DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
MR. HARDY: Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the document, counsel?
DR. SERVATIUS: This is from the files of the mental institution Kaufbeuren, and refers to the mortality of the children in this institution from 1910 on. This document is of great interest for it shows that in the first World War the mortality rate of the children reached almost 12 percent, and now if we take the time when Professor Karl Brandt was active in the Reich Committee we see that during the war the curve also rises and rises even as high as 13 percent, but then it drops a bit. It shows that the actual increase in mortality of children goes as high as 26 percent only in years 1943 and 1944 after Karl Brandt had already left. I think this is good proof that Professor Karl Brandt was not carrying out annihilation here, but that there was some new action; from someone also that caused this. When Karl Brandt was there you find that breakin the curve where it drops from 14 to 11 percent, and it rises after he left. The graph also shows in the last war children died in much the same way as they died in this one.
The next document is KB 85, which I put in as Exhibit 94.
MR. HARDY: I object to the admission of this document in evidence. It is merely a treatise justifying the according of mercy deaths. I don't think that is an issue here. I don't think it would be relevant; I object to it.
DR. SERVATIUS: It is true this is a literature document showing the various opinions toward euthanasia, but it is of great importance for the general attitude that Karl Brandt found prevailed in Germany, and it also shows the connection between the idea of medical euthanasia and the consequence of an economic nature. It doesn't, however, touch the most essential problems of medical approval of euthanasia.
Above all, I submit it because Professor Maltzer, the author, who was himself the director of a medical institution sent out a questionnaire to 200 patients, asking them what their attitude towards the mercy killings of children was.
This book study was published in 1925, much earlier than Karl Brandt's time. There were 162 replies altogether - 119 answered "yes", and 43 answered "no". The main point for the reasons why the parents agree or approve or disapprove is above all they emphasize the fact that they don't even want to be asked the question of euthanasia to come up in connection with their children, and Professor Meltzer says most of them say "yes", even those that say "no" don't want to be confronted with with this question of conscience, but are agreeable to the acts being carried out without their being asked. Now, just that is a critical point in the charges against Karl Brandt. They are always asking him why parents weren't asked, or weren't informed, in connection with the death of their children. This is a penetration into the psychology really concerned in this matter. This gives us an insight into the thinking of those actually involved and their motives. For that reason I consider it particularly material.
THE PRESIDENT: This document will be admitted,* Karl Brandt Document 85 will be admitted as Brandt Exhibit 94.
DR. SERVATIUS: In conclusion there are a few documents concerning the question of Brandt's membership in the SS, first an affidavit by a soldier by the name of Bonatz, who worked near Karl Brandt for a few months. I think that the attitude toward foreigners is important here. He says: "Above all I would like to stress that he treated the foreigners who were compelled to work there pleasantly and fairly. They said that they had no reason to complain and praised Professor Brandt as a pleasant and kindly man whom they had all reason to esteem."
THE PRESIDENT: What number are you giving it, counsel?
DR. SERVATIUS: Exhibit 95. The next document is KB 78, which I offer as Exhibit 96. This is an affidavit by Luise von Oertzon, chief official in the Red Cross during the war. She says that Professor Brandt's orientation was primarily medical, and he told her at that time he had been violently attacked by Conti and Bormann, because he was predominately a doctor and not a politician.
The next document KB 79 is Exhibit 97. That is an affidavit by Gottlieb Berger, Chief of the SS Main Office, regarding Brandt's position and his functions, in the SS. He says:
"As Chief of the SS Main Office, I only know that Professor Karl Brandt belonged to the SS only as an Ehrenfuehrer. I know of no single case in which Professor Karl Brandt exercised any function whatsoever or took over any task in the SS. He certainly never held any office.
"I consider it impossible that Professor Karl Brandt was one of Himmler's consulting physicians; Himmler had his own doctors."
Now comes KB 80, Exhibit 98. This is an affidavit by Julius Schaub, Hitler's personal adjutant. It makes statements about Brandt's close attachment to the Fuehrer headquarters. It says that Professor Brandt was Hitler's escort physician from 1934, and as such had to be available when called upon. Further, it says Himmler was inimicable toward Brandt; and he describes a case where there was bitter altercation about the status of the medical officer, where Himmler maintains the point of view, first he is primarily a soldier and politician, and only secondly a doctor, and this lead to a considerable altercation. It also says "several times Karl Brandt found the opportunity of interceding with Adolf Hitler, particularly on behalf of the interest of Catholic nurses."
The next is a document KB 83, which will be exhibit 99. This is an affidavit by Josef Brunissen from the French, Alsacia, and he says the following:
"I am a member of the Alsatian clergy and since 1925 have been spiritual director of the abbey on Mount Odile monastery on Mount Odile in France. During the German occupation, the Mount Odile monastery was to be converted into an SS school. The Commissioner General for Health and Medical Hatters, Prof. Dr. Karl Brandt willingly intervened in the matter in accordance with my wishes, and succeeded in preventing the conversion of the Mount Odile monastery into an SS school. We are indebted to Prof. Dr. Brandt for the preservation of our monastery and venerable place of pilarimage."
Now, comes KB 95, as exhibit 100. This deals with Brandt's connection with Professor Guasebart, and says that Brandt gave him assistance in many difficult situations and then everything he got for the civilian population.
And the last document KB 96, I put in as exhibit 101. This is an affidavit by Dr. Wille Gutermuth, Chief physician in the Clinic in Frandjurt on the Main. He makes statements regarding Karl Brandt's medical views and says he was sharply opposed by Conti and the Labor Front. He says also that Karl Brandt's offices did no political work and were not politically oriented.
That concludes my presentation of documents.
Now, Your Honor, I still have two witnesses, Huber and Wessel, I have agreed with the prosecution that I shall produce affidavits from both of them, and I ask permission to do so within a few days. The witnesses have been approved for examination by the Tribunal, but I wanted to put in instead the affidavits.
THE PRESIDENT: Were the witnesses procured by you, counsel?
DR. SERVATIUS: THEY are here in person, but in order not to take up the Tribunal's time, I simply didn't want to put them on the stand.
THE PRESIDENT: You may prepare the affidavits and submit them. For five or six minutes the Tribunal will meet with the committee of counsel, if they are ready to call on the Tribunal.
The Tribunal will now be in recess until 9:30 tomorrow morning.
(Thereupon at 1705 the Tribunal recessed)
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 27 June 1947, 0930, Justice Beals presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Courtroom will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the 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 court.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, will you ascertain if the defendants are all present in court.
THE MARSHAL: May it please your Honor, all defendants are present in the Court with the exception of the defendant Oberhauser, who is absent due to illness. The medical certificate will be presented shortly.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary General will note for the record the presence of all the defendants in court, save the defendant Oberhauser, who is absent on account of illness. The forthcoming medical certificate will be filed when it is received.
MR. HARDY: May it please the Tribunal, due to some transportation difficulties the witnesses Laubinger and Hoellenrainer were not able to arrive at the Palace of Justice. It is assumed they will arrive in a matter of minutes or perhaps one half to one hour. In the meantime, the Prosecution suggests that Dr. Nelte proceed with the introduction of the supplemental document books in the Handloser case.
THE PRESIDENT: Is counsel for the defendant Handloser ready to proceed with documents on his case, if so, he may proceed.
THE INTERPRETER: The witnesses are here, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The Interpreters have just informed the Tribunal that the witnesses have arrived. If they have, we will proceed to hear the testimony of the witnesses.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, the witnesses have arrived. At this time, the Prosecution would like to call the witness Josef Laubinger to the witness stand.
THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal will summon the witness Josef Laubinger.
(JOSEF LAUBINGER, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:)
BY JUDGE SEBRING:
Q Please raise your right hand and be sworn:
I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
JUDGE SEBRING: You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. HARDY:
Q Witness, your full name is Josef Laubinger?
A Yes.
Q Your last name is spelled L-A-U-B-I-N-G-E-R?
A Yes.
Q Witness, have you ever appeared before a Tribunal as a witness before?
A No, this is the first time.
Q I want to instruct you, witness, that in the course of this examination, kindly answer the questions that I put to you and make an attempt to be brief, also make an attempt to fully answer the question. If you have anything you wish to tell the Tribunal, you may do so and inasmuch as this examination is conducted through interpreters, you must pause a moment after you have heard my question before you begin to answer; do you understand me?
A Yes.
Q When and where were you born, witness?
A On 15 June, 1921, in Mitthaupten.
Q Where did you receive your education; if any?
A In Minden in Westphalia.
Q When were you first arrested by the Gestapo?
A In 1943.
Q Had you ever been in the custody of the police prior to March of 1943?
A No.
Q For what reasons were you arrested by the Gestapo in March of 1943?
A I was arrested for racial reasons.
Q That is because you were a Gypsy?
A Yes.
Q After your arrest in March 1943, were you placed in prison?
A Yes.
Q Where?
A In Heilbronn.
Q And were you later transferred from Heilbronn to another prison?
A To Stuttgart.
Q And then where did you go?
A I was taken from Stuttgart on a transport to Auschwitz.
Q At any time during the course of your incarceration did you go to trial; that is were you tried by the Gestapo?
A I don't understand your question.
Q Were you placed before a Court and given an opportunity to be heard prior to the time you were placed in a concentration camp?
A No.
Q After you arrived at Auschwitz, how long did you stay there?
A Not quite a year.
Q Then you apparently arrived in Auschwitz in the spring of 1943?
A Yes.
Q And you stayed there until the spring of 1944?
A Yes.
Q And then you were transferred to another concentration camp?
A Yes, Buchenwald.
Q And how long did you remain in Buchenwald?
A Not very long, a few weeks.
Q And what was your reason for leaving Buchenwald?
AA transport was made up of 44 men; we were told that these men would do clearing up work in Dachau, and we applied for this voluntarily.
Q What did you understand this clearing up work to be?
A I thought damaged houses were to be put in order, etc.
Q Was it commonly known among the inmates that Dachau would be a better place to be than Buchenwald?
A Yes.
Q Was that another reason why you volunteered for the work at Dachau?
A That is why we volunteered, because things were said to be better there than in Buchenwald.
Q Now, after your arrival in Dachau, would you kindly tell the Tribunal what happened to you?
A We spent our first night in the reception block. The next morning we went to the hospital. There we were given a physical examination.
Q Did you, also receive an X-ray?
A Yes.
Q And then what happened?
A Then we were weighed and our height was measured.
Q And after your physical examinations, X-rays, etc., were completed, did you leave the hospital?
A No, we were taken to the room in which we had to stay throughout the experiment.
Q When did you first learn that you were to be subjected to an experiment?
A Not very long thereafter, Dr. Beiglboeck turned up and told us that we had to participate in the sea-water experiment. We thereupon answered that we had not come to Dachau in order to participate in any experiment, but to do clearing up work. He responded that the experiment was not bad, no one would die, but we were still very much perturbed because we knew that we could not believe anybody in a concentration camp.
Q. Did you know that the professor in charge of the experiments was named Beiglboeck at that time?
A. No.
Q. Then the name Beiglboeck you have learned since you arrived here in Nuernberg?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you think you could possibly identify the professor who performed the experiments?
A. Yes.
Q. Would you arise from your seat, witness, walk over here to the defendants' dock, and carefully look at the defendants and make an attempt to identify the man who conducted the experiments at Dachau? What number is he? Would you kindly tell us in what place he is in the dock?
A. The third one over in the back row.
MR. HARDY: Thank you. I ask, Your Honor, that the record show that the witness properly identified the defendant Beiglboeck.
THE PRESIDENT: The record will show that the witness has correctly identified the defendant Beiglboeck.
MR. HARDY: You may sit down, witness.
Q. (By Mr. Hardy) Witness, would you kindly, now, and slowly tell the Tribunal just what Professor Beiglboeck told you people when he called you together in the one room prior to the time that the experiments started, in your own words?
A. We were lined up and were examined again by the professor. Since I had now found out why we were really there, I asked the professor to excuse me from this experiment because I had already had two stomach operations. He answered that I could participate in this experiment without any misgivings, that it would cause me no ills.
Then we were show our beds. I had bed number 7. The experiment was divided into three parts. The one department was pure sea water. The second section was mixed, but what it was mixed with I don't know, and the third group was distilled water.
I tried all three varieties of water. I drank the first and also the second. You could notice no difference between the first and the second so far as taste was concerned. Also I drank the distilled water, which tasted all right except that it was a little salty.
At first we received military rations. That consisted of zwieback, chocolate, and army food. We ate this for seven or eight days - I can't say exactly. When that was over, we received the water. The professor also asked us, "Do you know at all what thirst is? You will find yourself licking the dust from the floor." The whole experiment lasted four to five weeks.
Q. Now, witness, did the professor ask the experimental persons, that is, your friends who underwent the experiments with you, whether or not they wanted to volunteer for the experiments?
A. No.
Q. And you state that the experimental subjects told the professor that they had volunteered for work and not for medical experiments?
A. That is so.
Q. Then Beiglboeck did not ask anyone for their approval, to your knowledge?
A. No.
Q. Did he ask you for your approval?
A. No.
Q. Now, you were placed on a diet, a special diet for a period of seven or eight days, you think?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you have to work during that time?
A. No.
Q. Then you were to drink sea water. Do you know whether or not the water you were drinking was specially treated?
A. Yes, this was the second sort that had been mixed with something.
Q. Can you state how much you received of this water during one day?
A. In the morning, noon, and night we received a glassful, but how much there was in each glass I can't tell you. It was about the size of a beer glass.
Q. What effect did the drinking of this water have on you?
A. It tasted very salty. After drinking it one became thirsty and tired.
Q. Did you feel very sick?
A. We got so weak that we could hardly stand up.
Q. Did you have a fever at all?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you ever become so weak that you were unable to walk?
A. Well, I could stand up, but I had to hold on to something. Otherwise I would have fallen down.
Q. How long were you subjected to drinking this particular water?
A. For eleven or twelve days we drank this water.
Q. Well, did you yourself drink it for eleven or twelve or a less number of days, or can you remember specifically?
A. It was about eleven or twelve days.
Q. Well now, did you ever at any time receive a liver puncture?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you remember when you received that?
A. After the experiment, that is, when the experiments were over.
Q. Did you also receive a lumbar puncture?
A. I don't know what that word means.
Q. Well, that would be a puncture in your back?
A. Yes.
Q. And you received that also at the completion of the experiments, you think?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you ever receive any injections?
A. No.
Q. After the experiment was over, did you have to stay in the room until all the rest of the experiments were completed?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you examined after the completion of the experiments?
A. No.
Q. Were you weighed after the completion of the experiments?
A. During the experiments we were weighed every day.
Q. Well, after you had completed the experiment and then were allowed to go back to normal life, that is, to eat again and drink again, were you ever weighed after that?
A. No.
Q. Did you receive special food for three or four days after the experiment?
A. No, one day.
Q. Did you get the military food then?
A. Yes.
Q. And then after that did you go back to the usual camp diet?
A. Yes. Mr. Beiglboeck promised us that when the experiment was over we should receive extra rations so that we could recover to what we had been, and we would also get an easy work assignment that we could readily stand, but when the experiment was over Beiglboeck didn't concern himself with us at all after that. We never even saw him again.
JUDGE SEBRING: Mr. Hardy, what was that regular camp diet? The Tribunal would be interested in knowing.
Q. (By Mr. Hardy) Would you kindly answer the Tribunal's question, witness, the regular camp diet? That is not to be confused with the military diet, but the camp diet. Would you tell the Tribunal of what that consisted, please?
A. Mostly it consisted of turnips.
Q. Did you get anything else besides turnips?
A. We had a bread ration, eight men to a loaf. Sundays we got a little butter maybe or jam.
Q. Did you get anything to drink?
A. Yes, coffee or tea.
Q. Anything else? Did you get any cake or anything like that?
A. No.
Q. Any meat?
A. Sundays there was a special meal that contained noodles and there were a few little chunks of meat in there with fresh vegetables.
Q. Well now, after the discontinuation of the experiments you say you did not see Beiglboeck at all after that, that is, after you started eating the regular camp diet again?
A. After that I didn't see him.
Q. Did you eat the regular camp diet while you were still in the experimental station?
A. Yes.
Q. And was Beiglboeck still there, to your knowledge?
A. Yes, he was still there but we never saw him.
Q. Well now, after the experiments were completed, that is, the entire experimental program had been completed, did you then go to the hospital for rest?
A. No. Here is the way it was. Beiglboeck said that whoever felt weak would have a chance to convalesce in the hospital. A friend of mine told me that those who went to the hospital for convalescence would never come out again. I asked how come. He said they would get injections and would die. Of course, hearing this I declined to enter the hospital. I said I was quite strong enough to work.
Q. And did you then go to work?
A. Yes, I went to the block and stayed there only two days, and then I went on a work detail.
Q. Well, did you ever feel sick while you were working?
A. Yes, I felt ill, and if the work Capo hadn't been kind to me, I probably wouldn't be here today.
Q. Now, witness, in the experiments you state that Professor Beiglboeck did not ask you to volunteer. Now, did he promise you that you would be released after the experiments?
A. Yes, so far as members of the armed forces were concerned. For example, if I had a relative outside who had served in the army or if I had previously done service, then there would be the possibility of my release. Regarding not only myself but several other comrades of mine, it was ascertained that we either had relatives serving in the armed forces or had ourselves previously served. We all had to go to the courtyard. Beiglboeck was there with several other men. He went down the line and asked everyone whose relatives were in the army and wrote down the names, but nothing came of all this.
Q. Did anyone of the inmates attempt to rebel before the experiments started and try to influence the experimental subjects not to drink the water?
A. Yes, there was somebody there whose name I don't remember. He said that if we drank the sea water we certainly wouldn't survive, and he said we should all get together and refuse to drink the water. Beiglboeck heard about this and of course he threatened this person, saying that this was sabotage and telling the man that he knew very well what happened to saboteurs.
Q. Did Beiglboeck tell the man that something drastic would happen to him?
A. He told him he would be hanged if he didn't stop this sort of propaganda.
Q. Well, this particular man who wanted to object and organize a rebellion, did he receive the sea water later?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. In what manner was sea water administered to him?
A. The first two or three times he drank the water, but then, thereafter, every time he drank the water he had to vomit. Then Beiglboeck came with a rubber tube and the water was forcibly poured into this fellow, not the same amount that we were receiving, but an even greater amount. If I am not wrong, it was even as much as two or three liters.
Q. Did Beiglboeck administer this himself to that particular fellow?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. Can you tell the Tribunal whether or not any of the experimental subjects were ever tied to their beds in any manner whatsoever. If so, kindly tell the situation to the Tribunal as briefly as possible and in your own words.
A. There was somebody there who ran about and who did drink water other than the sea water. Beiglboeck investigated and found out that this man had drunk fresh water and had also eaten bread. This fellow finally admitted this, and then Beiglboeck went and tied this fellow to his bed and sealed his mouth with adhesive tape.
Q. Did you see this fellow with his mouth sealed with adhesive tape?
A. Yes, I knew him, but at the moment I don't remember his name.
Q. But you positively saw a man in the hospital or in the experimental station with his mouth sealed with adhesive tape?
A. Yes, that was the next bed to mine but one.
Q. Generally, did Beiglboeck mistreat the prisoners? Did he swear at them or punch them or do anything of a violent nature?
A. No, he wasn't brutal toward us, but his penalties consisted in giving us more sea water to drink or depriving us of other privileges. For example, he withdrew our cigarettes and things like that.
Q. Were any of the prisoners used of nationality other than German? In other words, were there any Poles or Russians or Czechoslovakians?
A. Yes, there were in toto seven or eight Germans, and the rest were all Russians and Poles and Czechs, people of every nationality.
Q. Do you remember whether any of the inmates used in the experiment had to be transferred to the hospital or the sick bay before the completion of the experiments?
A. No, I don't remember.
Q. Did the inmates have to stay in the experimental room all the time, or could they go out into the courtyard?
A. We could go into the courtyard next door under guard. Half an hour or an hour later we had to go back.
Q. Did any of the subjects used ever become delirious, froth at the mouth, become mad, show any other symptoms of that nature?
A. Yes, quite a few had these attacks. They rolled around on their beds and yelled like little children. Then they got foam at the mouth. Then the professor was called and he took the liver and spinal punctures. After this was over the person in question was given some liquid intravenuously, but what that liquid was I don't know.
Q. Do you know from your own knowledge whether or not any of the experimental subjects suffered permanent injury?
A. Yes, I know two. I, for example, still have spells of dizziness, and when I spoke with Hoellenreiter he told me that he still had these spells too.
Q. Can you tell me whether or not any of the experimental subjects died, to your knowledge?
A. So far as I can remember, no, but two were taken on stretchers to the hospital, and these we never saw again. What happened to them, however, I cannot tell you.
Q. Witness, when you first were transferred to the experimental room and you told Professor Beiglboeck that you had had two stomach operations and did not wish to undergo the experiments, why didn't you press the issue further and refuse to be subjected to the experiments?
A. I would have been very glad to do that, but we prisoners didn't have any freedom of action in the camp. We simply had to obey and if we did refuse, we received the penalty for it.
Q. Then you were afraid to refuse?
A. Yes.
Q. Was this opinion frequently expressed among other experimental subjects?
A. Yes, all of them.
MR. HARDY: I have no further questions, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for defendant Beiglboeck may cross-examine the witness.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY DR. STEINBAUER (Counsel for defendant Beiglboeck):
Q. Witness, in what district and what province were you born?
A. I was born in the Baden district?
Q. What is your father's name?
A. Josef Laubinger.
Q. What was your mother's maiden name?
A. Weiss.
Q. What were your grandparents' names?
A. Laubinger.
Q. Yes, of course, but I mean first and last names.
A. My grandmother's name was Alvina Laubinger.
Q. Were you yourself in the army?
A. No.
Q. Were you in the Labor Service?
A. No.
Q. Were you in Auschwitz in Block 20?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you remember what group you belonged to in the experiments?
A. Group 2.
Q. Wasn't the name of that Schaefer Group?
A. I didn't know that expression.
Q. What was your experimental number?
A. Seven.
Q. When Professor Beiglboeck gave you a physical examination, did he ascertain that you had had this stomach operation?
A. Yes.
Q. Did he ask you whether it still bothered you?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you not, for that reason, refused for the experiment?
A. No.
Q. Don't forget that you are under oath, witness. Isn't it more true to say that you really begged him to let you participated in the experiment?
A. No, it is not.
Q. After the experiment actually began, what did you get to eat?
A. The experiment proper?
Q. Yes, that's what I mean.
A. Nothing at all.
Q. Now, you are excited, Mr. Laubinger. Just relax and think about this. Didn't you receive the so-called emergency rations, cookies, chocolate?
A. That was before the experiment.
Q. No, before the experiment you got good food, jelly and butter and milk and so on.
A. Yes, that is so.
Q. Yes, that's what I wanted to clear up. And then, during the actual experiment you received cookies, coca cola, and chocolate?
A. No, no coca cola. Cookies and chocolate is what we got.
Q. For how many days did you get that food?
A. Three days.
Q. Couldn't it have been four days?
A. No.
Q. How do you know that for sure, if I can prove to you that it was four days?
A. Well, just because I know that it was three days.