Only then after the indictment had been served when Mr. Ohlendorf indicated it and testified to that effect in the witness stand here in court I finally became certain that such an order did in fact exist and what the contents of this order were.
Q. During this time in the East and afterwards when you were in Department 6 of the RSHA you never heard, neither officially nor privately about the Fuehrer Order, is that correct?
A. Yes,
Q. You heard about an order which was given to you in Lemberg, if I understood your testimony correctly, by Hermann, who told all the officers in the Sonderkommando?
A. Yes, he did not hand it on, he announced it, if I may say so.
Q. He informed you about it?
A. Yes, he informed us about it
Q. He did not tell you at that time that there was an order by the highest commander who fixed the tasks of the Einsatzgruppen as to the executions of Jews and Gypsies, and A-socials. He did not tell you that?
A. No, not in that form, Mr. Prosecutor.
Q. What exactly did Hermann tell you during this meeting about the execution of Jews?
A. He said that as part of carrying out the general security tasks, of which the commandos in the East were in charge the severest measured would have to be applied against the bearers of the Soviet System. Here in particular I would like to say in the civilian sphere concerning the Einsatzkommandoes, the Bolshevist functionaries and the Jews were considered the most important bearers of Bolshevism.
Q. That was all he said?
A. In this connection he also explained several Wehrmacht regulations and that martial law would not be applied any more. I beg your pardon, there is something important I left out here, he said that mass executions would have to be carried out if necessary but in Sonderkommando 4B he would make all the decisions.
Q. What did you understand when you heard what would happen then to the Jews and the Communists on the basis of this order. Did you understand on the basis of this order that the Jews and Communists were to be killed?
A. I understand it to mean that they could be killed if the situation required it. In this case the situation meant the security. It was never intended nor did I understand it to mean that everyone of them was going to be killed, without examining individual cases.
Q. What did you understand, that the great part, or the greater Part of the Jewish Population was to be killed on the basis of this order?
A. No, I don't understand it to mean that, Mr. Prosecutor.
Q. What did you understand then by the word "necessity" which you used just now in your explanation. You must have had some idea what would make it necessary to kill these people, under which circumstances it would be necessary to kill these people?
A. At the time I didn't have a general conception of this fact. I thought that according to the circumstances, according to the local situation which the Sonderkommando found, orders which the commandoleader might receive from other agencies, would then have to be decided upon by him, and he would decide which of these persons would have to be killed. Q. I understand that. What I want to learn form you is whether you ever did entertain any idea under which circumstances the circumstances would and could make it necessary according to this order to kill the people. Did you ever have in mind if that or that would happen, it would be necessary to kill the people? Did you understand the order in that way, that they would have to have committed first a crime against the security of the German Wehrmacht before it would be permitted to kill them according to the order -the officer had to decide, that is what you said, but, I would like to know whether you had an idea under which circumstances an officer was entitled to order an execution of these people?
A. At the time I thought that a definite state of affairs would have to exist to justify the execution of the groups of persons concerned. That is what I thought.
Q. You mean by that, an investigation of a suspected person which resulted in the proof that he was guilty?
A. Yes, I had that conception.
Q. But you knew as a matter of fact that there was no trial contemplated; that on the contrary, any form of trial was excluded by this order?
A. I knew that, Mr. Prosecutor, but I may add here that there were two elements which caused strong reaction when we heard about this order. The first fact was that it would be the teak of the commando, as part of the Security Police tasks which they had to handle, to carry out the execution of persons captured who endangered the security, and the second fact was the realization that the procedure itself was considered too summary.
Q. Do I understand you correctly that you were of the opinion that there was an insufficient safeguard for the suspected person, as there was no trial, that his rights as a defendant were not sufficiently safeguarded. Is that what you want to say, that that was your opinion; was that your opinion?
A. That was my theoretical opinion, Mr. Prosecutor.
Q. This order about which we spoke just now you received in Lemberg, it was at the end of June, was it not?
A. In Lemberg, yes.
Q. It was the end of June?
A. Yes, approximately.
Q. Sometime later, during the other three months you were in the East, it was the general practice of the Einsatzgruppen to kill all Jews?
A I can not say this quite like that. I would like to give an explanation about this. During the assignment I heard, it must have been about the middle of August, when the Commando-leader returned from a discussion with the Einsatzgruppe Shitomir, at the time that he was rather shocked and depressed, and said that he had been reproached because the Einsatzcommando IV-B had carried out too few executions, and he, the commando-leader, when being thus reproached, had had the feeling that they judged the efficiency of a commando according to the figures of persons executed by the commando. efficient commander of Einsatzcommando, or Sondercommando, if many executions were carried out by his unit. Is that what you want to say, is it not? Einsatzgruppe. Herrmann. Was it the commander of Einsatzgruppe C?
A I am not quite sure of this. I don't know whether I just don't remember it, or whether he didn't even tell me at the time. I only know and I can only remember generally in that connection that he described the government expert Hoffmann as a savage who held such an opinion. alone, without the support of the leader of the Einsatzgruppe - that is right - to live such information to a Sonderkommando-leader, when Hoffmann was subordinate to the leader of the Einsatzgruppe, or would he have to have had the approval and even the order of the commander of the Einsatzgruppe. Do you think that Hoffmann alone could have done such a thing? gruppe Chief, nor Hoffmann talked to me about that sufficiently on the subject.
Am I correct in assuming that from that time on you knew the Jews and other undesirables were indiscriminately killed by the different units of the Einsatzgruppe and Einsatzgruppe C?
A No, I didn't know that much. tion you received from Herrmann in August? What did you think he wanted to convey to you?
A He didn't have any special intentions in this. He mereley expressed his worry.
Q How did you understand his expression? What did you understand by that when he told you that it was his impression that only such a leader was considered a good leader of a Sonderkommando who executed many people? Didn't you find out then that it was not a question whether somebody was builty or not in order to be executed. It was rather a question that somebody was for some reason undesirable, that would have been the reason for execution? Did you find it out then?
A No. May I explain this in more detail. I said already that the procedure as such was considered rather summary insofar as for the officer who decided in special cases had only the alternative either, the man is going to be shot, or he is not going to be shot, and I said, when Herrmann informed us of the order in Lemberg, it was said very unambiguously, or at least that is how I understood it, that it would have to be decided in each individual case. It was, therefore, up to the commando leader, and such an explanation by Herrmann I could only understand to mean that this scope of decisions was being handled in too generous a manner. form Shitomir, up to the time he returned to Berlin, which was in the beginning of October 1941, did you learn, as a matter of fact, that Jews were killed deliberately, and that there was no decision in any single case; that these people were just killed for the simple reason that they were Jews and for no other reason, and that there was, of course, no decision on the part of the officer necessary in the individual cases.
Did you learn that sometime during the time that you in the East?
A No, I'll just describe to you briefly what I heard after leaving the commando and returning to Berlin. During my trip back I stayed in Kiev for one right, and there I heard at the group - I can not say any more who told me, certainly it was not Hoffmann, that during those days in Kiev large scale executions had taken place, mostly of Jews. At the time this was based on the fact that this was a retaliation measure against the large dynamiting actions and arson which hand occurred after the Bolsievists left Kiev. Later on I heard in Lemberg where I also spent one night that a large scale shooting of Jews had taken place. At the time these shootings were also connected with another event, namely, the murders the Bolshevists had committed before leaving, about which the defendant Schulz has spoken. At the time I think there were 7,000 persons concerned who had been murdered in the prison by the Bolshevists, at the time. from Poltawa, or when you came to Lemberg on you way to the East with the group?
Q That must have been then one of the last days of June?
A Or one of the first days of July. The first days of July. Unfortunately I could not reconstruct this from the report of events, and I didn't have any other calendars.
executions according to you memory, which was in Tarnopol, is that right?
A No, I didn't say that, Mr. Prosecutor.
Q What was it?
Q Yes? more executions during the time that you were with Sondercommando IV-B but only in one case you knew how many people approximately were killed, is that correct?
A I remembered that, yes. I still remember the figure.
Q How you can remember that? carried out by Sondercommando IV-B in the time when you were with the commando, can you remember?
A May I think about it for a moment. I have had no time to prepare myself. There must have been six or seven instances. tely the three months you were with the commando? least some of these executions?
A Yes. I heard that these were saboteurs and looters. I also heard that Communist functionaries were being shot. I also heard that Jews were being shot, but I didn't hear that Jews were shot mereley because they were Jews.
Q Did you learn way these Jews were shot?
A No, not in each individual case. I assumed at the time they were shot because they had been connected in some events which endangered the security of the Army in the operational territory.
Q How many instances was it that Sonderkommando IV-B had done that?
A Seven. Seven, including the commando-leader.
Q Did you have personal contact with these officers?
A Well, I don't know to what extent.
Q were you on friendly terms with them?
A Not particularly friendly. It was a correct comradely relation.
Q Were you on friendly terms with Herrmann?
A No, certainly not. If I may explain this, the commando-leader Herrmann was a very secretive person, and rather a hermit who didn't look for company in others but avoided them. the time together with the seven officers, is that correct?
A One can not say this so briefly, Mr. Prosecutor. I travelled a great deal in order to deal with the jobs I had been given as an SD Expert. I had to contact as many persons as possible in order to receive the necessary information. It occurred that I was absent for one or two days, for example, on an occasion that I mentioned, as chief of an advanced commando; it also occurred that the others officers who were absent, because they were in charge of advanced commandos. other commandos, that Sonderkommando IV-B kept very much together. That you were not divided up into sub-units, and part-units, and, if such a sub-unit was formed for a special task, they immediately again returned after having carried out this special task, but if I understand you correctly the quarters of the whole commando was in one place, is that right? Either in Poltawa or in another place you have mentioned here?
A Yes; in general it was like that. often. Did never one ever tell you that it was the official duty of the Sonderkommando to kill Jews indiscriminately. I am not asking you now whether you got any official information about that. I ask whether you learned from one of your fellow officers, any one of them, if it was that way, was that the way?
Q No?
A No. No. different reports, you learned what the population was doing, didn't you?
A That depended. I would have been satisfied if I had been able to hear everything the population thought.
Q But you know more than other people, didn't you?
A I would like to say the following here. That it was very difficult in Russia to hear anything at all. The Russians were used to keeping very quiet about certain things, even more than it was the case in Germany. held about the activities of the Einsatzgruppe?
A no, I can not remember. If I may explain this. It really would have needed unusual courage by the Russians to tell us, after we had been there for about eight days, that they didn't like the way we treated them. had informers form the civilian part of the population, did you not, and they certainly told you what the other civilian part, who were not the informers, said about the Germans; did they not?
A May I say something about that, Mr. Prosecutor. In my SD work I could not use informers. An informer is a person who says something bad about another person or group. That is not what I wanted. Such a man goes to the police but does not go to a person who wants to gather information, say about economics or the administration of a city. I do think that part of the morale of the population is, undoubtedly, this part of their opinions. You must have known how the population reacted to the killings of Jews. There were people who certainly had an impression. It was a kind of terror and we know that in the Ukraine there were many anti-Semites. They were very likely happy that Jews were killed. There are documents before the Tribunal that show that, for instance, in the Crimea. So you would have learned how the population reacted to these killings, favorably or unfavorably. You never heard anything about this?
A I did not hear of any such cases. If I may explain this further, Mr. Prosecutor, I think this is owing to the fact that our general information was too incomplete. I do not doubt that these reports would have come to my knowledge, if I had remained in that locality some weeks or months and conducted regular information service with a permanent staff and confidential agents. But, in the eight days one may have stayed in one location this was not possible except for coincidences or chance but this did not occur as far as I know.
Q May I ask now something else. You were the second highest ranking officer in Sonderkommando IV-B, is that correct? not represent him, you were not this deputy, but that in everyone's sphere of work the designated expert had to decide for himself when the commander was not there. That means, in other words, you in SD matters and the men who was in charge of Department IV, in Gestapo matters, executivematters?
Is that right? that Herrmann was away either for hours or for a day. in charge of Department IV were away at the same time? executive field, in the field of Department IV, the order to shoot somebody or people, or the order to arrest some people, or an order regarding executive measures, to whom would it have been left to order this measure? the other SS-Obersturmfuehrer who present who acted as deputy for executive measures because he was an expert on such matters.
Q That was an Officer?
Q Would not that have been your task?
A No. Apart from the face, Mr. Prosecutor, if I may add thisyou talked about executions. I doubt here whether this is a case which we can consider as an example - a person who was to be shot, say it is quite obvious in that case and would not depend on waiting until the Kommando leader would return in two hours or the same evening.
Q Might well have happened? It would have been against security measures to take the boy with you. You have told the Tribunal yourself that it happened that the Kommando leader sometimes left the Kommando and left the marching orders to a deputy.
It could have happened in such a time that such a case would arise - anyhow it is a hypothetical question and it would not have been your task so I do not think you need to go into that much further. I to Department VI of the RSHA?
Q Can you tell us why this transfer was carried out? training as candidate for the leasing service. Therefore, I held the lowest rank as a member of the leading service. Therefore, I returned to the expert field of the SD which I left during the time of my training and study. At the time inquiries were being made which tasks the individuals would like to work on. I myself was interested in the information from abroad. I therefore asked that I would be assigned to this, Office VI at that time needed people for this particularly and, therefore, I was sent to office VI. ties of the Einsatzgruppen which, as you have told the Tribunal in direct examination, did not like very much. You have also told me just now that you were shocked by the fact that it was a summary procedure and that your units were to carry out executions themselves. Did you ever, after having returned from the East, try to leave the SD service? forces. In every case I was refused, After 1944 it wasn't possible any more because having been ill I was no longer able to do service in the fighting forces. the SD and go into the Wehrmacht? Was it for the reason that you wanted to fight on the front or was it for the reason that you considered that your work with the SD was not a work you wanted, for instance?
I considered myself too young, before 1943, just to study while the others were fighting. And, secondly, after 1943, I considered myself too young to work in the staff in Berlin and not to be with the fighting forces. sidered the SD to be an organization which did things you did not like? You just wanted to leave the SD for patriotic reasons as you wanted to fight on the front, is that right? tion, if I may use that expression in this connection. and so on. Did you consider these measures about which you had learned in the East to be justified?
Q Did you consider them to be humane?
Q Nevertheless you did you not want to leave the SD for these reasons? Is that correct?
A Yes. If I may just explain this in one sentence, Mr. Prosecutor. I did not consider these things to be the affair of the SD. If I may explain this - in the Einsatzkommandos there were members from all parts of the SS working together. The SD itself held the smallest number among this. It was once worked out. I think it was only 38 and I knew from my own experiences, from my work until then, that executions and executive tasks were not being handled by the SD, that they merely handled information.
Q You have said that only 3% of the members of the Einsatzgruppen were members of the SD, is that correct, approximately?
A Yes. To explain this, not in the entire organization, but in the reporting section, that is a formation of the SS. members of the SD, most of the officers in the Einsatzgruppen?
A No, Mr. Prosecutor, if I may express it in that manner. Please excuse officers of the SD, were drafted into these Einsatzcommandos through unauthorized military power which actually had nothing to do with the SD as it had existed until then. It wasn't the initiative of these individual men and the work of these men in the Einsatzgruppen which is the subject being debated in this trial which resulted in the work done, but I don't know quite all the connections, whether Himmler or Heydrich were responsible for it.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now take its afternoon recess for 15 minutes.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: Proceed.
CROSS-EXAMINATION (Continued) BY MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: documents in evidence which show that in a time when you were second highest ranking officer in Sonderkommando 4b, people werekilled in great numbers by this unit, and I would like you to lllok now at Document Book II-A. This is on page 81 of the English, your Honor. Document NO-2938, Prosecution's Exhibit No. 44. The quote to which I refer is on Page 81 under the heading, "Page 14 of the original". It reads: "The Einsatzkommando 4b is at work at present in the Tarnopol area. It is planned to have the Kommando proceed to Preskurow. Out of the 54 Poles and Jews who had been working as agents for the NKWD, 8 persons, two of them being Jewish woman, could be arrested and executed, the remainder having taken to their heels apparently." It goes on: " At Tarnolop also 10 soldiers were found to be among the murdered in the prison, one of them being a lieutenant of the air force, 6 pilots and 3 soldiers off the mountain troops. Of the Jews assigned to the excavation of the corpses, about 180 were slain, partly in the prison court, party in the streets. Moreover, Jewish residences were destroyed by members of the Waffen-SS with hand-grenades and set on fire." Did you know anything about the things reported in this situation report?
A May I clarify something about your introductory statement? I wasn't the second in command of the kommando.
Q You were second highest ranking officer, weren't you? kommando.
THE PRESIDENT: Who was the second in command?
THE WITNESS: There was no on in general.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, if you are the second senior officer, who would be the second in command?
THE WITNESS: The second in command was that person who was appointed by the commander in each individual case.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, suppose he didn't appoint, suppose that the commander were killed, who would take over?
THE WITNESS: The senior officer present at that moment.
THE PRESIDENT: That would be you, wouldn't it?
THE WITNESS: That might have been me, yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, proceed.
Q (By Mr. Horlick-Hochwald) Did you know, Herr Fendler, about the happenings which are described in this report? Paragraph 5, on Page 14 of the original of the 54 Poles and Jews who worked for the NKWD as agents, I heard about this here for the first time. assigned to the excavation of the corpses of the members of the German Wehrmacht and were killed partly in the prison court and partly in the streets? and the Ukrainian militia, directed against the Jews in Tarnopol.
Q Did you hear how many Jews were killed during these excesses? correct? by the Ukrainians, mostly by those who guarded this excavation work, that is the Ukrainians, and secondly, in the first hours of the occupation of Tarnopol, excesses also occurred done by the German troops against the Jews, because among the few hundred corpses, the figure of 500 is given in the reports, several German prisoners were found, which the Bolshevists, before they had left, had killed in a cruel manner.
The mutilated corpses were found. these excesses were Waffen-SS units? macht, particularly the Mountain Corps had taken part, because they were found as corpses in the prison. to supervise the excavations? Am I correct in assuming that that was a German agency who ordered these Ukrainians?
A In this particular case I cannot give you any information. I can only make a general statement and draw a personal conclusion. This Ukrainians militia or the regular police, they were called different names in various localities, were always under the command, as far as I heard, of the competent local town commandant to whom they were subordinated, who employed them as provisional police. about these happenings here, so may I assume then that you knew that Jews here were deliberately killed either by members of the German Wehrmacht or by members of the German Waffen-SS or by members of the Ukrainian militia which was nothing else than a submit of some German agency in these places, is that correct? are described here in this report, is that right? occur. out by agencies either of the German Wehrmacht or of the German WaffenSS or of the SD? and you knew that the killers of these 180 Jews were Ukrainian militia which were active under German supervision, did you not?
inally and whether actually somebody instigated this action. At the time I heard that spontaneous actions occurred which are to be regretted and I was sorrowful about that.
Q Who were the people who acted spontaneously? They were Germans and people who had authority from the Germans, is that correct? That means the Ukrainian militia, is that correct?
A No. As I just said, at the time when I heard about these things, I gained the impression, that no authority existed, but that these were merely excesses done by individuals who then, as it is usual on such occasions, increased, because they were not conducted and not corrected. Jews were killed, is that right?
A I did not hear of a great number. I did not hear any figure concerning this or concerning these excesses. The figures mentioned in the reports of events here I saw for the first time when I read these reports here, during the trial. you the story about these excesses, approximately how many Jews were killed during these excesses? about this.
executions. You have told us now a story about excesses so I would ask you whether you know or whether you were told how many Jews were killed during these excesses?
A I beg your pardon. It appears we have been talking on different subjects all the time. I only talked about the excesses. excesses.
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: You will see in document book IIC, the document I am referring too your Honors, on Page 49 of the English. It is Document No-2934, Prosecution's Exhibit 78.
THE PRESIDENT: What book?
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: II-C, on page 49. It is the first paragraph under the heading, "Einsatzkommando 4b". This is an operational situation report which is dated 16th of July - no, I am sorry, 11th of July, 1941, and it is reported here that Einsatzkommando 4b has finished its activity in Tarnopol. 127 executions. Parallel to that, liquidation of 600 Jews in the course of the persecutions of Jews as induced by the Einsatzkommando.
Q (BY Mr. HORLICK-HOCHWALD) Of about 127 executions, if I am not mistaken, you have told the Tribunal that you know only about twenty to thirty, is that correct? You do not know about the--
Q You don't know about the others, approximately one hundred? course of the persecution of Jews as induced by the Einsatzkommando? excesses referred to the statements made in this report here as well. I cannot make any statements about this.
were by no means spontaneous, as you have said, but that they were induced by the units of which you were the second highest officer, isn't that right? Prosecutor. I personally can only doubt its credibility.
Q Why? You have just told the Tribunal that you have no personal knowledge of it, so either you change this statement or you have no reason to doubt the correctness of this report. I have questioned you at great length, and you have said, "I do not know a thing, I do not know who carried it out; I do not know whether it was instigated; I do not know how many people were killed." Why, then, do you doubt a report which gives all the details about which you profess, just now, to have no knowledge? It can be right; cannot be right, because according to what you have said just a minute ago, you do not know it. Am I mistaken in that?
A Mr. Prosecutor, I don't think that the one testimony excludes the other one. I said that looking back at it now I doubt the correctness.
Q Why? cannot imagine it according to the character of the kommando chief, that he should have given such instructions or that he should have approved of such a thing if he had heard about this in time and could have stopped it, and secondly, I heard that the kommando leader expressly prohibited members of the kommando to take part in the excesses at all.
Q When did you learn that?
Q Why did you give this order?
Q Why did he give it?