Q Tell us about the third death?
A The third death was just like the second one.
Q. How about the other deaths?
A I don't know. I can only judge from the reports where Rascher reported these deaths to Himmler.
Q Well now Dr. McHaney interrogated you on the 30th day of October 1946. At that time you told him that you knew that more than three fatalities occured, and you thought it was approximately five to ten people died in these experiments. Didn't you tell that to Dr. McHaney last October?
A I said that, yes. I said that in the Milch trial too.
Q How did you know about that? Where did you get that knowledge that other deaths occurred?
A I learned that from the other prisoners who told me about it when the experiments were broken off. They said they were really glad that it was finished. I said, "why", and they said: "Because things have happened." They weren't definite, but I concluded that there had been other deaths.
Q Well weren't you ashamed when you heard of that from the inmates at the conclusion of the experiments sometime in June or July? Weren't you ashamed you had been associated with Rascher in his murder mill?
A The situation was not simple for me. I didn't want to have anything more to do with these experiments; that can be seen from the fact that I interrupted them.
Q Well now in the course of these deaths, just what were you doing yourself? Were you just standing there looking in the window or were you operating some of the apparatus for Rascher?
A No, I have already said that at the first time I was looking at the electro-cardiogram, the point of light that follows the heart.
Q Then you were working with Rascher. You were studying the electro cardiogram? You were working with Rascher under Ruff's orders.
You worked with Rascher on that experiment and studied the electrocardiogram?
A No, I didn't collaborate with Rascher. I happened to be watching this experiment and I saw the electro-cardiogram, and when I saw a critical point was being reached where I myself would have stopped the experiment, I said to Rascher.
Q. Well what did it require at that particular point to stop the experiment? Suppose you were operating the controls that Rascher had in front of him or the controls on the pressure chamber. At that particular point, the fatal point where you noticed on the electrocardiogram, when you were studying it, what could you have done if you were operating it to stop the experiment and save the person from dying? What would have been the quickest thing to do, pull a valve or what? This is a simple question, doctor. I think you can answer it briefly. Did you turn a crank, or push in a plug or button, or throw off a valve, or how would you save him?
A Do you moan if that had been my own experiment?
Q Yes, what would you have done at the moment to save the man, if you saw he was going to high, what was the crucial thing to do to stop the experiment?
A I have to ask you again. Do you mean what I would have done in my own experiment with my own experimental subject, or what I could have done to make Rascher stop his experiment?
Q I am not asking you either question. I am asking you what could have been done to stop the experiment at that particular point. How would you stop it, how would anybody stop it, what did you do with the equipment to stop the experiment so that he would not die? Is there a button you push, or what is there?
A Rascher had a control in his hand with which he regulated the altitude. He would have had to turn that so that the pressure would be increased, that is. the altitude would be reduced in the chamber.
Q Well now, on these chambers, you do understand how all of the equipment works, don't you? It is elementary to you, isn't it?
A Yes.
Q And you were thoroughly familiar with the running of that chamber, weren't you?
A Yes, I knew that.
Q You had experimented with it yourself?
A Yes, of course.
Q You were connected with an institute for aviation research?
A Yes, I was an employee of Ruff's.
Q And you could determine from a study of the electro-cardiogram that the subject in that particular chamber at that time was reaching an altitude whore it might well result in death? You could determine that from your experience in the field of aviation medicine, couldn't you?
A When death occurs exactly I couldn't tell because I had never experienced any deaths in this sphere. I have already said that I myself, if this wore my own experiments, would have stopped.
Q. Well now for the first time I have hoard it - it doesn't appear in your affidavit and it never appeared in your interrogations before this but here for the first time in your direct examination you testified that you warned Rascher; you said: "Now be careful there, Sigmund, let's be careful, you are going to high." Now did you say that? If you did you must have known that death was going to come out of this thing, doctor?
A No, I din't know that exactly. I only knew it was a critically high point. I didn't say "Sigmund", I called him Rascher: But as far as I know in my interrogation here I said that. I pointed this out to Rascher. This is not the first time I have said that.
Q Well now while Rascher was operating those controls could he himself see the electro cardiogram?
A Yes, ho could.
Q Well now could you, with your arms reach out and point out tho Tribunal how far tho controls were from tho electro cardiogram, how far away was he from this physically? Was he whore ho could look over and study it here, and just what was his position with reference to the electro-cardiogram.
A Yes, I can show you. Here pointing was tho window where Rascher was watching tho experiment, and to tho left about that far, was tho machine which ho had to regulate tho altitude and to the right was the electro cardiogram.
Q Why couldn't you just reach right over there and turned that wheel and save that man's life.
A I said to Rascher he should go down.
Q I am asking you a question: Why couldn't you? You were standing at the electrocardiogram. You weren't ten miles away. Why couldn't you have reached over and turned that wheel and save that man's life. You could have, couldn't you?
A If I said that to him and he didn't do it--then I would not have been able to achieve anything by force. I would have had to beat him down, or something.
Q I agree with you, Dr. Romberg, that perhaps scientists are not good boxers or wrestlers, but Mr. Rascher was not a six foot six, perfect Nordic specimen; ho was in fact a man smaller than you were. You were physically better than he was and you could well have reached over and turned that wheel and saved that man's life, and then discuss with him later by use of words-- as you say, words arc so important, you can do more with words than you can with physical strength. Then you could have discussed the problem with him intelligently with words. And if you couldn't have gotten further with words, then you could have walked out and gone back to Berlin, and let him do it as he wished. Now, you were in a position to reach over and turn that wheel, weren't you, weren't you?
A No, since I said that to Rascher, and he didn't do it, he obviously didn't intend to do that. If, at that moment, I had attacked him by force-
Q You wouldn't have had to attack him--just reach over and turn the wheel. Don't touch Rascher--just his hand--just turn the wheel. Very simple.
A He had the wheel in his hand. If he doesn't do anything when I tell him to, he wouldn't do it if I try to turn it. He would simply have gone on with the experiment.
Q You were bigger than Rascher, weren't you?
A It may be yes, I was a little taller.
Q Well, now, after the person died, you make it ridiculous that you might well have reported him to the police for murder. Why didn't you do that? It is a logical thing to do when a man commits murder. It isn't so ridiculous to turn in a murderer.
A It looks like murder now, and now that we know all about it we can decide that, but at the time I knew that Rascher was a Stabsarzt of the Luftwaffe...
Q Let me ask you one question . When you saw this dead man, what did it look like then? It might look like murder now, right in this courtroom, but you saw that dead man lying there--what did it look like than?
A It was an experiment with fatal result. Such experiments do happen in the world, and nobody says it is a murder.
Q Well, now you saw the autopsies too, didn't you? Did they perform an autopsy on that man?
A Yes; I said that already.
Q And after having objected, as you say you did, both while the man was in the chamber and the altitude was increasing, and then object ing after the man died--you still watched the autopsy after all this argument you had with Rascher?
A I didn't think it was nice at all. Rascher had continued the experiment too long, and the man died. But whether he deliberately intended to murder him--I couldn't say. But a death had occurred, and do I watched the autopsy.
Q Now, at this time when this death occurred, Rascher was in the Luftwaffe, wasn't he?
A Yes.
Q You were in the Luftwaffe--a civilian employee of the Luftwaffe?
A No; I was an employee of the German Research Institute for Aviation. We did not belong to the Luftwaffe; therefore we did not wear a uni form.
Q Well, you were doing work for the Luftwaffe?
A In part we worked for the Luftwaffe, too. But we also worked for industry.
Q So then you reported this death and all these deaths, as a matter of fact--but you reported this first death to Ruff immediately, didn't you?
A Yes.
Q What did he do about it? Did he call the police?
A No, as he said himself, he did not. The police were not competent in the case of Rascher. He was a number of the Luftwaffe; Luftwaffe courts were competent. Ruff reported it to Rascher and his superior the Chief of the Medical Service.
Q Well, then after this first death, how does it happen that Romberg didn't turn up his coat collar and go out to get in the tractor part of the chamber and drive it to Berlin? Why didn't you got that chamber right out of there immediately? You saw deaths there. Why did you stay around?
A We talked about that for a long time, and as Ruff mentioned that we deliberated what we should do. It was clear that Ruff would report it; we didn't have to think about that. We also realized that we would achieve nothing with Himmler by going to him and saying Rascher performed an experiment and a person died. Himmler would probably have said, " I know I gave him the orders. That is none of your business."
For this reason we decided that I should go back, that our experiments should be completed so that we could say the experiments had been concluded; the chamber will not be needed any more. And then , in this way, after the experiments were concluded Rascher gave his approval and Himmler gave his approval--the chamber could be removed from Dachau to make any further work impossible.
Q The fallacy of all that story is that you had ample opportunity to just not repair the barometer. Here you were, trying to find a scheme and a way to quickly get that thing out of there, that chamber out of Dachau, and here was a broken part. The only way to get it repaired was to go to Berlin to get the parts, and Mr. Neff was so disappointed, he said his story was, he was disappointed that you had returned with the part and fixed it, when he had sabotaged it.
But you story is even far more fantastic. You said that you rushed right back in a mater of a 2,3,4,5, days, instead of two weeks, like Neff said, ruhed right back to get it in order, and then two people died after you put it back into operation again. It certainly was an active way to stop Rascher's work--wasn't it?
A I believe if it was compared with what Rascher intended to do-as the documents say; what I read this morning--it was a very effective method.
Q It certainly was.
Well now, doctor, you then still had--after you even cleared out of Dachau entirely, get out of Dachau altogether--the Chamber was retired to Berlin, whether it be May or July or August. Then you still associated yourself with Rascher when you reported and you wrote that report about the film, and the unfortunate fact that Milch didn't show up for the showing in September. So still even in September you were still friendly with Dr, Rascher and working with Dr. Rascher, the man that had proved himself to you to be a murderer, didn't you?
A It was not so clear to me that he was a murderer--neither morally or legally is it quite clear, I said already...
Q Now, at that time, you must recall that you have stated here on this witness stand that you personally saw three deaths, and that at the completion of the experiment--and you bring it way back in May that your inmates told you that there were some ten deaths. And now, with that in view, you knew this, you say--according to your own testimony in the month of May?
My word! In September you are still associating yourself with Rascher--proud to be with him, weren't you?
A. No, I was certainly not proud of working with Rascher. After Himmler gave me orders to perform cold experiments I could have worked with Rascher all I wanted to.
Q. When did Rascher give you the recommendations for a medal? When did that occur?
A. Recommendation....?
Q. Didn't Rascher recommend you for the medal that Himmler gave you?
A. To what extent that came from Rascher, I don't know exactly. It was doubtless so that Rascher, himself--if it was he who handed in my name--wanted the bar Merit Cross First Class. He told me himself that he already had a Second Class, and he wanted the First Class. Rascher no doubt wanted to bribe me in a sense to give him back the low-pressure chamber. He also wanted to continue with the experiments. He hoped that I would work with him again. What I said here about my attitude to Rascher, I did not tell Rascher personally, of course. I couldn't.
Q. Well, you were given a medal, weren't you? Yes or no.
A. Yes, I got it.
Q. Who gave you the medal?
A. I received it by mail with a document which was signed by Keitel.
Q. Keitel? And what did you get the medal for?
A. For services in the field of aviation research the War Merit Cross Second Class was awarded.
Q. And the documents which show that Rascher recommended you to Himmler for that medal, as I recall?
A. Yes, I have seen that in the documents too.
MR. HARDY: I have one more question, Your Honor. It will only take me a few minutes and I will be through.
THE PRESIDENT: Proceed.
Q. Now, the Nurnberg conference on freezing took place in October, didn't it?
A. Yes.
Q. You were there?
A. I was there.
Q. Ruff was there?
A. Ruff was there.
Q. You stated, on direct examination, that it was obvious that deaths occurred in the course of those experiments?
A. I didn't say that it was clear. I said that it was clear to me personally just as the witness Lutz here testified that it was clear to him.
Q. It was also clear to you, from the report given, that deaths had occurred? Is that what you are trying to tell me? Or was it clear to you because of the fact that Holzloehner had told you. How was it clear to you that deaths had occurred?
A. It was clear to me because I myself had seen that Rascher had had deaths, because I had broken off my work with him for that reason, taken the chamber away for that reason, refused to perform the cold experiments with him; and, therefore, I assumed that Rascher had had deaths again in the cold experiments, and if Holzloehner talked about deaths at the conference, obviously they were deaths which occurred thanks to the work of Rascher and Finke. I personally assumed that these were deaths that had occurred through cold experiments, but this was not obvious to every one.
Q. Now, did Ruff realize that persons had died in freezing experiments?
He was there at the meeting.
A. I don't know what Ruff said anymore.
Q. What has he said here.
A. I don't know exactly. I believe ha said he didn't realize it.
Q. And now you realized, on one hand, that deaths occurred in the high altitude experiments and you realized that deaths occurred in the freezing experiments. You were at a conference in October for freezing experiments, and, at such conference, there were several men there of considerable importance. Did you objects to these wholesale deaths as a result of the experiments in the Dachau concentration camp, to any one? An active objection?
A. Actively, no. I didn't do anything but what I had done before. The deaths which I knew about positively I had reported to the Luftwaffe, to Racher's personal chief and......
Q. (Interrupting) Now, as a physician, a man who was fully aware of the manner in which Rascher worked and surely realized, sitting in that conference in October that even further deaths were occurring in Dachau, did you object then, as a physician? Did you stand up and object or didn't you go to somebody and say "This must be stopped"?
A. No, I did not. There were other people there who realized it too, who were much more powerful than I.
Q. Well, then, you didn't go anywhere or actively object at that meeting? Did you?
A. At this meeting, no. I didn't do anything active. I had done that already.
Q. Than I can assume that it didn't bother you one iota if every inmate of the Dachau concentration camp was killed, did it? It didn't bother you at all?
A. It would have bothered me very much. I personally broke off the high altitude experiments for that very reason and took the chamber away. I acted against Hitler 's orders and against my signature when I reported the matter to Ruff which was certainly not without danger, so as to stop the high altitude experiments, The Rascher experiments in this way, and I can say, that he didn't carry out any more experiments.
Q. One other question. You were down there as a subordinate of Ruff in Dachau, weren't you? A subordinate of Ruff, according to Ruff's own testimony.
A. I was an associate of Ruff, yes.
Q. It was your duty to report to Ruff, wasn't it, the workings and the activities of your experiments?
A. Of course.
Q. No further questions, Your Honor.
BY JUDGE SEBRING:
Q. Dr. Romberg, at the time this first death occurred in the Rascher experiment, who was assisting Dr. Rascher at the time as a technician?
A. Working the controls. He did that himself as I have described. In the motor car, where the pumps were, it was probably Neff or Sobotta; he often did that. Or some other prisoner who knew something about auto mechanics. Those three people always took care of the motor.
Q. Do you know that to be a fact at that time this first death occurred?
A. That it was one of these throe who was in the pump car?
Q. Yes.
A. Yes, it certainly could have only been one of those three because nobody else had any business in that car. These two experimental subjects and Neff were the ones who always took care of the pump because they understood those things.
Q. I understood Dr. Ruff to say, on this examination, that the minimum requirements for the conduct of an experiment was one doctor and one technical assistant, Now, who was present, assisting Dr. Rascher, at the time the second death occurred?
A. That was surely the same situation. To go into Ruff's testimony when he said technical assistant he ho now doubt meant some one to take care of the pump. In the DVL that was generally the mechanic, Fohlmeister, or one of the apprentices in the work shop. In Dachau, there was no special employee or any one from the DVL present, but since the pumps were built very simply anyone could take care of them who know a little bit about auto mechanics and so it came about that one of these people always took care of it.
Q. Who was present as a technician or technical assistant at the time the third death occurred that you witnessed?
A. The situation was surely always the same. I cannot say Exactly which of these men happened to be present in this case.
Q. Approximately when did the first death occur?
A. At the end of April.
Q. 1942?
A. 1942, yes.
Q. When did the second death occur?
A. That must have been about May. Perhaps about the 12th to the 15th - about the middle of May.
Q. When did the third death occur?
A. I believe that was on the next day or the second day afterwards.
Q. When the first death occurred, who assisted in taking the dead experimental subject out of the chamber?
A. I can't say for certain, but it was probably so that Rascher sent Neff over to the mortuary to announce it and that two prisoners came from there with a stretcher to take the body away.
Q. Where was the autopsy performed?
A. In the mortuary which belonged to the hospital.
Q. Who assisted in taking the dead victim out of the chamber when the second death occurred?
A. That was in the same way. The prisoners who worked in the mortuary, who wore assigned to the mortuary, took away the body.
Q. Who assisted in taking the victim out of the low pressure chamber when the third death occurred?
A. That was no doubt the same two prisoners who took the body away from the chamber on a stretcher.
Q. I have no other questions at this time.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will be in recess until 9:30 o'clock Monday morning.
(A RECESS WAS TAKEN UNTIL 0930 hours, 5 May 1947)
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 5 May 1947, 0930, Justice Beals presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the court room will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal I.
Military Tribunal I is now in session. God save tho United states of America and this honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the court room.
THE PRESIDENT: Hr. Marshal, you ascertain if the defendants are all present in court.
THE MARSHAL: May it please, Your Honor, all the defendants are present in the court save the Defendant Oberhauser who is absent due to illness.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary-General will note for the record tho presence of all the defendants in court save tho Defendant Oberhauser who is absent on account of illness. I have a note from tho prison physician certifying that Defendant Oberhauser is unable to appear in court today. She will be excused pursuant to this certificate, it appearing that her absence will in no wise prejudice her case.
Counsel may proceed.
Dr. HANS ROMBERG - Resumed RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. VORWERK (Counsel for tho Defendant Romberg):
Q Mr. Romberg, what activities, in detail, were involved in taking core of the electro-cardiogram?
AAttending to the electrocardiogram began with putting the arm bands connected with the metal plates on the arm of the subject and starting tho current. This had to be done before the experiment began. Then tho apparatus had to be cut into the circuit, the little dot that registers the movements on the film had to be started, and then this moving point of light had to be observed, and at the moment when you wanted to record the motion tho film had to be set in motion and this registered tho actual electrocardiogram curve.
Q Now I can repeat then, in order to be perfectly sure that I am right, that attending to tho electrocardiogram in detail involves the following activities: first, putting on the electrodes, secondly, cutting in tho machine itself, the amplifier, then adjusting tho point of light, then observing tho point of light, and, fifth, setting tho film in motion. Is that correct?
A Yes, that is so.
Q Now, will you please concentrate on the experiment in which tho first death took place. In this experiment, who took care of putting on the electrodes?
A Rascher, since this was his experiment, and since he laid particular importance on registering the electrocardiogram.
Q Why was Rascher so interested in registering tho electrocardiogram record?
A That probably interested him particularly. He had already spoken of Fahrenkamp. As we have now soon from tho documents, he intended to work out tho whole thing and evaluate it with Fahrenkamp.
Q You have said, though, that Fahrenkamp was not present at these experiments.
A That is correct, tho experiments were broken off first.
Q Was Fahrenkamp a specialist in any field?
A He was a heart specialist, so far as I know.
Q In other words, you believe that Fahrenkamp was to have been included in these experiments because they were experiments in which the activity of the heart and thus the control of the heart activity through the electrocardiogram played an important role?
Is that correct?
A Yes, that is so. That can be seen from Himmler's letter.
Q What letter are you referring to?
A The letter of 13 April, 1971 b PS, Exhibit 51.
Q And are you, therefore , of the opinion that in these experiments which Rascher performed, alone ho was particularly interested in the activity of the heart and therefore in observing the electrocardiogram?
A Yes.
Q Are you also of the opinion that even if you had wanted to attend to the electrocardiogram Rascher would not have permitted it because thus he would have been leaving up to you what was the most important thing to him in his own experiment; is that correct?
A Yes, he was interested primarily in the electrocardiogram, and in had to chock it himself.
Q Now, to return to the experiment in which there was the first death. You said that Rascher himself put on the electrodes. Now, who cut in the amplifier?
A Rascher himself did that, and ho also adjusted the point of light.
Q And who observed the electrocardiogram during the experiment?
AAlso Rascher.
Q In your affidavit, this is the first document in prosecution document book number 2, it states that you had studied the electrocardiogram during this first experiment Now, let mo ask you, Mr. Romberg, this word "study", was that a word that you chose?
A No, I probably said that I took a look at it, or something of that sort, but I certainly didn't say "study", because this was such a minor thing for me that when I drew up this affidavit I didn't lay any groat importance on it.
Q. Do you remember the interrogation on the basis of which this affidavit was drawn up?
A. Not in detail.
Q. Do you remember whether in that interrogation you gave an answer to each individual question?
A. I can't say that for sure today but I certainly did not use this word "study" when I gave my answer.
Q. If you wanted to characterize this situation correctly, what word would you substitute for the word "study"?
A. Well, I probably said at that time that I looked at the electrocardiogram.
Q. You mean to say, then, that your activity at the experiment was not one of supervision in which you observed the electrocardiogram, but you wanted to say that because you were present you more or less by accident cast a glance at the electrocardiogram, which draws attention to itself anyhow because it contains an electric spark which from time to time lit up and moved. Is that correct?
A. Yes, there is a point of light moving on a little screen.
Q. In this first fatality who started the film in motion?
A. Rascher did, on the basis of his constant observations there ; when he wanted to have a part of the experiment registered on the screen he cut the film in.
Q. I assume further that running this machine involves also turning off the film. Now who turned off the film and took it out?
A. That was done by Rascher also, and he sent it to be developed.
Q. Now, according to what you have said, there are six stages in attending to the electrocardiogram; now if the Prosecution is of the opinion that in this experiment you took care of the electrocardiogram, then you must have done all of these things yourself; now which of these six individual activities did you carry out in the experiment in which the first death occurred?