Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America against Karl Brandt, at all, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 30 June 1947, 0930, Justice Beals, presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal I, Military Tribunal I is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal. There will be order in the Court.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, have you ascertained if the defendants are all present in the court?
THE MARSHAL: May it please your Honor, all the defendants are present in the court with the exception of defendant Oberhauser who is absent due to illness. Medical certificate will be presented.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary will note for the record the presence of all the defendants in court with the exception of defendant Oberhauser who is absent on account of illness.
Counsel may proceed.
MR. HARDY: May it please the Tribunal, before calling the two witnesses who will testify as to the activities at Natsweiler, the prosecution desired to know whether or not the defense counsels for Becker-Freyseng and Schroeder have any interest in this interrogation.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for defendant -
THE INTERPRETOR: The switch, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you kindly repeat it to them?
MR. HARDY: I would like to know whether or not counsels for defendants Becker-Freyseng and Schroeder intend to attend the session this morning while I am examining the two witnesses in connection with the activities at Natsweiler or whether or not it is only the defense counsel for Rose who has interest in this matter. They were duly warned or notified on Saturday that these witnesses would be called this morning, your Honor.
DR. FLEMMING (Counsel for defendant Mrugowsky): Mr. President, I shall notify these two defense counsels immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Doctor.
MR. HARDY: In the meantime, perhaps one of the defense counsels has some documents they can put in.
DR. KRAUSS: Mr. President, with the permission of the high Tribunal, I should like to make use of this interval to submit the English translation of three documents to the Tribunal, documents which I submitted into evidence a few days ago.
THE PRESIDENT: Will counsel, state for the record the defendant for whom you are appearing.
DR. KRAUSS: Dr. Krauss, counsel for the defendant Professor Rostock.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel may proceed.
DR. KRAUSS: The English copies have been provided with the corresponding exhibit numbers, which have been admitted into evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: These English documents available to the Tribunal?
DR. KRAUSS: Thank you, Mr. President, that will be all.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has received only three copies of these documents. Is there another file available?
The Tribunal has sufficient of these documents.
DR. FROSCHMANN (Counsel for defendant Brack): Mr. President, may I make a brief urgent application? During the afternoon session of 13 May, page 7581 of the German record, I have stated that after long efforts I had succeeded to find the author of the opinion which was given in connection with Document NO-205 upon which Brack has worked. This witness is now residing in the Russian Zone in Germany. In the meantime, I have been able to correspond with that witness asking him to appear in Nurnberg in order to make an affidavit upon his arrival.
Saturday evening -- that is, on the 28th of June -- I received a telegram according to which this witness, in order to travel to Nurnberg would have to possess a document which is requested by the Russian Military government in Germany in order to able to leave the Russian Zone.
Delay in correspondence with the witness can be explained owing to the well known circumstances which make it impossible for us to send letters to reach the Soviet Zone in time.
I am now submitting to the General Secretary an application which requests the Tribunal to invite this witness to appear here. His name is University Professor Friedrich Holz residing at Halle -- to testify that he had given an expert opinion to brack in the spring of 1941 and that this expert opinion had been converted by Brack's collaborators to Document NO-203. I ask the Tribunal to grant my request and to tell the General Secretary that this document be sent to the witness either directly or through me in order to enable him to leave the Russian Zone and appear in Nurnberg.
I should also like to ask you to permit me after Holz's arrival to submit the affidavit to the Tribunal if such a submission is still possible before the beginning of the final pleas. Unfortunately, I was not able to deal with the matter earlier since only Saturday I received the telegram.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, it seems to me that a matter requiring this much difficulty could well have been taken care of since 9 December 1946. This is now June 30, 1947. I don't see but that an affidavit would suffice. He has had ample opportunity to bring this witness here.
THE PRESIDENT: If I understand Dr. Froschmann correctly, he desires simply to submit an affidavit to the Tribunal, not call this man as a witness.
MR. HARDY: That is not my understanding, your Honor. It is my understanding Dr. Froschmann intends to bring this man in as a witness and get clearance papers from the Russian Zone.
DR. FROSCHMANN: Mr. President, I should like Professor Holz to come to Nurnberg in order to get the affidavit from him when he is here and then submit it to the Tribunal. Obviously, that is impossible to deal with by way of correspondence. Since December until April I have tried to get his address. I always receive my replies three or four weeks too late.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Froschmann does not desire to call this doctor as a witness but simply to have him attend at Nurnberg in order to make an affidavit.
DR. FROSCHMANN: Yes, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Froschmann, did you hand the Secretary the application which you have made to the Secretary General?
DR. FROSCHMANN: Yes, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Froeschmann, the Tribunal will consider this application at the morning recess.
DR. FROESCHMANN: Thank you, Mr. President.
DR. FLEMMING: Mr. President, Dr. Tipp will be in the courtroom immediately.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, perhaps we could call the witness at this time and have him sworn in and go through some of his biographical data.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
MR. HARDY: The witness the prosecution wishes to call at this time is a prosecution rebuttal witness, Constantyn Johan Broers.
THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal will summon the witness, Constantyn Broers.
CONSTANTYN JOHAN BROERS, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
JUDGE SEBRING: Hold up your right hand, please.
MR. HARDY: If your Honor please, this witness will testify in the English language.
JUDGE SEBRING: Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give in this issue will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
THE WITNESS: I will speak the truth and only the truth, so help me God.
JUDGE SEBRING: You may be seated.
THE PRESIDENT: I would ask the witness to spell his name.
THE WITNESS: My name is (spelling) B-r-o-e-r-s.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. HARDY:
Q Witness, what is your full name?
A My full name is Constantyn Johan Broers.
Q When were you born?
A I was born the 29th of September 1913.
Q Where were you born?
A I was born in Pekalongan in Java, in the Dutch East Indies.
Q You are a Dutch citizen?
A I am a Dutch citizen.
Q Would you kindly outline briefly for this Court your educational background?
A My educational background is school in Holland, and afterwards high school and then university; first year in Batavia in the medical high school and afterwards University of Utrecht where I studied biology and I finished my studies.
Q When did you finish your studies at the University of Utrecht?
A When I came back in 1945 from concentration camp Dachau.
Q Prior to the war had you finished a substantial amount of your study period at the University of Utrecht?
A Before the war you mean?
Q Before the war, yes.
A Yes, I only finished my studies when I came back.
Q I see. What are you doing at the present time?
AAt the present time I am an assistant of the University of Utrecht.
Q In what capacity?
A The capacity of an anatomical assistant on the medical and anatomical laboratory.
Q Witness, during the course of this interrogation inasmuch as we are both speaking in the English language, if you will kindly hesitate for a moment before you answer my question it will be helpful to the German interpreter and the court reporters.
A Yes, sir.
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment, counsel. Dr. Tipp, does the Tribunal understand that at this session you are acting as counsel for defendants Becker-Freyseng and Schroeder?
DR. TIPP: Yes, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: The questions propounded to the witness before your arrival were simply as to his age and his educational qualifications and the fact that he is a Dutch citizen.
DR. TIPP: Thank you, Mr. President.
Q (By Mr. Hardy) Now, Mr. Broers, would you kindly tell the Court when you were first arrested by the Gestapo and for what reason?
A I was first arrested by the Gestapo on the 21st of July 1942 for underground activity and spy work.
Q For whom were you performing this underground activity and spy work?
A This underground activity I was performing for the so-called O.D., Orde Dienst. That was a Dutch underground organization. And the spy work I was performing for the I.D., the Inlichtingen Dienst. That was an organization formed for the English intelligence.
Q Witness, were you ever arrested or in the custody of the police for any crime prior to this arrest by the Gestapo in July, 1942?
A No, sir.
Q Now, after your arrest in July 1942, would you kindly tell the Tribunal briefly what happened to you?
JUDGE SEBRING: Mr. Hardy, I think the Tribunal would like to know whether or not this man was tried, and if so, by what sort of court.
MR. HARDY: That's what this question comprises, Your Honor.
A When I was arrested on the 21st of July, I was brought to the prison of Schereningen in Holland and there I was interrogated about my spy work and that lasted about eleven days. Then I was, without a trial, condemned to death and they told me I shall be shot down the next morning, but the next morning they brought me before one of the high ranking officers of the S.D. and he said to me that it was an error and I should forget it. Then afterwards I was interrogated for the O.D. case and after five months transported to the prison of Haren, also in Holland, and in Haren I was interrogated for the case of the I.D., spy work case, and a short time afterwards in Haren we got a trial for the O.D. case.
After five months in Haren I was transported to Utrecht and in Utrecht I had the trial for the spy work case. In these two trials I was detached. The Germans called that -- I don't remember the name -- "Abtrennung", I was Abtrennung and then after five months in Utrecht they transported me to Armersfoerth, and in Armersfoerth I only was about three weeks and then became transported to Natzweiler.
Q Well, now, witness, after you had been tried twice for spying and for other underground activities, was sentence passed in your case?
A No, there was no sentence. The only two possibilities were sentence to death or Abtrennung. You could be sentenced to death or you could be detached from the process. You would be Abtrennung.
Q You mean acquitted?
AAcquitted, yes.
Q And were you then acquitted after these two trials?
A Yes, sir.
Q Well, then, for what reasons were you sent to the concentration camp Natzweiler?
A I was there with about 150 other people and these people were all of these two trials, and we were sent to Germany as "Nacht und Nebel Haeftlinge" and Natzweiler was a camp established, I believe, especially for "Nacht und Nebel Haeftlinge."
Q When did you arrive at the concentration camp Natzweiler?
A I arrived at the end of October, 1943.
Q And how long did you remain in the Natzweiler concentration camp?
A Until the 4th of September 1944.
Q And then where did you go?
AAnd then we were transported to the concentration camp Dachau.
Q And you stayed there until the liberation?
A Yes, sir.
Q Will you kindly tell the Tribunal what your duties were when you first arrived at the concentration camp Natzweiler?
AAt first, the first time for about the first three weeks about, I had my work in heavy command, called "strassenbau".
INTERPRETER RAMLER: Streetbuilding.
A (Cont'd) And then I became ill and I came to the so-called "Schonung". Schonung was a barrack where we could do light work until we would be good enough to again do the hard work, and then I made a portrait of one of the people there and so they saw that I was a draftsman and I got a job as the official draftsman of the Commander, "Schriftenmaler der Kommandantur".
Q Well then, at any time did you work in the camp hospital?
A Yes, that came afterwards. That was the end of April or the beginning of May, 1944, that I was called into the hospital by the chief physician, SS physician of the camp, Dr. Platzer, and he asked me, "You are a biologist", and he said, "Can you do some bacteriological work?" I answered him, "I am a comparative anatomist, but when you give me literature and I have some time to work in, I can do the work." So he said, "From now on you are an assistant of the hospital." And from other people, prisoners of the camp, I heard that I was now an assistant of Dr. Hagen and that Dr. Hagen would do experimental work about typhus and there should be built a laboratory for me, but it was at that time that the Americans already landed and came nearer and nearer and so I think Professor Hagen didn't like to make some experiments in a concentration camp with human beings, and so I never saw in this quality as an assistant of Professor Hagen, I never saw him. But while I was an anatomist, Dr. Bogartz - Georges Bogartz -
Q Just a moment, witness, before you go into that subject. In summation then in April or May of the year 1944 you became an assistant in the camp hospital?
A Yes sir.
Q And it was your understanding that you were to work as an assistant to Dr. Haagen?
A Yes sir.
Q But, you never did in fact work as assistant to Dr. Haagen?
A No sir.
Q Did Dr. Haagen ever appear at the camp?
A Yes sir.
Q But you never talked to him?
A No sir.
Q You don't know whether he was performing any work in the camp after May 1944?
A Yes sir, there was many gossips about that in the camp.
Q But, from your own knowledge you don't know that he was working with typhus?
A No sir, not exactly.
Q What do you know from hearsay?
A From hearsay that he was experimenting with typhus and used for that purpose the prisoners of the camp and he used the gypsies for that, they said.
Q Where did you hear that?
A I heard that in the hospital from the camp, the prisoner physician, and from the prisoner nurses. They are the people who told me that.
Q And that was after May 1944 that Haagen was supposedly conducting this work?
A Yes sir. I don't know that exactly for I should be his assistant but I never saw him in this quality so when he should have worked afterwards I think I should act as his assistant.
Q But you had never seen him before the time you were ordered to be his assistant?
A Yes sir, when he made his rounds through the camp I saw him some times.
Q I see. And the reason why you never became his assistant was because a special laboratory to be built was not in fact built?
A No.
Q And who told you that a laboratory was to be built?
A That was told to me. I mean, also by one of the prisoners who were working in the hospital.
Q I see. Well, now this job of yours fell through as assistant to Dr. Haagen what did you do then?
A So i had nothing to do and then I met George Bogartz who was a prisoner, too, and a Belgian surgeion and he had to make the autopsies for the hospital, the normal autopsies, who were ordered by the prisoner physicians. When somebody was suspected to have been died By typhus we should look after that and give a report, and he asked me, George Bogartz, if I would like to assist him by his work and so I became his assistant.
Q Did you ever perform autopsies on some gypsies?
A Yes sir. That was one morning. I was called by Bogartz and he said, "Now we have a job, I don't like it but we have to do it."
TEE PRESIDENT: Witness, about what date was that?
A I don't know exactly the date but it can have been in May or June.
BY MR. HARDY: Of 1944?
A Of 1944.
Q Continue witness.
A He said, "They have poisoned with gas some gypsies and the corpses of the dead we'll have to make a section of." So we went to the crematory and there was a section room there where we found on the table a naked corpse of a gypsy which was a young man in a good state, a good physical state.
And we saw there that there were blue colored spots on his skin. We waited for a moment and then came in a German in civies, he was wearing knickerbockers, and he was accompanied by an assistant and this assistant had with him some apparatus and photograph apparatus and photo cameras. And now we started on the direction of this German, we started our autopsy.
Q Do you know who that German was?
A I asked afterwards and people told me it was Haagen but when I was afterwards -- when afterwards I was - they showed me photograms I know exactly that it was Hirt.
Q That it was Professor Hirt?
A Professor Hirt, yes.
Q I see. Continue.
A We made the autopsy in a common way beginning with a longitudinal cut through the skin of the thorax and then prepared the thorax muscles and afterwards cut the ribs and put up the sternum with the ribs so that we could see the inner of the thorax. And then it was very good to see that the lungs were edematous. They were so very swollen that the triangle of the heart was covered totally by the edges of the two lungs. And we had to take out the intestines of the thorax after they were filmed on the spot. And we put them down on the section table and they were filmed again and they were also taking photograms.
Q Was it obvious from the autopsy just what the cause of death was in the case of these two corpses?
A I discussed it afterwards with Dr. Bogartz and we came to the conclusion that this man was poisoned with a gas effecting the respiratory intestines, the respiratory system. For when we made the section through the larynx we saw that the mucosa was swollen and very red. Afterwards we had to take little samples of the intestines and had to put them in little bottles with alcohol and it seems that it was for the purpose of making histological investigations afterwards.
I don't know if these histological investigations were done in the pathological section of the hospital of the camp or that Dr. Hirt took these samples with him outside the camp. And after the autopsy Dr. Hirt told me how to write down. He dictated me the protocol and I wrote it down it was later typed by the administration room of the hospital of the camp.
Q Now, at these first 2 autopsies who was present?
A Present was Professor Hirt, an assistant, and I believe there was another assistant one time, a second assistant, and there was George Bogartz and me and that were the people present who were there.
Q Did Professor Haagen appear at any time during the course of the autopsy?
A One time Dr. Haagen entered and he was accompanied by a blonde girl and by some of the officers of the camp. I believe he was making his round through the camp and he would like to see what happened here and to show it to this blonde girl.
Q Well, now when Professor Haagen came in were you performing an autopsy on an inmate?
A Yes, I was performing an autopsy on a gypsy.
Q Was that a different case than the two cases you told us about?
A Yes, it was one of these two cases.
Q I see. Did Dr. Haagen ask any questions or did he merely just stop in, look, and leave.
A He stepped in and he talked with Dr. Hirt and the blonde girl stayed in the opening of the door and then after some talking he went again. I don't know if they talked about these experiments or if they was talking about something else.
Q I see. Did you ever see Professor Haagen in uniform?
A Yes sir.
Q What type of uniform did he wear? That is the uniform of the SS, or the Wehrmacht, of the Luftwaffe, or the Navy, or what?
A I mean it was not the common uniform we saw there and I believe it was the blue uniform of the Luftwaffe.
Q Did Professor Hirt wear a uniform when he was at the camp?
A I don't think so. I mean the two or three times I saw him he was in knickerbockers.
Q I see. Now after the 2 autopsies on the gypsies did you ever perform any other autopsies on gypsies who had supposedly been poisoned by gas?
A No sir.
Q Did you ever perform autopsies on any other inmates who were used in experiments?
A No sir.
Q Then the extent of your knowledge in your capacity as an autopsy man in connection with experiments is the two cases of gypsies whom you autopsied and diagnosed as having died as the cause of gas poisoning?
A Yes sir.
Q I have no further questions, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, do I understand you to testify that your findings in the autopsy of the cause of death of these two gypsies was the same, that is, the cause of death was the same in each case?
A. Yes, Sir, it was the same.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for defendants may cross-examine.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY DR. TIPP (Counsel for the defendants Schroeder and Becker-Freyseng:)
Q. Witness, if I understood you correctly, the camp physician, Dr. Platzer, requested you to become Professor Haagen's assistant, isn't that right?
A. No, that is not right. Dr. Platzer asked me to become an assistant in the hospital but he did not mention the name of Dr. Haagen.
Q. And who did ask you to carry out Haagen's bacteriological work and become his assistant?
A. It was only Dr. Platzer who ordered me to be an assistant in the hospital and I afterwards heard from the prisoner-physicians in the camp that I should work for Dr. Haagen.
Q. If I understood you correctly, you never actually worked for Haagen, did you?
A. I never actually worked for Haagen.
Q. You also told us that, from your own knowledge, you could not tell us whether Haagen, after May 1944, carried out any experiments in the concentration camp, isn't that right?
A. Yes. I don't say exactly that I know about that but there was much gossip about that in camp.
Q. You have no knowledge of your own about that?
A. I have no knowledge of my own about that.
Q. Now as to the question of autopsies, witness. You were telling us before that you assisted in the case of 2 autopsies and that the cause of death in the cases of those 2 autopsies was found to be gas poisoning or disintegration of the lung because of gas, is that right?
A. That is right.
Q. Let me establish, witness, that the man that participated in these autopsies was Professor Hirt, not Professor Haagen.
A. That is right.
Q. Furthemore, witness, you were seeing that Professor Haagen at one time attended one such autopsy, accompanied by a member of the camp and a blond lady, to when he obviously intended to show the camp. In that connection, witness, let me ask you was an autopsy in the concentration camp of Natzweiler something that attracted particular attention, or were corpses autopsied there on frequent occasions?
A. There were autopsies on frequent occasions but I thought that this dissection drew the attention and that therefore he came to show it perhaps to that girl or that he would see what we were doing on his round through the camp, where he was the main doctor of the camp who came every week and sometimes every weak to look after the barracks with typhus patients.
Q. Very well, witness. You just told us that Haagen came to the camp once a week or more often than that and looked at the typhus barracks. Could you describe these typhus barracks to the Tribunal? Who was in there?
A. In these typhus barracks were laying the typhus patients. These typhus barracks were situated in the lowest part of the camp. The camp was built on the north side of a mountain in the Alsace and the barracks were laying on terraces and we had 2 rows of terraces; when you cane in the main entrance we had 2 rows of barracks on your left hand and between those 2 rows of barracks we had a so-called Appell-place (roll-call square) also in terraces.
Q. Witness, if I understood you correctly, were inmate patients, typhus patients, put into these typhus barracks?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. They were not, as it might be derived from your testimony, subjects who had been used for experiments but they were people who had fallen ill of typhus?
A. No but there was a secret part of one of the blocks and nobody of us could enter it; it was forbidden; and there should be these experiments with gypsies. Most of it I heard by the gossip in the camp and by camp physicians who said they could state it. I never saw it myself.
Q. In that case you have no knowledge of what was going on in the experimental barracks?
A. No, I have no knowledge about that.
Q. Very well, witness, one further question. Do you know anything about the fact that in the spring or summer of 1944 a typhus epidemic had broken out in Natzweiler, or do you know nothing about it?
A. Yes, sir; there was a typhus epidemic beginning in the winter of 1943---in 43 --44.
Q. Well, this epidemic started at a time when you were already in the camp, or was that before your time?
A. That was a new epidemic; when I was already in the camp it started.
Q. Could you tell the Tribunal, witness, perhaps you know it because of your connection with the camp physicians, how many patients there were in the camp at that time?
A. I do not know that. I cannot give any effective number of these patients.
Q. Do you know, witness, whether, during the course of this epidemic, there were any deaths?
A. Yes, sir, many death cases.
Q Let us revert once more to Mr. Haagen. You had not actually cooperated with Professor Haagen, had you?
A. No, sir.
Q. May I further establish that you know nothing about what Mr. Haagen had done in the spring and summer of 1944, from your own knowledge?
A. No, sir, I do not exactly know that from my own knowledge.
DR. TIPP: Thank you. I have no further questions to the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Are there any other questions to this witness by any defense counsel?
BY DR. GAWLIK (Counsel for defendant Hoven):
Q. Witness, do you know the City Councillor of Amsterdam, Stadtrat Seegers?
A. No, I do not know him.
Q. Do you know a Dutchman by the name of Pieck?
A. Yes, but I do not know him personally. I do not know him personally.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor. I submit that this cross-examination on the part of defense counsel must be limited to what I brought up in direct examination.
THE PRESIDENT: Objection overruled. Counsel may examine the witness generally.
Q. What is Pieck's reputation in Holland?
A. I do not know that exactly. I cannot give any information about that.
Q. Do you know a Dutchman with the name of Baron Palland van Erder?
A. No, I do not know him.
Q. Do you know a Dutchman with the name of Jan Robert?
A. No, sir, I do not know him.
DR. GAWLIK: Thank you, I have not further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Any further examination of this witness by defense counsel?
BY JUDGE SEBRING:
Q. Witness, will you be good enough to answer a few questions for the Tribunal, please? As I understand your testimony, you were arrested by the Gestapo on the 21st day of July, 1942?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you were then given a trial for underground resistance activity and for spy intelligence activity and were acquitted? You were acquitted?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. By what type of Court, or group, were you tried, do you know?
A. Yes, sir. The first trial was by the Wehrcacht. That was an O.D. trial. That was a trial in Haaren. The second trial.....
Q. That was a trial where?
A. In Haaren, H-a-a-r-e-n. And the first trial was in Utrecht.
Q. Do you mean the first or second trial?
A. The second trial was in Utrecht, under the direction of the Luftwaffe.
Q. You then were in 2 trials by a military court or commission of some sort?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. The first one by the Wehrmacht?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. The second one by the Luftwaffe?
A. Yes, sir.
Q And then as I understand you were acquitted upon both charges?
A Yes Sir.
Q How long after that was it before you were taken in custody and sent to Natzweiler?
A I was already in custody. I never came free. I was in custody from the 21st of July and I was brought to Natzweiler.
Q By whom
A By the Green Police.
Q And what sort of an organization was that, do you know?
A The Green Police was an organization who had to maintain the order in the state, and was always helping when transports were going to guard us, but the transport fuehrer was a man from the S.D. named Heirich.
Q Were you told for what reason you were being retained in custody after your acquittal or for what reason you were being transported to Natzweiler?
A No, they never said it to us. It was common that people who were acquitted were brought to concentration camps, seldom they came free.
Q Then you were never advised why you were in custody and were being transported to Natzweiler?
A No, sir, they suspected me, but they had no evidence against me.
Q Was anything told you after you after you were acquitted as to why you were being transported to Natzweiler?
A No, sir.
Q How many people were in your transport?
A Between 150 and 170.
Q And how were you conveyed to Natzweiler?
A With a train.
Q And that train, as I understand, was under the supervision of an S.D. officer?
A Yes, Paul Heinrich.
Q He was a German?
A He was a German.