50 Jews, and it is a fact as reported in this document, there was a finding of manslaughter here? That Judge who passed the sentence of 3 years, he was one of your colleagues of the Army. I suggest that this is typical of their acts, and typical of the attitude to such murders.
A I have the following to say in this connection. Alegal question is at issue, whether the actual fact of manslaughteer or murder existed. What actually existed as the cause to judge for manslaughter is not indicated by the document,. For that reason, I cannot answer it. Because this man was sensitive at the sight of Jews. It was just a youthful adventure. That was apparent in the Judge's mind, You know it is perfectly" clear?
A I should like to say the following. As the document indicates, the application of the prosecution had been made for a murder sentence and for the death sentence. The presiding Judge did not consider this a case of murder out manslaughter. According to the German Penal Law, the difference between manslaughter and murder is that murder is an action with previous deliberation with the aim of killing a person. Manslaughter is an act of impulse, resulting in the death of a person. This latter legal qualification the Judge passed his sentence on and considered the circumstances as described here. The end of this story was that the Army Commander in Chief said the sentences would drop under the Amnesty. That is the end of this case of murder by the Army Judicial authorities, amnesty and pardoning of the whole thing. Now we will turn to another document so the Tribunal can Judge how zealously the authorities were in such cases. It is D-926 and will be GB-568. This comes from an earlier period, not the days when the Poles or the others were operating. These were the pioneer days, 1933, when 7 Aug M LJG 7-4 you joined them.
This is a file relating to the deaths of prisoners in protective custody at the concentration camp of Dachau. It starts with a letter dated 2 June 1933, from the Provincial Court Public Prosecutor to the State Ministry of Justice. Subject: Deaths of prisoners in protective custody at the concentration camp of Dachau. It relates to the Schloss Hausmann, Strauss and Nefzger cases. "In accordance with my instructions, I had a lengthy discussion on the 1 June 1933, with the Police Commander Himmler in his office at the Police Headquarters, Munich, about the incident at the concentration camp of Dachau, which I have already reported to the Ministry of Justice separately; in particular I told him briefly, with the aid of the photographs from the investigation files, about the Schloss Hausmann, Strauss and Nefzger cases, of which he appeared to have been advised already. I pointed out that particularly the four above-mentioned cases, in view of the findings to date, offer good reason for cogent suspicion of serious punishable actions on the part of individual members of the camp guard and of camp officials, and that both the Public Prosecution and the Police authorities to whose knowledge these incidents have come are under the obligation, under the threat of heavy punishment, to carry out the criminal investigation of the above-mentioned incidents without consideration for any persons whatsoever." I need not trouble you with the rest of the article. Document 2, shows that no action has apparently been taken from the 2nd of June until the 11th of August. It is from the Provincial Court Public Prosecutor, dated 11 August 1933, to the State Ministry of Justice. The last sentence of that letter reads, "Should the dossiers not be required at present, I would request the return of the so files for the purpose of examining whether the decree of 2.8.1933 regarding the granting of immunity from punishment has to be applied." I won't trouble you with the 3rd and 4th documents. If the Tribunal turns to page 5, and you witness turn to document 8, I wish to refer to it. That is a report from the 7 Aug M LJG 7-5 Provincial Public Prosecutor to the State Ministry of Justice, dated 26 September 1936.
Subject: Death of the prisoner in protective custody, Hugo Handschuch in Dachau camp. Have you found that?
I am reading from page Five of the English text:
Subject. "Death of the prisoner in protective custody Huge Handschuch in Dachau camp.
"The judicial autopsy ordered by me took place in Dachau on the 23rd of September, 1933, It showed that death was due to a brain injury wing to hemorrhage in the left membrane and that this hemorrhage was caused by blows with a blunt instrument, which hit the skull particularly in the region of the left temple and the back of the head. In addition, extensive blooding was established in the corpse in the region of the left cheek, in the right shoulder and left upper arm regions, in the regions of the seat and the upper thigh and of the lower part of the left thigh, - the results of blows on the body of the deceased with a blunt object, during his lifetime. On the findings based on the post-mortem, the preliminary medical opinion gave grounds for assuming out side responsibility.
"I intend to continue the further necessary search for the perpetrators in collaboration with the Political Police." Prime Minister with a request to take note and forward to the Reich governor in Bavaria. Notice is also given to the State Minister of the Interior.
Then, Document 11, page 9 of the English Text. It is a proposal made by the Minister of the Interior to quash the inquiry into the deaths of the protective custody prisoners, Handschuch, Frantz and Katz. Witness, you will remember Handschuch Frantz and Katz. Dr. Frank and the representative Nazi jurist. This letter is dated the 29th of November, 1933.
THE PRESIDENT: What Dr. Prank do you refer to?
MR. ELWYN JONES: The defendant, Dr. Frank.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, go ahead.
MR. WLWYN JONES: "The Commander of the Political Police in the Ministry of the Interior presented to you on the 18th of November, 1933 a proposal, according to which the inquiry into the cases of the prisoners in protective custody, Huge Handschuh, Wilhelm Frantz and Delvin Katz, should be quashed for state political reasons. In connection with this case, you sent to me the liaison man of the State Ministry of Justice with the Bavarian Political Police, Public Prosecutor Dr. Stepp, Meanwhile, in a discussion with the commander of the Political Police Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler, I have ascertained once more that to carry out this inquiry would cause considerable damage to the reputation of the National Socialist State, because this inquiry would be directed against members of the SA and SS and thus the SA and the SS, as the main props of the National Socialist State would be directly affected. For these reasons, I support the proposal for quashing the inquiry presented to you on the 18th of November, 1933 by the Commander of the Political Police in the State Ministry of the Interior."
I don't think I mood trouble with the rest of the letter, which states that the inmates of the concentration camp were almost exclusively of the criminal types.
THE PRESIDENT: The Document, which you have just been reading from, page nine of the English text, is dated the 29th of November, 1933. Is that correct?
Mr. ELWYN JONES: Yes, My Lord.
THE PRESIDENT: Is that a misprint?
MR ELWYN JONES: No, My Lord, that is correct.
THE PRESIDENT: The Document, page five of the English text, is dated September 26, 1936. Is that correct?
MR. ELWYN JONES : No, My Lord, that is a misprint and should have called your Lordship's attention to it. That should be 1933, My Lord, and I am much obliged.
THE PRESIDENT: That is page five, In referring to the Document, you should state that the pages which you did not refer to, pages three and four, show that the other dossiers, in connection with the Public Prosecutor, Provincial Court, Munich were apparently lost and were not forthcoming and that, inquiries were going on about them until 1935.
MR. ELWYN JONES: Yes, My Lord. Much obliged. I was trying to deal with the essential contents of the file.
THE PRESIDENT: Go on then.
MR. ELWYN JONES: I want you, witness, to look at page size of the English text and Document 10 of your file. That is a memo from Dr. H. Frank, the defendant, dated July 2, 1933 to the Prime Minister and the subject is "quashing of Criminal Proceedings."
"A merchant's wife, Sophie Handschuch, of Munich, in a written statement received by the PUBLIC PROSECUTION at the PROVINCIAL COURT, Munich 11, on the 18th of September, 1953 stated that her son, Hugh Handschuch, taken into protective custody on the 23rd of August, 1933, dies of heart failure in Dachau camp on the 2nd of September, 1953. In the inquest certificate, heart for lure following on the concussion of the brain was given as the cause of death. The cody was not shown to the relatives and was handed over only after great difficulties and on condition that the coffin would not be re-opened The coffin was so firmly naiad down that it was impossible to re-open it. The writer asked that the coffin be opened and a judicial postmortem hold, as she wan ted the body identified and the cause of death established.
"In order to clear up the state of affairs, the Provincial Court Public Prosecutor at the Provincial Court, Munich 11, at first, personally questioned the plaintiff, Sophie Handschuch, and the fiancee of the deceased. Thea Kink. From their evidence, the assumption seemed justified that already on the day of his arrest Handschuch was badly physically treated in the Brauhaus in Munich, and in connection with the further established fact that the relatives on the dead man ware expressly refused the permission to view the body, sufficient grounds were given for the suspicion that Handschuch did not die a natural death. In order to establish the cause of death without any doubts, the body was exhumed in Dachau on the 23rd of September, 1933 and a judicial autopsy carried out on the orders of the provincial court public prosecutor. It showed that death was caused by injury to the brain, as a result of a hemorrhage of the soft membrane of the brain and that these hemorrhages originated from blows with a blunt object, which hit the skull particularly in the region of the left temple and that of the back of the head. document.
I read : "In addition, extensive bleeding was established in the region of the left cheek, the right shoulder and the left upper arm of the corpse, in the region of the sort, the thigh, and on the lower part of the left thigh, as a result to blows with a blunt instrument on the body of the deceased while still alive. The findings of the judicial autopsy gave ground for assuming outside responsibility."
Then, paragraph 11 : "In the forenoon of the 19th October, the Public Prosecution at the Provincial Court, Munich 11, informed by telephone by the Bavarian Political Police that in the afternoon of the 17th of October, 1933, Wilhelm Franz, of Munich, a prisoner in protective custody, born on the 5th of June, 1909, and, on the night of the 17th - 18th of October, 1933, Dr. Delvin Katz, of Nurnberg, a prisoner in protective custody, born on the 3rd of August 1887, hanged themselves in their military confinement celle in Dachau concentration camp. The Public Prosecution ordered the same morning a legal examination to be hold in the camp, followed by a post mortem, The corpses in a locked camp shed lying on stretchers, and with the exception of the feet were totally undressed. In Franz' cell, fresh blood spots and splashes were observed on the wooden plank bed."
October.
The next paragraph: "The autopsy gave grounds suspecting in both corpses, force by an outside hand. According to preliminary opinion of both law court doctors, provincial Court doctor Dr. Falmm and Court Doctre Dr. Ni denthal, death by suffocation, as a result of strangulation and throttling, was established in both cases. The strangulation marks found on the neck do not correspond to observations in the case of persons hanged. In respect of Framm's body, it is also stated in the preliminary opinion that fat embolism is not prime-facie to be excluded as a contributing cause of death, fresh weals on the head, covered with hair as well as particularly numerous ones on the body and the arms, with extensive bleeding and destruction of the fatty-tissues were established on this corpse, part from injuries on the neck. Also Katz' body showed various signs of drying up and rubbing off of the skin off the head and one separation of the skin.
"At the time of the examination already, the public prosecution had demanded the production of both belts with which Franz and Katz had allegedly hang themselves; they could not be handed over at once. The Dachau lower Court had ordered the confiscation of the belts, in accordance with the application. Up until now, the objects confiscated had not yet been received by the Public Prosecution." Then paragraph 111: "In each case I informed the Prime Minister, and through him, the Reich Governor in Bavaria, as well as the State Minister of the Interior of the Public Prosecution's reports on the cases quoted in 1 and 11.
"In a letter of the 29th of November, 1933, addressed to me, the State Minister of the Interior proposed that, for State political reasons, the inquiry pending at the Public Prosecution of the Provincial Court, Munich 11, into the death of Hugo Handschuch, Wilhelm Frantz and Dr. Delvin Katz prisoners in protective custody, should be quashed. As a reason, it is poin ted out that the conducting of investigations would cause great harm to the prestige of the National Socialist State, since these proceedings would be directed against members of the SA and SS and thus the SA and SS as the chief protagonists of the National Socialist State would be immediately affected".
has the right of pardoning. He stated in the last sentence :"According to the law, Reich Governors, this right is vested exclusively in the Reich governor in Bavaria."
The next paragraph :"In view of this legal position, I beg you to submit the proposal of the State Minister of the Interior to the Council of Ministers." German text, states :"The proposal of the State Minister of the Interior that the inquiry pending at the public prosecution at the Provincial Court Munich into the death of the prisoners Handschuch, Frantz and Katz, who were in protective custody, be quashed, was the subject of a debate during the meeting of the Council of Ministers of the 5th of December 1933. As a result, the State Minister of Justice communicated the following to the undersigned official.
"The criminal proceedings, regarding the happenings in the Dachau concentration camp are to be continued with all determination. The facts are to be cleared up with the utmost speed. " of the English text :
"Presented to the state ministers with the request that they take note. The note of the first public prosecutor, Dr. Stepp. regarding the carrying out of his instructions is attached with the request that note be taken.
"By order of Ministerial Counselor Doebig, I communicated to the Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler, the decision taken yesterday by the Council of Ministers concerning the case of Hadschurch etc. The Reichsfuehrer SS told me that the matter greatly concerned the chief of staff of the SA, Reich Minister Roehm. He (Himmler) had to discuss the matter with the latter first." by Dr. Stepp.
"The Dachau camp is a camp for prisoners who are in protective custody and who were imprisoned on political grounds. The incidents concerned are of a political nature and under all circumstances the political authorities must decide first about them. To my mind they are not suited to be dealt with by the legal authorities. This is my opinion as Chief of Staff and also as a Reich Minister. who is interested in the Reich not suffering politically because of the proceedings in question.
"I shall get the Reichsfuehrer SS to issue an order that no investigating authorities may enter the camp for the time being and that people in the camp may also not be interrogated for the time being."
Then there is a note:
"The Court of Appeals Public Prosecution Munich, was instructed by a direction from the Minister to refrain for the time being from making an application for the opening of preliminary investigations." Then follows the next document, document 13, a letter to the Public Prosecution as to the death of the prisoners. Wilhelm Frantz and Dr. Katz.
"With regard to the above mentioned matter, I have as instructed, requested the Bavarian Political Police to clear up the matter further in conjunction with the Commandant's office of the concentration camp of Dachau and to endeavor to find out the persons who are suspected of having been the culprits. In this request I mentioned also that I have not yet received the legally confiscated instruments of suicide (belt and braces) of the dead men.
"The Political police have apparently transmitted the files without any Aug-7-RT-M-9-2 Karr written direction to the Political Department of the concentration camp of Dachau.
The first paragraph of this letter reads:
"The latest application for production of evidence from the Public Prosecution Munich 11 shows what far-fetched means are employed in order to saddle the concentration camp of Dachau with allegedly perpetrated crimes."
"In the second paragraph of the letter regret is expressed that the two dead men were able by their suicide to escape impending punishment for smuggling letter The third paragraph refers to the confiscation and reads:
"After the two corpses had been dissected, according to law, and had been released, the commandant's staff had no further interest in the preservation of the instruments with which they had hanged themselves. The commandant's staff do not belong to those objectionable Kulturmrnscher (cultured people) who preserve such articles as souvenirs, as was done in America recently in the Dillinger case "The Leetter is signed on behalf of the camp commandant by SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Lippert."
Dachau which shows that the request of the Oberstaatsanwalt arose from the impartial observation of his official duty and then the file closes with this entry, 27 September, 1934, Public Prosecution, letter from the Oberstaatsanwalt to the Generalstaatsamwalt at the Court of Appeals Munich.
"Subject: Death of the prisoners in protective custody Wilhelm Frantz and Dr. Katz in the concentration camp Dachau.
"I have stopped the proceedings, as the investigations have not produced sufficient grounds for the assumption of outside guilt in the deaths of the two prisoners in protective custody." BY MR. ELWYN JONES:
Q. Well now, I have taken some time to read that document as that is a characteristic illustration of the fact that the SA and SS abominations in the camps were protected by the highest authorities of the Third Reich, is that not so ?
A. I must say to this document that it is from the year 1933, at a time when the concentration camp Dachau was not manned exclusively by SS men. This document indicates that the prosecution of the Court of Appeals in Munich had notice that some persons in protective custody had been murdered.
Q. Are you suggesting that conditions improved after the SS men took complete charge of running the camp?
A. I should like to say that these were individual cases from the year 1933, which are contained in this document. This document does not, however indicate general conditions in the concentration camps, particularly in the coming years.
Q. Did you know that the Waffen SS was making quite a profitable business out of killing people in concentration camps ? Did you know that ?
A. I want you to look at the document D-960, which will be Exhibit GB 568. It is a very short document, this one. It is headed:
"Waffen SS, Natzweiler Concentration Camp, Commandant's office -24 March 1943, Concentration Camp Natzweiler. camp, costs amounting to 127 Reichsmarks, five pfennig arose. The Commandant's office of the Natzweiler Concentration Camp requests the early dispatch of the above mentioned sum."
The tarrif for killing was very low in Natzweiler, wasn't it, six marks 38 pfennig for each dead man? Did you know that monies were being paid, to the Waffen SS for activities of that kind ?
A. No. As I understand it this document dues not show that either. The concentration camp commandatur here uses the stamp "Waffen SS".
I must refer to what I said yesterday, that the term "Waffen SS" is misleading to the extent that the concentration camp system was an independent police arrangement. This document seems to support my statement, since it shows that this terrible bill here was sent to the Security Police again to an executive organ.
Q. Just a moment. Assuming that the Security Police paid this bill, where would the money have gone to ? It would have gone back to Natzweiler. What would have happened to it. Would it have been credited to the funds of the Waffen SS or not?
A. The Commandatur of the concentration camps, including Natzweiler, settled their bills with the Reich and not with the SS. I cannot say how it was used and for what purpose it was spent.
Q. You have no knowledge of the financial arrangements of these camps vis a vis the Waffen SS, have you ? If you have not that suffices for me for the moment.
A. No, I know from my activity in the SS court a little about the economic subordination of the concentration camps and as to this point, I know that the commandaturs of concentration camps settled their accounts directly with the agencies of the German Reich when not connected with other treasuries of agencies of the Waffen SS , as such.
Q. Witness, please, now you said in your testimony that the guards in concentration camps had not committed crimes, that whoever else was responsible, Pohl and one or two others, certainly it was not the SS guards. Were you serious when you said that, witness ?
A. In order to clarify a misunderstanding, I should like to make it clear here that by guards, in the sense of my testimony, I meant only those persons who guarded a concentration camp from the outside in contrast to these members of the concentration camp on the commandatur's staff who guarded the internal installations of the camp.
Q. But both those categories of guards were SS men, were they not ?
A. As I have already said they belonged to the so-called nominal Waffen SS without having anything Organically to do with it.
Q. I shall return to that point in a moment. you a picture of the humanity and ethical attitude of SS guards. I am using a phrase which you used yourself vis a vis the SS. It is GB 57. It is a report this time from a Dutch source of the evacuation of the Rehmsdorff camp to Theresianstadt.
The first page is a statement by Peter Langhorst, who says :
"I am an ex-political prisoner and I have been detained in various prisons and concentration camps, finally in the Rehmsdorff damp.
"At the approach of the Allied armies this camp was evacuated and the prisoners about 2900 men, were put on transport from Rehmsdorff to Theresianstadt.
"Mostly these prisoners were Czechs, Poles , Russians , and Hungarian Jews, while they were only a few Dutchmen among them.
"Of these prisoners only some 500 actually reached Theresianstadt; the others were simply killed off during the transport by the so-called 'shot in the neck.
"The corposes were thrown into mass graves which were filled up afterwards," Then I need not trouble you with the rest of the statement but you see a further statement with regard to that matter by Baron von Lamsweerde of Amsterdam, who was on this transport who says, at the end of the second paragraph:
"On the 12th of November 1944, I was Imprisoned in the concentration camp Rehmsdorff where I stayed until my escape on April 20, 1945. At the approach of the Allied Forces, the Camp at Rehmsdorff was evacuated in great haste and the political prisoners of this camp were transported to the camp Theresianstadt.
"At first the prisoners were transported by train and in goods-vans. We arrived by train at Marienbad, where, for causes I do not know, we had a delay of about one week. The vans with the prisoners were kept standing at the station. In the course of that week Allied bombers attacked the Marienbad station and in the confusion sons 1000 prisoners escaped into the surrounding woods. Naturally the entire local service (the S.S., Volkssturm, and Hitler Jugend) was set to work to recapture the escaped prisoners and practically all prisoners, who of course were their camp-clothes and could easily be recognized, were recaptured. These prisoners, about a thousand men, were led back in groups to Marienbad station and there they were killed by the SS guards by a shot in the neck. As both engines of the train had been wrecked during the air attack, the prisoners had to walk all the way back from Marienbad to Theresienstadt. Many among them were unable to go so far, and fell down along the road, totally exhausted; without exception these prisoners were murdered by the guards by a shot in the neck. That evening their bodies were removed by lorry and buried in mass-graves in the woods." And he says he thinks that he could identify where it was. "I am fully prepare to assist in tracing them. When the transport started I heard the SS guards saying that the total number of prisoners amounted to 2775. Only some of these prisoners have reached Theresienstadt. The others were murdered during the transport. Near Lobositz, about 7 kilometers from Theresienstadt, I myself escaped. The leader of the transport was the SS Oberscharfuehrer, Schmidt, one of the henchmen of Buchanwald, who also there behaved in a most scandalous way towards the prisoners, and who was known to be a sadist." decency? had the characteristics of SS members. I said that our investigations showed that the criminal complex of crimes in concentration camps were committed by members of the commandanteurs and that we found no evidence that the guards had any part in them. a report to the Ministry of the Interior of the Czechoslovak Republic. I want you to turn to page 3 of the report: "Crimes committed by the members of the Allgemeine SS and the Waffen SS."
"The crimes committed by the members of the SS troops against the Czechoslovak and foreign citizens on the .....
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Elwyn Jones, isn't it rather late to put in documents of this sort which are general reports by the governments of allied countries? The case has been already fully made by the prosecution and to put in a new document of this sort, which is only a report of an allied country, seems to the Tribunal to be an unusual course to take,
MR. ELWYN JONES: With great respect, My Lord, I sub nit that the prosecution is entitled to put in documents of this kind in rebuttal of the sort of testimony that this witness is giving. The conception that a witness should solemnly say that SS guards committed no atrocities was one which certainly did not even occur to the prosecution, and in face of testimony of that kind I submit that the prosecution is well entitled to put in documents which do not deal with individual cases, which might possibly be objectionable to the Tribunal, but on the whole mass of testimony, I submit that until the very last moment the prosecution is entitled to put in such documents, regrettable though it is, perhaps, that they have not been put in before, but I do submit that the prosecution is entitled to put them in. If your Lordship pleases, if I might add a further comment to your Lordship's inquiry, the defense have, after all, produced over a hundred thousand affidavits and I do submit that in those circumstances, in view of that mountain of evidence, it is only right that there should rest upon the record the authority of statements submitted on behalf of the prosecution.
THE PRESIDENT: What is your submission, with reference to the construction of Article 21, with reference to this document?
MR. ELWYN JONES: If your Lordship pleases, I submit that the terms of Article 21 make it mandatory upon the Tribunal to accept reports of this kind by governments, which are submitted by the prosecution.
THE PRESIDENT: 'Which are the official words to which you refer?
MR. ELWYN JONES: The second sentence, "The Tribunal shall also take judicial notice of official governmental documents and reports of United Nations, including the acts and documents of the committees set up in the various allied countries for the investigation of war crimes and the records and findings of military and other tribunals of any United Nations."
Now this document, my Lord, has a certificate from the Czechoslovak Minister of the Interior on the face of it, certifying that it is a State Document, within the meaning of Article 21, and it bears the signature of the Minister of the Interior himself, so that I submit that quite clearly within the terms of Article 21 it is properly admissible and in that respect that the Tribunal should accept it.
THE PRESIDENT: Was there any committee or commission which drew up this document?
MR. ELWYN JONES: It is a report of the Czechoslovakian Ministry of the Interior itself; it is a report of the State Department.
THE PRESIDENT: Report to whom?
MR. ELWYN JONES: Furthermore, My Lord, my learned friend, Lt. Col. Griffith-Jones, draws by attention to article 19 of the Charter: "The Tribunal shall not be bound by technical rules of evidence. It shall adopt and apply to the greatest possible extent expeditious and non-technical procedure and shall admit any evidence that it deems to have probative value." I do submit that even if you were to find, and I find it hard to think that you would, that this is not a document within the meaning of Article 21, it is admissible under Article 19.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you want to say anything, Dr. Pelckmann?
DR. PELCKMANN: I believe, your Lordship, the decision of the Tribunal on this document should be the same as on the two documents which we attempted in vain to introduce yesterday. Whether this document falls under Article 21, I cannot judge. The Tribunal will decide that. But I refer to the other point of view which your Lordship has already mentioned. It is very late that these documents are submitted now. Article 21 is to be interpreted to mean that such documents can be submitted during the presentation of the case of the prosecution. The prosecution case is closed and it can only be submitted to the witness but then the defense, which deals with hundreds, perhaps thousands of cases, then the defense must have an opportunity to comment on it. This does not deal only with the credibility of the witness but is actually the presentation of new evidence for the prosecution. The defense must have an opportunity to answer it.
I do not believe that it falls under Article 21. Otherwise the trial would be extended indefinitely.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn and we will sit again at 2:00 o'clock.
(A recess was taken until 1400 hours.)
(The hearing reconvened at 1400 hours, 7 August 1946)
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Elwyn Jones, The Tribunal will take judicial notice of the document which you were submitting under Article 21. They don't think that you need deal with it at great length.
MR. ELWYN JONES: Very well, My Lord. The Document D-959 will be Exhibit GB 571. BY MR. ELWYN JONES:
Q. Witness, have you any knowledge of the part played by SS-units in the arrest and ill treatment of the students of Prague on November 17, 1939 ?
A. No. About that subject I cannot testify. Just the fact of the participation is now only becoming known to me for the first time.
Q. You had no knowledge of the participation of the 6th SS Totenkopf Standarte in that, did you ?
A. No.
MR. ELWYN JONES: I am referring, My Lord, to the Czechoslovakia Report, USSR 60. BY MR. ELWN JONES:
Q. You say you had no knowledge of that ?
A. No, I had no knowledge.
Q. This report refers further to reprisal measures against civilians suspected of contact with the partisans, in which the SS took part. Do you have any knowledge of SS troops taking part in reprisal measures against civilians ?
A. I can testify to that insofar as it is known to me, in which manner, in which fashion the Waffen SS was being employed. I know that the Waffen SS, the only Waffen SS that we can be concerned with in this case was fighting at the front.