A. Yes, that is on page 2 of the text in the document; it stops just here, and it goes on with the second page. That is the second part of the report.
Q. Well, I assume that you had been looking at the entire document, and have given us your observation of that document?
A. Yes.
Q. And we assume from what you had said that because it appeared in the report the report the executions were justified, and you gave quite a lay reason why you thought they were justified. Now I ask you, would it be justifiable to shoot 14 Jews only because it was assumed or was of purported that they had spread Communistic propaganda?
A. In the report it is: "Those who are proved guilty after they had been suspected." They proved to be guilty; it is not Just assumed, and not only because they belonged to a race.
Q. I, of course, do not nave the German text before me, and even if I did, I would not understand it. I would like to have you read from the German, and that is will be interpreted for us that sentence which begins, "The same day 22 persons, among them," and so on. Please read that sentence as you find it there. Read it slowly.
A. "On the same day in Kauen 22 persons of these 14 Jews who purportedly had spread Communistic propaganda very recently."
Q. Yes.
A. "Were shot in Kauen."
Q. Yes, the translation as it came to us now agrees with the translation of the document as it appears in the book.
These 14 Jews were only suspected of having spread this Communist propaganda, and it was assumed, it Was said, that they had spread it. There is no indication in the report that it was established and proved that they had spread the Communistic propaganda?
DR. SCHWARZ: Mr. President, Your Honor, I beg your pardon - -
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
DR. SCHWARZ: I must agree here with the defendant that the term "purportedly", according to German usage, expresses enough for the authorities to carry out these executions.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Schwarz, it all depends upon the translation of the word "purportedly." The work "purportedly' in English is a long distance from the word "To prove". Now I don't know how many kilometers it is away in Germany, but it is many miles away in English.
DR. SCHWARZ: If I may draw your attention to the fact, Your Honor, that the German word "Nachweislich" has been translated into English, and perhaps there is a mistake here, and the whole picture becomes distorted, and you get a distorted view.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the German word in the document?
DR. SCHWARZ: "Nachweislich". I beg your pardon, Your Honor. I am just being told that the word "nachweislich," should be translated by "approved", and I believe the English word "approved" actually expresses what I mean by the German word "nachweislich".
THE PRESIDENT: Of course, if the word in English were "proved" instead of "purportedly" then that would bear out what you have said.
THE INTERPRETER: Your Honor, there is a mistrans lation in the document.
When you asked the defendant to read the document book, I read from the English version.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
THE INTERPRETER: So it is a mistranslation.
THE PRESIDENT: Would you say then that translated literally, the word should be "proved" instead of "purportedly"?
THE INTERPRETER: Definitely.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well that correction will be noted in the document. We can assume then that this document says: "That 14 Jews had circulated Communistic propaganda and because of that they were shot."
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, I take it, witness, that you assume that to have been a correct procedure?
THE WITNESS: This manner of acting without the individual happinings of the event, today, after five and a half years, can no longer be looked upon in its proper light. It is Just a report.
THE PRESIDENT: I asked you directly: do you regard it proper, militarily proper, to shoot fourteen people, or only one person for that matter, because he spread Communist propaganda?
THE WITNESS: According to my orders these measures had to be carried out. In that far it was correct and justified.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
DR. SCHWARZ: Your Honor, may I then proceed in submitting the documents?
THE PRESIDENT: Please do. BY DR. SCHWARZ: No. 92; English 66. It is Exhibit 109. It is Document No. 3256. It is an operational duty report, U.S.S.R., No. 186, of the 27th of March, 1942. On Page 1 of this document where the Einsatzgruppe A is mentioned, in the place of the name of the leader of the Einsatzgruppe, there is a remark in brackets; it says, "Handwritten," and then "illegible". I ask you now if at this date - I beg your pardon, at the date of the original document, your name could have appeared as that of the leader of the Einsatzgruppe. of a report - when I myself had not taken over the post as leader of the Kommando, but it can be assumed, as I said, that on the 27th of March the authority who issued this report in Berlin, already knew of my appointment, because this was actually made known two or three days before. It is, therefore, possible that my name appears as a handwritten remakr there, although I had not actually taken over the office yet. But apart from this, the events mentioned in this document are so far back that they must have happened long before I actually took over my office, apart from the fact that, again, they were outside the territory under the command of Einsatzgruppe A. fact that in the opening speech of the Prosecution, which I have here, on Page 18 of the German document, the Einsatzgruppe A is being spoken about, and in the last paragraph on this page - this is on the 27th of March, 1942, - it says, "The Defendant Jost was in charge of Einsatzgruppe A when they reported that in Tscherven 15,000 Jews were shot.
I understood you correctly if I assume that this event was before the time at which you began your service with Einsatzgruppe A? report was compiled on the 27th of March in Berlin at a date when I myself had not started yet taking over matters of the Einsatzgruppe, but even if I had done so at that date, on the 27th of March, the mentioned events are far back, in fact weeks, and certainly long before I took over. you were already in command of the Einsatzgruppe? ings in Tscherven?
DR. SCHWARZ: Your Honor, I have now arrived at the conclusion of the direct examination of the Defendant Jost.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribuanl will be in recess for the usual afternoon recess, and then defense counsel will have an opportunity to cross-examine the witness.
(A recess was taken)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session. BY DR. MANDRY (Attorney for defendant Sandberger): March, 1942, until the beginning of September, 1942, Sandberger was your subordinate. What impression did you have of him, and his character, and his interests? What impression did you gain through these five months?
A In the year 1940 I met Sandberger in Berlin. On that occasion I talked to him for about five minutes. I saw him again in Larch 1942 and now I had an opportunity to talk to him repeatedly and on those occasions, of course, I got to know him better. His attitude was correct and well mannered. He was a man who tried in such difficult times and in such a territory to deal with his task in a manner which certainly one could not describe it as being a policy of tyranny. On the contrary, Sandberger certainly was not a friend of harsh and severe measures. the Security police?
A We might explain it in such a way: His interests were firstly political. He was interested in the territory he was working in, that is the Estonian territory, as a political problem. His interests in police matters were of minor importance. He was neither trained for police work; and this was not his sphere of interests. people?
AAs I heard repeatedly from him, Sandberger's opinion and attitude was that the Estonian people should become politically independent as far as possible, and the manner in which he dealt with Estonians, the way he dealt with the Estonian indigeneous government officials and Police officers, especially with officers of the Security Police and asked them to cooperate with him and how he supported their independence and always tried to form them into an Estonian unit, who could work independently.
of Communists, in particular, Communists who were charged with union offences. I should like to know if you would tell us. about Sandberger's general attitude in Security Police measures against Communists. Communists charged with minor offenses could be released from captivity. On that occasion, he told me that in Estonia this had happened previously, a few months before individuals were released continuously; and that on some holiday it had been achieved that a greater number should be released. However, he added that these measures were not approved by the national Estonian circles, who did not like anything that was connected with Bolchevism and they were not enthusiastic about it, because the Estonian people made the Communists responsible for all that had happened in Estonia in 1940 and 1941. Many of the Communists who had been released were again arrested, because they immediately became active again, and, therefore, the Estonian authorities and the German authorities had new trouble to trace them.
Estonia, or bad conditions calmed down? operational territory. Of course, they always tried to develop Communist activity in his territory. Small groups of partisans or parachutists and agents who came down by parachute were active and for that reason something was always going on. In any case the territory was endangered. collective measures against Communists, whether he ordered such measures, or whether he approved of them? and I can't imagine it, knowing Sandberger personally, but I do know that he had set up a very complicated channel of procedure in order to examine each individual Communist. This was also done with the strongest cooperation of the Estonian Security Police, because this authority knew the Estonians best and had to deal with the entire problem of the Communists in Estonia and also the individuals and could judge best. In general, some Estonian Police agency took such reports and sent them on to some superior agency where they were examined, I presume, and in the end in Reval, in a central office, they were again examined very thoroughly and here Sandberger has set up a commission to deal with the final examination, containing three lawyers or officers who examined the matter again. There, orders could be refuted, if not sufficient proof was given, or a decision was then confirmed by Sandberger's office. It was a very thorough system and certainly a very individual system. towards the Fuehrer Order concerning the extermination of the Jews.
Did you also discuss this with Sandberger? Did you discuss this Jewish question with him and what opinion did Sandberger hold on the problem, as far as you remember? Sandberger considered this order to be impracticable and that his whole attitude expressed this, even if he is not a man who talked a lot and criticized measures strongly or discussed it a lot, but it had been expressed quite clearly that he disapproved. passive person, concerning the Jewish question and the extermination of Jews? be described as passive, although that is an expression which is not correct and suitable here, because it was more than just being passive. What he expressed was a real objection. Estonia, you had the wrong view that in Estonia there were Jews who were concerned with the extermination decree. What did Sandberger tell you about the existence of Jews and executions that he had carried out? What did he tell you about this ? were left. That from the very beginning there had been very few Jews, whose greater part, when the Russians left, had left as well. Part of these Jews at the immediate direction from Riga without his cooperation had been gotten rid of. having caused executions of Jews? was done without his assistance and done during his absence and his knowledge.
About details I did not ask him.
Q You told us before, owing to Sandberger's attitude, it can be shown that he objected to the extermination of the Jews. Your predecessor was Stahlecker. Do you know about his views about the necessity of carrying out the Fuehrer Order concerning the extermination of Jews, do you know anything about that? Stahlecker and did not see him. I therefore did not have the opportunity to hear his personal opinion to this question but I had known Sthalecker previously for years and I do know that he was very ambitious and I know that he did everything in order to follow his ambitions. Therefore, I can imagine that an open objection, that means objecting to carrying out orders, he would never have tolerated. It was not his way to act in a very harsh manner himself, that is to take measures himself on the spot, but he would have made a report for the competent court which would have had the appropriate consequences.
Q Who was your legal chief? Jeckeln. the practice of war, he tried to attain through the SS and his idea about the jurisdiction of the time when you were with Jeckeln? Can you give us some examples about this? man who was very hard indeed, but also he was hard and strict to himself. What he expected of a subordiante he expected of himself too. In the same way as his own views were very strict, this was expressed in his measures, of course. I remember that during the summer months of 1942 he was in charge of a combat unit near Leningrad, temporarily.
Two volunteer officers of this combat unit -- did I say Estionian officers? -- had taken an unofficial leave, and left for a short period of time, about twenty-four hours and had travelled to Estonia. Jeckeln was informed about this or he somehow discovered this. They were out before a courtmartial immediately. They were condemned to death. The sentence was confirmed by Jeckeln. The harshness shown in the measure proves how Jeckeln dealt in such cases. Jeckeln? already explained this morning: that he was prepared to have shot SS men whose nerves could not stand the strain.
That proves his harshness towards his subordinates. This court-martial against officers also proves this. But how in his personal sphere, down to the bitter and he could be so, is shown by the fact that even one of his own children, which was not quite sane, he had killed -- that is, he used Euthanasia. That proves how hard this man was. took a hand in Sandberger's sphere of duty?
A Yes. In Sandberger's sphere, that is, Einsatzkommando 1-A. There Jeckeln discovered some Jews who lived in a barrack gathered there. He immediately ordered that they should be dealt with. Sandberger himself only heard about this afterwards, of course, because he was in Breskaw. option could he have done anything against it, in order to lay that his subordinate took a hand in this sphere? because the High SS and Police leader had all the authority. In this individual case it was not possible, in particular, because Jeckeln's personality as Obergruppenfuehrer certainly did not want any instructions given by people of lower rank. did you tell the interrogating officer about the fact, in how far Sandberger ordered executions of Jews? time Sandberger certainly did not carry out any such measures, and he had told me that in the previous time he had not carried out, or ordered, or caused, such measures to be taken. way Sandberger made his reports, and did you get to know it.
some offices, when Sandberger told a co-worker who had to make a report, and criticized him very sharply. He criticized the contents of the report, as well as its style, constantly. I stayed in the room for some time and I think Sandberger did not even see me. In any case, on that occasion I should see that he was very thorough and very conscientious about these reports.
DR. MANDRY: I have no further questions, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Any other defense counsel? BY DR. MINZFELT, Assistant to Dr. Gick, for the defendant Strauch: the way the civilian administration was set up for the Eastern territory. Will you please repeat when the civilian administration was set up in Latvia?
A I don't exactly know the date and the month, because, as I said, the civilian administration was set up in stages administration must have been set up. civilian administration had already been set up, was he sent there as a commander of the Security Police and of the SD, or as Einsatzkommando chief? had been set up, the Commando agencies had been set up; and if he had an immediate order for Latvia, he must have been ordered there as a commander. being set up, where was Einsatzkommando 2?
A I can't say that because the Einsatzkommandos in their entirety or in part had moved on to the front with the Army. previous replies, that Einsatzkommando 2 already was far away from the civilian administration in Latvia, that is, from Riga, and had moved to the front. at the time? Commando. 2 could be commanded from Riga? made up from this Commando, had the headquarters in the Army territory, owing to the distance it was hardly possible to command both units at the same time. Einsatzkommando 2 at the time when the Commando chief's position was taken over in Riga by Strauch Einsatzkommando 2 was near Krasnowardeisk; if it was near this locality, could Strauch's Einsatzkommando be commanded from Riga? Krasnowardeisk -- I don't know whether it was, it is possible -- I do not see any possibility how these two agencies could be commanded by one person only. Theoretically, it can be imagined; but practically, there would be no sense to it. leaders of Einsatzkommando 2 during, or before, your time?
constituted the Commando Loknia later on - I think it must have been like that - in that case, in Loknia there was Sturmbannfuehrer Dr. Bloetz, before my time; and during my time, Sturmbannfuehrer Kober. How it was before my time, I don't know, of course, provided that Einsatzkommando 2 later constituted Einsatzkommando Loknia. the Office of the Commander with the Security Police and the SD, and an Einsatzkommando.
A I have already done it this morning. The Einsatzkommando is a military unit connected with the army; the Commander of the Security Police and the SD, when the civilian administration has been set up, does not constitute a special unit but a proper authority. General Districts, were there any executions carried out? submitted -- of which I don't remember the number -- and there executions in Latvia were mentioned. Those were executions because of Communist propaganda, sabotage and similar things -- that is, if actual facts were proved, executions were carried out. you remember, and did you hear about, mass executions? to that effect. and the SD also carry out partisan measures, or rather, anti-partisan measures?
partisan problem as well, of course, and it was their job to make reconnaissance. The actual combatting of partisans was up to Army and Police troops. During reconnaissance, of course, occasional fighting took place, but that was not the idea. of March 1942 you met Strauch in Riga and talked with him there?
A That is right. At the beginning of March 1942 I saw him in Riga. that time when you met him there?
A Because I saw him; and I believe at the time I exchanged gasoline coupons because in the Reich territories different gasoline coupons were valid than in Eastern territories. Department III of the Command in Riga, and he worked there? the Commander of the Security Police and the SD, and there in Department III, that is, the SD Department.
Q Department IIId. Did Strauch tell you at the time that he would have to go to Minsk soon in order to take the position of the Commander of White Ruthenia? few days. He had been appointed to go to White Ruthenia and would soon go there. When he went, I don't know. Heydrich to give him authority so that in Jewish affairs temporarily he would not have to undertake anything?
it was Heydrich's intention to travel to White Ruthenia himself in order to give instructions there personally, without telling me what kind of instructions there would be. I also said that in the beginning of May, up to the middle of May, he actually was there, and that he did not inform me about his stay there, and his instructions. Later I heard from Strauch, however, that Heydrich had been there, and that after Strauch had addressed himself to Heydrich, Heydrich had granted to Strauch that for economical reasons, or for reasons of labor, temporarily nothing was to be done concerning the Jews for the time being, or that he would not have to undertake anything as yet. You say that Strauch also was very courageous, indeed, to address Heydrich and to ask him that the order for execution of Jews in White Ruthenia should not be carried out yet. took a let of courage to discuss the subject at all with Heydrich. Exhibit 111, Document 3428, the alleged letter of General Commissar Kube to Reich Commissar Lohse, of 31 July 1942, is contained. From the document books, did you also hear about this letter? newspaper which published it. Previously I had not known about it. of this letter? for several reasons. The greatest surprise for me in this letter was that Kube is supposed to have written it.
Kube was known generally, as well as to me, as a man who wanted the Jews to live, not only for economic reasons but also for humane reasons. For that reason the letter seems so incredulous to me. I also knew that Kube himself formerly had objected to measures against Jews. This is also in opposition, and contrary to that. Thirdly, I knew that in White Ruthenia at the time Kube described here, criticism was practiced as stated in reports. Therefore, it cannot be understood that on the one hand for economic reasons and reasons of labor the Jews should be put into ghettos, and on the other hand, that same Kube who requested such measures wanted Jews to be liquidated to that extent. within ten weeks before 31 July 1942, would you have known White Ruthenia, would you have heard about such an event, or heard about it some way or other? other, even if the report had been sent to Berlin immediately. But such events would have become known somehow. clever cooperator and worker. What do you think of this characterization of Strauch by Kube? between Kube and Strauch there was a very bad relation; they were on very bad terms, and I can't imagine why Kube should suddenly change his mind.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, do I understand that you question the authenticity of this document?
DR. MINSFELT: Yes, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you have the photostat available?
DR. MINSFELT: No, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Does the Prosecution have the photostat of this original document available?
MR. GLANCY: The Prosecution, sir, to the best of my knowledge and belief, is in possession of it, but not here in the courtroom. It can be furnished in a very few minutes, though.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that some time soon it should be submitted to the Tribunal for scrutiny and examination.
MR. GLANCY: It will be done, Sir.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
DR. MINZFELT: Your Honor, may I add - we consider this letter to be forged, but if it should be found that it has actually been written then we must consider the contents as incorrect and not corresponding with the actual events in White Ruthenia. For definite reasons we must state that the letter and the truth do not correspond.
THE PRESIDENT: At this moment, you can only question the authenticity of the document, and since you do question it, the Tribunal will need to pass upon whether the document is what it purports to be. With regard to the contents, that is something that your client can attack when he takes the witness stand.
DR MINZFELT: Yes.
MR CLANCY: May it please the Tribunal, I would like to advise that the Tribunal is already in possession of this in its archives as Prosecution's Exhibit 111.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary-General will present the photostat to the Tribunal tomorrow morning. Any other defense counsel who desires to cross examine the present witness will please step to the podium. If not , the Prosecution will begin its cross examination of the witness. By MR CLANCY:
Q Mr Jost, isn't it ture that you have stated in your affidavit that in addition to your duties as commanding officer of the Einsatzgruppe-A, that you were also at the same time Befehlshaber of the Reich Security Police and the SD? Commander of the SD? East were according to the instructions given by Heydrich, which were merely temporarily conducting this office as a commander. the SD and the Security Police during those four months? limitations that I told you about.
Q What limitations do you speak of? tasks of the executive were not part of my tasks, but, that these tasks were up to the independent commanders.