DEFENDANT BECKER-FREYSENG: Mr. President, Gentlemen of the Tribunal: I also was given full opportunity to submit all the statements and the evidence required to refute the charges of the indictment. For that I have to thank the Tribunal and my defense counsel, Dr. Tipp. But I have nothing to add to it. For all the immaterial spiteful talk which grew outside and twisted around the objective atmosphere of these proceedings like a messy hedge, I believe that fortunately the verdict of this Tribunal must be and will be the appropriate answer. I look forward to it with the firm conviction that I have acted in my duty to mankind as a physician and scientist, and as a soldier to my fatherland, Germany.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant Weltz:
DEFENDANT WELTZ: I have nothing to add to the statement made by my defense counsel. I thank Dr. Wille for his efforts made in my defense.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant Schaefer.
DEFENDANT SCHAEFER: May it please the Tribunal, since I consider myself entirely innocent, I ask to be acquitted. I repeat my request to be set free, if possible, even before the verdict.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant Hoven.
DEFENDANT HOVEN: I have nothing to add to Dr. Gawlik's plea of yesterday. I would at this point like to thank my defense counsel for the considerable help he has given me.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant Beiglboeck.
DEFENDANT BEIGLBOECK: May it please the Tribunal, the experiments which I conducted, I did not carry out on my own initiative, neither according to the plans of my own, nor spontanioulsy, but the medical part was played, with the knowledge and approval of my clinical teacher for more than ten years, I was a disciple of Eppinger.
During those ton years I had come to know and respect his ways of thought and his superior knowledge. My relations to him were based on personal gratitude and awe-inspired devotion. If there was anything which he considered right and important, then for psychological reasons alone, it would be imperative for me to share his belief.
The experiments were to solve the problem of saving human life and that had to be approved. It was a military order which compelled my to carry them out in the atmosphere of a concentration camp. I objected against that, but I was not successful. So we had to carry it out in the concentration camp.
May it please the Tribunal, in your evaluation of this fact, please do not fail to consider that this did not happen in times of peace, nor in a country which granted its citizens individual freedom of decision in all matters, personal and professional, but during the bitter days of a most horrible war. What I carried out, I did in accordance with a plan previously determined and specified. If i had to require of my experimental subjects to undergo hardships and they suffered from thirst with all of its unpleasant sensations, those physical and mental characteristics, I did that in the nature of the experiments and this could not be avoided. I have not, however, done this without informing myself first by an experiment on my own system how it felt what I expected them to undergo, nor did I expect it of anyone else, unless I was firmly convinced that he undertook it voluntarily. It is not true to say that I might have forced anybody to do it, neither psychologically, nor by reprisals raised by threat, or force of arms.
Many eye witnesses have agreed that my conduct was never brutal on anyone of the experimental subjects under my care. Among these witnesses are even some who were brought here to testify against me.
At last, in the final stage of this trial, one experimen tal subject could be found who tought it appropriate to introduce - a dramatic note in an atmosphere artificially created. Based on a layman's interpretation of indeed harmless medical procedures, combined with the uncertain recollection emotionally presented by more or loss distorting and misconstruing my motives the attempt was made to lend an impression to my experiments and the part I played in them.
In contradiction to that a defense document was offered be others who came from outside the concentration camp and who preserved their objectivity which reveals that my behavior in the medical sense, as well as from the human point of view was correct, to say the least. By my experiments, no human life was sacrificed, nor did they result in any lasting damage to their health. I also believe, that I have presented proof that I intervened for the inmates, as far as that was within my power and that I did not consider experimental subjects as individuals of an inferior type whom I could well afford to illtreat, for idealogical reasons, as has been charged.
For over 15 years as a physician I always felt the strongest responsibility for those entrusted to my care. Thousands who were my patients will confirm it. My assistants and colleagues have testified to it. At no time was my conduct other than that of humaneness, that of a physician. The experiments as they were actually conducted have never gone beyond that which can be justified by the physician.
I consider myself as a physician and a human being free of guilt.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant Pokorny.
DEFENDANT POKORNY: Your Honor, during this trial I have often asked myself what I should have done at the time in order to record my tru motive for this letter I had written to Himmler, but I believe that at the time when I dispatched this letter, I could not do anything else but to talk to the people in whom I had confidence and of whom I know that they would not betray me and confide in them my true reasons If today, this letter, which is against me, may seem objective, then this is a fact with which I must bear, although to the end I must say in correspondence with the truth that not surface reasons were the cause for my writing this letter, but that letter was written because at the time I had hoard facts about Himmler's plans, and, because at that time in my position standing lonely and slandered because of my family implications in a small town in Chechoslovakia, I felt that I was able to take the action described.
I retain the hope that you, my judges, will draw your conclusions from my conduct and the situation in which I found myself at the time, and will come to the conviction objectively that the true motive was a different one than that which is shown by this letter, and that you will not sentence me but will believe me in what I have not only told you, my judges, but others previously during my interrogations and, before that, what I have told my friends, at a time when this present situation had not arisen, in order to clarify my motives as being true.
With this hope I am looking forward to your judgment, and in that connection I am thinking of my children who, for years now, have lived under the protection of an allied power and who will not believe that their father, after everything that he has suffered, could possibly have acted as an enemy to human rights.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant Oberheuser.
DEFENDANT OBERHEUSER: I have nothing to add to the statements I have made from the witness box under oath. In administering thereapeutical care, following established medical principles, as a women in a difficult position, I have done the best I could. Moreover, I fully agree with the statements made by my defense counsel and will refrain, at this stage of the trial, from making any further statements.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant Fischer.
DEFENDANT FISCHER: Your Honors, when this war began I was just a young doctor, 27 years of age. My attitude towards my people and my Fatherland took me to the front line as a troop doctor. I there joined an armored division, where I remained until I was incapacitated for further service. For only a very brief period, during these years of war, I worked as a medical officer in a hospital back home, and there too my conception of my duties was directed by the wish to serve my country. During this time of my work at home, I received the order which made me a subject of the Indictment of this trial.
The order for my participation in these experiments originated from my highest medical and military superior and was passed on to me, as the assistant and first lieutenant, through Professor Gebhardt. Professor Gebhardt was the famous surgeon and much honored creator of Hohenlychen.
He was a scientific authority whom I looked up to with reverence and confidence. As a general of the Waffen SS he was my unconditional military superior. I believed him, that I had been earmarked by him to assist in the solution of a medical problem which was to bring help and salvation to hundreds of thousands of wounded soldiers, and which was to be a cure for them; and I believed that this problem would mean a question of life and death to my people. I believed unconditionally that this order had come to me from the head of the State, and that its execution was a necessity for the State. I considered myself bound by this order, as were thousands of soldiers whom I had seen walk to their deaths during my years at the front, also following an order by the State. Particularly since I had had the privilege during that time of working in a hospital at home, I considered myself doubly and particularly subject to that discipline, and felt myself in duty bound.
What this order demanded from me had been introduced as a method of modem medicine in all civilized countries. I was only to participate in the clinical part of it, and that was taking place just as a course of treatment in the institute of Hohenlychen, or any other clinic. What I did was what was ordered, and I did nothing beyond that order. I believed that I, as a simple citizen, did not have the right to criticize the measures of the State, particularly not at a time in which our country, our State, was engaged in a struggle for life and death.
I hope that through my unconditional devotion at the front and to my two injuries, I have shown that I not only asked others to make sacrifices, but that I was prepared at any time to sacrifice myself with my life and my health. Within the scope of the order given to me I did what I could, in my limited position as an assistant doctor, for the life of the experimental subjects and for an exact and proper clinical development of the experiment. I never found myself in a position where I had to expect that deaths would occur. When such fatalities did occur, I was as shaken by that event as I was by the death of a patient of our clinic.
After that, the experiments were immediately discontinued, and I went back to the division at the front.
Together with Professor Gebhardt, I reported about these experiments to the German public. Like many other Germans, there are many things which, in retrospect, I see more clearly today and in a new light. In my young life I have tried to be a faithful son of my people, and that brought me into this present miserable position. I only wanted what was good. In my life I have never followed egotistical aims, and I was never motivated by base instincts. For that reason, I feel free of any guilt inside me. I have acted as a soldier, and as a soldier I am ready to bear the consequences. However, that I was born a German, that is something about which I do not want to complain.
THE PRESIDENT: The personal statements by the defendants in this proceeding, made on their own behalf, have been heard by the Tribunal during this session in open court, and these statements are now concluded.
After over seven months of trial, consuming, I think, 139 trial days, hearing over 80 or 89 witnesses, the reception in evidence of many hundreds of documents and affidavits, the trial, insofar as the reception of evidence, arguments of counsel, and personal statements of the defendants, is not concluded. The Tribunal will now recess and enter upon the preparation of the judgment to be rendered in this cause. How long that preparation of the judgment will consume is, of course, uncertain, probably not less than three weeks nor more than five.
Counsel for the defendants must keep the Secretary General's office advised of their whereabouts, so that when the Tribunal is ready to formally render its judgment they will be available to appear before the Tribunal.
The Tribunal will now be in recess, subject to call by its own order, to reconvene to render the formal judgment in the cause.
(At 1225 hours, 19 July 1947, a recess was taken, subject to call by the Tribunal.)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America, against Karl Brandt, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 19 August, 1947, 0930 -- Justice Beals presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the court room 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 room.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, you have ascertained all defendants are present in Court?
THE MARSHAL: May it please your Honor, all defendants are present in the court room.
TIE PRESIDENT: The Secretary-General will note for the record the presence of all the defendants in Court.
The evidence in the case of the United States of America versus Karl Brandt, and others, defendants, having been closed, counsel for the prosecution and the defendants having filed their briefs and submitted them to the Tribunal, the Tribunal after consideration of the evidence and the briefs filed, is now ready to pronounce its judgment in the case of the United States of America versus Karl Brandt, and others, presently pending before this Tribunal.
In the reading of the judgment the formal title of the case will not be read.
The reading will commence with the judgment itself:
J U D G M E N T Military Tribunal I was established on 25 October 1946 under General Order No. 68 issued by command of the United States Military Government for Germany.
It was the first of several Military Tribunals constituted in the United States Zone of Occupation pursuant to Military Government Ordinance No. 7, for the trial of offenses recognized as crimes by Law No. 10 of the Control Council for Germany.
By the terms of the order which established the Tribunal and designated the undersigned as members thereof, Military Tribunal I was ordered to convene at Nuernberg, Germany, to hear such cases as might be filed by the Chief of Counsel for War Crimes or his duly designated representative.
On 25 October 1946, the Chief of Counsel for War Crimes lodged an indictment against the defendants named in the caption above in the Office of the Secretary General of Military Tribunals at the Palace of Justice, Nuernberg, Germany.
A copy of the indictment in the German language was served on each defendant on 5 November 1946, Military Tribunal I arraigned the defendants on 21 November 1946, each defendant entering a plea of "not guilty" to all the charges preferred against him.
The presentation of evidence to sustain the charges contained in the indictment was begun by the Prosecution on 9 December 1946. At the conclusion of the prosecution's case in chief the defendants began the presentation of their evidence.
All evidence in the case was concluded on 3 July 1947. During the week beginning 14 July 1947 the Tribunal heard arguments by counsel for the Prosecution and Defense. The personal statements of the defendants were heard on 19 July 1947 on which date the case was finally concluded.
The trial was conducted in two languages - English and German. It consumed 139 trial days, including 6 days allocated for final arguments and the personal statements of the defendants. During the 133 trial days used for the presentation of evidence 32 witnesses gave oral evidence for the Prosecution and 33 witnesses, including the 23 defendants, gave oral evidence for the Defense. In addition, the Prosecution put in evidence as exhibits a total of 570 affidavits, reports and documents; the Defense put in a total number of 901 -- making a grand total of 1471 documents received in evidence.
Copies of all exhibits tendered by the Prosecution in their case in chief were furnished in the German language to the defendants prior to the time of the reception of the exhibits in evidence.
Each defendant was represented at the arraignment and trial by counsel of his own selection.
Whenever possible, all applications by defense counsel for the procuring of the personal attendance of persons who made affidavits in behalf of the Prosecution were granted and the persons brought to Nuernberg for interrogation or crossexamination by defense counsel. Throughout the trial great latitude in presenting evidence was allowed Defense counsel, even to the point at times of receiving in evidence certain matters of but scant probative value.
All of these steps were taken by the Tribunal in order to allow each defendant to present his defense completely, in accordance with the spirit and intent of Military Government Ordinance No. 7 which provides that a defendant shall have the right to be represented by counsel, to cross-examine prosecution witnesses, and to offer in the case all evidence deemed to have probative value.
The evidence has now been submitted, final arguments of counsel have been concluded, and the Tribunal has heard personal statements from each of the defendants. All that remains to be accomplished in the case is the rendition of judgment and the imposition of sentence.
THE JURISDICTION OF THE TRIBUNAL The jurisdiction and powers of this Tribunal are fixed and determined by Law No. 10 of the Control Council for Germany.
The pertinent portions of the Law with which we are concerned provide as follows:
Article II "1. Each of the following acts is recognized as a crime:
"(b) War Crimes: Atrocities or offenses against persons or property constituting violations of the laws or customs of war, including but not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave labour or for any other purpose, of civilian population from occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.
"(c) Crimes Against Humanity: Atrocities and offenses, including but not limited to murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, imprisonment, torture, rape, or other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, or persecution on political, racial or religious grounds whether or not in violation of the domestic laws of the country where perpetrated.
"(d) Membership in categories of a criminal group or organization declared criminal by the International Military Tribunal.
"2. Any person without regard to nationality or capacity in which he acted, is deemed to have committed a crime as defined in ......this article, if he was (a) a principal or (b) was an accessory to the commission of any such crime or ordered or abetted the same or (c) took a consenting part therein or (d) was connected with plans or enterprises involving its commission or (e) was a member of any organization or group connected with the commission of any such crime.
....
"4. (a) The official position of any person, whether as Head of State or as a responsible official in a Government Department, does not free him from responsibility for a crime or entitle him to mitigation of punishment.
(b) The fact that any person acted pursuant to the order of his Government or of a superior does not free him from responsibility for a crime, but may be considered in mitigation."
The indictment in the case at bar is filed pursuant to these provisions.
Judge Crawfor will continue reading:
JUDGE CROWFORD:
TIE CHARGE The indictment is framed in four counts.
Count One - The Common Design or Conspiracy: The first Count of the indictment charges that the defendants, acting pursuant to a common design, unlawfully, willfully and knowingly did conspire and agree together to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity as defined in Control Council Law No. 10.
During the course of the trial the defendants challenged the first count of the indictment, alleging as grounds for their motion the fact that under the basic law the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to try the crime of conspiracy considered as a separate substantive offense. The motion was set down for argument and duly argued by counsel for the prosecution and the defense. Thereafter, in one of its trial sessions the Tribunal granted the motion. That this judgment may be complete, the ruling made at that time is incorporated in this judgment. The order which was entered on the motion is as follows:
"It is the ruling of this Tribunal that neither the Charter of the International Military Tribunal nor Control Council Law No. 10 has defined conspiracy to commit a war crime or crime against humanity as a separate substantive crime; therefore, this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to try any defendant upon a charge of conspiracy considered as a separate substantive offense.
"Count I of the indictment, in addition to the separate charge of conspiracy, also alleges unlawful participation in the formulation and execution of plans to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity which actually involved the commission of such crimes. We, therefore, cannot properly strike the whole of Count I from the indictment, but, insofar as count I charges the commission of the alleged crime of conspiracy as a separate substantive offense, distinct from any war crime or crime against humanity, the Tribunal will disregard that charge.
"This ruling must not be construed as limiting the force or effect of Article 2, paragraph 2 of Control Council Law No. 10, or as denying to either prosecution or defense the right to offer in evidence any facts or circumstances occurring either before or after September, 1939, if such facts or circumstances tend to prove or to disprove the commission by any defendant of war crimes or crimes against humanity as defined in Control Council Law No. 10."
Counts Two and Three - War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity:
The second and third counts of the indictment charge the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The counts are identical in content, except for the fact that in count two the acts which are made the basis for the charges are alleged to have been committed on "civilians and members of the armed forces then at war with the German Reich in the exercise of belligerent control", whereas in count three the criminal acts are alleged to have been committed against "German civilians and nationals of other countries." With this distinction observed, both counts will be treated as one and discussed together.
Counts two and three allege, in substance, that between September 1939 and April 1945 all of the defendants "were principals in, accessories to, ordered, abetted, took a consenting part in, and were connected with plans and enterprises involving medical experiments without the subjects' consent .... in the course of which experiments the defendants committed murders, brutalities, cruelties, tortures, atrocities, and other inhumane acts." It is averred that "such experiments included, but were not limited to" the following:
"(A) High Altitude Experiments. From about March 1942 to about August 1942 experiments were conducted at the Dachau Concentration Camp for the benefit of the German Air Force to investigate the limits of human endurance and existence at extremely high altitudes. The experiments were carried out in a low-pressure chamber in which the atmospheric conditions and pressures prevailing at high altitude (up to 68,000 feet) could be duplicated. The experimental subjects were placed in the low-pressure chamber and thereafter the simulated altitude therein was raised, Many victims died as a result of these experiments and others suffered grave injury, torture, and illtreatment. The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser, Schroeder, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugewsky, Poppendick, Sievers, Ruff, Romberg, BeckerFreyseng, and Weltz are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(B) Freezing Experiments. From about August 1942 to about May 1943 experiments were conducted at Dachau Concentration Camp primarily for the benefit of the German Air Force to investigate the most effective means of treating persons who had been severely chilled or frozen. In one series of experiments the subjects were forced to remain in a tank of ice water for periods up to three hours. Extreme rigor developed in a short time. Numerous victims died in the course of these experiments. After the survivors were severely chilled, rewarming was attempted by various means. In another series of experiments, the subjects were kept naked outdoors for many hours at temperatures below freezing.... The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser Schroeder, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Sievers, Becker-Freyseng, and Weltz are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(C) Malaria Experiments. From about February 1942 to about April 1945 experiments were conducted at the Dachau Concentration Camp in order to investigate immunization for and treatment of malaria. Helathy concentration camp inmates were infected by mosquitoes or by injections of extracts of the mucous glands of mosquitoes.
After having contracted malaria the subjects were treated with various drugs to test their relative efficacy. Over 1,000 involuntary subjects were used in these experiments. Many of the victims died and others suffered severe pain and permanent disability. The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser, Rostock, Gebhardt, Blome, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, and Sievers are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(D) Lost (Mustard) Gas Experiments. At various times between September 1939 and April 1945 experiments were conducted at Sachsenhausen, Natzweiler, and other concentration camps for the benefit of the German Armed Forces to investigate the most effective treatment of wounds caused by Lost gas. Lost is a poison gas which is commonly known as Mustard gas. Wounds deliberately infected on the subjects were infected with Lost. Some of the subjects died as a result of these experiments and others suffered intense pain and injury. The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser, Blome, Rostock, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, and Sievers are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(E) Sulfanilamide Experiments- From about July 1942 to about September 1943 experiments to investigate the effectiveness of sulfanilamide were conducted at the Ravensbrueck Concentration Camp for the benefit of the German Armed Forces. Wounds deliberately inflicted on the experimental subjects were infected with bacteria such as streptococcus, gas gangrene, and tetanus. Circulation of blood was interrupted by tying off blood vessels at both ends of the wound to create a condition similar to that of a battlefield wound. Infection was aggravated by forcing wood shavings and ground glass into the wounds. The infection was treated with sulfanilamide and other drugs to determine their effectiveness. Some subjects died as a result of these experiments and others suffered serious injury and intense agony. The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser, Rostock, Schroeder Genzken, Gebhardt, Blome, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, BeckerFreyseng, Oberheuser, and Fischer are changed with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(F) Bone, Muscle, and Nerve Regeneration and Bone Transplantation Experiments. From about September 1942 to about December 1943 experiments were conducted at the Ravensbruck Concentration Camp for the benefit of the German Armed Forces to study bone, muscle, and nerve regeneration, and bone transplantation from one person to another. Sections of bones, muscles, and nerves were removed from the subjects. As a result of these operations, many victims suffered intense agony, mutilation, and permanent disability. The defendants Karl Brand, Handloser, Rostock, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, Oberheuser, and Fischer are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(G) Seawater Experiments. From about July 1944 to about September 1944 experiments were conducted at the Dachau Concentration Camp for the benefit of the German Air Force and Navy to study various methods of making seawater drinkable. The subjects were deprived of all food and given only chemically processed seawater. Such experiments caused great pain and suffering and resulted in serious bodily injury to the victims. The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser, Rostock, Schroeder, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Sievers, Becker-Freyseng, Schaefer, and Beiglboeck are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(H) Epidemic Jaundice Experiments. From about June 1943 to about January 1945 experiments were conducted at the Sachsenhausen and Natzweiler Concentration Camps for the benefit of the German Armed Forces to investigate the cause of, and inoculations against epidemic jaundice. Experimental subjects were deliberately infected with epidemic jaundice, some of whom died as a result, and others were caused great pain and suffering. The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser, Rostock, Schroeder, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Sievers, Rose, and Becker-Freyseng are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(I) Sterilization Experiments. From about March 41 to about January 1945 sterilization experiments were conducted at the *uschwitz and Ravensbruck Concentration Camps, and other places, The purpose of these experiments was to develop a method of sterilization which would be suitable for sterilizing millions of people with a minimum of time and effort. These experiments were conducted by means of X-Ray, surgery, and various drugs. Thousands of victims were sterilized and thereby suffered great mental and physical anguish. The defendants Karl Brandt, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Brack, Pokorny, and Oberheuser are charged with special responsibility for and participation on these crimes.
"(J) Spotted Fever Experiments From about December 1941 to about February 1945 experiments were conducted at the Buchenwald and Natzweiler Concentration Camps for the benefit of the German Armed Forces to investigate the effectiveness of spotted Fever and other vaccines. At Buchenwald numerous healthy inmates were deliberately infected with spotted fever virus in order to keep the virus alive; over 90% of the victims died as a result. Other healthy inmates were used to determine the effectiveness of different spotted fiver vaccines and of various chemical substances. In the course of these experiments 75% of the selected number of inmates were vaccinated with one of the vaccines or nourished with one of the chemical substances and, after a period of three to four weeks, were infected with spotted fever germs. The remaining 25% were infected without any previous protection in order to compare the effectiveness of the vaccines and the chemical substances. As a result, hundreds of the persons experimented upon died. Experiments with yellow fever, smallpox, typhus paratyphys A and B, cholera, and diphteria were also conducted. Similar experiments with like results we conducted at Natzweiler Concentration Camp.
The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser, Rostock, Schroeder, Genzken, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugewsky, Poppendick, Sievers, Rose, Becker-Freyseng, and Hoven are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
" (K) Experiments with Poison. In or about December 1943 and in or about October 1944 experiments were conducted at the Buchenwald Concentration Camp to investigate the effect of various poisons upon human beings. The poisons were secretly administered to experimental subjects in their food. The victims died as a result of the poison or were killed immediately in order to permit autopsies. In or about September 1944 experimental subjects were shot with poison bullets and suffered torture and death. The defendants Genzken, Gebhardt, Mrugowsky, and Poppendick are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes."
In addition to the medical experiments, the nature and purpose of which have been outlined as alleged, certain of the defendants are charged with criminal activities involving murder, torture, and ill-treatment of non-German nationals as follows:
"7. Between June 1943 and September 1944 the defendants Rudolf Brandt and Sievers... were principals in, accessories to, ordered, abetted, took a consenting part in, and were connected with plans and enterprises involving the murder of civilians and members of the armed forces of nations then at war with the German Reich in exercise of belligerent control. One hundred twelve Jews were selected for the purpose of completing a skeleton collection for the Reich University of Strasbourg. Their photograpsh and anthropological measurements were taken. Then they were killed. Thereafter, comparison tests, anatomical research, studies regarding race, pathological features of the body, form and size of the brain, and other tests, were made. The bodies were sent to Strasbourg and defleshed.
"8. Between May 1942 and January 1943 the defendants Blome and Rudolf Brandt...were principals in accessories to, ordered, abetted, took a consenting part in, and were connected with plans and enterprises involving the murder and mistreatment of tens of thousands of Polish nationals who were civilians and members of the armed forces of a nation then at war with the German Reich and who were in the custody of the German Reich in exercise of belligerent control. These people were alleged to be infected with incurable tuberculosis. On the ground of insuring the health and welfare of Germans in Poland, many tubercular Poles were ruthlessly exterminated while others were isolated in death camps with inadequate medical facilities.
"9. Between September 1939 and April 1945 the defendants Karl Brandt, Blome, Brack, and Hoven... were principals in, accessories to, ordered, abetted, took a consenting part in, and were connected with plans and enterprises involving the execution of the so-called "euthanasia" program of the German. Reich in the course of which the defendants herein murdered hundreds of thousands of human beings, including nationals of German--occupied countries. This program involved the systematic and secret execution of the aged, insane incurably ill, of deformed children, and other persons, by gas lethal injections, and divers other means in nursing homes, hospitals, and asylums. Such persons were regarded as "useless eaters" and a burden to the German war machine. The relatives of these victims were informed that they died from natural causes, such as heart failure. German doctors involved in the "euthanasia" program were also sent to the Eastern occupied countries to assist in the mass extermination of Jews."
Counts two and three of the indictment conclude with the averment that the crimes and atrocities which have been delineated "constitute violations of international conventions.