DR. GAWLIK: Mr. President, in this connection I submit Hoven Document VII. This will be Exhibit 6. This is also a letter from another trial from the Fourth Criminal Court of Frankfort on the Main. From this it can be seen that all Concentration camps, including Buchen ald were to be cleared of Jews. This document is to close this part of my evidence. I have found out by interrogating people that when Buchenwald was liberated there were a large number of Jews present, and I have also discovered that Dr. Hoven prevented many transports of Jews, and through this letter I wish to prove that this is something Dr. Hoven be given credit for.
MR. HARDY: I move this be stricken from the record, and counsel be instructed to examine the witness, and now to testify on behalf of the witness.
DR. GAWLIK: I simply want to explain to the Tribunal the reason I put in this document, so that this will be understandable to the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Proceed.
Q, I also show you PS-1151, Exhibit 411, Document Book 16, page 18 of the English Document Book, This is the letter from the Inspector of the Concentration Camps, 12 December 1941, which was sent among others to the camp commander of Buchenwald, Did you know about this letter?
A. No.
Q. And the questionnaire forms mentioned in this letter, were they given to you by the camp commander?
A. No, but they wouldn't have been given to me anyway, because I wasn't first camp doctor at that time. If it had been given to anyone it would be given to Dr. Blancke, who was the first camp doctor.
Q. Do you know whether Dr. Blancke received such letters?
A. I don't think so, because if he had, of course, I would have found out about it also.
Q. How can you explain the fact that these questionnaires were not sent on. to Dr. Blancke who was first camp doctor in Buchenwald, how can you explain that fact they weren't sent?
A. I can explain that only as follows: filling out the questionnaires was no longer required in Buchenwald. This letter is dated December 1941, however, Mennecke, as can be seen from this letter, had already been in Buchenwald at that time previously. The forms which were annexed to this letter were to be the preparation for the coming doctors' commission, but since the Commission of Doctors had already finished its work in Buchenwald and had filled out the forms itself, it was no longer necessary to send these forms out again. I assume that these forms were kept by the camp commander in Buchenwald, and not sent on to the camp doctor.
Q. Please look at the last paragraph of this letter following the completion, of the examination of the inspector of the concentration camp and to make a report in which the number of the prisoners who were directed the special treatment 14 f 13 are to be mentioned; did you make any such report.
A. No, and if there had been any such report it would have been Dr. Blancke' s job, and not mine. However, I cannot recall that any such report was ever made. I think what is meant is that the camp commander should make the report to the Inspector of the concentration camp.
Q. I show to you also Document PS-1151, a letter from Amtsgruppe D of 26 March 1942. Page 43 of the English Document book. Do you know the contents of this letter?
A. Yes.
Q What was done in Buchenwald as a consequence of this letter?
A. On the basis of this letter I told the camp commander that Buchenwald contained no prisoners capable of work. Gottschalk, my first secretary draw up this letter, and I signed it and sent it to the camp commander.
It was then forwarded to Berlin. I know this for certain, because on the basis of our letter we finally had the assurance, namely the prisoners and myself, that at any rate in Buchenwald the 14 f 13 action had come to and end. Of course the joy of those who participated in our counter-action 14 f 13 was enormous. And because of this the transports wanted for 14 f 13 were abolished once and for all.
Q. Please tell the court what this 13 f 14 meant; the counteraction?
A. This was our counter-action, where I and the Czechs and Germans, and Jews took part in. It was just a pun --- we named our counter-action 13 f 14.
Q. This then was a counter-action undertaken by the illegal camp commander in connection with this in Buchenwald, to keep the Action 14 f 13 from being carried out?
A. Yes, but you have forgotten the four Jewish prisoners whom I mentioned before.
Q. Now, back to this letter of 28 March 1942; how could it be ascertained whether a person was capable of work?
A. It was never ascertained at all whether the people were capable of work. Without conducting an examination, I told the camp commander they were all capable of work.
Q. I come now to Mennecke's letter to his wife, in which he says that in November of 1943 he filled out questionnaires for 1000 Jews and 300 Aryans. This letter is in the record on page 1944 of the transcript. Did you have anything to do with filling out these questionnaires?
A. No.
Q. Please turn to page 29 of the English document book. This is document 1151-P.S., a letter of 16 March 1941 to the commander of the concentration camp Gross-Rosen. The prosecution asserts that this list was prepared for the commander by the camp doctor. On the basis of this document the Prosecutions claims the following and I quote: "This list simply describes what went on in the Camp Gross-Rosen. Oranienburg issued the orders that the concentration camps themselves should choose the prisoners who were to go in the transports." The Prosecution takes the few that the selection was made by the camp doctors and the defendant Hoven took care of this in the Camp Buchenwald; now is that correct?
A. That might have been the case in Gross Rosen, but as I have already said in Buchenwald the commission of doctors came before the letter from the inspector of concentration camps, also in Buchenwald the Jews did not have to go through a preliminary physical examination by the camp doctors, because the order read specifically and therefore all Jews interned in Buchenwald were to be included in notion 14-F-13, I really could not see why a physical examination would be necessary in such a case. Dr. Mennecke expressed this very clearly, as I remember.
Then it can be seen from Mennecke's testimony that no doctor in Buchenwald supported him in his activities there. All this goes to show that the situation in Buchenwald was not the same as the situation in Gross-Rosen. I gave no support to the Doctor's Commission under the direction of Dr. Mennecke and made no preparations for them at all, nor do I know that Dr. Blancke did either.
Q. Were you in Bernburg?
A. Yes.
Q. When?
A. In April of 1943.
Q. Why?
A. A prisoner doctor from an outside camp told me that in this camp two prisoners died a natural death and I went there for the cremation.
Q. Did your visit to Bernburg have any connection with the action 14-F-13?
A. No, that can be seen from the fact that this visit took place one and one quarter years after the transport had left Bernburg.
Q. Whom did you speak with on your visit to Bernburg?
A. A Dr. Eberl - E-b-e-r-l.
Q. During this conversation was the action 14-F-13 discussed at all?
A. No, the conversation lasted a maximum of ten minutes. I then went out to the outlying camp where the two prisoners had died.
Q. Please turn to document book 12 again, page 1 of your affidavit, No. 9, this number concerns itself with the Euthanasia program. Kindly tell the Tribunal what sentences in here are incorrect?
A. "In accordance with these orders 300 to 400 Jewish prisoners of different nationalities were sent to the 'Euthanasia Station' at Bernburg for extermination."
Now I don't exactly remember what number I said.
Q. Well, suppose you tell us just what did happen?
A. There were about 300 Jewish and non-Jewish prisoners. It is not stated in this sentence that there were non-Jews also.
Q. What else is wrong?
A. "A few days later I received a list of the names of those Jews who were exterminated at Bernburg from the Camp Commander and was ordered to issue falsified statements of death. I obeyed this order."
Q. Then, what really did happen?
A. I think it is my fault and not the fault of the interrogator that I expressed myself unclearly. Here the statement in itself is incorrect, to be sure I did not receive the order in turn from the camp commander. For the reasons I have already given, I paid no attention and laid no importance on the signature.
Q. Who issued these death certificates?
A. The prisoners did.
Q. Whom did you discuss the matter with first; with the aforementioned four Jewish prisoners; were these four prisoners part of the illegal camp committee?
A. Yes, there were Jews on that committee, namely these four. I must also say how this came about. I could not send this back to Dr. Blancke because this was a very long and tedious work since I had to write out all the death certificates myself and then Dr. Blancke would have to write them out himself, but the Jewish prisoners who were advising mo told me that I should leave the making out of death certificates up to them, because the usual death certificates were only three or four lines long, stating that on such and such a date, such and such a prisoner had died of such and such a disease.
The Jewish prisoners thought it would be better if I drew up an extensive death certificate in order not to frighten and make uneasy the person's relatives, because I remember the Jewish prisoners telling me that in the newspapers they always read announcements of death in this form and they had the feeling that the relatives would be suspicious and made unhappy by this, so instead of drawing up the death certificate myself I left that up to the prisoners to do and then signed them myself.
Q. One question to make this matter clear, to what extent does number nine render a false meaning? Please read the last sentence.
A. "I visited Bernburg on one occasion to arrange for the cremation of two inmates who died in the Wernigerode Branch of the Buchenwald Concentration Camp." This might be construed to mean that simultaneous with the 14-F-13 action I was in Bernburg; however, that is not true, because in the beginning we did not even know that Bernburg existed.
Q. Then this trip described in this last sentence took place one and one-quarter years later and bore no connection with the 14-F-13 action?
A. That is correct.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, it is time for the Tribunal to be in recess until 1:30 o'clock.
(A recess was taken until 1330 hours.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 23 June 1947.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
May it please your Honor, defendant Pokorny is absent having been excused by the Tribunal this morning.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary will not for the record the absence of defendant Pokorny, having been excused by the Tribunal in order that he may consult with his counsel.
MR. HARDY: May it please your Honor the Tribunal, several days ago during the course of the presentation of the case against defendant Beiglboeck, prosecution requested the Tribunal to impound the charts in the two books which were the records of the experiments conducted at Dachau Concentration Camp concerning sea water.
At this time, the prosecution requests that the Tribunal permit them to be allowed to send those charts and records to Frankfort. Prosecution desires to have the charts and records checked over by document experts, handwriting experts and people sufficiently capable to determine the extent of the alteration and markings on the documents.
In view of the ruling of the Tribunal that these records will not be perused by either defense counsel or prosecution without the presence of a member of the office of the Secretary General, it therefore seems apparent to the prosecution that it will be necessary, in order to carry out their request, that a member of the office of the Secretary General accompany a member of the prosecution to Frankfort while these documents are being worked on. If that meets with the approval of the Tribunal, we should like to have such a member from the Secretary General's office appointed to carry out this mission; or if the Tribunal deems it unnecessary to send such a representative, the prosecution requests that they be allowed to withdraw, or to take the documents and have them sent up to Frankfort for that purpose.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for defendant Beiglboeck not being present, the Tribunal would be glad to hear from him in connection with this matter before final direction is given.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, we are not in a position to wait for a period of a week for the defense counsel for Beiglboeck. I think he has gone to Vienna. This is a matter which prosecution deems relevant and would like to have permission to send them up inasmuch as we have now received -
THE PRESIDENT: The defense counsel indicates that Dr. Steinbauer is present in Nurnberg.
MR. HARDY: Could we take that up later today so that we could send these representatives up tomorrow inasmuch as the laboratories in Frankfort will be available to us tomorrow?
THE PRESIDENT: The matter may be taken up as soon as the defense counsel for Beiglboeck arrives.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, we can continue with our examination. When the defense counsel for Beiglboeck arrives we can take up the matter again.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for defendant Hoven may proceed. The other matter may be taken up when the counsel for Beiglboeck arrives.
MR. HARDY: Am I correct in assuming the defense counsel for Beiglboeck is here in the city?
DR. GAWLIK: My colleague, Dr. Nelte, has gone out to get Dr. Steinbauer. I assume my colleague Steinbauer will be here shortly. He is in Nurnberg. He has not left.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel may proceed. Counsel may proceed.
WALDEMAR HOVEN - Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY DR. GAWLIK (Counsel the defendant Hoven):
Q. I come to the subject of killings. Yore prisoners killed with your knowledge or by you?
A.- Yes.
Q.- How large is the number of prisoners killed with your knowledge?
A.- I can no longer give the exact number.
Q.- Can you give an estimate?
A.- Fifty or sixty.
Q.- I put to you the testimony of the witness Roemhild who said that one thousand would not be too low a figure. This is on page 1639 of the English transcript. What do you have to say about that?
A.- That is quite fantastic. Roemhild could not know because he was never there. These killings had to carried out very secretly. Henry Pieck and others have explained very well that it would be contrary to the laws of conspiracy if other persons were informed.
Q.- Kogon said that the figure was one hundred. What do you have to say about that?
A.- Since Kogon was never present, as he himself says, he cannot know the figure either.
Q.- How were these people killed?
A.- By injection of Evipan or Phenol.
Q.- Did you yourself perform these killings or were the injections administered by other persons with your knowledge?
A.- In the case of persons with strong connections with the SS, where the killings would have been of great danger for other prisoners, I carried out these killings myself. In other cases, the prisoners killed them.
Q.- What do you know about the killing of two Polish doctors?
A.- I heard subsequently of the killing of one Polish doctor by Dr. Ding through the prisoners but I never heard anything definite about it. One of the Polish liaison men told me that they were Fascists The others said the opposite. In any case, the Gestapo must have gone to Ding inasmuch as they were not able to accomplish anything with me.
Q Why were these two people killed?
A I do not know.
Q Is it true that Kogon went to you and Dr. Ding and tried to help these two people?
A Whether he went to Dr. Ding for this purpose, I do not know. If I had known anything about the arrest and intended killing, it would certainly not have taken place. Kogon testified himself that I was always willing at any time to try to save prisoners, and it wouldn't have to be Dr. Kogon who suggested to me to save prisoners. I tried to help any prisoner if it was in my power. In this whole affair, I know only that Polish prisoners informed me, and then it was arranged that another prisoner, also a Polish doctor, named Tczipyulowsky was saved. I transferred him to the outside camp in Wernigerode in order to get him out of the sight of Dr. Ding; but one must understand the environment and the mentality of the prisoners in order to know that in such a case I could not learn the truth. The fear of Dr. Ding was so great that no prisoner wanted to tell me exactly what was going on, since otherwise, he would be afraid for his life.
DR. GAWLIK: Mr. President, Dr. Steinbauer has arrived. Shall I interrupt my examination of the prisoner?
THE PRESIDENT: You may, counsel.
MR. HARDY: Does the Tribunal desire that I repeat my request again?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, counsel.
MR. HARDY: During the course of the presentation of the case against the defendant Beiglboeck, charts and two notebooks were presented. containing information taken at the time of the sea water experiments at Dachau. At the time the prosecution requested that these documents be impounded by the Tribunal. Thereupon, the Tribunal ruled that said documents would be retained solely in the possession of the Tribunal, and that the prosecution and defense may peruse them at any time, but in the presence of a member of the office of the Secretary General.
The prosecution desires to have these charts studied by experts in their laboratory in Frankfurt in order to ascertain when some of the markings were made thereon, and the other obvious discrepancies in the charts and to report to the prosecution the results of their findings. In order to do that, the prosecution requests that they be allowed to send the documents to Frankfurt. In view of the ruling of the Tribunal the prosecution assumes that it will be necessary for the Tribunal to appoint a member of the Secretary General's office to take the documents to Frankfurt with a representative of the prosecution. That is substantially the request of the prosecution, your Honors.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for the defendant Steinbauer -- I mean, for the defendant Beiglboeck, Dr. Steinbauer, being present has heard the statement by the prosecution.
DR. STEINBAUER (Counsel for the defendant Beiglboeck): Your Honors, I believe that this application of the prosecution is superfluous. By the detailed examination in the presence of the Court and the concessions of the witness Beiglboeck, it has been clearly determined what corrections he made. As for the names, the General Secretary's office already has a list of names which is to be photostated and made available to the Tribunal and the prosecution. I don't remember how many names were in this list. As I recall, there were many more than submitted in court, and it also explains in which group this person was so that this list of names contains more information that the charts even if there had been no erasures. The important thing is that in the lists, in the curves on the front which are the proper, no changes were made; and that Professor Ivy testified here as an expert, and no doubt he had been informed by the prosecution what changes bad been made, and he testified that these documents were an adequate basis for an opinion. I believe that was the reason why the Court accepted these documents. If the Court, contrary to my expectation, should grant the request of the prosecution, I ask that the defense counsel also be given an opportunity to examine the expert and to confirm with him.
MR. HARDY: Your Honors, this request is in the same nature as the request made by Dr. Flemming many months ago to have the Ping diary analyzed by an expert.
THE PRESIDENT: The request will be granted by the Tribunal. The only question concerns some detail. Do I understand counsel for the defendant Beiglboeck, if the documents are sent to Frankfurt for expert examination, he desires a representative to accompany the documents as well as a representative of the prosecution?
DR. STEINBAUER: If a representative of the prosecution goes, I should like the defense to have the same right.
MR. HARDY: Of course, your Honors, the defense may take the documents to his own expert. He has one in Nurnberg, the defense counsel does, but we haven't been able to make him available to the prosecution. The prosecution does have a laboratory, however, in Frankfurt to determine whether or not the ink notations contained on the notes of 12 September -
JUDGE SEBRING: As I stated, the request to send them to Frankfurt will be granted by the Tribunal. Mr. Hardy, how long do you anticipate that it will take your expert to make his inspection and findings? Will he be able to do that on the same day that the documents are taken there?
MR. HARDY: Unfortunately, your Honor, I am not able to estimate that; however, I would think it would take longer than one day. There are 44 charts, and how extensively they do their work with microscopes and whatever is the process used in such work, that I am not too familiar with. The laboratory is run by the U.S. Army, by the C.I.D., and they have working in there German nationals who are experts in this type of work. How long it takes, I am unable to determine, Your Honor. Perhaps I could inquire and report later, but I don't think I could get any further information.
JUDGE SEBRING: It has been referred to the Tribunal that perhaps if the matter could be completed in a day, there might be a possibility of ordering a member of the Secretariat to retain the documents in his custody, to take them to Frankfurt, and there act with the power of the Tribunal as a commissioner; and at that time, be empowered to take such questions and answers as might be propounded by either side, reduce them to writing, and bring back the papers and make his return as commissioner of the questions and answers together with the analysis and report of the experts.
MR. HARDY: That could be easily done that way. Your Honor. However, I am merely certain that such an operation would take more than a day.
JUDGE SEBRING: Could you investigate that?
MR. HARDY: I can investigate that, but I will be unable to report today unless I could use the recess time. As soon as possible, we would like the mission to return to Nurnberg inasmuch as we may be done here in a week or two.
DR. STEINBAUER: May I make a remark, Mr. President? In case these big charts are submitted, then I ask that the two small books are taken along, too. As far as I recall, Professor Beiglboeck said that the weights entered in ink on the upper edge were not written by him at all, but by a French medical man; and these books which were kept by the Frenchman, there is the handwriting of this Frenchman, and it would be necessary to compare them. If he only has the charts, of course he cannot compare the handwritings.
THE PRESIDENT: I understand that the request of the prosecution included the two small books. These will go with the charts? This might be done: The documents might be sent to Frankfurt under the cover of the Secretary General. The experts then might examine them and when they have done so, counsel for the prosecution and counsel for the defense could go over and listen to the report of the experts and ask them any question that they might desire to ask.
MR. HARDY: The purpose of the prosecution in sending the documents to Frankfurt is to ascertain what, where and when the entries were made.
And this is purely on the behalf of the prosecution. If defense counsel has any objections, I don't see why they can't send a representative there with him; however, the prosecution doesn't necessarily mean to take the documents out of the hands of the Secretary General, inasmuch as they have been duly and correctly impounded by the Tribunal. But if a member of the Secretary General's office could accompany -- in other words, take the documents there, then the prosecution could have the work done that they deemed to be necessary, It may prove that the work is fruitless; however, it may in turn prove enlightening in some things that we have misgiving about.
THE PRESIDENT: Of course, counsel for the defendant Beiglboeck is entitled to examine the expert that makes the report.
MR. HARDY: Assuming of course, the Prosecution wishes to introduce the report, if the Prosecution determines that the alterations are something of material value to the Tribunal, then we will, of course introduce a report, and if necessary have the particular experts involved come here to testify. However it is next to impossible to have this work done here in Nuernberg due to the fact we don't have the laboratory.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal understands that thoroughly, if it understands counsel for the Prosecution correctly he stated softer the Prosecution has the reports and if he desires to use them before the Tribunal the expert who made to examination would be available here in Nuernberg.
MR. HARDY: We can make the chief cf that department available in Nuernberg for a day. I don't see why that would be impossible. I think that it is very possible.
THE PRESIDENT: Well if the Prosecution undertakes that, if the documents arc used here with that report by any expert from Frankfurt, that that expert will be here available for cross examination, and if the defendant desires to cross examine the witness he will be here vailable, then I question whether there is any particular necessity for a counsel for defendant Beiglboeck going to Frankfurt with the documents. Do you agree, Dr. Steinbauer?
Dr. Steinbauer: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Then the Tribunal will enter an order that the documents in question be taken to Frankfurt by a representative of the office of the Secretary General to be named and that a representative of the Prosecution may accompany the documents and call the attention of the experts to those matters upon which he desires the expert to concentrate his attention, and then when the expert has made his report if the Prosecution desires to use that report in any way whatever before the Tribunal that the expert who made the report will be available or someone who understands the matter will be available here in Nuernberg for cross examination by defense counsel and will testify before the Court as to his view.
MR. HARDY: Yes, Your Honor. Would that appointment of a representative of the Secretary General
THE PRESIDENT: I beg your pardon.
MR. HARDY: Would that appointment of a representative of the Secretary General's office be fulfilled today so that orders can be made out and so forth to leave perhaps tomorrow?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, the appointment can be made at any time. I don't know whether Mr. Wartina could go or not of whether he would be suitable or any one who would be suggested to accompany the mission as custodian of the documents.
MR. HARDY: Thank you, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for the Prosecution during the afternoon recess shall ascertain what representative of the Secretary General can take the documents.
MR. HARDY: Yes, sir, I will ask Colonel Ray.
THE PRESIDENT: And then order should be prepared for signature by the Tribunal, an order should be prepared embodying the order of the Tribunal, a written order.
Counsel for defendant Hoven proceed.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q Witness, what do you know about eho killed these two Polish prisoners.
A In May 1945, Dr. Ding at Freysing accused me of killing a Polish doctor. Ding assumed that I was no longer alive. On the basis of this accusation I was arrested and also taken to Freysing. This was on the 23rd of June 1945). When Ding learned that on the 23rd June 1945 I would come to Freysing he attempted suicide on the evening before, that is on the 22 June 1945. The attempt was unsuccessful, however. He had cut the artery in his left hand.
On the 28th June 1945, I was interrogated in Freysing because of this accusation of Ding's. Since I knew nothing even about the killing of the doctor I was to be confronted with Dr. Ding personally, but Dr. Ding preferred instead to make a confession and admitted that he had done it himself. That is all I know about the matter.
Q And I put to you the testimony of Dr. Kogon in this connection. This is on page 1215 of the English record. Kogan said the following I quote:
"Who exactly killed the three prisoners?
"Whether it was Dr. Ding or Dr. Hoven I did not see myself. It was said in the camp that each of the two doctors had killed one prisoner or one of them had killed two but I cannot say myself."
What do you have to say about this?
A When he reports rumors which circulated in the camp he knows exactly as well as I do what to think of them. When Dr. Kogon was Ding's first secretary such incredible rumors were circulated about him in the camp, that he was in the same with Dr. Ding and so forth. When I first heard of it I didn't even find it necessary to inform Dr. Kogon.
Q Did you know the prisoners Freudemann and May?
A Yes.
Q In what category of prisoners were they?
A They were professional criminals who had been previously convicted. .
Q Is it true that these two prisoners treated the Camp Commandatur Koch who had contracted syphilis?
A No, Walter Kramer, a former Reichstag delegate was the one Kogon meant here who was my first Kapo in the hospital with whom I was great friends The thanks that Kramer got from Koch was that he was put in an outside camp and shot. The material had been supplied by KuschniaKuschnarev who was Walter Kramer's bitterest opponent. I wrote a letter to the Commandant in favor of Kramer but the only result was that Koch did not venture to murder Walter Kramer in Buchenwald.
Q Is it true that these two prisoners, Freudemann and May, were put in a typhus experiment because they had treated Koch in order to aid him in this way?
A No, they were not put in the experiment for that reason.
Q Is it true that these two prisoners were murdered in the prisoners hospital, killed there?
A That is true.
Q At whose instigation were these two German professional criminals, Freudemann and May, killed?
AAt the instigation of the Committee of German and Foreign Political Prisoners.
Q In this connection, I remind you of Kogon's testimony on page 1282 of the English Transcript, in answer to my question and I quote:
"Are you aware that the political committee, that is the illegal camp administration, was involved in this killing?" End of quotation.
And Kogon answered: I quote:
"Later while I was in the camp I learned of that." Is this true?
A When Kogon says later he means the time and the reason for my arrest by the Gestapo. Since I refused to give the names of the prisoners who had been involved in the killing of these two SS spies I was accused because of this killing. Among other things these two were the best collaborators of the SS. The killing cf these two informers and traitors was necessary because otherwise hundreds of decent German and foreign prisoners would have been betrayed to the SS by Freudemann and May and been killed in the camp. They were called Jew slaughterers because they literally beat Jewish prisoners to death.
Q.- By what right were these traitors and SS and Gestapo informers killed?
A.- The justification against people like these two one cannot judge from normal circumstances. The issue was not that they were informers, not just that they betrayed their fellow prisoners to the SS and Gestapo, but beyond that they had hundreds of murders on their conscience, not only murders they had instigated but murders they had performed themselves. The Prisoner Committee and I realized that they would continue in this activity if they wore not stopped. They were morally very inferior characters who gave way to their own murderous instincts and against whom there was no protection. The victims among these were the most valuable among the prisoners, those who were under arrest for political reasons. One must imagine that men like Henry Pieck, Dr. Horn and Dr. Kogon were their victims. But what they themselves were like, the Prosecution witness, Dr. Kogon, has shown with the example of Kuschnia-Kuschnarev. This was not an unusual case. It was a typical one. There was no other possibility of rendering such creatures inoffensive. I can imagine that the heads of partisan groups who are today considered heros in their own countries had the same problem as the prisoners and I did. I know that such a decision was not easy and is incomprehensible to a Person who does not know such an environment from his own experience and observation. But that such a decesion was an absolute necessity is a fact which can be explained only in a comparative sense, as connected with the environment. If there had been any other possible solution the prisoners and I would not have chosen this solution but there was no owner. If we had not acted in this way thousands of prisoners, the most valuable people, would have been killed by the SS. Such informers and traitors of the class of Kuschnarev might now be on trial but their victims could not be brought back and punishment would not bring them to life. None of those who fell victim to the camp justice which took the place of the criminal SS jus tice was without considerable degree of guilt.