THE PRESIDENT: Surely, Dr. Laternser, you can give us the reference to the numbers of the affidavits which state that prisoners were treated properly. Why waste time about it by telling us what each affidavit says. You only have to tell us that these affidavits refer to good treatment by individuals.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, if I only give numbers and do not refer at least partially to the contents, all the material will hardly have any weight because these affidavits are not translated. Of all my affidavits approximately 40 have been translated. If I cannot go into the contents at all, then -
THE PRESIDENT: We have got the summary before us in writing. What you are doing practically in every case is repeating the summary we have before us in writing. For instance, 1174 (Decent Treatment of English Prisoners) There is another one from some of the British officers showing who the British officer is and saying what he said about the treatment. Well, I have made it quite clear to you, I hope, that you will not be allowed to go beyond a half day; and now the Tribunal will adjourn.
(A recess was taken.)
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will not sit on Saturday next.
DR. LATERNSER: The Russian Prosecution assertions on pages 4336 and 3494, evidence to the contrary, affidavits 1176 following. The Russian Prosecution asserts that Soviet Prisoners of war were used in the service of the German Wehrmacht and were forced to do so. In this connection I should like to refer to affidavits 1179 to 1203, affidavits from which we see that within the period of one year the number of volunteers was 500,000 men. like to refer to affidavits 1203 to 1213. like to refer to affidavits 1214 to 1216. material into five branches:
1. Alleged destruction and desecration of churches.
2. Destruction with the advance in the East.
3. Alleged destruction and plundering of cultural monuments and 4. Destruction connected with the retreat.
5. Plundering. Prosecution dealing with the destruction of numerous churches and their being desecrated. Most of the churches had already been destroyed or had already been desecrated or they had been made into museums. Affidavits 1301 to 1323 concern themselves with this subject. In the retreat, churches were especially protected: Affidavit 1324. Quite on the contrary, churches were once more restored to their religious purpose, as shown by affidavits 1325 to 1348. Special protection granted the churches in the French Campaign and the prevention of the destruction of the Cathedral at Rouen is shown by affidavits 1349 to 1353. advance, affidavits 1354 to 1401. Affidavits 1354 to 1362 prove a planned work of the Soviet Commandos charged with destruction under German advance. Affidavit 1363 shows tremendous destruction by the Soviet Russians in the Denitz Dasin, as well as the same which applies for the industrial realm of Maikop, Artenisk, Dnjeptropetrowsk, Kriwoi-Rog, Orel, Ovchom-Kisegrad Brjansk, Stalingard, Saporoschje, Riga and Charkov.
established who had petrol at their disposal and all of this is being brought forth to refute the record, pages 4812, 4819, and 4857.
The demand Dnieper was destroyed by the Russians themselves. Proof: Affidavits 1371 to 1384. 1400. Destructions in Greece were not carried out by the German troops but rather by the retreating troops and this is proved by affidavit 1401. monuments, affidavits 1402 up to 1552 cover an unequivocal refutation of numerous statements. Affidavit 1402, deposed by Field Marshal von Kuechler, according to which objects of art were taken from the front areas to the rear region and safeguarded and secured for their solemn transmission to the Metropolitan of that city. Leningrad destruction determined by military necessity; affidavits 1403 to 1405 are proof and refute the witnesses Orbeli and Numarti. Affidavits 1406 to 1411 refer to the destructions in the vicinity of Leningrad which in the majority were destroyed by Russian fire. This may be seen from affidavits 1406 to 1411. The famous estate of Telstei was protected by the Germans under express command by Colonel General Guderian, as shown by affidavits 1412 to 1418. One of these affidavits testifies that in the Russian Victory film of the spring of 1941 the Telstei Estate was shown complete and without any damage after the recapture by the Russians. The Tchaikovsky Museum was not plundered by the Germans; Proof, affidavits 1419 to 1422. Affidavits 1423 to 27 prove that the Observatory on Keltchovai was never in German hands and was not plundered by the German Wehrmacht. The plundering of the Naval Observatory at Siemais on the Island of Crimea, was not carried on by German troops, according to affidavit 1428. Instruments were removed by the Russians in their retreat before the German troops marched in. Destruction in Novgorod, affidavits 1429 to 1438. Petri Church and the famous house in Riga were not destroyed by the Germans but rather by the Russians themselves by setting fire to the houses.
Riga, Rival and Novgorod suffered heavily through Russian bombing attacks. The church goods of Bleskav were not plundered by German troops. The Russians in 1941 took all these goods on a ship; it was sunk and remained there. Proof of this, affidavits 1429 to 1438. The monument, "1000 years of Russia", was treated by the Germans in a perfect manner; proof for this affidavit 1439. Never was an order given that 500 villages in the neighborhood of Rostev be set on fire. Proof 1441 to 1443.
or rather rob the museum of valuable paintings. This is proved by affidavits 3,021.
Destruction in Kiev. Kiev care into German hands pretty much damaged. That is shown by affidavits 1441. The destruction was caused chiefly by too many bombs. The German troops did everything in order to do away with the nine, and in that way the Lenin Museum was saved. Hoses to fight fire were brought in from Germany by airplanes.
Plundering in Tula never took place. German troops were never at Tula. Affidavit 1452 proved this. Affidavit 1883 by General Wohler proved the fact that at the last minute the wish of a higher Russian Church Principal was granted that church valuables would be secured. kind was strictly prohibited. If anyone was guilty of plundering he would be severely punished even if it was of insignificant value.
Affidavit 3,024 is especially important. General Eberbacht deposed that the order given by Hitler in the summer of 1944 that everything was to be destroyed in the retreat from France, was not carried out by the Commander-in-Chief of the Seventh Army in agreement with Fieldmarshal Model. Weizsaecker and Kesselring and in addition, affidavits 3,009, 25 and 26. First of all, cities that were valuable were evacuated in good time. Monte Cassino, Bologna and Ravigni were protected. Thirdly, the destruction of industrial installations was not carried through through the personal intervention of a German General. The Port of Genoa was not bombed. This is shown in affidavits 3,008, 3,025 and 3,026. That port was not blown up.
I should like to refer to the Documents USSR 115, 168 and 119. I should like to refer to the Wehrmacht Communique of the 18th of May, 1940, in which it is shown that Louvain was taken after a hard struggle. The destruction of the university may be shown by the Witness Van Der Essen and can he traced back to arbitrary action.
Treatment of civilian population: The Russian Prosecution has asserted on Page 4101 of the Trial Transcript, that according to the principles laid down by the Barbarossa order, the physical destruction of the people under suspicion has been put down. In order to refute that I should like to refer to affidavits 1601, 1601a and 1601b. There we see that frequently the death penalty was applied when it came to excesses, especially in cases of rape. against the family. On Page 4471, it is asserted that the German Wehrmacht on the first of July, 1944, had done much killing at Lemberg. I should like to refer to affidavits 1602, 1603 and 1604 which show that when the German troops marched in, many, many heaps of corpses which had been mutilated were found. On the second of July, a Moutaineer Division marched in. As far as mistreatment of Jews, in the area of Smolensk, according to the indictment, 100,000 corpses were found. Evidence to the contrary; 3,006 and 1607. It is easy to prove an especially good relation existed at Smolensk. The Cathedral was restored and re-opened. At the retreat of the German troops, large masses of the population followed the troops. That is proved by Affidavit 1608. certain number of children were poisoned. Evidence to the contrary; 1609, an affidavit by General Konrad. From this we can also see that the relationship with the population of the Crimea was especially good. this connection. According to the assertion found on page 4145 of the indictment a strict alarm by the Commander of Theodosia was ordered. Proof, affidavit 1612-a. There we see that the 260th Infantry Division never was on Crimea. Supplementary proof, 1614.
On page 4548, reprisals in Kiev were mentioned in the year 1941. I should like to refer to an affidavit deposed by General von Obstfelder, Page 15. According to this, the German troops had reinstated an insane asylum. The insane asylum gave a terrific picture of negligence where the inmates had been left to themselves. Dealing with the murdering of 33,000 Jews in Kiev, I would like to refer to the affidavit deposed by General Heim, 1936, I believe it was. He knows no order to that effect. In the autumn of 1943, 193,000 men in Kiev allegedly were killed.
Evidence to the contrary, 1116-a, 1116-b and 1116-c. Stalingrad told everywhere how things were in Stalingrad. That may be seen from Affidavit 16, 17. Wehrmacht had drowned 144,000 Jews in the sea, and in another spot, 144,000 citizens are mentioned who were taken into the ocean on ferries and then drowned. I should like to refer to Affidavit 1609, 3007, 3140, 1625 and 1625a. There we see, among other things, that the shipping space at their disposal was so small that not even the supplies of German troops could be handled by way of water in its totality, but rather that the Luftwaffe was charged to help out. that participation of the Wehrmacht in the persecution of the Jews is definitely set down. He very comprehensively pictures the condemnation of the Wehrmacht in this regard and endeavors to take steps to prevent excesses. where special measures of medical help, against the will of certain officers, in the spotted lever epidemic among the Jews were applied. There were no orders issued for the killing of Jews or other members of the peculation of the occupied territories. 3099, 3000, 3124, 3050, 3150 and 3127; a few documents of the Soviet Prosecution, USSR 291, Pages 1 to 3 assert atrocities in the area of Jasma, Rischevska and Rchev. by Weiss that people were hanged. Two women, at that time, were sentenced to death and were hanged publicly.
Reasons? The murdering of 15 children and the sale of the flesh of these children on the open market. For that reason two women were hanged publicly at Rehev.
USSR 2, Page 7, deals with slavers in Staline; evidence to the contrary, Affidavit 2637, of General Kittel. and Pskov; refutation by Affidavit 1640, deposed by Field Marshal von Kuecher; the alleged shooting of 50,000 inhabitants of the town of Narva, refuted by the statement given by the some officer. Pleskau are testified to, and in Affidavit 1645.
USSR 39 deals with Estonia; refutation: evidence to the contrary by Field Marshal von Leeb, Affidavit 1641. Reichenau Order may be seen by Affidavits 1662, 1663, and 1665. Particularly the last affidavit, 1665, states the reasons according to which the decree was given by Reichenau. Among other things, one of the reasons was the murdering of two German officers. by Affidavits 1666, 1667, and 1670. Among them is an affidavit by Prince von Hessen, who, in his affidavit, also states the opinion of the last Italian king. Matters obtained in the same way in Yugoslavia; proof: Affidavits 1671 and 1672.
Especially good cooperation was found in Norway and Denmark; proof: Affidavits 1673 and 1674. Numerous examples of the endeavors of the Wehrmacht for cooperation with the Belgian and French populations, and above all through restrictive controls of troop discipline. From Affidavits 1675 to 1679 Colonel General Blaskowitz's dealings can be seen, and those of two other generals in Affidavits 1681 and 1682. From this it can be seen that the Wehrmacht took sharp measures against excesses on the part of the troops in Poland. As far as plundering is concerned, many strict measures were taken; proof therefor: Affidavit 1683.
It is known that in all occupied countries the proverb applied: "German soldier with eagle on the breast -- very good". And such a situation as that indicates the merit of the military leadership.
the attention of the High Tribunal to the picture contained in my document book which has the number MIL 12, and which may be seen on Pages 74 to 76 of my document book. The High Tribunal can see from this picture that the commander-in-chief of an army was the judicial overlord only for part of the army, and this may be seen from Page 74 of my document book. system, see Affidavits 501, 502-A, and 503. Furthermore, three of the highest judges of the former German Wehrmacht have been examined. Their attitude can be seen from affidavits 504, 505, and 506. Here we are concerned with Generaloberstabsrichter Lehmann and Hammerstein. Both of them testified that punishments were very severe for crimes against the population of the East, and they testified how the Wehrmacht always made its will prevail over Hitler's will. 602-PS, USA Exhibit 541, and 503-PS, USA Exhibit 542. These documents were submitted, and I should like to point out in this connection that both of these documents were signed by Hitler.
Affidavit No. 600 gives a comprehensive picture to the effect that his Kommando Order is to be traced back to the sale initiative on the part of Hitler, and without his having consulted his commanders-in-chief beforehand. Affidavit 600, therefore, refutes and contradicts the assertion put forth by the Prosecution that the military leaders, when this order was issued, participated in the setting up and the drafting of this order. Regarding the carrying through, or the execution, of this Kommando Order, the Prosecution has proved three cases which took place in Norway. Italian theater of war. 1942, three British Commando Troops were captured and turned over to the SD for special treatment: Documents 509-PS USA Exhibit 547. As far as the submission of this document 509-PS is concerned, the Prosecution will see a proof to the effect that this took place because of the instructions given by the OKW.
This conclusion, of course, seems obvious, but as has been proved, it is not true. him before the Commission, in which he states expressly under oath that these three British Commando Troops -- and the witness gave the place of their landing -- were not turned over to the SD, but rather were given to a prisoner of-war camp, and that the report to which the Prosecution refers, 509-PS, was an erroneous report to the OKW. In these three cases, therefore, the Kommando Order was not applied; evidence to the contrary: two documents, 503-PS, through the statement under oath by General Westphal before the Commission. cords of the court martial were not put at my disposal. But I should like to refer to the fact that a supplementary order given by Field Marshal Kesselring was issued, and that he reserves the right to determine just when a Commando expedition actually took place. General Dostler does not belong to the great group of people involved. through the application of the Command Order, foreign military commissions allegedly were shot. I should like to refer to the contents of Document L-151, USA 521, from which we see clearly that the Wehrmacht had nothing to do with this matter. that the General Staff of the Army and of the air forces objected to the Kommando Order; and further I should like to refer to Affidavit 610 regarding the application or non-application of the Kommando Order for the theater of war in the West, and supplementary affidavits, 611 and 622. Affidavit 611 shows that this order was not applied in the Netherlands. Affidavit 601 shows that this order was not applied in Africa, confirmed by Affidavit 603-C and 603-D. In the Italian theater of war, Affidavits 614 and 621 show that the order was not applied there, and of particular importance is Affidavit 619, in which proof is given that Field Marshal Kesselring reserved the right to determine when a Commando enterprise was being dealt with.
3148 from which we also see that the commander in chief in the Southeast decreed that English Commando Troops who were landing on the Aegean islands were not to be considered as commandos but rather they were to be treated as German prisoners-of-war.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Laternser, you have over half a day now. The Tribunal would like to know what it is further that you have to refer to.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, in a minute I shall complete my reference to the Kommando Order, and then I shall refer briefly to the deportation of workers. That will take perhaps two minutes, and then I shall deal with crimes against humanity war crimes. I believe, Mr. President, that I shall conclude in twenty minutes altogether.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Laternser, the Tribunal has already -at least I have already pointed out to you over and over again that all you are doing in substance is to read out what is already before us in writing, with certain references in addition to the Prosecution's evidence. In nearly every case we have before us in writing exactly what you say about these affidavits.
There is no use nodding your head at me. I have checked it and that, in the opinion of the Tribunal, is quite unnecessary. You can go on and you must refer us to the affidavits which you say relate to these topics, which you have properly announced as topics upon which you were going to produce documents. That is to say, deportations, rules of war and humanity, and you may refer to the numbers of the affidavits which deal with that and refer us also to the numbers, particularly of the documents which have been translated, and then we shall know where to find the documents which are important. Now, will you please go on?
DR. LATERNSER: I had left off with the statement that according to Affidavit 3174, the Kommando Order did not apply to the 20th Mountain Division and that is was changed by the agreement of the Commanding General. in the naval sector of Italy. For the Eastern Theater of War, Affidavits 608 and 616, as well as 624, show that the order was not carried through.
THE PRESIDENT: In order to show that I was entirely accurate in what I said to you, what we have before us is 608, General Bilka, "Rejection of the order by all Commands in the East. No instance of shooting." Go on.
DR. LATERNSER: With respect to the participation or the alleged participation of the military leaders in the deportation of workers, I should like to refer to Affidavits Number 2001 to 2019, and that is all I should like to say to this point.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Laternser, have any of them been translated?
DR. LATERNSER: No, your Lordship. Mr. President, that is the misgiving which I had, for if the affidavits were translated -
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Laternser, 2001, the substance of the affidavit is in the summary; the same in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2004-A and right on down to 2019. The substance of the affidavit is in the summary before us. It doesn't help us in the least to have it repeated by you.
DR. LATERNSER: Regarding the attitude held by the military leaders dealing with humanity and rules of war, I should like to refer to these Affidavits 505 to 514 and furthermore, in this connection I should like to refer to the documents which are found in my document 105 to 112, 2-C 119, pages 116 to 119, and to the publication and announcements found on pages 120 to 141 which applied and were valid for the various Theaters of War. tion according to which the German military leadership tried to bring about an incident between Hungary and Russia in that German areas with Soviet insignia attacked Hungarian territory. The High Tribunal will remember this assertion. Affidavit 531 refutes this through the officer who was the IC Officer with the Commander in Chief of the Luftwaffe. with the murdering of air crews who had been shot down, I should like to point out that Affidavits 652 to 659 apply in this connection. 651 especially, shows that the Wehrmacht protected the airmen who had been shot down, protected them against the excited population. The fact that lynching was condemned and rejected may be seen from the Affidavits 518 and 519, 520-A. Two of these affidavits refer to the Chiefs of the General Staffs of the Air Forces, General Koller and General Kleipe. Particularly may be seen from Affidavit 520-A that General Kleipe took steps against civilians through official channels where they practiced violence against fliers.
521 is an affidavit deposed by Gallant, Lt. General Gallant, who testified that German fighter squadrons never received orders to carry on the fight when the hostile crow members had parachuted.
Affidavit 522 -
THE PRESIDENT: How do you think it helps the Tribunal for you to have made the statement which you have just made, when we have before us Affidavit Number 521, "General Gallant, 7746, no order was over given for the combatting of shot down crows." Now, do you really think that you have added anything to that?
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, I wanted to be a little more explicit and have only tried to be a little more brief, and that is the reason why I am trying to be a little more brief, but I shall conclude in a moment, Mr. President. both of which show that rescue measures for enemy fliers are dealt with and are proved, and in conclusion, I should like to refer to Affidavits 3103, 3106. In both of these affidavits it is proved that the battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau rescued the survivors of the British auxiliary cruiser Ravalpinsi, even, though the British cruiser had sent out an S.O.S. and was expecting to receive aid from their own naval forces, whereas our own battleships could have been cut off from the return. the spring of 1941 with the battle ships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, and they deal also with an incident in 1943 where a German U-boat went to Spitzbergen to rescue the ship wrecked in that area where the U-boat was sent out for that purpose, and in this way I have concluded my submission of documentary evidence. lated, Documents 124, 933, 935, 939, 1501, 508-A, 508-B, 513 and 514-B, I should like to introduce these documents at this time.
21 Aug A LJG 22-1 Blakley of General Beckett, on the occasion of the anniversary of the 125 years' existence of the Military Academy of the War College, I should like in conclusion to state and refer to this fact where this speech shows and sets out the attitude of the military leaders.
DR. BOEHM: Mr. President, may it please the Tribunal, first of all I should like to submit an index to the High Tribunal, from which it can be seen that the document books, SA-1, A, B, 2, 3, and 4 have been submitted. I should like to submit these documents; and I shall do that when I have the originals at my disposal, the original text of the transcripts of the Commission sessions, affidavits, affidavits for the General SA, and especially twenty-one affidavits which have been translated, and an additional sixty-eight affidavits which have been deposed and dealt with before the Commission, 17,087 affidavits which have been dealt with in summary, then affidavits of the SA in so far as they deal with the members on the SA who have been taken over from the Steel Helmet organization, and their respective transcripts of the Commissions' sessions, and documents dealing with the mounted units, seventy-two affidavits, of which Nos. 1, 13, 21, 24, 29, 30, 64, 68, 70, 72 , and 75 have been translated. They an index which lists the individual affidavits in so far as they apply to the General SA, to the Steel Helmet organization, end to the mounted unit. I should like to submit this index to the High Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Have you submitted it?
DR. BOEHM: Mr. President, I shall submit this material as soon as I have received it; and at this point I reserve the right to call the attention of the High Tribunal to it. This will be just a matter of but a few minutes. In the first part of my presentation of documents, I shall submit documents which show what legal compulsion the National Socialist State put on the young generation so that its entrance into the various units 21 Aug A LJG 22-2 Blakley of the Party would be brought about and compelled.
the H. J. We see that when these young people reached the age of eighteen, they were taken into the Party and to the various branches of the Party and the SA. So that the youth would be taken in, decrees were given out to the various universities and institutes of higher learning so that the student bodies received certain authority. This may be seen from Document 147. This refers to Bavaria only but it applies to all of Germany. applies to the training of the students and their being brought into the community and their training for Wehrhaftigkeit is shown. Document 156 refers to this. On the basis of this decree, which applied to all institutes of higher learning in the Reich, all students were forced to go into the SA if they were not physically unfit. They did not have to report to the Hechschulamt but to the various SA Stuermen. This office was later dissolved. The institutes had to report to the local agencies. They remain in the SA; and the obligation to serve in the SA in this respect is referred to, as may be shown by Document 151. This is an excerpt from the monthly periodical of the B. Z., Catholic German Youth Organizations association. State. Therefore, in the year 1936, all students from the first until the third semester were taken over into the N. S. student body. Document SA-151 should be seen in this connection, that the National Socialist student body took over the obligation that all those who were studying would have to belong to the Party as well; and many, many German students in this way were once more incorporated into the SA. In Document 159-SA we see what results non-compliance with this directive had. SA or a similar formation was quite impossible.
21 Aug A LJG 21-3 Blakley coercion was taken. It is d early shown that the Prussian Ministry for Culture and Education said that service in the SA was the prerequisite for being admitted to teachers' examinations; and as Document SA-185 shows, in the year 1935 we can read in the official dispatch on page 56 that one of the conditions for becoming a teacher was membership and activity in an organization such as the SA. most strong with these who were economically the most weak. I should like to prove this by submitting Document SA-167. with the sixth grade were not exempt from this compulsion with activity in the N. S. P. and its various formations. This legal coercion in the intermediate schools is shown in my final plan: and I shall also deal with the compulsion applied to personnel replacements. servants had turned out to be something quite different. Document 173 is a commentary dealing with German Servants Law of the year 1937. It says on Page 67 of young German officials, it was required of the young Erman as far as his physical condition permits that he be a member of the SA or the SS. For the development which was started for the restoration of civil servants, they have as model in career other German officials, in Paragraph 2 of this directive. And we return to Document SA-178: Applicants must belong to the Party or one of its formations or must have belonged to them.
In this connection I should like to refer to Document SA-175; and as an exception I should like to deal at length with this document and quote it. "Finally each applicant for an official position will have to comply with the demand that he belong to the Party or one of its formations, for the official shall not only belong to the SA or to the SS but rather he must have been in the Hitler's Mouth as well. Through the law of the 1st of Dece the aims that outside of the home and school they be trained in ber, 1936, the Fuehrer has grouped the entire German students with the sphere of National Socialism in the Hitler Youth spiritually, ethically, and physically, and to have then trained for service to the communities.
arose from the various branches and were developed organically. This kind of newly setting up of the law is in accordance with the basic principle of National Socialist conduct of the State. It is not as in the case of a state which has just given out laws which sound pretty. It does not only apply because the organs of the state were not sufficient; but the organs of the Third Reich will set up the conditions necessary first and then the necessary corresponding law will be issued. after the other appeared and one directive after the other came out. Some of those directives are set out in my document book. Document S--171 shows that apprentices could be taken only from such formations as the SA and SS. In the year 1934, as Document Sa-183 shows, in order to receive any practical training, the condition was presupposed that a membership such as that in the SA existed; and the same applies, as may be shown by Document 165. This was true in the case of the Reich-Bahn, the railroads. young generation was forced into the N.S.D.A.P. through law and directives. In Document 180 it says, " An exceptional case gives me the occasion to point out once more to all organizations engaging in training courses for higher posts, as well as to the assistants and construction assistants already belonging to the administration that they should actively cooperate in the Party or its formations." This is not an exceptional case given by the Reichsminister of Transportation but rather it is typical for all districts dealing with all legal matters. We can see that every sphere of life will be coordinated in the same way.
presupposed membership in the NSDAP. That may also be seen from 191. satisfied with but a formal membership, but rather demanded an active membership in the Party or its formations, such as the SA. That the police did not make any exception either may be shown by SA document 196. Membership in the NSDAP or one of its formations was a condition of one's coming into the police. directives issued in 1994. the SA is required for the replacement of men. It is regrettable -
THE PRESIDENT: What is regrettable?
DR. BOEHM: Please:
THE PRESIDENT: Finish year sentence.
DR. BOEHM: Yes of course. I shall submit all the documents, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn new.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 22 August at 1000 hours).
DR. BOEHM: Mr. President, may it please the Tribunal yesterday I submitted some of my documents which prove that many people were members of the SA through legal compulsion. In that connection I should like to contine my presentation of evidence. replacement in the Finance Offices. power, one witness, Dr. Meder, could not appear. We could not correspond with him, for it had been learned that he had been earmarked to be a witness in this proceeding. All of the attempts made by the Secretary of this High Tribunal have been in vain, and it has been impossible for us to bring this witness from the Russian Zone to Nurnberg. 1936 through 1944, fourteen --
THE PRESIDENT: (Interposing): Dr. Boehm, we are hearing you now upon your documents; we are not hearing you upon the question of any difficulties there may have been in getting witnesses.
DR. BOEHM: The following are the schools as they existed in the Reich: Herrsching, Ilmenau, Meersburg, Woellerhof, Berlin, Moelln, Feldkirch, Leipa, Leitmeritz, Bodenbach, Thorn, Siegmaringen, and Boppard. the HJ and the SA. This is proven by documents 215 and 216, that membership in these organizations was required.
THE PRESIDENT (Interposing(: You are going a little bit too fast; your light is flickering.