12 Aug A LJG Fitzgerald in Dachau from the very beginning.
AAs much as I can recall, that was guarded by SS. I, myself, was never in that camp. Only later did I find out about the excesses of that camp. 30th of January to the old SA man; that is, what was the result as far as the SS man was concerned after the serious political confront of the "years before? And if I think back at that time today, I remember that I believe at first that on the basis of the tremendous political tensions and conflicts of the 12 years chat preceded that time, that just at that time, it would have to come to a tremendous erruption of jury and hatred and reprisals. I wish to state that within this sphere, which I could overlook, I had to see and could notice that the seizure of power passed quietly and that also the old SA man who from the fighting days still know conditions, was calm and remained calm and collected. which have occurred later on from 1933 to 1934 according to the statement which you have now given? judge so that in spite of discipline and order which had been commanded, they could only have committed by a few individuals or small groups, who did not understand the sense of our socialist revolution. That is the limitation, the full extent; or on the other hand there were Individuals who were thrown out of their regular ways and could not find their wry back to the order the sound order of their own state.
DR. BOEHM: Mr. President, I have no further questions to put to this witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Does the Prosecution wish to cross-examine?
12 Aug A 21-2 LJG Fitzgerald BY MR. BARRINGTON: trained only In political soldierdom. Did not "political soldier dom" mean that the SA non had special privileges in the State which, the ordinary German citizen had not? to have had.
Q. Was not the SA man one of the National Socialists' elite? ment and nothing else.
DR. BOEHM : Mr. President, our machinery does not work. We do not understand the question. The Witness only understands it In part because he understands some English.
MR. BARRINGTON: Would it be possible for Dr. Boehm to come and sit here? The German switch appears to be working all right here.
the president; Yes, I think so. If his earphones are not working properly he can get another pair. BY MR. BARRINGTON: behavior as an ordinary German citizen?
A To a much greater extent. The SA man performed his services voluntarily, and he was subject, In a particular measure, to the law. I have dealt for years with the turning out of thousands of SA men, and supporting then In their work. I had to take care of many poor and needy SA men.
Q. I ask you -- perhaps the translation did not come through correctly -- were there the same restraints, or restrictions, on the behavior of the SA men as there were on ordinary German citizens ?
A. Mr. Prosecutor, I would ask you to tell me what restraints you mean. I do not know of any essential restraints.
Q. Is your answer no? There were no restraints? Or is it yes ?
A. I asked a question of the Prosecutor, what restraints are you referring to as not being the sane that the SA man had imposed upon him? That is how I understood the question.
Q. Was the SA man as from in his behavior, or was the SA man more tree in his behavior, than the ordinary German citizen?
A. (No response)
Q. If you cannot answer it, have a look for a moment at the general service regulations that you talked about just now.
MR. BARRINGTON: My Lord, that is on Page 30-A of Document Book B. It is Document 2820 PS, and is USA Exhibit 247. BY MR. BARRINGTON :
Q. Look furst at Affidavit I. I think it is on Page 9. Have you got it?
A. Yes.
Q. "The SA man is the political soldier of Adolf Hitler"; and a few lines further down : We therefore enjoys special prestige and has definite rights in the State."
Q. Do you deny that those words mean what they say? Wasn't the SA man in a privileged position?
A. (No response.)
Q Wasn't the SA man in a privileged position? much as I know about SA men, SA men were not in a privileged position. Besides, we are concerned here with the SA service regulation of 1933, which, according to my knowledge, was rescinded essentially in 1934, and -
Q I do not care when it was rescinded. It was issued on the 12th of December, 1933, was it not? And that was after the Hazis were in power?
A (No response.)
Q Well, you can say it says so on the top of it. Tell me what those definite rights in the State were that the SA man is said to have by Article I. What were the definite rights in the State? what did it mean? Every SA man read, that book? used, in the service of the State, or merely the police service, he, of course, had the privileges accorded, that particular service.
Q You cannot answer what they are, I suppose. Well, look at that Article 10 on Page 13. Have you got Article 10, Page 13?
Q "The exalted position of the SA man may not be degraded by insulting, slighting or unjust treatment".
How was the SA man "exalted." above other German citizens? or special duty.
Q What did it mean when it said he had "an exalted position", and he must not be insulted? He could insult other German citizens, could he not?
A (No response).
Q Was the SA man exalted above the Army? Yes or no? myself I never had any special privilege or assumed any special privilege, and therefore I cannot imagine that the SA man had any particular privilege or could have assumed any special privileges.
Q Very well, then; that is your answer. How, look at Article 18, Page 17:
"The SA man may use weapons which are entrusted to him only in execution of his service for legal self-protection". man's service might require the use of weapons other than selfdefense ? for emergency service (Notdienst); generally with regard to these service Populations, I would like to say that in my opinion it had been issued under Roehm at the time -
Q I do not want that. Roehm was chief of staff of the SA and what me issued presumably was law to the SA. And he says that they may use weapons only in execution of their service or for local self-Protection. ease could there be where the SA man's service should require the use of a weapon? If you cannot answer, say so. a question of my counsel, that the SA was armed only to the extent that it was active in carrying out functions of the State, and in the course of that service, use their weapons might be a military purpose, then?
A (No response) purpose, if they were called for that purpose?
police service, or police service as far as the SA was called on to do so. in the army, but you are asserting they might use them to assist the police, are you? service, police auxiliaries, this regulation in the General service Regulations of the SA was the regulation that applied to them?
Or did police regulations apply?
A (No response). of the police when they were auxiliary policement? That is what I want to know.
A Mr. Prosecutor, I have only stated that which I have seen myself. I do not know what has been decreed in detail according to the service regulations. The SA man, as I have seen it, was armed whenever and as far as he was used in the State or police auxiliary service, or emergency service. would have to use his arms, except self-defense? Any other case?
A (No response) in this Article 18 were meant for was nothing more nor less than for the carrying out of the so-called SA action; is that not right?
Q THE PRESIDENT: Witness, you can answer the question. It is either right or it is wrong. You can say you were with the SA all this time. THE WITNESS: If the SA man used the weapons without being used himself for emergency service, then he became liable to punishment. Apart from that, the man was used only for emergency service. BY MR. BARRINGTON: used his weapons for a purpose that the SA did not approve of. But what I am saying new that he was encouraged -- indeed, ordered -- to use his weapons for actions which the SA did approve of?
A (No response) Look on in that little book to one more thing.
Look on to Page 33, No. 6 of the punishment order; page 33. Have you got Page 33?
Q Read the last sentence of the first paragraph, about punishment:
"Right is what is advantageous to who movement and wrong what harms it." Have you got that?
Q "Right is what is advantageous to the movement and wrong what harms it." movement, such as SA actions, is precisely the thing that the SA arms and weapons were meant to be used for; is that right or wrong? Will you answer that yes or no? they had to know for what purpose they used their SA men.
Q I do not think that has much to do with my question. Look again at that sentence, "Right is what is advantageous to the movement and wrong what harms it." Does that not show perfectly clearly that the Nazi Party regarded the SA as a privileged par by who were entitled to commit crimes if they were advantageous to the movement? tion act as an individual, as he wanted to. The regulation alone did not entitle his to do that.
MR. BARRINGTON: I have only got one more document. There are only two or three questions on it, Mr. Lord.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
MR BARRINGTON: My Lord, the document is the first document in Book C. It is D-918. Oh, I beg your Lordship's pardon. It is Book 16-B. The document is D-918 and it will become GB-594. BY MR. BARRINTON:
Q Witness, I am not going to take you into any detail in this document. You can see what it is. It is Lutze's Training Directive for 1939, and you will see on Page 2 the date on which it was issued was the 4th of November, 1938, which was before Hitler's order about the pre- and post-military training. Now I have only one point to put to you on this document. You have maintained just now, have you, that the training of the SA was predominantly for sport; is that right? towards the achievement of the sport insignia and ideological and physical training generally.
Q But didn't you say that the emphasis was placed upon sport and not upon military tendencies? If you didn't say that, admit it. one thing, that the SA only had a wehrsportliches training; that is defense as sport training. As far as the physical -- the training of energy is concerned and the mental attitude is concerned, it was such as is stated here.
Q You don't deny then that that training had a military tendency behind it; do you deny that? The training for the sports insignia, had a military tendency behind it?
A For any kind of military training we had not received any mission. That was moral education. And I should like to point out again and again that in so far as the mental education, education toward energy was concerned and nothing else. document. Look at Page 7 of Lutze's Training Directive for 1939. You will see that Page 7 deals with the first training period, from November '38 until the beginning of February '39, and at the bottom part of the page you will see, set out in certain sequence, the items on which particular attention is laid: Marching, drill, shooting, field training, and last of all, sport. Can you see that?
Q Now turn to page 3 -- I'm sorry, Page 10 -- Page 9 first. Turn on to page 9, which gives you a similar thing for the second training period., from February to April, 1939. In the middle of the page you will see, underlined: Drill, firing training, and last of all, sport. Do you see that?
A I don't know, Mr. Prosecutor, what you are referring to right now. I have it now. training period, which is May to June '39. On Page 10 you will see the same thin Drill, musketry, field training, and last of all, sport. Isn't it perfectly clear that sport was very much an excuse and a means to an end?
MR BARRINGTON: My Lord, I am not proposing to ask any more questions of this witness, as the general topics will be dealt with in the cross examination of the witness Juettner.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. We will adjourn now.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 13 August 1946, at 1000 hours.)
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT OF THE INTERNATIONAL LIC, THE.
I UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will sit in closed session tomorrow afternoon at 2;00 o'clock. That is to say, it will not sit in open session after 1:00 o'clock tomorrow.
Mr. Barrington, had you finished ?
MR. BARRINGTON: Yes, My Lord.
THE PRESIDENT: Are there any other Chief prosecutors who want to cross examine ? Then, Dr. Boehm, do you wish to re-examine ?
DR. BOEHM (Counsel for the S.A.): Mr. President, I should like to ask a few brief questions on the cross-examination yesterday. BY DR. BOEHM: briefly as possible. Do you know the basic formula which prevailed in the SA namely, copal rights to everyone ?
A Yes, I know this formula. It was taught at the school. mentioned yesterday meant nothing except the respect held for him in the community for his achievements in the Third Reich ? to keep the rules and legal descriptions. anything different from the expect of the SA man for the political soldier ?
A The SA man had no privileges. He could obtain no privileged rank in view of his official capacity, but other wise he was subordinate to all legal responsibility.
ple, armed. He had an SA dagger. From Sturmfuehrer on, he had firearms for which he needed a license like every German who wanted to carry firearms. in question here, was there a right for the individual to use this pistol against other members of the State? ny other citizen, had to know that he could use it only in emergencies for his own defense. high position of the SA man must not be reduced by Einsatz Groups. to have a special form of right. But never--that was repeatedly emphasized--could he overstep the existing laws. use weapons that were entrusted with him in executive of his work and for legal self-protection. Does this not say that the SA man, like every other German citizen, had to obey the existing rules concerning the carrying of weapons?
A. I have already said so once. The SA man was subject to the existing rules. That is shown by the fact that he needed a police license and his use of the weapon was limited.
Q. Was it not true that the SA man, because he was in the SA and because more was demanded from him than from any other citizen, that he would received were severe punishment in connection with an offense committed with his weapon?
A. An order was in existence that the SA man, when he was on trial, was to be punished especially severely or special standards are to be employed if he committed any offense.
Q. From the service regulations of the 12th of September 1933, it was read yesterday that all violations of discipline were to be punished, Does that not mean that violations of discipline were punished by the Gruppen SA leadership and that order was the principle?
A. The leaders and the schools worked to see to it that every SA man stayed within the legal limits. In addition, we had strict orders that the SA man, if he had committed any offense in his civil life, that he had to be reported and that a report was made to us by the judicial authorities and then the person in question was given disciplinary punishment.
Q. According to the document which was shown to you yesterday, of the 2th of December 1933, on page 33, No. 6, it says "Right is what aids the movement; wrong is what herms it," Did this mean anything more that the English say "Right or wrong, it is my Fatherland".
A. As I interpreted, it means that the man has rights in the framework of his duties and that if he does wrong, if he moves outside of legality he harms his Fatherland.
Q. The training directives were shown to you. They were on page 7 and on page 9. Now, I ask it -- it mentions "sports" and so forth; was anything done in the Olympic games except what is mentioned here? Did not the athletes march into the stadium in order which was made possible only by exercise? Did they not shoot, drill; did they not carry on sports, all the forms of sports which are listed here?
THE PRESIDENT: Don't you think this is really more argument than examination? we have has this argument as to whether or not it was for snort of whether or not for military purposes over and over again. We have got to make up our minds about it. It doesn't help very much to have it put in again in redirect examination.
DR. BOEHM: Yes, Mr. President. I would not have asked this question if the witness had not been referred to the fact that the last of the exercises in these training directives -- I should like to point out that the other exercises also which are listen here, were carried out in the Olympics. I hardly believe that their involves a military or militaristic attitude. Then I should like to point out one thing to the witness or ask one question. BY DR. BOEHM:
Q. You did not answer my previous question. Were not the same exercises or similar ones carried out in the Olympics?
A. I was interrupted by the President. I, myself, was present at the Olympics and I know the individual Arms of sport well. We carried out all the drills in such a way that we could appear in public in a disciplined fashion like all sport organizations. Because we were later to carry on those big battle exercises, we took discipline from the Olympics. These were talked and practiced by us. We shot; we had the obstacle race and we used all these disciplines in our training.
submitted to you yesterday, it says that in the drill---this would be the only one which ressembles military training---the training has to start with the greatest efforts. After practice of the basic movement applied drill tests are to be set, as they occur in drill movement, resulting from training movements necessary in political assignment. From the wording of these instructions, did you think of military training or militaristic training When it was a question of drill within the SA? individual as well as closed formations was always for the purpose that in a public appearance a unified picture night be presented.
DR. BOEHM : I have no more questions to put to the witness.
THE PRESIDENT : The witness can retire.
DR. BOEHM : I should like to call the next witness, Schaefer. and testified as follows BY THE PRESIDENT :
Q Is that your full name?
Q Will you repeat this oath after no : will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
THE PRESIDENT : You may sit down.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. BOEHM:
Q Witness, what are you by profession?
Q Were you a member of the NSDAP or any of its branches?
Q Were you a member of the SA?
A Since 1932 I have been a member of the SA; as an Oberfuehrer since 1938. thousand local assembly places of the SA. were used as sites for arrests. Do you know anything about that and is any such statement true? I Know knothing. isted in that number? have known of them; in fact, a few of these places did exist but shortly after the consolidation of circumstances, they were dissolved or taken over by the Gestapo and administered by the Gestapo. I am of the opinion that they were an emergency measure in the period of 1933?
A Yes, it was definitely an emergency measure. At the time we Were in a state of latent civil war in Germany. It was therefore necessary for opponents to be arrested in order to carry out what the Fuehrer had ordered. --- the non-blood execution of the revolution.
in confiscationg the weapons was fulfilling an assignment of the State?
A Yes. The Prussian Minister, Goering, had ordered this. He used the SA as an auxilliary police.
Q Dr. Diehls says in an affidavit that it was his task to prevent the transfer of the political police into the SA and to follow up many complaints about illegal actions by the SA, since some SA fuehrers appointed as police presidents from July to November, 1933, had allowed lawless circumstances to arise. What do you have to say about this statement of Dr. Diehls? relationship with the SA Chief of Staff Roehm and also in a friendly relationship with the chief of the Berlin-Brandenburg Group, Ernst. Therefore, I cannot understand his attitude that he considered it his main task as chief of the Gestapo to follow up any complaints which ware received against the SA. I should like to say that it was precisely in order that the undisciplined elements which could damage the movement and the SA were kept from doing so within the SA by a special staff headed by the Gestapo; and it was Gruppenfuehrer Ernst who at that time and in his own unit in the concentration camp at Oranienburg arrested such undisciplined elements. It was, therefore, not a task of the head of the Gestapo to operate against undisciplined elements of the SA or the movement; but these tasks were quite clearly on another level. This limited the very excessive activity and especially limited it to Berlin. the was removed by Hitler in June, 1934?
A I know Helldorf from the activity of the SA Fuehrer in Berlin. Shortly after he seizure of Paris, he was for a short time in the Prussian Ministry of the interior and was then police president in Pottsdam; and as such the police president, Count Helldorf, did everything necessary in order to insure an orderly police constitution. For this purpose he employed old, reliable police officials. He was superior in this capacity. As to the concentration camp, Oranienburg, I must ate that frequently in Oraneinburg. He made surprise visits and inspected the asures which had been ordered. He was known to me as a man who advocated the solute maintenance of discipline.
Q I show you Diehls' statement, which says that the SA formetions entered prisons, stole prisoners, took away files, and established themselves in the buildings of the police. Is that true? Did such circumstances ever exist?
A I cannot recall such circumstances. They should have been known to me, for I was frequently in Berlin; and I must say that I did not learn of any such thing Later I should have had to hear something about it when I became an official in the Penal Execution Administration of the Reich. The Berlin colleagues would certainly have reported such events to me afterwards. This was not done. We were at that time Commandant of Oranienburg and were in Berlin almost every day, together with the men of the police or of the Gestapo. Even if I was not in Berlin every day, I was there quite frequently so that it certainly would not have escaped my notice.
Q Is Diehls' assertion true that it was his task in order to avoid mass murders to get the SA into the hands of the states? In his affidavit for the SA he says that fifty people were the victims of the revolution in Berlin. Is this true?
A This statement of Diehls' is doubtless not true. I can say that it in no way corresponded to the ideology of the SA to remove political opponents through mass murder. As Diehls himself says in his affidavit, he gives the figure of fifty victims in Berlin. This figure proves what I say. One must not forget that a large part of the political opponents of yesterday were now marching with the SA. If such an intention had existed at all to remove the political opponents by mass murder, the execution of this intention would have found the greatest resistance in the SA itself; and I may say frankly here that what Diehls asserts was in no way true.
Q Is it true that Diehls' position became untenable as a result of constant conflict with the SA? He says that in his affidavit for the Gestapo; but he says that he must admit that he was the Regierungs President of Hannover and Cologne. the SA leadership. I do not believe that that is true as he said. For a few years later, I found him in very close relationship to the Chief of Staff Lutze; and on a later trip to the Emms district, he was in a very friendly relationship to the Chief of Staff Lutze and the fact that he was Regierungspresident in Cologne and especially the fact that he was Regierungspresident with the Chief of Staff Lutze in Hannover contradict this statement, according to which he had difficulties with the SA.
citizens? He says in his affidavit for the SA that the staff of Ernst and the intelligence section set up participated primarily in the revolutionary activity ing. If some cases occurred which probably cannot be denied, I should like to say that the generalization of these individuals cases does not agree with the truth. There is no justification here to generalize individual cases which doubt less occurred. One must not forget that such individual cases were absolutely possible. I may recall that the brown shirt, which the SA man had to buy himself could be found in all the stores in Berlin and in the whole Reich; and I learned personally of a number of cases when obscure elements who did not belong to the SA or to the movement which was established later not the opportunity to commit illegal actions under the protection of the party uniform. This finally led to the party uniforms having to be put under legal protection.
Q You know that Diehls was Gestapo chief in 1933 and 1934; and if one reads that the SA took the property away from peaceful citizens, the question arises whether he tries to transfer Gestapo customs to the SA.
A I must say that this assertion if Diehls surprises me greatly. As I have said, he was at that time in very close relationship to the leaders of the SA. I cannot see how he comes to make this assertion. forty illegal camps. Can you say how many concentration camps actually existed at this time?
A I do not have any statistical material; but I should like to attempt to investigate this figure of forty thousand internees, and particularly the number of forty camps which Diehls mentioned. During 1933 the circumstances arose that Oranienburg, Berlin, and Brandenburg were the only camps for political opponents A few of the camps which had existed were dissolved. There could not have been many prisoners in them, for they were transferred to Oranienburg. There was only a very small number of prisoners.
at the most, and considers that this camp was for a district of over 6 million people, if one considers further that Berlin was the center of the political opponents of the NSDAP and had an extraordinarily large proportion of active political opponents, then I cannot imagine the number of 40,000 internees. The number of 40 camps I do not know at all. I never heard anything about this number, not even from Diehls with whom I was personally very friendly, and I should have known of this figure.
Q Diehls speaks of approximately 40,000 prisoners. Could you give an approximate figure which might be more correct?
A That is extremely difficult to say. I should like to say that the Christmas amnesty ordered by Prime Minister Goering at that time -- and I should like to emphasize this particularly -- was carried out on a very generous scale This Christmas amnesty permits a certain conclusion. Then, in all of Prussia, 5,000 -- I recall this figure -- internees were dismissed from the existing camps. Oranienburg, for instance, which as I said was the only recognized and state controlled camp for Berlin, and Brandenburg, reduced the number of prisoners to a little more than 100. Over two-thirds of the camp were released, at that time.
Q You were commandant in Oranienburg?
Q From when to when?
Q This camp was guarded by SA men?
Q From when to when?
Q And to whose orders were these men subject?
A These SA men were members of the auxiliary police. As such they were under my direct orders as commandant.
Q And to whom were you subordinate as camp commandant? competent for Oranienburg, who was located in Potsdam, Police President Count Helldorf, and, of course, the Prussian Minister of the Interior.