'Useless eaters', were transferred to special institutions where they were killed, and their relatives informed that they had died from natural causes. The victims were not confined to German citizens, but included foreign laborers, who were no longer able to work, and were therefore useless to the German war machine. It has been estimated that at least some 275,000 people were killed in this manner in nursing homes, hospitals and asylums, which were under the jurisdiction of the defendant Frick, in his capacity as Minister of the Interior. How many foreign writers were included in this total it has been quite impossible to determine."
The second excerpt is from page 17,007 of the official Englist transcript, and it appears on page two of the English Document Book. It roads as follows:
"During the war nursing homes, hospitals, and asylums in which euthanasia was practiced as described elsewhere in this Judgment, came under Frick's jurisdiction. He had knowledge that insane, sick and aged poeple, 'useless eaters', were being systematically put to death. Complaints of those murders reached him, but he did nothing to stop them. A report of the Czechoslovak War Crimes Commission estimated that 275,000 mentally deficient and aged people, for whose welfare he was responsible, fell victim to it."
I would call the Tribunal's attention to the fact that these findings by the International Military Tribunal draws no distinction between German nationals, subjected and executed through the euthanasia program, and non-German nationals.
The second excerpt makes in distinction whatever, and all of those executions are described with the word "murders".
We turn now to Document 630-PS which we offer as Prosecution Exhibit 330. This is on page 3 of the English Document Book. This document was presented in evidence in the trial before the International Military Tribunal, and was there admitted as USA Exhibit Number 542.
This is a letter dated 1 September 1939, on the letterhead of A. Hitler.
THE PRESIDENT: What is that date, counsel? My page here, it is impossible to read it.
MR MCHANEY: I will pass the original up, Your Honor.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, ths document is just being introduced as a letter of Hitler. I would like to state at the very beginning that it is not a letter. A letter is addressed to an addressee, but I claim it is a decree. It was compiled with the assistance of Karl Brandt. I only want to state here that this is not a letter, but that it is a decree. I would like to emphasize this at the very beginning.
MR. McHANEY: I take it that is a matter of argument whether it is a letter or a decree. In any event, I would like to have the document passed up to the Tribunal, and they can see for themselves just what the document looks like. In any event, it is dated Berlin, 1 September 1939. It reads as follows:
"Reichsleiter Beuhler and Dr. Brandt..." The translation "N. D.", I don't know whether that should be "N. D." or not..."are charged with the responsibility of enlarging the authority of certain physicians to be designated by name in such a manner that persons who, according to human judgment, are incurable can, upon a most careful diagnosis of their condition of sickness, be accorded a mercy death. signed, A. Hitler", with a handwritten note at the bottom"giver to me by Beuller on 27 August 1940, signed Dr. Guertner."
times to argument, to which it now actually is. Counsel the pages in the Document Book furnished the court is not numbered.
MR. McHANEY: Is not numbered?
THE PRESIDENT: Is not numbered. Please explain this part which was left out.
MR. McHANEY: If the court please, at the conclusion of today's session, if you will please hand your books back, I shall see that they are numbered.
DR. FRUERCHMANN: Mr. President and Mr. McHaney, I am defense counsel here for Brack-Viktor Brack. The prosecution now intends to make the chart-Mr. President, the prosecution now intend's to make the chart the subject of discussion. I object to the admission of the chart as evidence, and I shall give a full reason for my objection. The chart was compiled in the course of a preliminary procedure by the gentlemen of the prosecution as from the defendant Brack and as a sketch without any further documentary support, and the official relations between the persons for which they are interested was shown to the Prosecution in this matter; in this way there is the picture of coordination, subordination, organization, and system between the defendants Brack, Karl Brandt and Blome and of Frick and so on; an organization which in reality never existed. The affidavit itself was not compiled by the defendant Brack, but by one of the interrogators. It was only submitted to the defendant Brack on the 12 October 1946 for his signature. It was compiled from the statements of five or six of his interrogations. At that time Brack had protested against the contents and the formulation of the affidavit because of using inappropriate German words, which had become completely incorrect. It was so admitted by Brack to one of the interrogating officials that the text of the affidavit was not correct on all the points, and did not agree on all the points in the tezt of his affidavit, and on two points the affidavit contained a conclusion which had been drawn by the prosecution; also from the translation into the English language also showed some linquist difficulties. However, it was further stated that it was not so much the words as rather the meaning of the declaration. Since, however,
MR. McHANEY: As to the date on the top of this document shows that is 1 September 1939, this letter of Erlab's, or order, was issued on the very day of Germany attack on Poland, on the day when the highest war lord of Germany certainly was not concerned with humanitarian and eugenic matters. This date alone proves that the measures to be carried out were not intended for the benefit of humanity, but for the benefit of total war. The other day he handwritten note on the bottom of the letter showed that Guertner, the Minister of Justice, received it almost one year after its issuance, If the persons who were charged with the responsibility for the execution of these instructions would have considered this piece of paper to constitute a law, they would not have hesitated to submit it immediately to the highest legal authority in the Reich in which the sphere of influence would have widely affected this program.
At this time I ask the Tribunal to recall the affidavit of the defendant Karl Brandt, which was document NO-475, introduced as Prosecutor's Exhibit No. 4; also the affidavit of the defendant Viktor Brack, which was document NO-820, introduced as Prosecution's Exhibit No. 34, and the affidavit of the defendant Blome, which was document NO-471, introduced as Prosecution's Exhibit No. 238.
In paragraph five of the affidavit of Karl Brandt, he admits his connection with the Euthanasia program. So it is with the defendant Brack in paragraph five of his affidavit, Prosecution's Exhibit No. 34, and, defendant Blome in paragraph five of his affidavit, Prosecution's Exhibit No. 238, admits his knowledge of the program itself, and in the row which was played by the defendants Karl Brandt and Brack. For the convenience of the Tribunal we have included the affidavit of Karl Brandt and Viktor Brack in the document Book on page four and page seven respectively. The affidavit of Blome should be included in one of the following document books on Euthanasia.
I now offer into evidence Document NO-253.
THE TRIBUNAL: Just a moment, counsel. Regarding the remarks made by Dr. Servatius; of course, the description by the Prosecution of this document or letter is not binding. The document speaks for itself subject at all it had been incorrectly introduced, in reply to this Brack has also objected to the change of the formulation that took place on some points.
However, Brack at that time was physically and mentally in a very bad condition, and therefore, he did not realize that the affidavit submitted to him, together with the chart, contained numerous mistakes, misunderstandings, and incorrect statements. He therefore gave in to your official and signed the affidavit. With this story as I have just described it to you, the affidavit and the chart, which was part of the affidavit, is not a correct declaration which came out of the defendant Brack himself, and therefore, it seems to be and to have lost its legal admissibility as evidence.
MR. MCHANEY: If the Tribunal please, the argument seems to be somewhat confusing, by the fact that a great number of the remarks made by the defense counsel were addressed against the document, which has already been admitted into evidence, namely, the affidavit of Viktor Brack. I did not quite understand his objection at the start.
THE PRESIDENT: Of course, in the matter of the affidavit already received in evidence as made by the defendant Brock is subject to any attack by him, which he may have the privilege of making when he takes the witness stand, as to his physical and mental conditions at that time. On the other hand, the prosecution must be prepared to establish that chart new under disucssion is correct.
DR. FRUERCHMANN: May I still make another statement.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
DR. FRUERCHMANN: When the affidavit was presented, the chart was not enclosed with the affidavit.
The chart was only submitted as a document to the defendant Brack two days ago, and therefore, he was not able to previously take any stand whatsoever in connection with this chart.
Dr. SERVATIUS: Dr. Servatius for the defendant Karl Brandt. Mr. President, I have just found out the objections which exist against the admissibility of this affidavit. I, therefore, object to its use against Karl Brandt, and I ask that the prosecution be requested to present the original interrogation and files so comparison can be made to what he has personally stated, and what has later been put into the affidavit.
MR. McHANEY: I would like to repeat that the affidavit, if I am correct, is already a part of the record, so I don't understand the objections being made to the affidavit itself. I now want to offer into evidence the chart, which is going offered as sinned by the defendant Viktor Brack. This affidavit is true, and it contains same description material which we will read into the record, but the affidavit itself has long since been admitted, and is Prosecution's Exhibit No. 34, Document No-320.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. McHaney, is this chart which is now on the wall a correct facsimile or the chart -
MR. McHANEY: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: --If tim smaller chart which you are preparing to offer an evidence, or is it a composite chart made from several charts, as was the case in reward to the composite charts that were referred to at the inception of the trial?
MR. McHANEY: The court room chart which is used for the convenience of the court only purports to be a reproduction of the chart drawn and signed by the defendant Brack. The big chart, of course, is not offered into evidence. It is a copy of the smaller chart. The smaller chart, which is signed to by the defendant Victor Brack, is the document being offered at this time.
THE PRESIDENT: Of course, it's very important to all concerned that any chart offered and received in evidence, studied by the Tribunal and the respective parties, is in fact correct.
At the time, the Tribunal will recess until nine thirty o'clock on Monday morning. The counsel for the prosecution should make every effort in the meantime to ascertain whether or not this chart is, as a matter of fact, a correct representation of the facts, and we will take the matter of the presentation upin the morning.
MR. McHANEY: I would like, before the Tribunal adjourns, to correct the record. It was stated that the affidavit of Brack was document NO-320, Prosecution Exhibit 34. That is, in fact, an affidavit of Victor Brack. However, the one with which we are here concerned is another affidavit by Brack which is Document NO-426 which was admitted as Prosecution Exhibit 160.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now recess until Monday morning.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will net recess until nine thirty Monday morning.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 13 January 1947, at 0930 hours.)
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 13 January 1946, 0930, Justice Beals presiding.
THE MARSHAL: The Honorable Judges of Military Tribunal 1.
Military Tribunal 1 is now in session God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the courtroom.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, ascertain if all the defendants are present in court.
THE MARSHAL: May it please, Your Honor, all the defendants are present in the court.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary-General will note for the record the presence of all the defendants in the court.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, you asked how the defense are going to conduct their defense. We arrived at an agreement that we are going to do that as the defendants are sitting in the defendants' docket and in the same way as the prosecution has named the defendants. If there should be any small changes among a few defendants and if a few defense counsel should make some changes in the manner in which they are going to present their case, we are going to advise the Tribunal about it in time.
THE PRESIDENT: The statement of counsel, of course, will be included in the record.
The prosecution may proceed.
MR. McHANEY: If the Tribunal please, I think at this time we have open for ruling by the Tribunal the admissibility of two documents, one is Document NO 1063 which was offered as Prosecution Exhibit 328 and is the report by a committee of the Netherland's Government on the investigation of certain was crimes. Is the Tribunal prepared to make a ruling on that document this morning?
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal is not prepared to make a ruling on that document this morning. Give me again, if you please, the number of that document.
MR. McHANEY: That is Document NO 1063 which was offered as Prosecution Exhibit 328. The other document as to which there was an objection is the chart of the organization of the so-called Euthanasia program signed and sworn to by the defendant Viktor Brack. That is Document NO 253 which was offered as Prosecution Exhibit 331.
THE PRESIDENT: Has the prosecution checked that exhibit or examined it?
MR. McHANEY: I am convinced, Your Honor, as I recall, the question was whether the wall chart now behind the witness box is a facsimile of the chart drawn by the Defendant Viktor Brack, and I am prepared to state that it is. In other words, this big chart was drawn by the presentation section from the small chart.
THE PRESIDENT: As I remember the objection urged by the defense counsel was the original chart was not a true representation of the facts. I may be wrong about that.
MR. McHANEY: That the original chart was not a true representation of the facts?
THE PRESIDENT: I understand the defense counsel urged that the Defendant Brack in making his affidavit in preparing the chart had prepared one which he now contends was not accurate. Concerning that, I may be in error.
MR. McHANEY: Well, if the Tribunal please, he has done two things. Firstly, he has given us an affidavit which is Document NO 426, which describes at some length the operation of the Euthanasia Program. That document has already been admitted as Prosecution Exhibit 160. The only document now before the Tribunal for a ruling is the chart. As to that, I can see no grounds for objection. The chart was drawn by the Defendant Viktor Brack or at least under his direction, and is signed and sworn to by the Defendant Viktor Brack, and consequently we submit it is admissible.
THE PRESIDENT: Will counsel make an objection to the admission of the chart, will he state his objection again.
DR. FROESCHMANN (Counsel for the Defendant Viktor Brack): Mr. President during the Friday session I pointed out that Defendant Brack because of his physical and moral condition at that time was not in a position to consider the details of his statement and the chart which he drew, and still recognize it exactly. He has now found out that this chart, through the manner of its presentation, there arises the impression between the Chancellery of the Fuehrer and the Defendant Brack, there is an organizational coordinational relationship which in actuality did not exist. At the time when he was interrogated had he been at that time in full physical health and had he been in a position to consider the matter carefully, he would have pointed out to the prosecution that a number of connecting lines in this chart are wrong and erroneous.
DR. SAUTER (For the Defendant Blome): Mr. President, as defense counsel for the Defendant Blome, I do not object to the admissibility of this chart. In order to avoid the prosecution having to tell us later, however, that we had accepted this chart as being correct by our being quiet about it, I should like to point out the following at the moment. In this chart on the left side there is a yellow square with the designation "Dr. Conti". Underneath that in the small square there is the notation "Office Dr. Linden" That is the square which was just pointed out. To the right of this square, in brown color, there is a smaller square with the designation "Blome". This small square "Blome" is connected with the large square "Dr. Conti" by a green line. Whatever this green color should mean I don't know yet. I should like to point out now that the defendant, Dr. Blome, cannot recognize the fact that his name be mentioned in this chart at all since officially he had nothing whatever to do with the entire Euthanasia program. At a later date, as soon as the Defendant Brack will be called to the witness stand, I shall ask the Defendant Brack how this brown square with the designation "Blome" could have been put into the chart at all and whether it isn't correct that before signing this chart he objected against it immediately and declared that the name of Blome does not belong in that chart since according to his knowledge Blome had nothing whatever to do with Euthanasia.
That, gentlemen of the Tribunal, is not an objection to the admissibility of the chart but merely in explanation and so that I can come back to the same matter at a later date when the Defendant Brack is called to the witness stand.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal understands the position of the Defendant Blome, which position is entirely correct, and the rights of the defendant to question the accuracy of the chart. The court recognizes the position of the counsel for the Defendant Blome, which position is entirely correct and the rights of the defendant will be preserved to him to question the accuracy of the chart as to him.
DR. SERVATIUS (Counsel for the Defendant Karl Brandt): Mr. President, I also object to this chart and the connecting lines therein, especially since there can be some objection as to the way this chart was drawn up. It is completely incorrect with reference to the position of Karl Brandt in particular, the impression is being awakened that all the officers underneath Karl Brandt who are mentioned there were actually subordinate to him. It will show itself later that this is not correct in any way, that rather the office of Bouhler was entrusted with the execution.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal understands the position of counsel and the admission of the chart in evidence will not be binding upon the defendants who may later question its accuracy. Meanwhile, the chart will be admitted in evidence.
JUDGE SEBRING: What will the exhibit number be there, Mr. McHaney?
MR. McHANEY: Exhibit 381.
MR. McHANEY: This chart shows the large organization which was set up by the Defendant Karl Brandt and Bouhler and others for the execution of the Euthanasia Program. In order to explain this chart I would like to read certain paragraphs of Document NO 426 which is an affidavit of the Defendant Brack and has already been admitted into evidence as Prosecution Exhibit 160.
This is on page 10 of the English document book. I read from paragraph 4:
"4. The Euthanasia Program was initiated in the summer of 1939. Hitler issued a secret order to Prof. Dr. Karl Brandt, Reich Commissioner for Medical and Health Matters, and at that time personal physician to the Fuehrer, and to Phillip Bouhler, charging them with responsibility for the killing of human beings who were not able to live, that is, the according of a mercy death to incurably insane persons. Prior to the issuance of this secret order Bouhler had a conference with Dr. Brandt and Dr. Leonardo Conti, the Reich Chief for Public Health and Secretary of State in the Ministry of Interior. On the basis of this order of Hitler, Bouhler and Brandt were to select doctors to carry out this program. Inasmuch as the insane asylums and other institutions were functions of the Ministry of Interior, Dr. Herbert Linden became the representative of the Ministry of Interior. Dr. Karl Brandt and Phillip Bouhler appointed Prof. Dr. Heyde and Prof. Dr. Nietsche along with several other medical men to aid in the execution of this Euthanasia Program."
"5. Professor Dr. Karl Brandt was in charge of the medical section of the Euthanasia Program. In this capacity, as shown in the chart I have drawn dated 12 September 1946, Dr. Karl Brandt appointed as his deputies Professor Heyde and Professor Nietsche. In charge of the administrative office under Brandt was first Mr. Bohne and later Mr. Allers. Three different names were used by Brandt's section in order to disguise the activities of the organization. The names of the organizations are as follows:
"Reich Association - Hospital and Nursing Establishments "Charitable Foundation for Institutional Care "General Patient Transport Corporation.
"6. In the early stages of this program, Dr. Karl Brandt visited Phillip Bouhler and discussed with him many details of this program. As a matter of fact, after such meetings between Brandt and Bouhler, I received many orders, more often from Bouhler than from Brandt directly.
"7. In my capacity as Chief of Office 11 of Bouhler's Chancellery, I was ordered to carry out the administrative details of the Euthanasia Program. My deputy was Werner Blankenburg, who eventually became my successor, that is, in the beginning of 1942 when I joined the WaffenSS. Van Hoegner, Rhinhold Verberg, and Doctor Hovelmann were members of my staff.
"8. In the Ministry of Interior, Dr. Linden was in charge of the Euthanasia Program and his deputy was Councellor Franke. The department for Public Health of the Ministry of Interior had authority over all insane asylums of the Reich, and in this position, my department as well as the office of Dr. Brandt had close liaison in order to efficiently operate this Euthanasia Program.
THE PROCEDURE "9. By order of Doctor Linden, the directors of all insane asylums in the Reich had to fill out questionnaires for each patient within their institutions.
These questionnaires were drafted by Bouhler, Heyde, Nietsche and others in several of their many conferences. Then the questionnaires were forwarded to the Ministry of Interior to be distributed to the various insane asylums and similar institutions.
Theoretically Doctor Linden's office had the questionnaires returned and then forwarded them to the administrative section of the office of Doctor Brandt. The Program was so arranged that photostats of each questionnaire were to be sent to four experts to determine the status of each patient. The panel of experts consisted of about 10 to 15 doctors. I do not remember the names of all the members of this panel but Doctor Pfannmueller, Doctor Schumann, Doctor Falthauser, and Doctor Rennaux are fresh in my memory in this connection. Each of these experts indicated by making a certain comment on the questionnaire whether or not the patient could be transferred to an observation station and eventually killed. Then the questionnaire was forwarded to a chief expert. According to the regulation, the chief expert was only entitled to order the transfer of the patient when all four experts voted for the transfer. This chief expert also marked the questionnaire and then submitted it to Doctor Linden who ordered the insane asylum to transfer the patient to one of the observation institutions. Off-hand I can remember, among others, the names of the following observation institutions: EglfingHang, Kempton, Jena, Buch, Arnsberg.
"10. At these institutions the patients were under the observation of the doctor in charge for a period of one to three months. The physician had the right to exempt the patient from the program if he decided that the patient was not incurable. If he agreed with the opinion of the chief expert, the Patient was transferred to a so-called Euthanasia Institution. I can remember the names of these Euthanasia Institutions:
Grafeneck - under Dr. Schumann "Brandenburg - under Dr. Hennecke "Hartheim - under Dr. Rennaux "Sonnestein - under Dr. Schmalenbach "Hadamar (I do not remember under whose leadership) "Bernberg - under Dr. Bohnke or Dr. Becker.
"In these institutions the patient was killed by means of gas by the doctor in charge. To the best of my knowledge, about fifty to sixty thousand persons were killed in this way in the period from Autumn 1939 to the Summer of 1941.
"11. The order issued by the Fuehrer to Brandt and Bouhler was secret and never published. The Euthanasia Program itself was kept as secret as possible, and for this reason, relatives of a person killed in the course of the program were never told the real cause of death. The death certificates issued to the relatives carried fictitious causes of death such as heart failure. All persons subjected to the Euthanasia Program did not have an opportunity to decide whether they wanted a mercy death, nor their relatives contacted for approval or disapproval. The decision was purely within the discretion of the doctors. The program was not restricted to those cases in which the person was "in extremis".
"12. Hitler's ultimate reason for the establishment of the Euthanasia Program in Germany was to eliminate those people confined to insane asylums and similar institutions who could no longer be of any use to the Reich. They were considered useless eaters and Hitler felt that by exterminating these so-called useless eaters, it would be possible to relieve more doctors, male and female, nurses, and other personnel, hospital beds and other facilities for the use of the Armed Forces.
"REICH COMMITTEE FOR RESEARCH ON HEREDITARY DISEASES AND CONSTITUTIONAL SUSCEPTIBILITY TO SEVERE DISEASES.
"13. This committee, which was also a function of the Euthanasia Program, was an organization for the killing of children who were born mentally deficient or bodily deformed. All physicians assisting at births, midwives, and maternity hospitals were ordered by the Ministry of Interior to report such cases to the office of Doctor Linden in the Ministry of Interior. Then experts in the medical section of Doctor Brandt's office were ordered to give their opinions in each case. As a matter of fact, the complete file on each case was sent to the offices of Bouhler and Doctor Brandt in order to obtain their opinions and to decide the fate of each child involved. In many cases these children were to be operated upon in such a manner that the result was either complete recovery or death. Death resulted in a majority of these cases. The program was inaugurated in the summer of 1939. Bouhler told me that Doctor Linden had the order to ask for the consent of the parents of each child concerned. I do not know how long this program continued since I joined the Waffen-SS in 1942.
"THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE EUTHANASIA PROGRAM AND SS BRIGADEFUEHRER GLOBOCNIK.
"14. In 1941, I received an oral order to discontinue the Euthanasia Program. I received this order either from Bouhler or from Doctor Brandt. In order to preserve the personnel relieved of these duties and to have the opportunity of starting a new Euthanasia program after the war, Bouhler requested, I think after a conference with Himmler, that I send this personnel to Lublin and put it at the disposal of SS Brigadefuehrer Globocnik. I then had the impression that these people were to be used in the extensive Jewish labor camps run by Globocnik. Later, however, at the end of 1942 or the beginning of 1943, I found out that they were used to assist in the mass extermination of the Jews, which was then already common knowledge in higher party circles.
"15. Among the ??? one doctors who assisted in the Jewish extermination program were Eberle and Schumann.
Schumann performed medical experiments on prisoners in Auschwitz. It would have been impossible for these men to participate in such things without the personal knowledge and consent of Karl Brandt. The order to send these men to the East could have been given only by Himmler to Brandt, possibly through Bouhler."
I think that is a sufficient reading of the pertinent sections of the affidavit of Viktor Hermann Brack.
Now, I would like to return to the chart. You find the defendant Karl Brandt as the head of the program in the box at the top center of the chart. The Tribunal will please refer to the chart on the wall behind the witness box, and Mr. Hockwald will use his pointer to indicate the appropriate place on the chart which is under discussion. Under this program are the organiations which are used for camouflage purposes. First we have the Reich Association, Hospital and Nursing Establishment, The Charitable Foundation for Institutional Care, and Patient Transport Corps. Then there is the Administration Office with its Department for Questionnaires. Over to the right are the so-called top experts Heyde and Nietsche, and about fifteen other experts, among them, Pfannmueller. Down below the Observation Stations; and then below, the so-called Euthanasia Institutions where the victims were actually exterminated -- including Hadamar, Grafeneck, Bernberg, Sonnestein and Hartheim. In connection with Bernberg, the Tribunal will recall the witness Eugen Kogon's testimony that transports left Buchenwald in 1941 and 1942 to go to Bernberg, which was one of the Euthanasia Exterminating Stations. These names, and the names of the chief doctors of these institution will occur again and again in the testimony which will be presented.
As it is pointed out in the Brack affidavit, and as shown on the chart, there was a very close collaboration in the execution of the program, between the defendant Karl Brandt and Bouhler, whose name appears in the right hand corner of the chart. Under Bouhler you will find the defendant Brack, his deputy Blankenburg, and Hegener, Vorberg, and Hefelman; all of those play, as the evidence will show, a very active part in the execution of the program in collaboration with Brandt's subordinates, as closely as Brandt with the Chief Bouhler.
On the left hand side of the chart you find the set up of the Reich Ministry of the Interior under Frick, showing only the offices which were connected with the Euthanasia Program. Here it was Conti, the Secretary of State for Health Matters, and Reich Health Leader, whose deputy was the defendant Blome. Linden, shown in the same box with Conti, was most active in collaborating with Brandt and Bouhler in the program. Linden provided for the distribution of the questionnaires in the different insane asylums all over Germany, and had them filled out and forwarded to Brandt in the Administrative Offices, shown in the lower left center of the chart by dotted lines connecting the two offices. Together with Brandt and Bouhler, Linden, also directed the organization for the killing of deficient children. The set up, of which, is shown on the outer left hand side of the chart. The connection between Bouhler's office, Karl Brandt, Linden, and this organization is shown on the photostatic copy by special dotted lines, and in green and brown on the enlarged copy on the wall.
Conti, Bouhler and Linden, are no longer living; all of them having ended their lives by committing suicide.
I think it might be well if I re-emphasized the manner in which those questionnaires operated. The questionnaires were made up in the Administrative Office under Allers, and he had a special office for questionnaires under that. He then sent the questionnaires to Linden's office in the Ministry of the Interior. The questionnaires were then sent to the insane asylums all over Germany, and the questionnaires were then filled out by the doctors in these asylums. The questionnaires were sent back to Linden; Linden, then farmed them out to the so-called exports. And these experts, in fact, were in a lot of cases directors of other insane asylums in Germany. In other words, they were thoughtful enough not to have the director of an asylum 'expertize' his own patients, but directors of other asylums were 'expertizing' these questionnaires. The questionnaires then came back and then were finally 'expertized' by Heyde and Nietsche, the top experts, and an ultimate decision was reached as to what to do with the patients on the basis of these questionnaires. Then it appears, at least, in the early stages of the program, that it was decided to possibly exterminate the patients, on the basis of the questionnaires, were sent to one of these Observation Institutions.
The order coming down from Linden's office, having been in the Observation Institutions, and no change having been made in the decision to exterminate the patients, they were then picked up and transported to one of the mercy killing stations down below.
Mr. Hochwald will continue with the presentation of the evidence for the prosecution.
MR. HOCKWALD: May it please the Tribunal, I want to offer into evidence Document NO-470, which will be Prosecution Exhibit 332. This document is an affidavit of Pauline Kneissler. "Affidavit: I, Pauline Kneissler, being duly sworn, depose and state:
"1. I was born on 10 March 1900 at Kurdjomovka in the Southern Ukraine. In 1920 I became a German citizen. From my sixth to my fifteenth year I was tutored in my parents' house in Russia. In 1920 I moved to Duisburg on the Rhine, where I studied nursing. I was trained for my job till 1923, and on 4 January 1940 I was hired by the Ministry of the Interior in Berlin. For 15 years I worked for the Magistrate of Berlin as municipal nurse. In April 1937 I joined the NSDAP. I was a member of the NS Frauenschaft, of the NSV, of the Reich Air Raid Protection League and of the Reich Nurses' League.
"2. My experiences as a sick-nurse and the fact that I had been working for many years in different German hospitals and nursing establishments in connection with the so-called euthanasia program enable me to depose the following statement concerning this program.
"3. In 1939 I was summoned by the Chief of Police to report on 4 January 1940 to the Ministry of the Interior, situated in the Kolumbus building. There a man called Blankenburg talked to our group, which consisted of 22 or 23 persons. He discussed the importance and the secrecy of the euthanasia program and explained to us that the Fuehrer had worked out a euthanasia law, which, in consideration of the war, was not to be published. It was completely voluntary for those present at the meeting to assure their cooperation. None of those present had any objections to this program; and Blankenburg swore us in. We were sworn to secrecy and obedience; and Blankenburg called our attention to the fact that any violation of the oath would be punished by death. Dr. Bohne was present at this meeting.