primarily from a policitalpolice or from an economical point of view?"
Other questions follow:
"How many Jews live in the Government-General, how are they split up as to sex and professional groups?"
"Who can give information a bout the nature, extent and location of the existing Jewish movable property?"
"Who is the possessor of the Jewish movable property?"
"How is the Jewish property to be taken over? Under a trusteeship or directly?"
"When are the Jewish enterprises not under the charge of the SS to be taken over, immediately or gradually?"
"Are concentration camps to be established according to the German pattern, which assigns the prisoners to the OSTI and other trustworthy firms?"
These questions were either answered or by-passed at the conference, but the significant point is that Loerner participated in the discussion and know of the underlying program of OSTI to fully utilise Jewish slave labor in its enterprises. When it was determined to liquidate OSTI in March 1944 because of the withdrawal of its labor supply, Loerner attended the final meeting and signed the minutes with Pohl.
A report by Pohl, dated December 7, 1943 (Ex. 63), of a conference at which Loerner was present, shows that it was agreed that 10 labor camps in the Lublin district should be taken over by the WVHA as branch concentration camps, as a result of which "the inmates of these labor camps will become concentration camp prisoners." It was further agreed that all other labor camps in the Government General should be taken over by WVHA "in the interest of a general clearing up."
As a further measure of control, it was agreed that the police guards acting in the labor camps should be subordinated to the WVHA and taken over by that office "as far as they are members or possible candidates for the SS."
A significant document (Ex. 30) is found in the report of Loerner and others to Pohl, dated January 9, 1942, concerning the proposed acquisition of property for the enlargement of the concentration camp Stutthoff. Pohl had collaborated with others in a detailed study of the proposed plan, which contemplated the housing of "25,000 prisoners, including prisoners of war." Although this plan was never consummated, Loerner participated in it up to the time of its abandonment. A few days later, Maurer reported to Loerner that Pohl had made him responsible for concluding the details and outlined at length his plans for acquiring the property for the concentration camp. If Loerner was only a straw man or a figurehead, it is difficult to understand why Maurer felt impelled to report to him.
Exhibit 414 discloses that on March 3, 1944, Loerner participated in a conference for the preparation of a new wage scale for prisoners, at which it was decided that their wages be fixed at about 75% of the wages paid in private industry. It will be observed again that this has no reference to wages to be paid the workers but only to the amounts to be paid by the industries to the concentration camps. Loerner participated in the conference to the extent of pointing out that it might be advisable to inquire whether these rates could be paid by the individual plants without loss and suggested that the plant cost sheets be checked.
That Loerner was not regarded as insignificant by Pohl is evidenced by Pohl's letter (Ex. 404) directing that all matters of importance concerning DWB should go to Loerner for his comment and signature before being sent to Pohl and directing Loerner to keep informed on all important developments in the DWB industries. The fact that this order was rescinded a short time later is of no consequence.
The exhibit indicates that when Pohl wrote it he considered Loerner a responsible person of considerable consequence in the WVHA organization, especially with reference to the W enterprises.
In view of all this proof, Loerner's claim that he was a mere figurehead in the field of the concentration camps and the enterprises which were dependent upon them, falls flat. Whether or not he know of the mistreatment and extermination of the prisoners has not been conclusively proved, although there is substantial ground for suspecting that he could not have avoided knowing it. It is undoubtedly true that he knew of the Reich policy of furnishing slave labor from the concentration camps to the vast area of industrial enterprises which were, at least in part, under Loerner's supervision. When Berger, of Office D IV, reported to Loerner on August 15, 1944 (Ex. 73), that there were then over 500,000 prisoners in concentration camps and that over 600,000 more were expected immediately, Loerner must have know, and the Tribunal finds that he did know, that these inmates were slaves who had been snatched from their homelands and herded into concentration camps to further the German war effort. Loerner must have gleaned some knowledge from the list of expected new arrivals which Berger furnished him, as follows:
"1) from the Hungary Program (Jewish Campaign) 90,000
2) from Litzmannstadt (Police prison and Ghetto) 60,000
3) Roles from the General Government 15,000
4) Convicts from the Eastern Territories 10,000
5) former Polish officers 17,000
6) from Warsaw (Roles) 400,000
7) current arrivals from France approximately 15,000 to 20,000 612,000" Assuming that mere knowledge is not sufficient to inculpate Loerner, it nevertheless appears conclusively that, in addition to knowing of the slave labor program, he helped administer it in an active and responsible fashion.
His connection with the program was not remote or intangible; it was direct and vital. The fact that he knew that prisoners of war were also being enslaved and compelled to perform labor on war munitions in violation of the Hague and Geneva Conventions, only adds to his guilt.
As an old veteran of World War I, he more than others, should have realized that there are certain rules of warfare which should be observed by all civilized nations and that one of the foremost of these rules was being violated under his very nose and with his help and connivance.
Supply of Food and Clothing to Concentration Camps The first duty which a slave owner owes to his serfs is to feed, shelter and clothe them properly.
His own self-interest in maintaining their working capacity would seem to dictate no less. The story of the starvation and suffering of the concentration camp inmates, of their being beaten and abused and worked to death, is an old one and it would be idle to repeat it here. That they were under-fed and illclothed has been repeatedly proved before these Tribunals. The immediate question confronting this Tribunal is whether or not Loerner was responsible for these appalling conditions. It is to be observed that the supplying of concentration camp inmates was not his only duty. In addition he was required to supply the garrisons, guards and other stationary units of the Waffen-SS. It is obvious, we think, that no one had the right to provide for one group at the expense of the other, especially when such deprivation was carried to the extent of freezing and starvation. The Tribunal is well aware of the fact that the blockade of Germany and the military reverses which followed the surrender of Stalingrad made the problem of procurement of food and clothing an increasingly acute one, but we are also aware that even before Stalingrad it was the policy of the Reich to feed and clothe concentration camp inmates only to an extent which would permit them to keep on working.
WVHA was the top agency for the administration of the concentration camps and the task of administration was a comprehensive one. If WVHA was concerned with the last details of prisoners' wages, production and allocation, it was also concerned with furnishing food and clothing for prisoners, and this obligation carried down to the final step of distribution - actually seeing to it that the prisoners got the necessary supplies.
The duty of administration goes that far. Clothing which is ordered or requisitioned but not delivered does not keep men from freezing. Loerner's office was not charged with labor allocation; but that did not prevent his going to Dachau in April 1941 to address a conference of labor allocation officers. In August 1944, Loerner was advised by Berger that with an immediate prospective camp population of over a million, he did not have sufficient clothing to supply their needs, in spite of having seized large amounts of civilian clothing in Hungary and Poland. Loerner was more than a mere purchasing agent or requisition clerk. He was a top-level administrative officer in charge of clothing supply, with all that that term implies. Pohl in an affidavit filed in the case (Ex. 523) states:
"It was the responsibility of Loerner to assure the provision of clothing to the concentration camp inmates."
Fanslau corroborates this statement in his affidavit (Ex. 6):
"Georg Loerner was in the last resort responsible for the procurement of clothing for the prisoners."
Loerner's defense is the typical one: "That was the duty of somebody else." He testified that all he could do was to receive the requisitions for clothing from Amtsgruppe D and process them by sending them to the SS clothing factories at Dachau. But the obligation of his responsible office did not end there. The industries in which he was so active as incorporator, director and supervisor and to which he gave so much time and effort were the principal users of inmate labor. Both as an employer and as a supply officer it was his duty to see to it that the inmates were supplied with adequate clothing. It is not sufficient for him to say, "Well, I've ordered clothing. That's all I'm supposed to do." The lives of thousands of men depended on his doing more than that.
Action Reinhardt The evidence concerning Loerner's connection with Action Rein hardt is not sufficient to convict him on this specification.
There is some proof from which it may be reasonable inferred that he had knowledge of property being confiscated from Jews, but there is nothing which shows with the requisite degree of certainty that he knew that such property had been taken from Jews who had been killed in concentration camps or in pursuance of the extermination policy. Pohl stated in an affidavit that Loerner had prepared for his signature a "report on the realization of textile salvage from the Jewish resettlement" (Ex. 479). An order from Pohl (Ex. 481), which was distributed to Amtsgruppe B among a number of others, refers to "Administration of Jewish Property" and has a file note reading. "Reinhardt Prisoners Journal," but the order refers only to auditing procedure. There are other bits of proof on this subject, but in the aggregate it is insufficient to justify a determination beyond a reasonable doubt that Loerner took a consenting part in or was actually connected with the action itself.
On the grounds herein indicated and for the reasons specified, the Tribunal finds the defendant Georg Loerner guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity, as charged in Counts II and III of the Indictment.
The Tribunal finds that the defendant Georg Loerner was a member of a criminal organization, that is, the SS, under the conditions defined by the judgment of the International Military Tribunal, and is therefore guilty under Count IV of the Indictment.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will recess until 13:30 this afternoon.
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 3 November 1947).
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom please take your seats. The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: Judge Phillips will continue the reading of the judgment.
ERWIN TSCHENTSCHER Tschentscher was born in Berlin on February 11, 1903.
He attended public and higher schools in Berlin and finished his educational career in 1919. He was a professional soldier, having joined the Allgemeine SS as a private on May 1, 1930, with the SS No. 2447. He joined the Waffen-SS at the beginning of the war on October 1, 1939 with the rank of Standartenfuehrer. He joined the NSDAP on December 1, 1928 with the party No. 102547. After completing a number of assignments with the SS on November 30, 1940, he was transferred to the SS Viking Division, which was then being activated. He was placed in command of the Economic Battalion, consisting of the Supply Office and the Bakers and Butchers Companies, and was directly subordinate to the defendant Fanslau. During the period of activation and training of this unit it was a part of his duties to give lectures to the troops. Among other topics discussed in these lectures. Tschentscher explained the ideology of the SS on the Jewish question, racial theories, the SS marriage program and other military and political subjects. He stated in these lectures that "the Jews were a foreign body within the community of the German people and that the solution of the Jewish question was to be that the Jews should disappear from Germany should permanently settle in other countries or be placed in concentration camps and places like that." Thus, it may be seen that he was thoroughly familiar with the aims of the SS and was willingly participating in planning and carrying out its program.
About the middle of June 1941, the Division having completed its period of training and activation, moved into the area of Lublin in Poland. Tschentscher actively engaged in the first Russian campaign, from about the first of July until the 31st of December 1941, when he was transferred to Obersalzberg.
During this campaign, he was batallion commander of the supply column, as wall as company commander, and directly subordinate to the defendant Fanslau. While his command was in the area of Eastern Poland and in the Ukraine, thousands of Jewish civilians and other non-combatants were ruthlessly murdered and exterminated. There is evidence to the effect that members of Tschentscher's command engaged in this program, together with Einsatzkommandos Units. These murders and atrocities took place particularly in the vicinity of the Ukraine. There is hearsay evidence that Tschentscher personally participated in these crimes, but there is no direct evidence to this effect. There is some evidence that he had constructive knowledge of the participation of members of his command, but absolutely no evidence that he had actual knowledge of such facts. He emphatically denies participation in and all knowledge of these matters.
The law of war imposes on a military officer in a position of command an affirmative duty to take such steps as are within his power and appropriate to the circumstances to control those under his command for the prevention of acts which are violations of the law of war. The Supreme Court of the United States pointed out in a decision entitled "Application of Yamashita", 66 Supreme Court 340-347, the following:
"It is evident that the conduct of military operations by troops whose excesses are unrestrained by the orders or efforts of their commander would almost certainly result in violations which it is the purpose of the law of war to prevent. Its purpose to protect civilian populations and prisoners of war from brutality would largely be defeated if the commander of an invading army could with impunity neglect to take reasonable measures for their protection. Hence the law of war presupposes that its violation is to be avoided through the control of the operations of war by commanders who are to some extant responsible for their subordinates." The reason for the rule is plain and understandable, but what has been said in this decision does not apply to the defendant Tschentscher.
Conceding the evidence of the prosecution to be true as to the participation of subordinates under his command, such participation by them was not of sufficient magnitude or duration to constitute notice to the defendant, and thus give him an opportunity to control their actions. Therefore, the Tribunal finds and adjudges that the defendant Tschentscher is not guilty of participating in the murders and atrocities committed in the Russian campaign as alleged by the prosecution.
Tschentscher's Activities in the WVHA On October 1, 1943, the defendant was transferred to the WVHA and was appointed Chief of Amt B-I of Amtsgruppe B; shortly thereafter he was appointed deputy to Georg Loerner, Chief of Amtsgruppe B. He stated that his duties and responsibilities as Chief of Amt B-I consisted of the following:
all matters pertaining to food concerning the Waffen-SS and the police at home, roughly for about 1,000,000 men. His duties also comprised the negotiations with the Army Administrative Office, in order to fix the food rations for the troops. His office also worked on the planning and the actual delivery of the food, the earmarking of the rations, and their supply to thirty troop storage plants which were scattered over the Reich. His task was to have the food ready so that it could be collected by the troops. About twenty to thirty thousand concentration camp guards were fed by his office. This particular aspect of his feeding program was done by the troop camp stores in the area where the concentration camps were located. He stated that his office did not have anything to do with feeding and supplying food for concentration camp inmates.
It may be seen from his statements that the only contact his office had with concentration camps was the furnishing of food for the concentration camp guards. He further stated that Burger, Chief of Office D-IV came to see him three or four times for the purpose of securing certain food for concentration camps. Burger stated that he wanted to have special diet furnished for sick inmates, such as fruit, canned vegetables, and wine, in small quantities which he could not otherwise obtain.
He stated that he furnished these articles to Burger but realized at the time that he was exceeding his authority. (R. 3169) The defendant stated that he visited the concentration camps in a few cases.
On one occasion, in 1941, he visited concentration camp Dachau. While there he participated in an inspection of the actual concentration camp, and testified that the barracks were extremely clean and quite fit for human habitation. The inmates kitchen, the hospital, the dental station, were very modern and other installations , such as the bakery shop, the carpenter shop, and work shops, were all in excellent condition. The inspection lasted about an hour and a half, and was conducted by five or six SS leaders.
Towards the end of 1944 he visited Buchenwald concentration camp for the purpose of obtaining a storage room for food. He saw some inmates marching past, but saw nothing that would attract attention.
In November 1943, in company with Kammler, Chief of Amtsgruppe C, he made an inspection of concentration camp Dora, where two construction places were visited. Two large tunnels about 3 kilometers long had been built into the mountain. During these inspections, Pister, Commander of Buchenwald, Foerschener, the Commander of Dora, Barnewald, the half administrative officer, and Dr. Schiedlausky, the camp physician of Buchenwald, were present. Tschentscher described the conditions as follows: clothing was insufficient, especially for cold weather, barracks were inadequate, the air was very bad from lack of ventilation. The inmates, approximately 1500 to 2000, were housed in the shafts of tunnels which were eight to twelve motors high. The inmates slept on bunks, four on top of each other, and had insufficient covers. The lighting system was extremely bad and caused the inmates to appear to have dust from the stones covering their faces. The food was insufficient for the work to be performed. Medical care was also insufficient, as the camp did not have its own physician and the personnel consisted of inmates who were only medical assistants. A great many of the inmates were reported sick, and on that day sick call amounted to forty inmates.
He further stated that deaths did not occur in the beginning, but later he heard that inmates had died probably as a result of exhaustion and colds. He stated that he did not need any confirmation of this fact when he saw the people, because when he saw them it was rather unnerving. He further concluded that when an epidemic occurred a catastrophe might follow because of the low resistance of the inmates. The defendant stated that when he saw these conditions his only thought was to help them as quickly as possible. On the following morning he made another short inspection and what he observed only confirmed his conclusions. He returned to Berlin and gave immediate instructions to the various depots to turn over food from the storage warehouses. He stated that he also contacted Office B -II for clothing, and the Reich physician SS for medical supplies. He urgently requested that a physician be assigned and that medical personnel of the SS be furnished. He telephoned the main medical depot at Berlin, asking them to allocate medicine and disinfectants for the camp. He stated that he received the cooperation which he desired from all of these agencies, and that from his depots he furnished twenty to thirty tons of food, - flour, peas, beans, canned meat, oils, fats, dehydrated fruits and rice, supplementing regular rations. In addition, he furnished post exchange items, rum and tea, as well as cigarettes and toilet articles. He then made the following significant statement:
"It was our specific intention that these people be able to recover somewhat so that they would regain a better physical condition and be able to perform their work better."
He stated that he made a written report to the defendant Pohl concerning this inspection, together with his recommendations.
The defendant admitted that approximately three or four weeks after the Dora inspection he was again requested to send additional food, which he did. He stated that upon Kammler's request he also sent food to a camp near Linz.
The defendant was asked:
Question: "Did your department maintain and supervise training kitchens at Oranienburg, Dachau, and Beneschau?
Answer: "We had three training kitchens, one at Dachau, one at Oranienburg, and a third one located at Beneschau, near Prague. These three training kitchens were also subordinated to me. I was the immediate superior; and I visited these three kitchens. I supervised and directed the training curriculum there."
The courses at these training kitchens included instructions as to how not to prepare food.
He testified that Office B-I was dissolved in April 1945, owing to the condition of the war. When asked if he participated in the destruction of records of Amt B-I, he answered:
"Before we left Berlin we destroyed superfluous files, which was a routine matter and an order. The remaining files we took with us to the mountains. We burned them there."
He stated that the records were destroyed for the purpose of keeping them from falling in the hands of the enemy. He denied any knowledge of prisoners of war and nationals of other countries being confined in the concentration camps. He denied all knowledge of the "Reinhardt Action", and the program for the extermination of the Jews, of the medical experiments which were conducted in the concentration camps, of the Euthenasia Program, and of inhumane treatment and atrocities. He offered documents and the testimony of the witnesses Walter Hoyer and Arnold Ertel in corroboration of his contentions.
The Tribunal concludes that the defendant Tschentscher was not a mere employee of the WVHA, but held a responsible and authoritative position in this organization. He was Chief of Amt-B-I, and in this position had large tasks in the procurement and allocation of food. Conceding that he was not directly responsible for furnishing food to the inmates of concentration camps, he was responsible for furnishing the food to those charged with guarding these unfortunate people. According to his own admissions, on a number of occasions he furnished food to the inmates when requested to do so by those in authority. He contends, however, that he was not competent for this task and only furnished this food from a humanitarian motive. Nevertheless, from his own testimony we conclude that he had other motives as well, when he stated:
"It was our specific intention that these people be able to recover somewhat so that they would regain a better physical condition and be able to perform their work better."
These people included slave laborers from occupied territories and prisoners of war.
The Tribunal is fully convinced that he knew of the desperate condition of the inmates, under what conditions they were forced to work, the insufficiency of their food and clothing, the malnutrition and exhaustion that ensued, and that thousands of deaths resulted from such treatment. His many visits to the various concentration camps gave to him a full insight into these matters.
The Tribunal finds without hesitation that Tschentscher was thoroughly familiar with the slave labor program in the concentration camps, and took an important part in promoting and administering it. The successful operation of the concentration camps required the coordination and cooperation of experts, as well as materials, and Tschentscher, as Chief of Amt B-I, and deputy to Georg Loerner, contributed his share in the allocation of food and clothing.
The Tribunal finds and adjudges the evidence, and beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant Tschentscher is guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity, as charged in Counts II and III of the indictment.
The Tribunal finds and adjudges from the evidence, and beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant Tschentscher was a member of a criminal organization, that is, the SS, under the conditions defined by the judgment of the International Military Tribunal, and is therefore guilty under Count IV of the indictment.
RUDOLF SCHEIDE The defendant Rudolf Scheide was born on the 24th day of December 1908 in Wolfenbuettel.
He attended elementary schools until 1922; from 1926 to 1927 he served one year as an agricultural laborer near Brunswick, and during 1928 and 1929 he was with the voluntary labor service working on private estates. From 1929 to 1930 he did odd jobs for friends near his home, and from 1930 to 1933 he worked in the sugar factories in Schladen, and other places. He joined the NSDAP in 1929, with the Party Number of 93508. He was a member of the SS from 1930 until the end of the War, and had the SS-number 2351. His first rank in the General SS was SS-man, and last rank in the SS was Standartenfuehrer (Colonel). He commanded a motorized company from 1938 until October 1, 1942. At that time his motorized organization became a division, and the defendant became the Division Technical Officer. On October 1, 1942, he was transferred to the Economic and Administrative Main Office, WVHA. When he joined the WVHA on October 1, 1942, he became the Chief of Amt B-V as a technical expert in the field of motor transportation. In the defendant's own affidavit, (Ex. 10), he outlined in detail his duties as Office Chief of Amt B-V of the WVHA. All Motor Transport technical officers were in principle subordinate to the Operational Main Office, formerly the Command HQ of the Waffen-SS. Pohl informed him that Georg Loerner was his chief, and he thereupon reported to Loerner. As Chief of Amt B-V of the WVHA, he took over the whole of the transportation of the WVHA, with the exception of the transports of human beings, which were taken over by D-1. When he came to the WVHA he was commissioned by Gruppenfuehrer Loerner to bring all motor vehicles, weapons and railroad transports under this office, so that everyone who had anything to do with them or with fuel, oils, tires, etc.
, was to report to him or to his main office. He was the representative of the Operational Main Office in the WVHA and was in charge of transportation for all the Amtsgruppen. Amtsgruppe A needed no transport space. Amtsgruppe B required transport space continually for forwarding goods to supply and equip the Waffen-SS. Amtsgruppe C had its own quota of motor vehicles from the Operational Main Office, and had the vehicles of the private building firms put at its disposal. Amtsgruppe D constantly ordered motor vehicles from his office, and he passed on the orders to the Operational Main Office. These demands mostly came from Gluecks. He also dealt with the demands for arms and ammunition for the concentration camp guards and passed them on to the Operational Main Office, which in turn gave instructions to the ordnance depot of the Waffen-SS in Oranienburg, where Amtsgruppe D collected these weapons. He never assigned the vehicles for the concentration camps to the camps themselves, but to Schulz who then assigned them to the concentration camps. If concentration camp inmates were shipped in railroad trucks, the preparations were made by the staff of Amtsgruppe D.
The prosecution contends that by virtue of the high office which the defendant held in the WVHA, he was required to furnish the necessary transportation for all the Amtsgruppen of the WVHA, including Amtsgruppe D, which had charge of maintenance and control of the concentration camps.
The prosecution further contends that according to the large field of tasks carried out by the defendant in connection with the various offices and Amtsgruppen of the WVHA, he gained knowledge of how the concentration camps were operated, how the prisoners were treated, who they were, and what happened to them; that the defendant Scheide further knew that the concentration camps engaged in the slave labor program, and that he furnished transportation in this program with knowledge of its use.
The prosecution further contends that the defendant Scheide knew of the mass extermination program carried out by the concentration camps under Amtsgruppe D, and that he furnished Amtsgruppe D in this program with transportation, spare parts, tires, gasoline, and other necessary commodities for carrying out this program.
The defendant Scheide contends that he had no knowledge of any of the activities and programs of the concentration camps, and that there is no evidence other than his own affidavit and his own testimony and that of other defendants as to his duties, responsibilities and activities as Chief of Amt B-V of the WVHA. He further contends that the prosecution has not submitted a single document against the defendant which mentions his name and that no prosecution witness has testified to any facts against the defendant. He further contends that the prosecution has submitted no evidence which would tend to show his individual guilt of the charges contained in Counts II and III of the indictment.
The defendant further contends that the only evidence offered against him is contained in the organizational charts of the WVHA, which shows that he was Chief of Amt-B-V of the WVHA.
CONCLUSION After weighing all the evidence in the case, and bearing in mind the presumption of innocence of the defendant, and the burden of proof on the part of the prosecution, the Tribunal must agree with the contentions of the defendant.
If the Tribunal were to convict the defendant on the charges contained in Counts II and III of the indictment, the only evidence on the part of the prosecution to sustain such conviction would be the organizational charts of the WVHA, which show (and the defendant admits it) that he was the Chief of Amt B-V. All of the evidence as to the duties performed by the defendant in this capacity, the responsibilities assumed by him, the connections and influence that he had with other Amtsgruppen, and the knowledge that he had, if any, as to the activities and duties of the other Amtsgruppen, was furnished solely by the defendant himself and other defendants, who testified in corroboration of the defendant.
Therefore, the Tribunal finds the defendant Rudolf Scheide not guilty of the charges contained in Counts II and III of the indictment.
The defendant admits that he joined the NSDAP in 1928, and that he was a member of the SS from 1930 until the end of the war. In regard to membership in certain organizations declared criminal by the International Military Tribunal, the following was said:
......"A criminal organization is analogous to a criminal conspiracy in that the essence of both is cooperation for criminal purposes. There must be a group bound together and organized for a common purpose. The group must be formed or used in connection with the commission of crimes denounced by the Charter. Since the declaration with respect to the organizations and groups will, as has been pointed out, fix the criminality of its members, that definition should exclude persons who had no knowledge of the criminal purposes or acts of the organization and those who were drafted by the State for membership, unless they were personally implicated in the commission of acts declared criminal by Article 6 of the Charter as members of the organization. Membership alone is not enough to come within the scope of these declarations."
The defendant admits membership in the SS, an organization declared to be criminal by the Judgment of the International Military Tribunal, but the prosecution has offered no evidence that the defendant had knowledge of the criminal activities of the SS, or that he remained in said organization after September 1939 with such knowledge, or that he engaged in criminal activities while a member of such organization.
Therefore, the Tribunal finds and adjudges that the defendant Rudolf Scheide is not guilty as charged in Count IV of the indictment, and directs that he be released from custody under the indictment when this Tribunal presently adjourns.
MAX KIEFER The defendant Max Kiefer was born on the 15th day of September, 1889 in Kampen on the lower Rhine.
He graduated from public schools in 1909. Thereafter he studied architecture at Munich and Aachen. During the time that he was engaged in his studies of architecture, a certain amount of his time was consumed with construction jobs of the Reich Railway Inspectorate, as well as taking study trips to Italy, France, Holland and Belgium. In the year 1914 he completed his studies in architecture, was graduated and soon thereafter became City Architect for the City of Aachen.
During World War I, the defendant Kiefer was drafted into military service and served for the entire period of War, being discharged with the rank of Lieutenant in the reserve. After the first world war the defendant pusued his career as an architect, working for the government and latter as a private architect, specializing in city planning and housing projects. In 1936 he accepted a position with the Reich Air Ministry as Building Councilor in the Department of Dwellings and Settlements. In this position his immediate superior was Kammler, who was later Chief of Amtsgruppe C of the WVHA. The defendant joined the Allgemeine-SS in July 1933 and the NSDAP in May 1937. When he was called up for military service in August 1941, Kammler intervened in his behalf and was Court No. II, Case No. IV.
successful in having him assigned to the Waffen SS. Later, he was assigned to the Building Section of the Budget and Buildings Office of the WVHA. In February 1942, he was appointed Chief of Office C-II of the WVHA and remained as the Chief of this Office until the close of the War.
In order to properly carry out and maintain the various functions of the WVHA, specialists were required for every field. The defendant Kiefer was a specialist in architecture and his services were in great demand by the WVHA. With his great experience cornering a long period of time as a master planner and architect, the Tribunal can easily understand why the defendant Pohl, as Chief of the WVHA, appointed him Chief of Amt C-II, and assigned to him duties which included the planning, maintenance and construction of concentration camps in the Reich and in occupied territories. Amtsgruppe C was the supreme building office of the Waffen-SS, and Office C-II was concerned primarily with Special Construction Tasks. The defendant, as Chief of Office C-II, was also head of the Main Department in charge of general affairs of the Building Inspectorate. Subordinate offices to Office C-II, which were also subordinate to the defendant Kiefer, were as follows:
1. C II/1, Food and Clothing Installations 2. C II/2, Arms, Ammunition and Signalling Installations 3. C II/3, Hospitals and Ambulances 4. C II/4, Industrial Buildings 5. C II/5, Accommodations Center Bureau 6. C II/6, Agriculture and Special Buildings Despite the fact that none of the other offices within Amtsgruppe C was charged with special construction tasks or any of the constructions outlined above, the defendant contends that these office titles were only for organizational purposes and not actually concerned with building projects; the projects with which they were concerned were far removed from the realm of construction of concentration camp installations but were for humanitarian objectives.
The defendant further contends that Office C II/2 was concerned solely with the coordination of such construction with local zoning and building regulations. He further contends that his office only worked out general basic plans for hospitals and ambulances, and denies that he ever participated in the planning of construction of any hospitals or other buildings, or any concentration camps or concentration camp installations.
The Tribunal does not agree with such contentions. The evidence clearly shows that concentration camp hospitals were constructed, and that plans and drawings for such construction were prepared in the Office C-II. The prosecution offered in evidence Exhibit 662, which was a drawing and plan for a hospital and sick bay for inmates of Auschwitz Concentration Camp. This drawing and plan was signed by the defendant himself. The prosecution also offered in evidence Exhibit 663, which was a drawing and plan signed by the defendant himself for a sick bay for the troops at Auschwitz Concentration Camp. If the defendant and his office was competent to draft and approve such drawings and plans for such installations, the Tribunal may reasonably find that all other installations necessary for the maintenance and construction of concentration camps also emanated from this office. Since the defendant is an expert architect, the Tribunal concludes that the defendant not only planned the construction of such projects at Auschwitz, out that he supervised the progress of construction as any architect would do.
The concentration camps under Amtsgruppe D of the WVHA operated and maintained gas chambers and crematoria in which thousands of people were exterminated and cremated.