Q Yes, I was going to put that to you. Now, on the basis of the number of visits you made to the observation stations, which you admitted was none, are you in a position to tell the Tribunal anything?
A I never visited any observing institutions.
Q Yes, that is what I say, therefore, you cannot swear to this Tribunal about the manner in which the examinations were carried out there; can you?
A I can only say that I am of the conviction that they were run in a professional manner.
Q Can you tell us anything about your observations at the Euthanasia station?
A I have visited one institution, that was at Grafeneck. At the beginning of the year or during the first half of the year 1940 I visited it. Few Patients were located there, there were approximately thirty patients there and I saw the patients. Then I visited the administrative office, which was established as a registration office. It was then discussed further how the question of the formal written correspondence program should function after the Euthanasia was performed. That is the only time I saw such an institution.
Q Was there any one killed?
A No.
Q Do you know how these patients were killed in the Euthanasia Station?
A They were killed by carbon monoxide.
Q Do you know what was done with their bodies?
A The corpses were then cremated.
Q You saw the pictures of the Hadamar Institute in this Tribunal; did you observe the disinterment of large numbers of bodies from the general grave?
A Yes, I have seen that.
Q You spoke of the humane way in which these people were put to death; I cannot say that you are in a position to testify concerning that matter because of your lack of knowledge.
AAbout the humane manner, will you please repeat that again?
Q I said I think you are unable to testify about the humane manner in which these people were put to death; isn't that true?
A I believe a big difference must be made between the pictures of Hadamar and between the Euthanasia Institutes, for example at Grafeneck. Hadamar with the corpses, who had not been cremated, certainly has nothing to do with the performance of Euthanasia, which was known until the end of 1943 and I say that for the reason that at Hadamar the corpses were not cremated, while the corpses, who were accumulated in connection with the Euthanasia program, were cremated.
Q Is it your opinion that the Euthanasia stations were operated in the best possible manner?
A I am of the opinion that they were conducted in the best manner, yes.
Q You spoke of relieving these patients from great pain and suffering; do you think all these patients wanted to die?
A That is a question which I cannot answer in this form. I am of the conviction that the patients did not have a clear concept of their actual condition because they were insane and among them were certainly cases, which in excess of that, certainly were suffering. It is quite possible that a human being, who might be described by the simple word "crazy", might under circumstances not even realize the difference between life and death. In this form, you cannot even include such people as to the question if they want to die or if they do not want to die.
Q I think that you will concede that possibly a substantial number of these victims were fully aware of what was happening to them; won't you?
A I do not think so. If I go back and remember the patients whom I have seen at Grafeneck, they were very poor creatures who were all confined to bed and certainly some others may have been there who could be up and were not confined to bed, however, for the most part they more or less would have been confronted with certain death.
Q I think you observed from the instruction sheet, which we went over together, that feeble minded persons and persons suffering from senility were subjected to the program.
A Such patients, feeble minded of course to a severe degree and also certain forms of senility could also be included in this group.
Q Did you employ a man by the name of Fritz Bleich?
A Bleich came into my office in 1942 or 1943.
Q What did he do?
A He worked for me in the registration office.
Q Registration of documents, mail and the like?
A The registration of general mail matters. Furthermore in 1944 when my office was moved from Berlin, he got the mail and brought the mail back to the city.
Q Which office was Fritz working in?
A He worked in my office.
Q Fritz Bleich?
A Yes.
Q You have stated that you had two offices in Berlin; one in the University Clinic and one in the Fuehrer's Chancellery. I ask you whether or not Fritz Bleich worked in your office at the Fuehrer's Chancellery?
A I did not have any office in the Fuehrer's Chancellery. I had my office in the Reich Chancellery and in the Reich Chancellery was located the Chancellery of the Fuehrer, the Ministry of Lammers and Meissner and there were still several other offices.
Q I am sorry, I made a mistake, I meant the Reich Chancellery where you did have an office. Was Fritz Bleich working in that office?
A No, Fritz Bleich did not work in that office. My office there consisted of three rooms, one had the telephone agency, one contained the secretary and my collaborators. Bleich came there somewhat later on and it may have been as late as 1943.
Q Now, I am asking you whether Fritz Bleich physically worked in your office in the Reich Chancellery or your office in the University Clinic?
A No, he did not work at the University Clinic.
Q And he was a clerk in the Reich Chancellery?
A He was employed by me in my office in the Reich Chancellery.
Q Herr Brandt, who would know more about the operation of the Euthanasia program; you or Fritz Bleich?
A I believe that perhaps Fritz Bleich may have more information about it.
Q Your clerk is better informed on these matters than you are?
A In this case, it may perhaps be possible.
Q If you consider the Euthanasia program to be in the interests of the patient and not for fiscal purposes, why were veterans of the first World War and those injured in the course of industrial labor exempt from this program?
A This question is in the field where I have to say is basically not correct. According to the conditions and the sufferings of these people, it is not right to make these exceptions, however, other considerations were decisive in this case, in order to have these exceptions made. There was the consideration that because of the war and also because of the conscription of labor, the mentality of the people towards such questions would be different than in cases where only pure insanity is concerned, and because of these considerations, the exception of the war invalids and the people injured in industrial labor and the actual point of view from which the thought of Euthanasia originated, it would not have been correct to make these exceptions.
Q You have testified that the euthanasia program would have no proper relationship to concentration camps, is that correct?
A Yes.
Q Why is that so, weren't there insane persons in concentration camps?
A I am of the opinion that there were no insane persons in the concentration camps.
Q Upon what do you base the opinion, did you make any investigation to find out?
A No, I did not. However, I maintain the natural point of view that somebody who comes into a concentration camp because of a political or other crime, would have no connection with a mental disease.
Q But you didn't inquire as to whether there were any insane persons in concentration camps when this program started, did you?
A No.
Q You heard the testimony of the witness Menecke about his visits to concentration camps, what say you about that?
A Menecke has testified that this examination, - I do not even want to call it an examination, was a medical measure, that he had the impression it was a purely political racial matter with which he had occupied himself in the case.
Q But Herr Brandt, Dr. Menecke was one of the operating experts under T-4 in Berlin.
A The program is I personally passed the material in 1941, and it was halted in August of that year. I do not know that after the program was halted that euthanasia was performed in one place or another on a greater scale. It is not clear to me either from what office or from what possibilities Dr. Menecke made his examinations or was able to carry out his examinations in the Buchenwald Concentration Camp. It certainly is not possible that it started with T-4, because from all that has been shown here that what took place in the concentration camps was the sole responsibility and was subject to the sole decision of Himmler. From the files concerning the subject it was shown that Herr Menecke received orders from his clerks in connection with the Inspectorate for the concentration camps.
Q Now, Herr Brandt, you are a man of intelligence out of the ordinary, and I am sure you remember Menecke's testimony quite vividly. He was called to Berlin in January 1940, given instructions about what he was to do in connection with the operation of euthanasia. In the summer of 1940 he was instructed by perhaps the defendant Brack, who issued instructions to him on at least one occasion he testified, or Heppelmann, or one of the other people mentioned on the chart concerning the euthanasia program. He was ordered by them to concentration camps and to make examinations, and he testified that he visited a number of concentration camps from the summer of 1940 until January 1942, so these visits wore started quite early in the program, and were carried out even after you say the program had ended in August of 1941. Menecke was not a concentration camp man. He was not under the direction or orders of Gleucks, Pohl or Himmler. He was a man working in the program which you assisted in setting up, and getting into operation?
A I can only say the same thing again on the subject, I thought that within the concentration camps there were no mentally insane persons and I have never heard or discovered that such examinations had been carried out in the concentration camps, and I have not heard anything about the fact that after the summer of 1941 euthanasia was still being continued by some other agencies. Of course I have not heard anything in this respect from the concentration camps. I am also of the opinion that the fact that Menecke has been sent to camps by order of T-4, that such a decision would not be made either by T-4, without Himmler setting it up such measures could not be carried out in any camp.
Q According to the testimony which Menecke has given here about the examinations in 1941 and the beginning of 1942, it certainly had nothing to do with the euthanasia program, as it had been determined with T-4 or either in the field concerned. Now, Witness, I don't wish to argue with you about it, but it is quite obvious it did have something to do with T-4, and Menecke's testimony was to the fact that Brack himself had ordered him to go to the camp now, there is no dispute that the concentration camps were also in the program and they had to cooperate and they did so, and I also will not argue with you about the code name, 14 F 13. The witness Menecke himself did not know that code name, but how do you explain the fact that these concentration camp operations could be carried out by personnel of the euthanasia program and they could be exterminated in an Euthanasia Institute like Bernburg without your knowledge, Witness?
A I cannot give you any explanation to this question. I cannot say because it is not clear to me in what manner and by what procedure T-4 participated and in what way the connection was established. I can only say I did not find out anything about it, and in addition I want to state if I had found out anything about it I would have done anything in order to stop such measures which later on degenerated into just a plain form of extermination, with all possibilities available to me. In my opinion it had nothing to do with the concept of euthanasia, and I cannot possibly explain it, - first of all how this contact was established, and it is not clear to me with whom the orders for such measures were issued.
Q What was the explanation you gave on direct examination about the 14 F 13 order being sent only to concentration camps in Bavaria and Thuringia?
A I have stated here that my attention was drawn to the fact that the reference number 14 F 13 in connection with what Menecke has testified at one time, is concerning the district of Bavaria and then Hess and all Thuringia, and some document stated that some people were sent from the concentration camp to the Buchenwald camp in this action, -- I think it was Buchenwald, and from there they were transferred to Bernburg, so that I am of the opinion that perhaps within certain areas under the Reich Defense Commissioners, are perhaps by order of Himmler, and in collaboration with Himmler; because they listened to these demands these results were carried out in this way. This is an assumption and perhaps a way to reach clarification on this point, I cannot say anything in addition about this subject.
Q You testified the program was stopped in August 1941 due to the resistance of the church and press; is it true you got the order for the discontinuance of the program from Hitler?
A Yes.
Q And then you passed it on to Bouhler?
A Yes, I passed it on to Bouhler by telephone.
Q Why is it the cessation order was given to you since your testimony here indicates you had so little responsibility in connection with the program?
A I was situated in the Fuhrer headquarters, and I received the order from there because I was together with Hitler.
Q But the operation of the children's euthanasia continued until 1944?
A It was carried on until the fall of 1944, or the late summer of 1944.
Q. Why was the distinction drawn between the two types of euthanasia?
A. Because in the question of the children we wanted to avoid and prevent the fact, also because of difficulties with their families and so on, that this should develop further. We wanted to kill and put an end to these deformities as soon as possible after they had been born.
Q. Now, I understood you say on direct examination that you continued in some association with euthanasia until 1942; is that correct?
A. Until 1942, no. Euthanasia was discontinued in the summer of 1941.
Q. And your testimony is that you had nothing further to do with euthanasia after August 1941?
A. That is something different. I have stated that in the year 1942 I resigned the authority which I had been given by the special decree. That refers to the authority with regard to the children of the Reich Committee.
Q. Well, that's what I was trying to get straight. Now, precisely when did you resign the authority which you received on 1 September 1939?
A. I resigned this authority in the spring of 1942.
Q. Well, you should be able then to give us some information about what happened to the personnel in T-4 and in other parts of the euthanasia program
A. I cannot say that.
Q. You said questionnaires continued to be sent in and evaluated after August 1941; is that correct?
A. Yes, certainly the questionnaires continued to be worked on because this material was passed on to euthanasia institute. In this case it would be 1941.
Q. Did they continue to expertize the questionnaires?
A. I assume that perhaps they continued to handle them, but I cannot say it with certainty.
Q. In other words, they continued to do everything except execute the patients, is that right?
A. That may have been the case during the first time there, yes.
Q. Isn't this another one of these absurdities? Why were they going?
through all these useless motions when the German Reich was in such pressing need of doctors and other medical personnel?
A. I believe that the matter of the diagnosis were also discontinued, and only that for the time being a diagnosis was given because these questionnaires were still arriving and for the time being the personnel was still available and they were occupied with organizational matters. An office had been established and we wanted to restrain from dissolving it completely for the time being. That was the only reason.
Q. Well, does it seem a bit senseless to continue to file these questionnaires in view of the fact that it could normally be expected that thousands of these patients would probably die before the end of the war from natural causes or they might recover and be without -
A. That would have been senseless in part to continue with these questionnaires. I do not even know if these questionnaires were completely discontinued. I cannot say that.
Q. Were you familiar with the fact that the German Government was indulging in repressive measures against Jews?
A. At the time I did not know anything about these measures in the form as I know of them today. I did not know any more than what could be seen generally; that certain groups of Jews were first of all given a certain distinguishing mark and that later on it became generally clear that they had been settled in certain areas. Outside of this I did not knew anything.
Q. You did not know that Jews were being systematically exterminated?
A. No, I did not know that.
Q. Do you now admit that they were, in fact, systematically murdered?
A. No, I did not know it.
Q. I am asking you if you now know it?
A. Yes, now I know that this has happened to a great extent. Through this trial and after I was arrested it came to my knowledge. I did not know of it before.
Q. Herr Brandt, how do you explain that the extermination if some sixty thousand Germans, using your own figures, in the euthanasia program was common knowledge in Germany as the proof in this case has shown, while a man in your high position did not know that Jews numbering in seven figures were being executed?
A. I do not believe that a number of seven figures was generally known in Germany.
Q. Well, will you make an admission about something less than seven figures?
A. No, I do not want to do that either, but I only want to point out in this way that the number as such is not the decisive factor because if sixty thousand insane persons were known, then, of course, the seven figure number of the Jews would most certainly have been generally known, but this has not been the case. The fact that euthanasia became public -- that can be traced back to the opposition by the church and the fact that the church discussed these questions, and therefore it became known more concretely with regard to the Jews. I have not heard anything like it. I am convinced that the number of these who had never heard of it or who did not know anything about it within the Reich will be enormous, certainly within the Reich.
Q. I take it from your statement that the reason for that is that there was no opposition to the Jewish extermination?
A. It just was not known.
Q. Herr Brandt, did you issue orders directly or indirectly to the Patients Transport Corporation for the transfer of inmates?
A. No, I did not issue any such orders.
Q. Is the name Blankenburg familiar to you?
A. Blankenburg, yes.
Q. Did you give Blankenburg orders directly or indirectly for the transfer of inmates of insane asylums to euthanasia stations such as Grafeneck, Hadamar, Hartheim, Bernburg?
A. No, I did not give him any such orders.
Q. After the euthanasia program allegedly came to a stop in 1941 did you ever issue orders directly or indirectly to one of the euthanasia stations that inmates of insane asylums should be transferred to these stations?
A. No.
Q. I would like to put to you Document NO-892.
MR. McHANEY: If the Tribunal Please, it might be appropriate to take the afternoon recess at this time until she can locate the exhibit.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will be at recess for a few minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session. May it please your Honors, Defendant Oberheuser is absent this afternoon having been excused by the Tribunal earlier today.
THE PRESIDENT: The absence of the Defendant will be noted for the record, absence pursuant to excuse.
BY MR. McHANEY.
Q. Herr Brandt, I want to put to you Document No-892. Herr Brandt, this is a letter on the letterhead of the General Patients Transport Corporation dated Berlin, 20 July 1943, to the mental institution, Hadamar near Limburg/ Lahn. It reads as follows:
"In the course of the evacuation of institutions situated in the Western territory of Germany endangered by air raids, I order transfers of insane persons to your institution also, this by order of Professor Brandt, the Commissioner-General of the Fuehrer for Medical and Health Services.
"You will get the 26th of July, 1943, one hundred fifty insane women from the mental institution Warstein if the Reichsbahn will furnish the necessary cars as requested. The Transport will be accompanied by about twelve persons as nursing personnel. I request you to provide for housing and feeding of the accompanying personnel if they are not able to leave your institution before the following day in order to return to their original institution.
"In all matters of bills and expense accounts which might result from the transport of the patients, I request you to address the Central Clearing Office for Mental Institutions, Tiergartenstrasse 4, Berlin W 35, referring to the fact that the transfer has been carried out by the General Patients Transport Corporation.
Heil Hitler."
And I submit to you that the signature is Blankenburg. In view of this letter, don't you now wish to change your testimony to the effect that you never did issue any orders to Blankenburg concerning the movement of insane persons to an Euthanasia station?
A. This letter certainly cannot be considered to be in connection with the Euthanasia station.
In the year of 1943 the Air Raid Precautionary Committee, which I touched upon yesterday, was already activated. This was an institution which was activated according to a Reich decree. In this Air Raid Precautionary Committee there were Dr. Conti, and I was also a member of that Committee, and in this Air Raid Precautionary Committee I was included because I was already in charge of these special hospital institutions.
If in this case the Chartiable Patients Transport Company participated, they did so because of their transport facilities, because otherwise no transport would have been available. This morning it was already mentioned that this transport which was available had to be specially committed during the winter catastrophe of 1941-1942 with the Group Center. I assume without remembering the details in that connection that we are here concerned with the same thing, namely, that considering the hospital damages which we had in the West and which then extended to the rest of Germany, a transfer had to be carried through. The name of the Institution Hadamar became known to me through the trial last year, and I do not know where the Institution Warstein is located.
Q Do you know whether these one hundred fifty insane persons were exterminated at Hadamar?
A I don't know that and I don't believe it, and it is not known to me that the patients would have to be sent there. This letter does not clarify the situation at all. I merely wanted to point out what it says at the top, the evacuation of air-damaged territories. Maybe you could tell me where Warstein is located.
Q I do not know, witness. However, you will recall, I think, that the form letters issued from the Patients Transport Corporation concerning Euthanasia in 1940 and 1941 usually carried such words as, "Due to planned economy, we must order the transfer of so many patients to such and such a plance." You recall that don't you?
A Yes.
Q Do you deny that this letter is in fact an order from the same Patients Transport Company, transferring insane persons from an asylum to the Euthanasia station at Hadamar?
AAccording to the letterhead we are concerned with the Chartiable Patients Transport Company, GMBH, one of the sub-department of T-4.
Q And, moreover, T-4 covered the movement expenses, didn't they?
A The expenses of the entire Euthanasia Program were dealt with by an advance of Reich Treasurer Schwarz, and these were then accounted with the State. It says here that questions of account have to be dealt with that agency, that is, with reference to transport.
Q Well, Schwarz advanced monies to T-4, did he not?
A Yes. Yes. That was so.
Q And T-4 was paying for the transfer of these insane persons to Hadamar was it not?
A Yes. It was so as can be seen from the letter.
Q Did you have any supervisory control over insane asylums in Germany, either during the operation of the Euthanasia Program up until 1942, or thereafter by virtue of being General Commissioner?
A No, I certainly had no supervisory duties regarding these institutions.
Q Did you have any authority to give orders and instructions to the doctors of such insane asylums?
A I do not remember ever having issued such an order to any such mental institutions. I cannot remember any one such event.
Q Did you ever issue any such orders to director of asylums through the Reich Committee or any other agency of the Euthanasia Program?
A I do not remember. He could have been concerned with questions of information. Although, I do think that they would have been passed on to Doctor Linden. However, I do not remember any such incident.
Q Did you ever intervene for victims of the Euthanasia Program, so that they might not be killed?
A Since I was only in one way concerned with reference to these Euthanasia institutions, such a question could only refer to a conversation I had with Pastor Bodelschwing regarding his patients. That, according to my recollection occurred in the year of 1940 -- 1940 or 1941, I am not quite sure.
Q Now, Herr Brandt, you have had sometime to consider this subject very carefully. I am asking you if you ever intervened for the victims of the Euthanasia Program so that they might not be killed?
A I do not believe that I intervened in that matter since I was always in full conformity of the idea of Euthanasia. We can only be considered with discussions in Bethel, as far as I think, that is where I spoke to Pastor Bodelschwing. And, this discussion which I carried on with him was decisive, not finally decisive but helped to decide the stoppage of the entire action. I do not remember having intervened on any other occasion or in any individual case, or having given any normal directive. I really cannot remember.
MR. MC HANEY: If the Tribunal pleases, I have put Document No. 0892 to the witness, and would like to have it admitted in the record at this time as Prosecutions's Exhibit No. 442. Heretofore, it seems that the proper procedure would be to marke the exhibit for identification with a number, admit it as an exhibit later.
Does the Tribunal think it would be desirable to put an exhibit number on it for identification or would the identification number 0892 be satisfactory. My own point of view is I have noticed Heretofore that the Tribunal desired that tho Defense Counsel have their documents normally admitted during the Prosecution's case. I do know that before the IMT that the Prosecution's documents and as far as I know also the Defense documents were, in fact, admitted into evidence during the Defenses case. And, I am just afraid there might possibly be some slip up in the latter stage of the trial and we might not formally get these documents into evidence. If the Tribunal sees any serious objection to it, I am perfectly ready to reserve until a later time to put them in, but it might be best to have them normally admitted at this time.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal is of the opinion the better method would be to mark it for identification with the number it would have if it was now received as an Exhibit, and then held by the Prosecution to be offered as an exhibit at the appropriate place at a later time.
MR. MC HANEY: Very well, your Honor, I would like for the record to show that Document No. 0892, which was the letter I have already put to the witness, be marked as Prosecution's Exhibit No. 442 for identification.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal calls the Counsel's attention to the fact that the copy of the document submitted to the Tribunal is incomplete. It does not correspond with the copy of the document the Counsel read to the witness. Some paragraphs are lacking, apparently.
MR. MC HANEY: I will be glad to have that checked into, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: It is the same in substance, but it is not identical with what the Counsel read.
BY MR. McHANEY:
Q Witness, in view of the testimony you have just given, I wish to put the document to you, Document No. NO 890, and I will ask that the record show that this Document has been identified as Prosecution's Exhibit No. 443 for identification.
(A copy of the document was handed to the witness.)
Herr Brandt, this letter is dated Berlin, November 16, 1943, and from the letterhead of the Reich Committee for Research of Hereditary and Constitutional severe Diseases. It is marked confidential, and it is addressed to Oberarzt Dr. Schmidt, Sanitorium Eichberg. You remember Dr. Schmidt's test* money before the Tribunal?
The letter reads as follows:
"Re: Inmate Anna Gasse from Frankfurt/Main "Dear Dr. Schmidt:
"On the basis of a letter directed to Professor Dr. Brandt concerning the above mentioned I request an elaborated diagnosis about the mentioned Anna Gasse who is reported to be at your institution at present. At some time the Oberpraesident at Wiesbaden was concerned with that matter. It seems that the relatives of Anna Gasse try to obtain her release by every possible means. If from a medical point of view such release is warranted, one could take into consideration whether one should not perhaps comply with such request in the interest of the good reputation of the institution.
"Heil Hitler "Signature:
illegible."
Now, Herr Brandt, will you not again have to change your testimony? Did you not, in fact, intercede for punitive victims of Euthanasia? Did you not in fact, get in touch with the Reich Committee and through them, with the director of the Eichberg institution?
A I assume that we are concerned here with a letter directed to me by a member of the Gasse family, and I think I probably passed this letter on with the directive and request to submit a detailed diagnosis about the condition of the child, probably in order to enable me to inform the parents about this matter or let the doctor inform the parents. Since I know nothing about the further developments of this letter, I cannot make any other statement about it. This letter can only express that I personally passed on the letter which was directed to me to the agency which dealt with the question of research of hereditary and constitutional severe diseases; nothing else, as far as my opinion goes, can be seen from this letter. I cannot remember the incident with that child, nor do I know whether I received any concrete reply in that connection.
Q But, witness, it is true that you were injecting yourself into euthanasia matters at as late a date as November, 1943, is it not?
A I would probably even have done that in February of 1945. If I was addressed personally I always tried to deal with these matters and reply personally and if I had perhaps the impression that something was not quite in order or quite clear it would have been a matter of course for me to investigate such an incident. I believe that quite concretely I have done so in this case. The letter starts, "On the basis of a letter directed to Professor Dr. Brandt". Certainly, some such letter was directed to me personally. I didn't merely put it away, but in this case I requested to receive an elaborated diagnosis.
Q But, Doctor, I have put the question to you whether you had any authority in regard to these matters. You state "No", and now you tell me that you gave instructions that there would be an elaborate diagnosis of the possible victim, Anna Gasse. Isn't there a little inconsistency there?
A I see no inconsistency. It is a matter of course that whether I have authority or have no authority that whenever I gain the impression that something is not quite in order that I should try to do something and clarify the matter as far as I can. In what way exactly I did that probably differed according to the special situation which prevailed. I don't know to whom I passed this matter and I assume this letter is correct. The signature of this letter is not very clear. It is certain, however, that after this matter was pointed out to me through this letter I did everything in order to clarify it. This has nothing to do with the authority as such.
Q But, in any event, you forwarded a letter to him without knowing who he was?
A I probably passed it on to Dr. Linden.
Q What would you have done if you had ascertained that there had been an improper diagnosis in the case of Anna Gasse?
A That is a question which retroactively after a period of four years or three and a half years I could not answer very clearly. In any event I should have tried to find a correct way of dealing with it - a correct and simpler way - but I cannot say what we were concerned with at that time.
Consequently, I can't answer the question which you put to me.
Q Well, witness, isn't it perfectly clear what we're concerned with. I take it that the question was whether Anna Gasse was to be improperly executed. Her relatives - her parents were showing some concern in that matter, and I ask you if you had ascertained that there had in fact been an improper diagnosis and that she was about to be improperly subjected to euthanasia what would you have done?
AAt first I would have made a report to the Fuehrer and in any case I would have notified the Reich Ministry of the Interior, in this case Linden's agency, but all these are assumptions. But one cannot see from this letter that any such question could have arisen. It only appears from this letter that the members of the family had some desire that this child be released, but it could well have been that I wrote to the parents after I had confirmed that request, and I think that is a matter of course that I would have tried to convince them about the correctness of euthanasia. But the decisive thing is that with reference to the children belonging to the Reich Committee the approval of the parents was necessary. It may be that in this connection the parents did not give an approval and for this reason a letter came to me.
Q Dr. Brandt, are you seriously suggesting that no children were subjected to euthanasia without the consent of the parents?
AAccording to my knowledge the approval of the parents was absolutely necessary and had to be given, and it was the task of the agency of Linden to establish connection with the local physicians in order to get that approval. At that period of time I heard of no case where a child received euthanasia without the approval of the parents. The fact that the parents were told that it was done on the basis of approval is something completely different.
Q Now, witness, this is the first time that I have ever heard mentioned in connection with the euthanasia program that anybody's consent had to be obtained and I take it that it is a rather fundamental matter. Are you ready to swear to this Tribunal that the Reich Committee never performed euthanasia on children without obtaining the consent of the parents of the child?