"Hamburg". Now write "Dr. Haensch". Write "391".
THE PRESIDENT: Page, give her another sheet of paper now. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. May I see them now, please.
A. (The sheets were handed to the President).
Q. And what is your explanation as to why you used different script while you were working with Frau Schreyer?
A. In those days I did not have any English correspondence and I was not used to Latin characters, because one did not use them in those days.
Q. And what caused you to write in this way today?
A. What exactly do you mean now, Your Honor?
Q. Why do you now use the different type of typography today?
A. You mean another kind of handwriting?
Q. Yes, that's right. Why do you write differently today from the way you wrote in 1943?
A. As I have said, because I now have a lot of English correspondence and I must write in Latin characters in order not to get back to the German kind of handwriting again.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Hochwald, do you want to examine? Do you want to examine the witness?
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: Certainly, I do, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed. BY MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD:
Q. Witness, do you remember having sworn to and having signed two affidavits in the time between 3 December and today?
A. Yes, I do. Two affidavits.
Q. Did you sign and swear to two affidavits in the time between December 3 and today?
A. Well, once at the interrogation and then I had to make a short statement in handwriting, and the next day somebody else came to me and gave me something which I signed again.
Q. Did you make these affidavits voluntarily and freely?
A. Yes.
Q. Well, is it therefore true? Is what you said in your affidavit the truth?
A. Yes.
DR. KRAUSE (ATTORNEY FOR THE DEFENDANT HAENSCH): May I object to this question. I think it is impossible to question a witness whether what he has stated some time ago is true. It is possible that a witness when further considering has come to a better recollection of an event.
THE PRESIDENT: That is the only way you can find out, by asking whether it is correct and true.
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: If the Tribunal please, I do not want to comment on the objection on the part of the defense.
Q. (By Mr. Horlick-Hochwald) Are these two affidavits the truth?
A. Yes, that is what I stated at the time.
Q. Were you convinced on the 3rd--I am sorry, the 4th--I am sorry, I cannot find the date -- on the 3rd of December when you signed this interrogation that you have said the truth to the interrogator?
A. Yes, at that time I was of the opinion.
Q. May I ask you, who did speak to you about this matter in the time from the 3rd of December until today?
A. You mean who was in charge of the interrogation?
Q. No, with the exception of the interrogator, with the exception of Mr. Sachs, who interrogated you in this case, with whom else did you speak about this matter?
A. No, I spoke really to nobody. I discussed it briefly with my friend with whom I share a room, I did do this because Mr. Sachs came and as he had no time then, I said she should go into another room and she asked me what was the matter, and I told her that I could not give her further information.
Q. So you spoke to nobody else?
A. No.
Q. The Presiding Judge has interrogated you about paragraph No. 7 of your interrogation. Do you have the interrogation before you?
A. Yes.
Q. I want you now to turn to paragraph No. 12. Mr. Sachs asked you, "Do you have anything else to add?" Will you read to the Tribunal please, the answer which you gave.
A. (Reading) "I only want to point out that I consider it improbable that the name of Walter Haensch is in the cash book, because I was supposed to transfer the names from the appointment pad to the cash book and because of this I would have remembered the name."
Q. Are you still today of this opinion?
A. No.
Q. Why not?
A. Because I have first of all convinced myself of the contrary.
Q. When?
A. Just now when you showed me the pad and the cash book.
Q. But is it not true, Witness, that you changed your statement in this respect before you had seen these two books?
A. No.
Q. But that was just a routine question. Is it correct that you worked for Mrs. Schreyer, usually only in the evening?
A. With the exception of Saturdays when I was generally there in the afternoon already.
Q. Did you ever work for her in the morning?
A. I cannot remember really.
Q. Please try to remember.
A. Yes, it is possible, of course, on days when I had a day off, given me by my firm, when we had air raid precaution practice.
Q. Will you turn to paragraph 9 of your affidavit and you said, "In general, the appointment pads were only kept by Frau Schreyer. On Saturday afternoons, when I was in the place and clients were actually finished, I often made entries in the appointment pads. Aside from the two of us, no third person made entries, with the exception and so on" That is enough, and it is definitely said that you worked only in the evenings and afternoon.
Do you change this statement?
A. Yes, then I did not think, that I did have days off owing to air raid practice.
Q. So, you think it is correct that--did you look at the pad, 391 the little pad?
A. Yes, I looked at it.
Q. 391? Did you write that?
A. Yes.
Q. Would you look at the entry 391 in the big black book?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you write all of it or only part of it?
A. May I have another look at the book. I don't remember exactly. Yes, I wrote all of it.
Q. When did you write that?
A. It is possible that I wrote it on the same day or one or two days later.
Q. Will you explain the fact that two addresses appear in this book, one address in Berlin and another one in another place, which I don't recall, but you can tell the Tribunal, as you have the book before you?
A. Yes, the first one, the address in Berlin was the living quarters of the person concerned and then it was the remark to be sent to Mrs. Dr. Haensch Renfelde via Zittau where the pictures were actually sent.
Q. Do you remember actually sending the pictures there?
A. I saw on the pad that I made a remark "sent" and then the date.
Q. May I ask you another question who used to write the names, numbers and dates on the negatives?
A. Frau Schreyer did.
Q. Always?
A. It is possible that I helped her occasionally when I was there and she had a lot of work to do.
Q. I want to tell you what Mrs. Schreyer said about this. It is very interesting. She did not find either name or number on the pictures. I asked her, "Will you just examine these two pictures?" I am quoting from Record 3356, Your Honors. "Will you just examine those two pictures. Can you tell the Tribunal whether on these two negatives" -- and she interrupted me by saying, "No, there is no number on them." I asked her for the name --"Is there a name on it?" and she said, "No, no name either, unfortunately."
The Presiding Judge asked here, "Why do you say, 'unfortunately' Why did you add that? What difference does it make whether they are there or not?"
And now says Mrs. Schreyer, "Because my employees did not do this properly when they wrote on the negatives. It really should not have occurred."
Isn't it clear from this statement that these names and numbers were usually written by you and not by Mrs. Schreyer?
A. No, it was generally the work that Frau Schreyer did, because there would have been a mix up if the photographs, and prints had been left until the evening.
Q. Mrs. Schreyer even goes farther, when the Presiding Judge asked her, "Well, therefore, you are the one who should have added the name and number-" She said: "No, I developed and printed them and the next day when the employee came she handled these writing matters." And the presiding Judge asked here again, "And she would write on the negative?" Answer: "Yes, she would have written the name and the number on it." Can you explain why Mrs. Schreyer made this statement or who of you according to your opinion is mistaken on this point?
A. I really do not know why Frau Schreyer said that.
Q. It is then true that you were supposed to do this to put these names and numbers on the negatives, is that right, and not Frau Schreyer?
A. No, it was really the work that Frau Schreyer did herself, because, as I said, when she developed the photographs and prints and when I arrived in the evening, the prints and photographs would have been mixed up.
Q. You have no explanation as to why she gave this explanation under oath in court?
A. No.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Hochwald, we will have the recess. Witness, during the recess, which will last fifteen minutes, please do not speak with anybody of the prosecution or of the defense.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, when were the pictures usually taken, in the daytime or in the evenings?
THE WITNESS: During the dry, but sometimes during the evenings. That is, during business hours.
Q. Until what time was the shop opened in the evenings?
A. I cannot say. It might have been six or seven o'clock.
Q. Well, you would come to work at seven o'clock, wouldn't you?
A. Yes, seven o'clock, sometimes already at six.
Q. Now, did you recognize your own entry in the appointment pad?
A. Yes.
Q. Well, if you would come to work at seven o'clock and no pictures were taken after seven o'clock, how could you have made the appointment?
A. It might have been on my day off, after my air raid service.
Q. I don't understand that.
A. I already said if I did air raid service for the firm, then I had the next day off.
Q. Which firm?
A. That was with the Aluminum Sales Company.
Q. In your affidavit, or rather in your interrogation you say, "I ordinarily worked for Frau Shreyer from six to seven o'clock in the evening until ten and later. Saturday , I worked in her business from three to six or seven o'clock." You did not indicate any exception in that answer?
A . At that time I didn't even think of that fact, that I had days off.
Q. Have you thought of anything else since you answered these questions and wrote up your affidavits, which in any way changes what you told the interrogator and wrote up?
A. I merely determined that the beginning date was not 1939 but it was 1941.
Q. What did you tell the interrogator, what year?
A. I told him I didn't know exactly any more whether it was 1939 or 1940, but it was already during the war.
Q. Well, you tell us now that it was in 1941?
A. Yes.
Q. Just before we recessed you said that you told the interrogator 1939?
A. Yes, 1939 or 1940.
Q. Well now, which was it? What did you tell the interrogator, 1939 or 1940?
A. I think 1939.
Q. Will you please look at your affidavit, Document NO 5718?
A. I don't have it with me here.
Q. Well, will some one please show it to her . In the second paragraph, what do you say there, about working for -
A. Since November 1940.
Q. Yes, you wrote that out yourself, didn't you?
A. I wrote it by hand.
Q. Yes. Well, how was it now that you say it could have been '39 when you yourself wrote 1940?
A. Well, I must be quite honest, and I must state that I always mixed up the years.
Q. Then when you were questioned -- do you have Document 5698 there?
A. Yes.
Q. The interrogation under oath. Look at question 2-B. Read the question and read the answer?
A. "Since when? Answer: Since November 1940, shortly after -since November 1940. "
Q. Yes, that is enough. So that is twice you have indicated 1940, isn't it?
A. Yes.
Q. Then in your affidavit, Document No. 5718, -- no, you did refer to that. I am sorry. Well, you were confused about the time that you started to work for Frau Shreyer?
A. Yes.
Q. How was it you remember it so clearly now, that it was 1941?
A. I once more thought about the matter and, then it occurred to me that I still must have a picture which Frau Shreyer had before the time that I started to work for here, and on this occasion she asked me whether I can remember working for her, and, that I still must have this picture at home. I looked once more and I found the picture, and I saw that it was in November 1941.
Q. Let me have the transcript, please, of Frau Shreyer. Witness, do you know Frau Haensch?
A. No, I cannot remember.
Q. Did she come to you and ask you to locate the negatives of the pictures of her husband?
A. I cannot remember that, either.
Q. well, if that happened, it would have happened recently.
A. No, it was certainly not recently.
Q. Shortly before Frau Shreyer came to Nurnberg?
A. No, I didn't see any one there, nor talked to any one.
Q. How do you identify these negatives as being plates which come from Frau Schreyer's studio?
A. I noticed it from Frau Shreyer's handwriting on the top of the negatives.
Q. You don't remember the picture itself, do you?
A. I got a superficial recollection of it when I saw the negative.
Q. Do you remember having seen the subject in the studio, Haensch himself?
A. No, I cannot really remember that.
Q. Then you identify it from the handwriting?
A. Yes, and on the basis of the superficial recollection of having seen such a picture in the studio.
Q. You remember the picture but not the person?
A. That is right.
Q. Do you remember most of the pictures that you looked at?
A. I think if I would see them, yes.
Q. How long did you work there?
A. How long did I work there? Do you mean with -
Q. Yes, with Frau Shreyer?
A. From 1941 until the beginning of 1943.
Q. About how many pictures were taken during that time?
A. Well, I cannot say. There was a lot of work to do there.
Q. Would you say as many as a thousand?
A. Even more than that.
Q. Two thousand?
A. Well, I could not really say.
Q. Well, anyhow you had at least one-thousand, and do you think that you would remember the features of one-thousand faces?
A. Not all of them.
Q. Would you remember most of them?
A. I think so, yes.
Q. You remember the features of most of one-thousand which, of course , would be over five-hundred, but yet you could not remember when you went to work there, whether 1940 or 1941?
Q Well, was 1940 the same as 1941?
Q Was 1939 the same as 1941?
Q Well, you had more reasons to be happy in 1939 and '40, than you did in 1941, didn't you? the furlough of my husband, and thus, the time always seemed the same to me.
Q I didn't quite catch that answer?
A I was always waiting for my husband's furlough, from one furlough to another, therefore, the time always seemed the same to me.
Q When did he go away?
Q I don't recall your having said that you were married in 1939, when we questioned you before about that? Is that when you were married, in 1939?
A No, I was married in '41, but in '39 I was already engaged.
Q Yes. Wouldn't you remember 1941 very distinctly if that was the year in which you got married? Wouldn't you?
Q Well, how could you confuse that with 1940? for Frau Schreyer.
Q In what month were you married in 1941?
Q Where is the black book? Let me have the black book, please. When did you start to keep this book (shows witness the book?)
Q What is the first month indicated here? this book before.
Q When did you start to keep the book?
Q Was that the 13 November 1941?
Q What happened to the first seventy pages of this book?
A I don't know. ably devastated the studio? Were you working there at the time?
Q When did you leave?
Q When was the studio destroyed by bombs?
Q Is that when you ceased your services with Frau Schreyer?
Q How many days before?
Q Well, was it a matter of days or a matter of weeks? you left just before the planes arrived?
A No, I was always in Berlin, but my husband didn't want me to work in the evenings. just a day before the bombing attack?
A Why one day? studio, is that correct?
A I don't know whether it was one day before.
Q When was the studio destroyed by airraid?
Q Well, you left the day before? Look at the book.
A (Delivers the book to the witness.)
Q Does that say, "28 February," the last entry? the day before the airraid?
A Yes, I can now remember. On the first of March I had air raid service in the firm and when I came home on the second of March I went to Frau Schreyer to help her to clear up the place. On the same day, however, my husband came home on furlough and he didn't want me to continue to work for Frau Schreyer. didn't you?
THE PRESIDENT: Any further questions? Dr. Hochwald, you may proceed.
DR. HOCHWALD: If the Tribunal please, I have one or two questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly.
DR. HOCHWALD: If I can get the book. BY DR. HOCHWALD:
Q Will you tell us, witness, what day you married?
Q Did you work that evening?
Q On the 27th of December 1941?
Q Will you look at the book. Isn't the entry of this day from you, made by your handwriting?
THE WITNESS: May I say something about that, please.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, certainly.
THE WITNESS: We always made the entries but it sometimes happened that I would put them in afterwards. It is possible that perhaps I made the entry on 30 December but we wrote in the date when the appointment was made. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Were you working on your wedding day?
Q Well did you make up any appointments on that day? In that appointment pad? Where is the appointment pad?
MR. HOCHWALD: Should be on the bench, your Honor.
THE WITNESS: No, I don't have the appointment pad.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. You may proceed counsel. BY DR. KRAUSE: entry with ink in the book?
Q Did you use a fountain pen?
A Yes. I have a fountain pen.
Q Do you still possess this fountain pen?
Q And something else. In the course of time when you were working for Frau Schreyer there were centuries of entries in this book; do you recall every single name?
A No, of course not. I could not. consider it improbable that the name Haensch appears in the cash register book, since you had transferred the names from the appointment list to the cash register book and therefore would recall that name. How did it occur to you to say this was improbable if your memory of the various names is not so good after all? quite correct. mean this? but that I can't recall it.
Q Yes. After you left Frau Schreyer, that is, after March 1943, did you ever have this book in your hands again?
your hands again after this time?
Q Did any one on the order of Dr. Haensch get in touch with you?
A You mean now? Recently?
Q At all, I mean, ever? tions altogether and you were sworn in as to what you testified. After you answered these 12 questions or during the course of the interrogation was it said to you that the name of Dr. Haensch is contained in the book, contrary to your own assumption? reproduces your handwriting at that time? down or even letters which you wrote and which were handed back to you?
Q Thank you, I have no further questions. But I would like to make a motion. I would like those samples of writing of the witness which are available from the year 1942 and which reproduce her handwriting as it was at that time, that this material be safeguarded and secured and be submitted here in order to compare the handwriting. Furthermore, I request that the sample taken today be repeated by the witness in ink by using her own fountain pen.
Your Honor, at this occasion I would like to ask a question. After the completion of the examination of the defendant Haensch it was intended to undertake a medical examination of the defendant in order to to determine how his state of health has developed.
Now, as I hear from the defendant, a short visit by a physician was made in his quarters and the defense is interested in whether the result of a possible examination is already available.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary General will be instructed to report to the Tribunal as soon as possible on the result of the examination made of the defendant Haensch and as soon as this report comes into possession of the Tribunal defense counsel will be informed.
DR. HOCHWALD: If the Tribunal please, I have no further questions to the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Now, defense counsel has made a motion with regard to - - -
DR. HOCHWALD: I want to express the view point of the Prosecution. We do not, of course, oppose this motion but I do think that we could ask the Tribunal to instruct the witness to write down the affidavit which is in evidence before the Tribunal and is written by the witness in Latin letters, to write down the same affidavit in Gothic letters in ink so that a good basis for an examination of the handwriting may be available.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, you are instructed to copy again the affidavit which you have already written in your own hand, but to copy it this time in Gothic in the script which you used in 1942.
DR. HOCHWALD: If the Tribunal please, I do not want her to copy. I do want her to write it from the mimeographed text which does not give an example to the witness in the way in which she wrote.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, by copying I meant copying the wordage and not the form of writing.
DR. HOCHWALD: May I move then that the witness be handed a mimeograph copy in German that from this mimeograph copy in German she should write in ink the contents of the affidavit in Gothic letters.
THE PRESIDENT: And we ask you witness, is there any reason why you can't do that after you leave the witness stand and you don't need to bother about it any more, while you are here, you can write it and submit it to the Tribunal and you don't need to concern yourself about it later.
THE WITNESS: Of course, I can do that immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Now just how do you intend to obtain these other papers that you referred to, counsel?
DR. KRAUSE: Well, I have the following to say, your Honor. I believe it is not so important how the witness writes German today but how she wrote German in 1942. Therefore, taking a German sample of her writing today I do not consider so relevant but, of course, I would not object to it. On the other hand I consider it important that any kind of sample of her writing from the year 1942 be brought in for purposes of comparison, and I would ask you to instruct the witness to put such a sample at our disposal and by the motion that I made before about securing all the writing material I don't mean that everything be confiscated from her which she put down in writing. It may be left up to the witness to give us any kind of sample of her writing in 1942 and to submit it here.
DR. HOCHWALD: It goes without saying, your Honor, that of course if the witness wants to put at the disposal of an expert a letter or something in her handwriting from the year 1942 it would be of great help to this expert, but nevertheless I still move that it should be shown how she writes today, first of all, it is easily possible that the witness will be not able to put at the disposal of the Tribunal examples written by her personally in 1942 as the identification is not easy of such things. Second of all I do think it is necessary that the Tribunal knows that this example is written by the witness herself and that can only be done here and nowhere else.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. We will sum up the entire matter. This is what will take place. In the first place the witness will in accordance with defense counsel's request, copy these words which she wrote on this sheet with her own pen on a sheet of paper. That is number one. And you may introduce that as an exhibit, counsel. Then number two. As you leave the courtroom you will step into one of the ante chambers and copy from the mimeographed sheet the affidavit which you wrote in Berlin. Number three. When you return to your home you will endeavor to locate some letters which you wrote to your husband in 1942. If he is a good husband and loved you perhaps he kept the letters, but maybe he is still a good husband and loves you but lost the letters.