A. Yes, the people who drank the water or ate some bread. Then the doctor from the Luftwaffe would get some sea water.
Q. Yes, we have already heard that. Do you know that some people had what they called an "escape point"?
A. I don't know.
Q. Were you there when the station was dissolved and the apparatus was packed up? Did you help?
A. No.
Q. Do you know whether the professor tried to help the prisoners get some privilege, or to have people released from the Wehrmacht? Did you hear anything about that?
A. No.
Q. Didn't he promise that?
A. I don't know.
Q. You don't know anything -- do you suffer from a weak memory?
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, will you please propound your questions more slowly. The question and answer are too fast for the interpreters.
Witness, will you speak more slowly and before answering counsel's questions wait a moment to let the interpreters translate counsel's questions.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
Q. Witness, you have already told us about the cigarettes. Do you know whether the professor did anything else for the experimental subjects, for example, that members of the Wehrmacht were to be released?
A. I don't know.
Q. Do you remember some criminals, that is, criminal police, that came and inquired?
A. No, I know nothing about that.
Q. Neither do I. Do you know that Laubinger came to the Quartermaster's office?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. He was in the same room with you, 22?
A. Yes, when the experiments were finished. I was on the farm for about a week and then had a phlegmone and was then taken to the hospital.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, I must insist that you wait until the witness has finished his answer and then propound your next question, so that it can be translated. And witness, you must delay your answer until the Question propounded by counsel has been translated.
Q. Witness, do you know whether in the winter of 1944 or in the spring of 1945 there was a big famine in the camp?
A. I don't know anything about that.
Q. Did you ever hear anything about it?
A. No.
Q. And that many gypsies died then, you didn't hear that?
A. In Dachau?
Q. Yes, in Dachau.
A. No.
Q. Did you meet any of these 44 people?
A. No, there were not many. When the experiments were finished, many gypsies were sent to other concentration camps. I was in the hospital then.
Q. And you weren't in any malaria experiment?
A. No.
Q. Or typhoid experiment?
A. No, typhoid and malaria was in Auschwitz. A lot of gypsies had that in Auschwitz. Dead people were stacked like flour sacks and then taken away by trucks to the crematorium. Gypsies and Jews weren't worth anything in the camp.
DR. STEINBAUER: In the meantime, Mr. President, I have obtained the excerpt from the criminal record, which is only in German. I shall have it translated and offer it to the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: From that record you might ask the witness concerning the statements on the record which you have.
MR. HARDY: May I see the record to check its authenticity? Will the German interpreters kindly look at this for me to check its authenticity?
Q. Witness, I don't want to bother you with the question, but do you think it possible you had nine convictions?
A. I don't remember. I was a deserter and they betrayed me when I came to Auschwitz.
DR. STEINBAUER: I have no further Questions, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Are there any other questions to this witness by defense counsel?
DR. GAWLIK: Gawlik for Hoven.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, on what matters do you desire to examine this witness?
DR. GAWLIK: About the general treatment of Jews in the concentration camp.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't see the relevancy of that matter concerning your client.
DR. GAWLIK: In order to prove the attitude of Dr. Hoven toward the Jews.
MR. HARDY: I think that is a matter of chronology, the attitude toward the Jews in this matter, taking into consideration the record of the IMT.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you going to ask the witness whether or not he knows Hoven?
DR. GAWLIK: No.
THE PRESIDENT: I see no materiality concerning the case of Dr. Hoven in the examination of this witness.
DR. GAWLIK: For my case I consider it material for my closing brief, but if the Tribunal does not think the questions necessary then I will dispense with them.
THE PRESIDENT: I see no pertinency of the questions to your defense.
DR. GAWLIK: I consider it pertinent to prove the good reputation and character of the defendant Dr. Hoven and to prove that it is unlikely that he committed the offenses with which he is charged.
THE PRESIDENT: I suggest, counsel, if you contend that this witness knew Dr. Hoven, then it would be a different question, but you said you made no such contention.
DR. GAWLIK: No.
THE PRESIDENT: Then I see nothing to which he can testify that would be pertinent to Dr. Hoven's defense.
DR. GAWLIK: Very well.
THE PRESIDENT: Are there any other questions by defense counsel representing clients by whom this witness may be properly examined?
MR. HARDY: I have nothing further.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness Hoellenreiner is excused from the witness stand to be reconducted to his confinement in the prison.
The Secretary of the Tribunal - I see the Secretary is now absent.
MR. HARDY: The defense counsel have some documents. I think they might well introduce them now. I think I will be in a position at 1:30 to start with documents for identification.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, Dr. Sauter for defendants Blome and Ruff.
I have heard that yesterday the Tribunal asked for a list of documents which are still to be offered by the defense. This morning I asked my colleagues how many documents they still have to offer, and I have drawn up a list which I now hand to the Tribunal so that the Tribunal will be informed. I shall hand you a list in a moment. On the right side I have always indicated whether these documents are in the hands of the Translation Branch, or whether they have not yet been handed in. You will be able to get a picture from this list. Unfortunately I have this list only in German, as there was not enough time to have it translated. I am sure, however, you will be able to understand the list anyhow.
THE PRESIDENT: I am surprised that defense counsel have documents which they have not yet handed to translation. I understood all such documents were in the hands of the translation department some time ago.
The Tribunal has received the list of the documents referred to by counsel.
DR. SAUTER: And then, Mr. President, may I make another remark? I have made a listing on a point, which the President brought up for discussion about the approximate number of pages of the closing briefs and the final pleas, insofar as they have not yet been translated. I have made this listing. Just a moment, perhaps I can give the court some copies of it.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, from looking at this list concerning the supplement documents -- wait a minute, I can see we only have to deal with the supplemental documents in the case of Schroeder, Mrugowsky, Sievers and Brack, combined with all the others are merely miscellaneous documents and it seems to me Bracks', Schroeders', Sievers', Mrugowskys' attorney should be able to present their documents today. They certainly must have had their documents in more than a week ago, particularly the defendants Brack, Sievers, and Mrugowsky inasmuch as their cases were completed weeks ago.
DR. SAUTER: The delay with many documents can be explained by the fact that the Prosecution has offered now evidence against various defendants through the cases has long been completed. For example, against the defendant Dr. Blome, whose case has been finished for months, more documents were offered last week by the Prosecution. In this case, I have had no opportunity to call witnesses. I have made a statement on this new evidence and on an important point I have taken an affidavit of Dr. Blome today. I want this affidavit, which was taken, to be translated. It was not possible to do that earlier and it is possibly the same with other defense counsel. These documents, which are still missing, are documents dealing with these recent charges raised by the Prosecution.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, you see the great difficulty has been here, the Prosecution, in an endeavor to be cooperative with the Tribunal and defense counsel, has introduced rebuttal evidence out of order.
We have done that to shorten the number of days and to expedite the closing of the trial. In so doing, the defense counsel picked up rebuttal evidence and tried to have new affidavit made.
I think a lawyer like Dr. Sauter who went through the whole I.M.T. and is far more familiar with the procedure of the Tribunal is trying to offer further evidence in rebuttal to the Prosecution's rebuttal evidence. We will never have the trial close if all of this evidence is permitted today.
THE PRESIDENT: There is merit in what the Prosecution has said. The Prosecution introduces evidence, the defense introduces evidence, the prosecution then introduces evidence in rebuttal and then rebuttal evidence is introduced by the defense. At the conclusion of the defense's rebuttal, the case is ended.
The prosecution in order to expedite the trial introduced some evidence out of order. Such evidence is not subject to defendant's rebuttal, it entitles them to bring in further evidence, but the case closes with the presentation of the defendant's rebuttal evidence. If the evidence here had been introduced in an orderly manner, it would be ended. If, of course, the prosecution in rebuttal, after introducing new evidence that is not in rebuttal in what the defense's contention is, the defense has an opportunity to introduce evidence.
Mr. HARDY: May I correct you, Your Honor, you erroneously said defendant's rebuttal when you mean prosecution rebuttal.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, after receiving other evidence, which is not rebuttal or in explanation of evidence introduced by the defense that the new evidence will be excluded then there is no necessity and it might be excluded on objection. If there are no objections, it would go in. If it was admitted in evidence then the defense might answer. If the Prosecution offers the objection, it may open the door for the defendant to introduce other evidence to deny it. That would be a matter to be decided by the Tribunal and the Court trying the case as circumstances might arise.
Dr. SAUTER: Mr. President, may I saw something which is important for myself and which also goes more or less for all my colleagues. The Prosecution just said that Dr. Sauter had been in the I.M.T. and know the procedure very well. Now, I must say we learned something new in this field in many respects. For example, that the Prosecution on the last day of the case can bring new witnesses that is something new for us. I, as defense counsel, if it is a fair trial, demand that if such new evidence is brought in at the last moment, I am given an opportunity to answer it.
I should like to show you by a practical example what I mean. During the whole trial, which has been going on for eight months, the Prosecution did not say a single word against the defendant Dr. Blome in connection with typhus. Then it would have been their right to charge the defendant Dr. Blome in this connection, but for eight months they did not do so and now at the last moment, I believe it was last Friday, a document was submitted which suddenly charges the defendant Dr. Blome with typhus experiments. In his whole life he heard nothing about them and during the whole trial nothing was said about them.
In the interests of a fair trial, the Prosecution cannot say I am now in rebuttal and I think I have a right to demand that when such a new charge is raised, I have a right to answer it and if this document is given to me on Friday, I am not a magician, I cannot offer the affidavit of the Defendant Dr. Blome months ago. That is apparently ture of many other cases of the other defense counsel. Mr. President, I ask the Tribunal to have understanding for this affidavit.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, may I ask the defense counsel one question? Is the Defendant Blome charged in the indictment with typhus? No, is the answer. No further questions.
DR. SAUTER: Then I would like to ask the Prosecutor why, I think it was last Friday, he submitted a document which connects the defendant Blome with typhus experiments?
Mr. HARDY: The defendant Blome is not charged in the indictment with typhus, the evidence will show that the Prosecution definitely entertains no charge against Defendant Blome with typhus. That is correct.
It seems to me that defense counsel can read the record and see which evidence they can well ignore. I think in a question like this document, they would do well to ignore it. The affidavit shows the Tribunal the entire procedure, they held conferences, how typhus experiments were started.
It seems at this last date the document at least did show Dr. Blome was connected with typhus.
THE PRESIDENT: You introduced no official evidence to show that the defendant Blome was charged with typhus experiments?
Mr. HARDY: I did not introduce it, Your Honor, and this is the first time the Document was introduced.
THE PRESIDENT: The matter of evidence is covered by Ordnance No. 7, which allows the Tribunal in its discretion to allow rebuttal on both sides. The situation is not altogether fortunate, but I would like to say defendants in preparing these documents they were informed they must get in their documents to the Translation center. I don't know how many documents are coming out. The translation authorities said the documents would be turned out every day beginning with yesterday, today and tomorrow. I don't know if the defense received any documents or not.
I notice defendant Mrugowsky has put in 19 documents, put them in on the 27th day of June -- just a few days since. Have any defense counsel further documents to introduce? We have some here, I notice.
Dr. SAUTER: Mr. President, may I add something? In addition to the one list, which I gave you about the documents, which are not ready yet, I have a second list which I also handed to you, showing approximately the number of pages of the closing briefs and final pleas, insofar as they are not yet translated.
On the left side, I have the name of the defendant and defense counsel; in the middle, I have a column showing whether these closing briefs and pleas have been handed in for translation yet or not, or whether this translation is finished. On the right side, I have the number of pages still to be translated. The majority of these closing briefs and pleas are in the hands of the translating branch. I am giving you this list so that the President will have a picture of how much material still has to be translated.
THE PRESIDENT: I understand that the number of pages shown in the right hand column simply indicates the number of pages not yet translated; is that correct?
Dr. SAUTER: Yes, the number of pages not yet translated. On those that are translated, I simply made a line and dash on the right and that is indicated in the center column. The figures on the right are only those which are still to be translated, which have not yet come back from the Translation Branch. The President can see how much work there has to be done by the Translation Branch and it will be easier for the President to reach his dispositions.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I understand. We appreciate this list. Of course, the documents which must be introduced before the close of the evidence are the matters of first importance. The briefs will be done as soon as the documents which are to be referred in evidence are ready. I shall endeavor during the noon recess to ascertain how the translation department is proceeding.
The Secretary will file for the record the certificate concerning defendant Oberhauser who is ill.
The Tribunal will be in recess until 1:30 o'clock.
(A recess was taken until 1330 hours.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 1 July 1947)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. SEIDL (consel for the defendants Gebhardt and Fischer): Mr. President, on last Saturday in connection with Document Book 18, the Prosecution offered an affidavit of the camp commandant Suhren. This is NO-3648, Exhibit 350. I objected to the admission of this document. The court overruled, my objection but said that to refute these statements I could submit an affidavit from the Defendant Karl Gebhardt. I have obtained this affidavit in the meantime, and this morning I sent four copies of it to the Translation Branch. I should like to offer this as Gebhardt Exhibit 55. It is Document 47.
THE PRESIDENT: What number did you wish to be assigned to this exhibit, Counsel?
DR. SEIDL: Gebhardt 45. I have no translation of this document yet, Mr. President, but I am in a position to give the Tribunal four copies in German so that the document number can be entered.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for the Prosecution, are you at all familiar with the document?
MR. HARDY: No, I am not familiar with the document, your Honor; however, it is a document of the Defendant Gebhardt. It is sworn to, and as a matter of convenience and expeditiousness, I will not object to it if an English copy is filed with us in due course.
THE PRESIDENT: How long is the affidavit, Counsel?
DR. SEIDL: Nine pages, but it is written widely spaced.
MR. HARDY: Of course, Your Honor, this is an answer to document which I consider to be true rebuttal evidence. The Defendant has taken the stand, and in tho testimony of the defense he has given his opinion as to the status of the girls, and the affidavit of Fritz Suhren gives the opinion of the camp commandant at that time as to the status of the inmates in the camp and other particulars which were testified to by the Defendant Gebhardt.
The affidavit cf Fritz Suhren doesn't bring any now evidence, and this is an answer to the affidavit. In my opinion in the theory of the law it is incorrect to introduce this, and it would be erroneously received, inasmuch as the affidavit of Fritz Suhren is in the nature of true rebuttal.
THE: PRESIDENT: I think it would be better to wait until the last of the documents are offered so that we might probably have the English translation. We will pass the document at this tine and consider it at some later date.
I would state for the benefit of counsel for both parties that this noon I spoke with the head of the Translation Department. I talked with him Saturday, Mr. Hodges, and he told me that every document which he had last Saturday, would be available for this Tribunal tomorrow morning, Wednesday morning. He informs me today that his promise will be carried out, that every document that he had at the time I spoke to him last Saturday will be ready tomorrow morning. He also informed me that he had received several documents for translation yesterday, some on behalf of the Defendant Handloser, some on behalf cf the Defendant Rose, and some documents from another defendant whose name he had forgotten. It seems to me that as far as Defendants Mrugowsky and Handloser and concerned there is little excuse for the late date these documents were turned into the Translation. As to the other defendants, I am not advised, but we will see what we have tomorrow morning.
Counsel for tho Prosecution is ready to proceed with his documents?
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, I should now like to proceed with the documents which the Prosecution have introduced during the course of the defense and which documents have been marked for identification only. I will distribute a limited number cf copies of indexes and documents of these particular documents which were marked fer identification, in English and in German; and during the presentation of these documents for formal admittance, the Prosecution would appreciate any suggestions from the Tribunal in connection with the introduction thereof. I have four copies of the complete documents with indexes for the Tribunal.
The two that I presented to Judge Sebring and Justice Beals yesterday were a little out of order in one or two instances, but these, I am assured, are in better order; and I think that if you will refer to these you will have a better index and all the documents complete. At the same time, I have one copy for the interpreters in English and one for the court reporters. We have four remaining copies in German for the defense counsel. Bearing in mind, of course, Your Honor, that ail parties have previously received copies of these documents. These are merely for convenience.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary will hand these documents to the Tribunal.
MR. HARDY: If Your Honors please, for convenience, if you will take the last document, on the bottom of all, that should be the first one which I introduce which is Exhibit No.442. You see the asterisk on page 1 which refers to the last page. This is Exhibit 442, which is Document NO-892. Put that on the top, and then I think ore can continue along in order until we hit another snag. And as I go through these, Your Honor.....
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment, Counsel.
MR. HARDY: Yes, sir.
THE PRESIDENT: The last document....
MR. HARDY: The last document was No. 892.
THE PRESIDENT: That doesn't seem to be here, Counsel.
MR. HARDY: Perhaps it's been put on top.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, that is on top. I thought you referred to the last document in the boOk. Very well.
MR. HARDY: The first document is Document NO-892, which is Exhibit No. 442, which I offer at this time formally for admission into evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: Can you state, Counsel, in connection with each document the name of the defendant in connection with whose evidence these documents were identified?
MR. HARDY: That would be almost an impossibility.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, I just asked for the information.
MR. HARDY: However, this is a euthanasia document.
I think I can do that, Your Honor. Miss Johnson has prepared a list for me.
This document NO-892, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit No. 442, was introduced during the course of the cross examination of Karl Brandt and is found on page 2540 of the official transcript.
THE PRESIDENT: What page, Counsel?
MR. HARDY: The page is contained in the index, Your Honor. The index has the page of the official transcript.
THE PRESIDENT: That is in the right-hand column?
MR. HARDY: That is right, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: All right.
MR. HARDY: Will I assume, Your Honor, that these documents are accepted into evidence and continue right along unless there are objections to the contrary?
JUDGE SEBRING: Mr. Hardy.
MR. HARDY: Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE SEBRING: I notice in several of those there is a reference; well, in 890, for example, "on the basis of a letter directed to Professor Dr. Brandt"; and, if you can, when you come to the documents referring to Dr. Brandt, if it is convenient for you to do so, will you indicate whether that is Karl Brandt or Rudolf Brandt?
MR. HARDY: Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE SEBRING: And also it appears that some of these copies do not have signatures, and it may be that the originals do. If they do, will you please give us the documents -- for example, the last exhibit, 442 -- I don't know whether that had a signature or not.
MR. HARDY: The last exhibit does not have a signature, Your Honor. It is a certified copy by the -- I think it is the prosecutor or the court officer in Frankfurt from whom we received the copy. It is purported to be a copy of the original.
JUDGE SEBRING: The latter itself evidently has a signature, because the word "signature" is written there, but the name is not trans cribed.
MR. HARDY: That is right, Your Honor. The name wasn't reproduced.
THE PRESIDENT: These documents, as they are called to the attention of the Tribunal and offered, will be considered as received in evidence unless there is an objection, in which event, of course, the objection will be heard and decided.
MR. HARDY: There is one other point I want to clarify, Your Honors. When I refer to these documents which are submitted during the cross-examination of a particular defendant I do not limit the document and the contents thereof to that particular defendant's case. It may well fit into other defendants' cases.
THE PRESIDENT: That will be understood.
MR. HARDY: The second is Document NO-890, which is offered as prosecution Exhibit No. 443. This was introduced during the crossexamination of the Defendant Karl Brandt and is found on page 2500 of the transcript. The original letter, Your Honors, contains a signature which I am unable to decipher and is illegible, unless it could be deciphered by other German handwriting experts.
The next is Document NO-1758, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit No. 444. This is found on page 2545 of the official transcript. These are excerpts from General Halder's diary. The diary was taken in shorthand. The original shorthand notes were transcribed into German and duly certified, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the number of that document, Counsel?
MR. HARDY: That will be Exhibit 444. The document number is NO-1758.
The next document is Document NO-119, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit 445, found on page 2638 of the transcript, and is an order of the Fuehrer regarding the release of doctors from their professional discretion. This is an original letter, Your Honor, which is on the official stationery, of the National sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei and was found by the Prosecution in the document center in Vienna, and is duly certified.
This is also offered in connection with the case of Karl Brandt.
The next document, Your Honor, is NO-154, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit 446, which is found also on page 2638 of the official transcript, and this is a report on some experiments with the decontamination of water. The original exhibit is a photostatic copy which is signed. This was found by myself personally in the files of the Reich Research Council in Frankfurt.
The next document is Document NO-1419, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit 447, which is found on page 2641 of the official transcript and is a letter from Rudolf Brandt to Karl Wolff regarding the food experiments in concentration camps. Pardon me, Your Honor -correction -- it is a letter from Karl Brandt to Wolff, and it bears the original signature of the defendant Karl Brandt.
The next document is NO-1382, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit 448 and is found on page 2644 of the official transcript, during the course of the cross examination of the defendant Karl Brandt. These are two telegrams, Your Honor.
The next document is NO-1620, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit 449 and found during the cross examination of Karl Brandt, on page 2646 of the official transcript. This is a memorandum from Grawitz to Himmler on proposed medical experiments and then the reply of Rudolf Brandt for Himmler. The original exhibits contain the original signature of Reichsarzt SS Grawitz and also the initials of the Defendart Rudolf Brandt.
The next is 1490, NO-1490, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit 450, which is found on page 3024 of the official transcript. These are two letters regarding the Handloser appointment to the Reich Research Council, which were introduced during the cross-examination of the Defendant Handloser. These are in the original, Your Honor, with an envelope attached thereto. One has the typewritten signature of Fromm, and the other has a signature which I am unable to make out, and you recall that there was a note on the top regarding Professor Rostock.
The next is a statement by the Defendant Handloser, which is NO-732, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit 451. It is found on page 3060 of the official transcript. This was likewise offered during the course of the cross examination of the Defendant Handloser.
The next is Document NO-1323, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit No. 452, which is found on page 3082 of the official transcript and bears the original signature of the Defendant Handloser. It has an attachment thereto and it concerns spotted fever or typhus vaccines.
The next -
JUDGE SEBRING: Wait just a minute, please. No. 732 was 451?
MR. HARDY: Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE SEBRING: No. 1323 was 452?
MR. HARDY: Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE SEBRING: And No. 1321 is 453?
MR. HARDY: That is what it will be, Your Honor. I am getting to that now. Do Your Honors have copies of the index before you?
JUDGE SEBRING: Yes.
MR. HARDY: Next is Document NO-1321, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit No. 453, which is found on page 3083 of the official transcript and was introduced during the cross examination of the Defendant Handloser.
The next document, Your Honors, is NO-1315, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit No. 454. It is found on page 3086 of the official transcript and was offered during the cross examination of the Defendant Handloser. It contains the original signature of one Dr. Bieber.
The next is Document NO-1318, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit No. 455. It is found on page 3090 of the official transcript and was offered during the cross examination of the Defendant Handloser.
This contains an original signature which is reported to be illegible in the translation and I, unfortunately, am unable to decipher it.
THE PRESIDENT: That, Counsel, is Document 1315?
MR. HARDY: 1318, Your Honor. It is offered as Exhibit 455 as indicated on the index.
The next document, Your Honor, is Document NO-1852, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit 456, which is found on page 3406 of the official transcript and was introduced during the course of the crossexamination of the Defendant Rostock. At that time it was objected to by Dr. Servatius. The original copies of the documents were sent here from Natzweiler and were exhibited to Defense Counsel, and he informed me orally that he withdrew objection after having the opportunity to peruse the original documents.
The next document, Your Honor, is NO-692, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit No. 457, found on page 3408 of the official transcript and was introduced during the cross examination of the Defendant Rostock. This is a list of research assignments from the office of the Chief of Science and Research. The Defendant Brandt signed, the original signature by the Defendant Rostock.
The next document, Your Honor, is Document NO-934, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit No. 458, and which is found on page 3655 of the official transcript and is a list of further assignments in research in connection with the office of the Reich Research Council and the Chief of the Medical Services. That is the office of Dr. Brandt, Karl Brandt.
The next document, Your Honor, is Document NO-232, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit No. 459. It is found on page 4237 of the official transcript and is a letter from Gebhardt to Brandt regarding experiments at Dachau.
JUDGE SEBRING: Which Brandt?
MR. HARDY: This should be Rudolf Brandt, Obersturmbannfuehrer Dr. Brandt.
That is to be found during the cross examination of the Defendant Gebhardt.
The next document, Your Honor, is NO-919 which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit 460, found on page 4244 of the official transcript was offered during the cross examination of the Defendant Gebhardt. This is a Himmler order regarding experimentation on concentration camp inmates.
THE PRESIDENT: One moment, counsel. I don't seem to have that in order.
MR. HARDY: That's 919, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: I have it.
MR. HARDY: Now, if you will turn to the second page of the index Your Honor, you will come to Document NO-190, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit No. 461, which is found on page 4714 of the official transcript and was introduced during the course of the examination of the Defendant Blome.
The next document, Your Honor-------
THE PRESIDENT: Just a minute Counsel.
MR. HARDY: Yes, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel on the top of the second page of this index I find Document 1185.
MR. HARDY: The second page?
THE PRESIDENT: No, Page 2 is omitted from my index. That's the top of Page 3, but I have no Page 2.
MR. HARDY: I will send you up a Page 2 Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: I have one. I have another Page 2 here.
MR. HARDY: On Page 2, Your Honor, the top document is NO-190. It is offered as Prosecution Exhibit 461 and is found in the transcript on pages 4714 and was introduced during the examination of the Defendant Blome. Are you in order now, Your Honor?
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment -- yes.
MR. HARDY: The next document is No-1424, which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit No. 462, found on page 4773 of the official transcript and was offered during the examination of the Defendant Blome. The next document is NO-1057, which is Prosecution Exhibit No. 463, found on page 4783 of the transcript, and was offered during the examination of the Defendant Blome.