After twenty-four hours the Gestapo men started torturing him; he was interrogated, and beaten only at night. After the interrogation he was called into a separate chamber, where very special machines and devices for tortures were, chains with rings for leg irons and feet irons. This chain was attached to the cement floor of the chamber. Those arrested were first absolutely undressed, and then nut on the floor, and their hands and feet were chained.
Citizen Kovaltchuk was subjected to such tortures. While being bound in chains he could not move at all. He was lying on his stomach and in such a position he was beaten by rubber clubs sixteen days. Besides this inhuman torture, the Gestapo also resorted to the following: Some were bound in chains on their back where they used to put on a wet board, and they used to bound this board with heavy weights, and as a consequence of this, the person was bleeding from the mouth, nose and ears, and he would lose consciousness. These torture chambers in the Gestapo building was arranged in such a way that during the torture of the one person, others arrested people who were in the cells in the next chambers, and who were expecting reprisals, would be eye-witnesses of the tortures and the beatings. After this torture those arrested who were unconscious would be thrown aside, and the Gestapo men would by force grab the next victim, and again they would put it in chains and would continue to subject it to the tortures in the same manner.
The torture chambers were always covered with blood. The board which was placed on the back also was covered with blood. The rubber clubs which were used to boat the arrested were red on account of blood. Arrested Soviet people doomed to shooting after unbearable torture and whippings and beatings, would be driven into a car or truck and be taken out of town and shot there. I skip more paragraphs and continue my quotation.
"The witness Tchaika Varvvaza Ivanovna was born in 1912 and was in Dzerdzinsky Street 31, Apartment 3. While she was in the Gestapo prison, she was subjected to incredibly cruel tortures carried on by the Chief of the Gestapo, Captain Vintz. During her sojourn in the prison she testified about it; "I was subjected to torture and beatings by the Chief of Gestapo, German Captain Vintz. He called me into an interrogation in the torture chambers. There were four tables in there and a chair. There were wooden rails on the floor, and two buckets of water in which ware leather thongs. On the ceiling there were two rings, with ropes threaded into them, and the arrested during torture was suspended from these rings, and on order of Captain Vintz the Gestapo man placed me on a table and took all my clothes off, and then severely boat me with lashes. I was beaten twice. Altogether I received seventy-five torture lashes. My kidneys were practically split open, and I lost eight teeth." What had taken place in the Starzopak torture chambers on Dzerdzinsky Street was not exceptional at all. The same thing was being done all over. To confirm this I shall refer to the already presented document Exhibit USSR-9, communication of the Extraordinary State Commission about the depredations and tortures which were committed by the German Fascist commission in the city of Kiev.
paragraph, and again I shall quote from their excerpt, from which I begin:
"Murders were often preceded by sadistic tortures. The Archimandrite Valerian testified that Fascists used to beat the weak and sick people until half dead. They would subject them to water treatment in cold weather. Finally they would shoot them against a police wall and in torture chambers which were in the Monastery of Kiev-Petshersk." I shall direct the Tribunal's attention to the fact that the place was a monastery which was one of the most of the churches visited. It was regarded of such architectural value that it is very close to the hearts of the Soviet people and a real monument which adds greatly to Russian culture. And this police terroristic chamber was established in this monument of culture. As to the subsequent fate of this cultural monument of Russia, the Tribunal will learn from the next presentation. of the German Fascist extermination in Odessa. I refer to the extraordinary communication of the Extraordinary State Commission to crimes committed by German program in the city of Odessa, and the Odessa district. I submit this to the Tribunal as USSR Exhibit number 47, and I submit it as refutable evidence in confirmation of the evidence provided by Article 21 of the chapter. I shall quote and you will find on page 282 of the document book, fourth paragraph, of the second column of the text. In this particular text there was testimony further to the Tribunal which was given. I quote it. I quote from the communication of the Extraordinary State Commission, page 282.
examiner wished, then the voltage was increased. The body of the one start to rotate him.
After having rotated him up to 200 revolutions, speed.
At that particular moment the executioners would beat him with rubber truncheons on both sides.
The man would lose consciousness, Colonel Pokrovsky, USSR Exhibit 41.
That is a communication of the of the Territory of Latvia, Soviet Socialist Republic.
I shall quote from this document.
I begin on page 286 in the document book, "In the camps and prison, the German executioners subjected prisoners to torture, beating and shooting.
In the central prison prisoners were beaten and tortured.
All around were heard shouts and groans in the chambers.
Daily from 30 to 35 people died because of torture.
Whoever survived after torture and boating would return his body torn.
No medical aid was given to the ones who were tortured."
in the text of the communication of the Commission. I shall not delay I shall now address myself to the next section, and that is:
Murder of Hostages. I shall make a few introductory remarks.
German Fascists of the bestial system of hostages. The system of in carrying out murder of hostages.
Under that system the Hitlerites about the murder of hostages.
Since crimes were perpetrated by murders.
Considerably the same remarks apply to Poland and especially to Yugoslavia.
In those countries Hitlerites, under the of Eastern Europe.
I submit an extract from the report of the Polish Republic.
The Tribunal will find the quotation on page 128 in the sixth column of the sixth paragraph.
It begins this way.
"One of the most repulsive features of Hitlerite occupation of Poland was the introduction of the system of hostages.
The collective "Here are several typical cases of mass reprisals that serve "In November 1939 an unknown person set on fire a warehouse The warehouse was the property of a German.
As a result of this, a certain Sterling, who was an SS Standardefuehrer, received an order from higher authorites to resort to reprisals.
A certain number of Poles from among the most prominent citizens were arrested. Out of those, 50 were chosen and publicly shot by SS men. Among the victims were: the two brothers Jankovsky, one an attorney, the second a priest, the tailor Malkovsky, the merchant Zemny, major in the army reserve Vona, the son of a barkeeper, the publisher of a newspaper, and a priest Bronislav Dembenovsky.
"In October 1939 German authorities caught a certain number of Poles in the city of Inovroplav, and put them in prison as hostages. Then they were led into the courtyard where they were unmercifully beaten and were shot one by one. Altogether, 70 were killed, among them the city mayor and his deputy. Among the victims were the most prominent inhabitants of the town."
"On the 7th of March, 1941, movie actor Igo-Sym, who considered himself as belonging to the German nationality, and who was in charge of the German theaters in Warsaw, was killed in his own apartment. Even though the killers were not found, the Governor of Warsaw said that Sym was killed by Poles, and he ordered the arrest of a large number of hostages, the closing of the theaters, and he set a curfew for the Polish population.
"Hostages were taken in order to ensure the finding of the ones who were guilty of the murder. There were about 200 people arrested. Among them were teachers, clergy, physicians, attorneys and actors. The population of Warsaw was given three days to find the murderers, the killers of Sym. After the expiration of the three days, since the killers were still unknown, 17 hostages were executed, among them Professor Orkopetz, his son, and Professor Sakuchevsky." Government and ask the Tribunal's permission to refer to a short extract from the report of the Czechoslovak Government. There is one part I would like to read into the record.
The Tribunal will "Even before the beginning of the war, thousands of Czech doctors, teachers and others, were arrested.
Furthermore, in every as hostages at the first indication of disorders of 'public peace and security.
' "In the beginning, in 1940, Karl Franks said in his speech to loyalty.
Some time after the attempt on Heydrich's life, many of "A typical method of Nazi police terror was reprisals against "In such a case in 1939 the Gestapo called in all the directors told them that they would be shot should there be a strike.
On "I know the condition that I shall be immediately shot if my factory stops production without a good reason.
' "In a similar way school teachers had to be responsible for the loyal behavior of their pupils.
Many teachers were arrested only writing anti-German slogans or while they were reading forbidden books."
By way of introduction I shall just say a few words. These special development.
Here one really could not mention the killing of hostages even though the official documents of the Hitlerites, which will be presented to the Tribunal, mentions this term.
In essence really, under the alleged murder of hostages, Hitlerite criminals on an enormous scale were carrying out or executing the regime of terroristic extermination of the peaceful population, not only the guilt of someone, but also for what, according to Hitler's way of thinking, might have been done by some people. I submit the document that confirms it. the honorable members of the Tribunal will find on page 259 in the document book, (first paragraph) I begin the quotation:
"Murder of hostages. Murder of hostages was one of the means which were used by military organizations and the Reich Government on an unbelievable scale for mass extermination of the Yugoslav population." this connection an inumerable number of concrete details and original evidence from German archives. We herewith submit only a very limited number of such documents and proof, which are sufficient in number, however, to present the fact of the killing of hostages as a part of a common plan and of the methodica system of Nazi crime. from the order of the Commander of a so-called "West" group, which is General Brauner. The following quotation is used:
"In regions seized by partisans, seizure of hostages from all strata of the population remains in force as the only means of intimidation that really is successful." with the murder of hostages, the Yugoslav Government submits to the Tribunal a series of documents which I am submitting to the Tribunal and I ask them to be incorporated into the record as evidence. I am submitting to the Tribunal the following documents:
1. Under USSR 318, a certified photostat of a poster of a commanding gene Commandatur in Serbia, dated 23 of December, in which he announces the shooting of fifty hostages.
2. As USSR Exhibit Number 319, certified photostat of an announcement of the same commanding general, dated the 19 of February, 1943, in which he announces the shooting of four hundred hostages which was carried out on the same date in Belgrade.
3. As USSR Exhibit Number 320, a certified photostat of an announcement of the Regional Commandatur in Pozarevatz, dated 3 April, 1943, in which it is announced as to the shooting of seventy-five hostages.
4. As USSR Exhibit Number 321, a certified photostat of an announcement of the Regional Commandatur, dated 16 April, 1943, in which there is announced the shooting of thirty hostages.
5. A certified copy of an announcement of the Military Commandant of Belgrade dated 14 October, 1943, in which he announces the shooting of one hundred hostages. I submit the document as USSR Exhibit 322.
"Planned and systematic murder of hostages is revealed by the following testimony, which was collected by the Yugoslav State Commission Investigating War Crimes on the basis of confiscated German archives and data found in archives. The evidence refers only to Serbia.
"On the 3 of October, 1941 in Belgrade, there were sho 450 hostages. On the 17 of October, 1941 in Belgrade were shot two hundred hostages. On the 27 of October, 1941 in Belgrade, fifty hostages were shot. On the 3 of November, 1941, in Belgrade, one hundred hostages were shot.
"Other information reveals the enormous number of crimes in a very short period.
"On the 12 of December, 1942, in Kraguevatz there were shot ten hostages. On the 12 of December, 1942 in Krusevatz ten hostages were shot. On the 15 of December, 1942 in Brush thirty hostages were shot. On the 17 of December, 1942 in Petrovatz fifty hostages were shot. On the 20 of December, 1942 in Brush ten hostages were shot. On the 25 of December, 1942 in Petrovatz fifty hostages were shot. On the 26 of December, 1942 in Brush there were ten hostages shot. On the 27 of December, 1942 in Krusevatz twenty-five hostages were shot." such figures could be cited ad infinitum.
"Shooting of hostages as a rule was conducted in a barbaric manner. More often the victims were made to stand one behind the other in groups, to wait their turn to be eye-witnesses of the execution of the preceding group. In such a consecutive manner those groups were exterminated." of the Political Administration of the Quisling Administration of Milan Nedrich, where it refers to the shooting on the 11 of December in Leskovatz of three hundred and ten hostages, out of which two hundred and ninety-three were gypsies."
"Through an examination of the location and interrogation of the gypsies by the original administration investigating war crimes in Leskovatz, the following methods of carrying out this shooting was established or discovered." referred to by the Government of the Czech Republic. I submit it as USSR Exhibit Number 226 and I ask to have it incorporated as evidence. out of this document:
"On the 11 of December, 1941 from six o'clock in the morning to four o'clock in the afternoon Germans carried in their trucks arrested hostages in groups, up to twenty people in every group. All of them had their hands bound. They were taken through the foothills of the Mountain Hisar. From there on they were made to walk across the mountain and then stood up in ranks and near dug out graves they were shot and thrown into the graves."
THE PRESIDENT: This will be a good time to break off. made to leave out unnecessary details and to cut down the length of your address and it hopes that during the adjournment you will continue your efforts in that direction.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Of course, I shall.
(The Tribunal adjourned until February 18, 1946, at 1000 hours.)
THE PRESIDENT: I have an announcement to make, and I make it in this order, in the form of paragraphs.
Paragraph 1: The Tribunal cannot accept paragraph 1 of the prosecution's motion as to the evidence of the defendants, dated 11 February 1946, but directs that in complying with Article 24-D of the Charter, counsel for defendants shall confine their evidence to what is required for meeting the charges in the Indictment. 2 to 5 of the prosecution's motion.
Paragraph 2: With regard to the naming of witnesses, etc., by the defense under Article 24-D of the Charter, which is referred to in paragraph 1 of Dr. Stahmer's memorandum to the Tribunal dated 4 February 1946, the Tribunal makes the following order: procuring of documents, and without prejudice to the defendant's right to make further application at the conclusion of the case for the prosecution, counsel for the defendant Goering, Hess, Ribbentrop and Keitel shall, before 5 p.m. on Thursday, the 21st of February, file with the General Secretary written statements giving the names of the witnesses and particulars of the documents they respectively desire to call or put in evidence, with a summary of the facts to be proved thereby and an exposition of the relevance thereof. that is to say, 10 o'clock--for the hearing of argument upon such statements in open session.
Paragraph 3: The Tribunal will, in due course, issue directions as to the filing of similar statements on behalf of the other defendants and the hearing of argument thereon.
Paragraph 4: The Tribunal will announce later their decision on the other matters raised in Dr. Stahmer's memorandum.
The Tribunal will now hear the defendants' counsel's application for a recess.
PROFESSOR KRAUS: Kraus, representing defendants' counsel.
The defendants' counsel are thankful to the Tribunal for the opportunity that is presented for them to give the reasons for their application for an adjournment of the trial after the conclusion of the prosecution, this application being of the 4th of February. defense has striven to achieve a simple, clear, and as rapid a presentation as possible of its case. points.
First: All the defendants are accused of participation in a conspiracy. That is apparently intended to mean that every act brought up in the course of this trial, no matter by whom it was committed and to whom it was done, is charged against every one of these defendants, and that he can be convicted on every one of these acts. Even though the individual defense counsel finds certain fields with which he must concern himself particularly, there are, nevertheless, no fields at all which he can entirely ignore. and sometimes alone, it can be seen how enormous is the extent of the labor involved in the examination and discussion of the material that is daily presented by the prosecution. The necessary, continual discussions with the defendants uses up the evening hours and the days on which there are no sessions. These discussions are, moreover, because of the security measures that have been taken, very exhausting. lawyer, along with his attendance at the trial and his continuous working over of the material presented at the trial, to make those intellectual and technical preparations that can justifiably be expected in a trial of such significance as this one.
Secondly: The material presented is not yet conclusive. The Russian Prosecution is presenting new evidence daily. In the opinion of the defense counsel, it would lead to an incorrect evaluation of the extent and importance of the accusations which the Russian Delegation is presenting if the defense counsel were expected to conclude their preparations for t heir defense before they had even heard the conclusions of the prosecution's case.
Thirdly: The Tribunal has already been informed, in the written application, of the difficulties involved in getting evidence. A few examples might be cited in this regard, examples to which every one of the defense counsel could add. call a witness who was of decisive importance for the presentation of his case. The application was approved by the Tribunal. Although this witness was a very high German official, it was only in January of this year that the camp could be found at which he then was. The witness has, thus far, not turned up in Nurnberg. Therefore, the defense lawyer has, so far, no idea as to which questions this witness can testify on and what he would testify.
Another example: In numerous cases the place of residence of witnesses could not be determined, whose appearance at the trial the Tribunal had ordered in orders of November of last year. Defense counsel can help in no way in finding out where these witnesses are, in all those cases in which the witnesses are to be found in allied prisons, if they -- that is, the witnesses -- have no opportunity to provide information as to where they are.
Another example: One part of defense counsel, has been asked, for the hearing of witnesses outside Germany, to present questionnaires in which they are to state where these witnesses are to be heard. The answers to these questions have yet to return, in any case, to the defense counsel. In the case of witnesses who live in Germany, the defense counsel have repeatedly been asked to provide the interrogation themselves or to present a written declaration. Since the defense counsel are obliged to stay in Nurnberg during the sessions of the trial, they could fulfill this request only if there were a long adjournment.
Another example: One member of the defense, at the beginning of November, applied to submit a series of documents which were indispensible for his case. The documents are in the possession of one of the signatories of the Charter. They have been examined by the prosecution and have been submitted in evidence by the prosectuion, in so far asthey serve to implicate the defendant in question. The defense counsel is still not in possession of these exonerating documents.
Fourthly: We should like to emphasize again the purely technical difficulties that arise from the mimeographing and multiple translations.
THE PRESIDENT: Just one moment, Professor Kraus. You referred to a document which you said was indispensible, which was in the possession of the signatory power, examined by the prosecution and put in evidence in this case, and the defendants are still not in possession of it.
What is the reference to that document?
PROFESSOR KRAUS: No, Mr. President, it is a collection of documents in which the incriminating parts were presented by the prosecution, but we defense counsel have yet to come into possession of the exonerating parts of that collection of documents.
Dr. Kranzbuehler can give you further details on that subject.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, there is an application, I know, by Dr. Kranzbuehler, but if it is really a part of a document, the Tribunal has ruled on several occasions that if the prosecution puts in a certain part of a document, the whole of that document must be available to the defendants' counsel so that they can criticize and comment upon any other part of it which may throw light upon the part of the document which is put in evidence.
PROFESSOR KRAUS: Here it is not a single document in question, but a whole collection of documents. Dr. Kranzbuehler is anxious to have, from that collection of documents, those that would assist him in his exoneration of his client, since the incriminating documents have already been presented by the prosecution.
THE PRESIDENT: You may continue.
PROFESSOR KRAUS: Fourthly: The defense is thankful to the prosecution for the readiness they have shown in assisting the defense in the translations and mimeographing. The great difficulties which the prosecution itself has had in this matter, and the repeated discussions that the Tribunal have had to have on this matter, show, nevertheless, that an efficient solution of this problem will demand a certain length of time. its intention not to prolong the trail unnecessarily. Nevertheless, they are of the opinion that an inadequate preparation before the beginning of the defense will inevitably lead to a corresponding delay in the course of the defense, and that the results of such a defense might conceivably not suffice to the Tribunal to allow them to pass a fair verdict. portant in history of humanity, must be conducted throughout with peace and reflection, with that peacefulness and clamness that have characterized its previous course. Moreover, the understandable impatience of those who wish a quick ending of the trial must not be allowed to interfere with this. tion. The length of time applied for, namely, three weeks, cannot be considered unreasonable in view of the entire length which the prosecution has taken to complete its case.
The granting of this length of time would, on the other hand, contribute to the fact that the defense, in the pursuit of its case, would find itself in a spiritually and a materially lightened circumstance. today's application contrary to the opinion of the defendants we represent, but we feel that we must rely, in these matters, exclusively on our own consciences and on our professional tasks as defense lawyers. after serious and basic consideration my colleagues and I, without exception, are of the opinion that the length of time applied for, namely, three weeks, is the minimum which is necessary for an orderly preparation of the defense.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Kraus, the Tribunal would, like to know if you can answer the question whether Defendants' Counsel have they desire to call in evidence; whether they have made up their
PROFESSOR KRAUS: I cannot answer this question. I should have to ask among my colleagues.
The cases are different in the case of individual lawyers.
Some of them are more or less ready;
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: May it please the Tribunal, I think its attention to two aspects of the matter; first, what Dr. Stahmer, which was followed in the main by Professor Kraus today.
It is stated that a respite is required for the that is, of the Prosecution; secondly, that the Defense Counsel such a manner that smooth functioning is guaranteed; and thirdly, I respectfully request the Tribunal's attention to some October, which is exactly four months ago today.
The Defendants stated at Berlin, "It must be understood that the Tribunal, which preparation of the Defense or of the trial."
placed in the Defendants' information center on the 1st of November.
to many hundred, was made on the 5th of November. Except for one, Dr. Bergold on behalf of the Defendant Bormann, all Counsel explaining the scope and emphasis of the Prosecution's case.
Every have been applications for witnesses.
I shall deal later with certain in quite considerable trials where men's lives have been at stake picture.
But this case does not stop there.
presentations. In every case Defendants' Counsel had these documents and trial briefs by the latest at the middle of January.
All the
M. Dubost, M. Quatre, and by my Soviet colleagues as they went along.
that the Prosecution have given assistance. And I want to say this, the case for the Prosecution and the case for the Defense.