BY THE TRIBUNAL (General Nikitchenko):
Q. When do you contend that Professor Butz told you that the burial of the corpses was in the spring of 1940?
A. I cannot tell you the day exactly, but it was in the spring of 1943, before these excavations had started. I beg your pardon: He told me that he had been instructed to excavate, and during the excavations he was with me on occasions. It may have been in May or the end of April, middle of May, and at that time he told me details about his excavation work, and among other things he told me tht things that I have testified to and stated before this Court. I cannot tell you on just what date Professor Butz visited me.
Q. As I understand you, you said the following things: That Professor Butz arrived in Katyn, when did he arrive in Katyn?
A. In the spring of 1940, Professor Butz came to me and told me that on instructions of the Army Group he was to undertake excavations in my forests, and these excavations were started, and in the course of these excavations -
Q. You say 1940? Or perhaps the translation is wrong. Did I understand you correctly?
A. 1943, in the spring of 1943. In the course of the excavations, a few weeks after the beginning of the excavations, when I was present in this vicinity, Professor Butz visited me and reported to me; or, father, he discussed this matter with me, and on that occasion he told me the things that I have testified to here. It may have been the middle of May 1943.
Q. According to your former testimony, I undertood you to say in answer to a question from Defense Counsel, that Professor Butz contended that the shootings took place in the spring of 1940, before the arrival of the commission for the exhumations. Is that correct?
A. May I repeat once more that Professor Butz-
Q. Do not repeat what you have already said. I am asking you whether it is correct or incorrect. Maybe the translation was incorrect, or maybe your testimony was incorrect at the beginning.
A. I did not understand the question just put to me. That is the reason why I wanted to explain this thing once more. I do not know just what is meant by this last question. May I ask that this question be repeated?
Q. At first, when you were interrogated, I understood you to say that Professor Butz told you that the shootings took place in the spring of 1940, before the arrival of the commission for the exhumations.
A. No, that has hot been understood correctly. I testified that Professor Butz visitied me and told me that he was to undertake excavations, for a small grove was concerned here. These excavations did take place, and six to eight weeks later Professor Butz visited me. Of course, he visited me on other occasions as well, but six to eight weeks later he came to no and told no that he was convinced that on the basis of his findings the date of the shootings could be fixed and that he had fixed this date. The explanations which he gave me may be set to the middle of May.
Q. Were you present when the diary and the other documents were found--the documents that were found by Professor Butz?
A. No.
Q. So, you do not know where he found this diary and the other documents? I mean you personally do not know about it?
A. No, that I do not know. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. When did you first report to superior authority the fact that you suspected that there was a grave there?
A. First of all, I was not suspicious. I have already mentioned that fighting had taken place there, and on the basis of what I head heard, I did not pay much attention to this and did not give this matter, or the stories, any credence. I believed that it was soldiers who had died there.
Q. You are not answering my question. I am asking you, when did you first report to superior authority that there was a grave there?
A. In the course of the summder 1942, I spoke With Colonel von Gersthoff, and mentioned these stories. Gerthoff told me that he himself had heard similar stories, and in this fashion my conversation with von Gersthoff was concluded. I believe that he did not give any credence to these tories. That I do not know, however. was the time when those bones were brought ot me, the bones which had been found, and on that occasions I told the officer who was in charge of graves that apparently they were the graves of soldiers who had died or been killed.
That was before Professor Butz had 1 July M LJG 9-1a visited me.
Q Did you rake any report in writing?
Q Never?
THE PRESIDENT: The witness can retire.
DR. STAHMER: Then, as an additional witness, I should like to call Lieutenant Reinhard von Eichborn.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. testified as follows; BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Will you state your full name please?
Q Will you repeat this oath after no: the pure turth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
THE PRESIDENT: You may sit down. BY DR. STAHMER:
Q Witness, what is your occupation?
Q During this war, were you called to service?
Q And what was your unit?
Q And what was your rank? and at the end, first lieutenant. Theater of the war?
A Yes, from the beginning of the war.
1 July M LJG 9-2a
Q With your regiment? Center--Heeresgruppe Mitte. unit 537? engineering unit 537. Katyn? ferred its headquarters to the region of Smolensk.
Q And before then, where had you been stationed?
A How am I to understand this question?
Q Where did you come from?
THE PRESIDENT: One moment. The witness said 20 September. That does not identify the year. BY DR. STAHMER:
Q What year was this 20 September?
Q At that time was the regiment 537 there already? a staff of the Army Group at about the same time, where then headquarters of the Army Group was, and advanced units had been stationed there a little in advance in order to set up communication?
Q. And where was this staff accommodated ?
A. The staff of Army Group 537 was accommodated in the so-called NieperCastle.
Q. Where was the advance unit ?
A. The advance unit occupied this building -- or at least a part of this advance unit did -- so that they could prepare and insure this building for the regimental staff.
Q. Do you know who was in command of this advance unit ?
A. Lieutenant Hodt was in command of this advance unit.
Q. Then did this advance unit come to Katyn ?
A. Smolensk fell on about the 17th of July 1941. The Army Group had planned to put its headquarters in the vicinity of Smolensk. However, after this group had selected the quarters, immediately after the fall of the city, this region was confiscated. The advance unit arrived at the time this area was confiscated, and that was probably in the second half of July of 1941.
Q. The advance unit was there from July of 1941 until the 20th of September 1941 ?
A. Yes.
Q. And the entire staff was there from the 20th of September, 1941 ?
A. Yes. It may be that a part of the staff arrived somewhat later, but the bulk of the staff arrived on the 20th of September.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you speaking of the staff of the Army Group or the staff of the Signal Regiment ?
THE WITNESS: I am speaking of both staffs, because the moving of large staffs such as of an army group, could not be taken care of in one day; usually a period of two to three days was needed for that. The operations of the signal corps had to be assured, and therefore some of the staff was left behind until the entire staff had been moved. BY DR. STAHMER:
Q. Where was the advance unit accommodated ?
A. At least part of the advance unit was accommodated in the Dnieper Castle. Some of the others were put in spots where the companies were quartered later on. The reason for that was to keep the quarters ready for this regiment until the bulk of the regiment had been moved.
Q. How about the Regimental Staff 537 ?
A. In the Dnieper Castle.
Q. Can you give us the names of the officers who belonged to the regimental staff ?
A. At that time there was Lieutenant-Colonel Bedenck, commanding officer; Lieutenant Rex, adjutant; Lieutenant Hodt, ordnance officer; and Captain Schaefer, who was a signal expert. It may be that one or two other officials were present as well, whose names I do not recall now.
Q. What were the tasks of the regiment ? The other witness has told us about some things. What were the activities of the regimental staff, and how were the activities controlled ?
A. The regiment, which consisted of ten to twelve companies, had to give an exact report each evening as to the work to which the various companies had been put. It was necessary for us to know this so that forces would be at the disposal of new tasks, or could be used for new tasks.
Q. How far were you from the Dnieper Castle ? How far were your accommodations ?
A. Four to five kilometers. I cannot give you the exact distance, however since I always made this distance by truck, but I judge it to be four to five kilometers.
Q. Did you frequently go to Dnieper Castle ?
A. Very frequently, outside of office hours, since I had come from this regiment, knew most of the officers, and was on friendly terms with them.
Q. Can you tell us about the kind and extent of traffic which came to the Dnieper Castle ?
A. In order to judge this, you have to differentiate between persons and things. So far as people were concerned, the traffic was very heavy because the regiment had to be organized very centrally in order to take care of its tasks. Therefore, many couriers came, and commanders of the various companies came to visit the regional staff frequently. On the other hand, there was a heavy traffic of trucks and passenter cars, because the regiment tried to develop its business there, and all sorts of construction work was being carried on there since we regained for quite some time.
Q. Did you know anything about the fact as to whether, 25 to 45 kilometers west of Smolensk, 300 Russian camps with captured Polish officers had been found, which camps allegedly came into German hands ?
A. Polish officers from prisoner of war camps ? That was something I never heard anything about.
Q. Did your Army Group have reports about these Polish camps ?
A. No. I would have noticed that, since the number of prisoners, and especially officers, were reported on, and these reports were submitted to me in the evening, reports which the prisoners made. It was our responsibility to receive these reports and we saw them every evening.
Q. You did not receive a report to that effect ?
A. I never saw such a report from an army group which would have made that report, nor did I ever receive a report from an army group which would have had to transmit this report.
to another office ? and this staff saw to it that official channels were followed. The army group was obligated to give those reports which they had to fill out according to form, and this group took care of the figures concerning prisoners. Therefore, it is quite out of the question. If a number of officers had fallen into the hands of an army group, it would have been impossible for this army group to have transmitted this report in the channel and along the lines that you have just outlined. ship with the officers of this regiment. Did you learn anything through Colonel Bedenck or Colonel Ahrens, or others, to the effect that Polish officers had been shot in Katyn Forest ? I myself had been with this regiment for more than a year. I was in such close relationship with most of the officers that, even outside of official channels, they told me everything that took place. Therefore, it is quite out of the question that an important matter like that would not have come to my attention. On the basis of the training which obtained in the regiment, it is quite impossible that there should not have been at least one who would have come to me immediately to tell me about such things. these orders in the course of your work ? applied to the wireless, and second, to the teletype. Since I was an expert at the latter, it was quite a matter of course that I drafted these reports and submitted them to General Oberhaueser. Therefore, each report which was issued had either been crafted by me, or I had seen it in advance. of war ? office to the regiment. We did not have a report to this effect, nor did we hear about things like that from any other source or through any other channel.
come through your office and through you ? regiment would have been taken away. Since we were very short of men almost every man in the regiment had to be informed about everything, and it would have been quite out of the question that members of the regiment would have been taken away without our knowing about it.
DR. STAHMER : I have no further questions, Mr. President.
DR. KRANZBUEHLER ( Counsel for defendant Doenitz) : Mr. President .
THE PRESIDENT : Dr. Kranzbuehler, whom are you appearing on behalf of
DR. KRANZBUEHLER : For Grand Admiral Doenitz, Mr. President,
THE PRESIDENT : There is no charge made against Grand Admiral Doenitz in connection with this offense at all.
DR. KRANZBUEHLER : Mr. President, the exaggerations and the propaganda connected with them took place at a period of time when Grand Admiral Doenitz was Commander-in-Chief of the Navy. The prosecution alleges that at that time Grand Admiral Doenitz was a member of the Cabinet and had participated in all acts taken by the government. Therefore, I consider him accused in connection with the case Katyn.
THE PRESIDENT : That would mean that we should have to hear examination from everybody who was connected with the Government. The Tribunal has already, pointed out, with reference to Admiral Raeder, that his case was not connected with this matter. It is only when it is directly connected with the matter that counsel for the individual defendants, are allowed to examine, in addition to the defendants counsel who calls the witness. If there is any suggestion that you wish to make to the counsel who is calling the witness, you can make it to him, but you are not entitled -
DR. KRANZBUEHLER: Mr. President, I shall try to restrict myself to the utmost, but I am asking your permission to put two or three questions to this witness.
THE PRESIDENT: If you have any special questions to put, you may suggest them to Dr. Stahmer, and Dr. Stahmer will put them.
Dr. Kranzbuehler, if you want to put any questions, you may put them to Dr. Stahmer, and he will put them to the witness.
DR. KRANZBUEHLER: Mr. President, I did not quite understand. Shall I write these questions down for Dr. Stahmer?
THE PRESIDENT: If you cannot do it verbally, you may do it in writing, and you may do it later on. But I really do not think there can be any questions which it is so difficult to suggest to Dr. Stahmer as all that.
DR. KRANZBUEHLER: It may be put through Dr. Stahmer? I was only thinking that I would save some time by putting the questions myself.
THE PRESIDENT: I told you, if you wish to ask any questions, you must ask them through Dr. Stahmer.
DR. KRANZBUEHLER: Thank you, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: In the meantime, the Tribunal will go on with the cross examination, and any questions which you wish to put can be put in reexamination.
Does the prosecution wish to cross-examine? BY COLONEL SMIRNOV:
Q Witness, will you state your exact function in the army? You were in charge of telephone communications in the headquarters of the army group center, were you not?
A No, Mr. Prosecutor, you are wrong. I was the export of the signal corps of the army group center, not the wireless expert.
Q That was precisely the core of my question. The translation was probably incorrect. So you were in charge of telephone communications, were you not? Is that correct?
A Yes; you are right.
Q Simple, clerical telegrams, or ciphered telegrams?
in the keeping open of connections.
Q No, I am not asking you in a general sense. I would like to know whether those were secret telegrams or current army mail, which was not secret.
Q Here you in charge of the secret telegrams, too? police authority passed through you; is that correct? the secret ones. These were submitted to me.
Q Yes. Consequently, the correspondence between the police authority and the Wehrmacht units passed through you; is that correct? I am asking you this question for a second time. not come through me, but only the more important secret teletype matters were submitted to me -- not the entire exchange of letters, because that was handled by correspondence and by couriers as well.
Q That is clear. Do you know in this case that in September and October, 1941, there were special units in Smolensk which were bound in close cooperation with the army to carry out the purge of the prisoner of war camps and to exterminate prisoners of war?
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, I must object to the utmost to this questioning of the witness. This questioning can have only the purpose of determining connections between the OKW and other commanders. Therefore, they are accusing the general staff and the OKW; and if I am not permitted as the defense counsel for the OKW to put questions for reasons of equal treatment, then the same rules must apply to the prosecution as well.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Allow me, please, to give you a short explanation, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Smirnov, the question is competent,
COLONEL SMIRNOV: I beg your pardon?
THE PRESIDENT: I said the question was competent. You may ask the question.
BY COLONEL SMIRNOV:
Q I would like to ask you the following question. Since the secret war telephone messages passed through you, did you accomplish closer telephone communications with the so-called Einsatzgruppe B and the Sonderkommando Moskov, which was at that time in Smolensk, which was assigned to commit crimes in Moscow? Both commandos were at that time in Smolensk.
A Such reports did not come into my hands. I can give a complete explanation to you, Mr. Prosecutor. If, in the area of sphere of the army group center, commandos like that were used, those commandos had their own wireless stations; in the course of the Russian campaign, later, those officers had teletype connections as well. Then they based this activity on the network of the army group. However, that only happened later. accordance with instructions of high police authorities were assigned to carry out Sender actions in cooperation with military units did not pass through your hands in September and October of 1941?
A That is correct. At that time, there were no teletype connections and offices for special units, even if they were in that area at all.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Mr. President, this document was already presented to the court when the Report No. USSR 3 was presented. If the Tribunal will permit it, I should like to present to the Tribunal and to the defense photostatic copies of one of the documents which were joined to that document.
If the Tribunal will look at Page 2 of this document, it will see that the Sonderkommando Moskov and the Einsatzgruppe 3 were located in Smolensk . It says on the first page that this unit, together with Wehrmacht units, was assigned to carry out mass killings in the camps.
THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Smirnov, that is a matter of argument. We shall take judicial notice of it, of course, of everything which is in the Soviet Government's publication. I understand you to say that this document is a part of the Soviet government communication or Soviet government report.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Yes, Mr. President; but I would like to ask permissionto present to the Tribunal an original German document, a secret document, which confirms the same thing,and which says that in the area of Smolensk therewere two such Sonder Commandos assigned to carry out mass killings in the camps. And they had to coordinate this action with Wehrmacht units which had to cooperate with them.
THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Smirnov, is this document which you have just handed up to us a part of the Report USSR-3?
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Yes, Mr. President, it is a part of the report USSR 3, called Special Instructions of the Hitlerite Government concerning the Treatment of Prisoners of War. I would like to ask the Tribunal to allow me to present an original document. and were assigned to carry out mass killings in the prisoner of war camps.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Colonel Smirnov. This document is already in evidence, if the Tribunal understands.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Thank you, Mr. President. BY COLONEL SMIRNOV: correspondence of these special units did not mass through your hands; is that correct?
THE PRESIDENT: He has said that twice already.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Excuse me, Mr. President.
BY COLONEL SMIRNOV:
about the killing of the Poles? Because the killing of the Poles was a special action, and communications of this action was not supposed to pass through your hands? Is that correct?
A Ianswered to the Soviet prosecutor -- rather I answered Dr. Stahmer-that if in the area of the Signal Group 537 killings of that sort had taken place I would have known about them. As the prosecutor just said, I did not claim that which he is trying to put before me.
THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Smirnov, the Tribunal think you had better read this passage from this document, which is in the German language, to the Tribunal so that it will go into the record.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Yes, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Go on, Colonel Smirnov.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Thank you, Mr. President.
This document is dated Berlin, 29 October 1941. It has a classification "Secret, important state matters", In the column concerning the reason, there is a reference to July and the 12th of August, 1941. I shall now read a few short sentences, and I shall begin with the first sentence:
"In the appendix, I give your directions for the evacuation of Soviet war civilian and prisoner of war camps and transient camps in the rear army territories and ask you for your acknowledgment.
"These directives have been worked outin collaboration with the OKW. The OKH has advised the commanders of therear army territory as well as the local commanders of the prisoner of war camps and the transient camps .
"The Special Action Groups, depending on the size of the camp in their territory, are setting up Sonder Commandos in sufficient strength under the leader ship of in SS leader."
Now I shall start reading the last paragraph:
"I emphasize especially that the orders Nos. 8 and 14, in case of evacuation, are to be destroyed immediately and a report is to be made in such a case to me." sent, especially the part concerning Smolensk. It says here that in Smolensk and 9; and in addition to this, there was also located in Smolensk, a Sonderkommando Moskov, which had been so named prematurely.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal directs that the whole document shall be translated. We will now recess until five minutes past two.
(A recess was taken until 1405).
(The hearing reconvened at 1400 hours, 1 July 1946.)
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Mr. President, I have no more questions to put to this witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Stahmer. BY DR. STAHMER:
Q. Mr. Witness, do you know who was in that Dnieper Castle before the occupation by German troops, who owned it, who lived there ?
A. That, I cannot say for certain. We noticed that the little castle was furnished astonishing well. It was built very efficiently. It had two bathrooms, a skiing room, a rifle range and a cinema. Just then we had drawn certain conclusions, that is to say, when the events became known but I do not know anything certain about the previous owner.
Q. The Russian prosecutors have submitted to you a document dated the 29th of October 1941. It contained directives for commandoes of the chief of the army group. With reference to that document, I want to ask you whether you had an opportunity to learn personally what the attitude of Fieldmarshal Kluge was, the chief of the army group, what his views were regarding the shooting of prisoners of war ?
A. Quite by accident, I became the personal witness of a conference between Book and Kluge, both supreme commanders. That conversation took place about two or three weeks, three or four weeks before the beginning of the Russian campaign and I cannot tell you the exact time. At the time, Fieldmarshal von Bock was the supreme commander of the army group center and Fieldmarshal von Kluge was the supreme commander of the 4th army group, at Warsaw. One day, I was called by the adjutant of Fieldmarshal von Bock, who was Lt. Colonel Count Hardenberg. He gave me the ------
THE PRESIDENT: Those details are entirely irrelevant, aren't they. All you want to ask him is : what was the attitude of von Huge ? That is all.
DR. STAHMER: The answer didn't come through. I didn't understand, Mr. President, what you said.
THE PRESIDENT: I said that all those details are irrelevant.
DR. STAHMER: It still isn't coming through. Yes, now Mr. President,
THE PRESIDENT: That I said was, that all these details about the particular place where von Kluge met some other army group commander is utterly irrevelant. All you are trying to ask him is : what was von Kluge's attitude towards the murder of war prisoners ? Isn't that all ?
DR. STAHMER: Yes. BY DR. STAHMER:
Q. Will you answer the question briefly, Mr. Witness. Please just tell us what von Kluge said .
A. Von Kluge told von Beck during a telephone conversation that the direction which contains orders to shoot certain prisoners of war was an impossibility and could not be carried out, considering the discipline of the troops. Von Bock shared this point of view and both these gentlemen talked for half an hour about the measures which they wanted to adopt in this connection.
Q. According to the allegations of the prosecution, the shooting of those cloven thousand Polish officers is supposed to have been carried out sometime in September 1941 and the question now is : Do you consider it possible, considering the local conditions, that such mass shootings and burials could have been carried out next door to the regimental headquarters without you yourself having heard about it ?
A. In preparation for the move of the army group to Smolensk, we were most attentive. We had quite a let of signal troops which were used for the purpose of extending the site. The entire site was continuously used by these troops for the laying of cables and telephone lines and it is out of the question that any such event could have occurred in that particular area without the regimental headquarters having failed to gain knowledge of it.
DR. STAHMER: I have no further questions to the witness, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness can retire.
DR. STAHMER: Mr. President, before calling my third witness, Lt. General Oberhausser, may I ask your permission to make the following remarks ? The prosecution have up to now only alleged that Regiment No. 537 had been the one which had carried out these shootings and it has alleged that they have done so under Colonel Ahrens' command. Still today, Colonel Ahrens is accused of being the perpetrator. Apparently this allegation has been dropped because it has been said that if it wasn't Ahrens it must have been his predecessor, Colonel Bedenck, and if it hasn't been done by Colonel Bedenck, then apparently there is supposed to be a third version, that it has been done by the SD. The defense had entirely adapted themselves to the contradicting statement that it had been Colonel Ahrens who had committed the act, but considering the changed attitude adopted by the prosecution, I shall have to name an additional fourth witness and that is 1st Lieutenant Hodt who had been mentioned as the perpetrator today and who was with the regimental staff right from the beginning and who was with the advance party which arrived at the Dnieper Castle, in July. The address of 1st Lieutenant Hodt, I heard of quite accidentally yesterday. He is at Gluecksburg near Flensburg and I therefore ask to be allowed to name 1st Lieutenant Hodt as a witness, who will give evidence that during the time between July and September such shootings were not carried out.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Stahmer, the Tribunal will consider your application when they adjourn at half past three with reference to this extra witness.
DR. STAHMER: Yes, sir. Then I shall now call the witness Lt. General Oberhaueser. follows: BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Will you state your full name, please?
Q Will you repeat this oath after me: truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath).
THE PRESIDENT: You may sit down. BY DR. STAHMER:
Q General, what position did you hold during the war? the Polish campaign North; then Western campaign B, and then in Russia, Army Group Center.
Q When did you and your staff roach the neighborhood of Katyn?
Q Where was your staff located? Commander of the Army Group; that is to say, about twelve kilometers west of Smolensk near the railroad station of Krasnibor.
Q Was Regiment No. 537 under your command?
Q What task did that regiment have?