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?
A. None of them.
Q. Did you take part in this experiment in any other way than by attending the electrocardiogram?
A. No, Rascher was in charge of the experiment, and cf course he did everything.
Q. But as Rascher's assistant or for Rascher you could have done certain things or you could have taken care of the electrocardiogram or gone on an errand cf some sort in support of the experiments of Rascher, but now concentrate on the experiment which had the first fatality and tell me, since you have already said you didn't attend the electrocardiogram, did you do anything else in this experiment?
A. No, and Rascher was very much concerned to carry out his experiments himself when he was in charge of the experiments.
Q. Am I correct in my assumption that the experiment could have been interrupted by turning a little wheel?
A. Yes.
Q. Who took Care of this wheel, and when he turned the wheel what happened?
A. This wheel controlled the entry of the air into the chamber. Rascher had the wheel in his hand, and by turning this wheel one way or another he regulated the altitude.
Q. Did Rascher have this wheel only occasionally in his hand, or did he have it in his hand throughout the experiment ?
A. You had to keep it in your hand all of the time in order to regulate the altitude.
Q. Now, I ask you, would it have been possible for you to roach this wheel without attacking Rascher first?
A. Since he had it in his hand, I should have first had to remove his hand from the wheel.
Q. Then it is correct for me to assume that in order for you to stop the experiment prematurely you could only have done something if you had attacked Rascher?
A. Yes.
Q. How for the second experiment, the one that involved the second fatality; now in this experiment who took care of the electrocardiogram?
A. Rascher must have, but I don't know about this in detail any more because I didn't pay any attention to it.
Q. Now please just think of this second experiment; did you not see the dotted light that moved in the electrocardiogram?
A. In the second experiment I was in the anteroom of the chamber because we had just finished performing experiments ourselves, and I was still engaged in evaluating the experiment just concluded; thus I didn't pay too much attention to these details.
Q. Were you present at all three of these experiments only because you were still evaluating the experiments you had just carried out on rescue from high altitude and just happened to be at the chamber still, is that correct?
A. Yes, I always evaluated these experiments sitting on the bench in the chamber because the tables of altitudes were in there, and I transferred my notes to the record book.
Q. Ye have heard here from various witnesses, particularly prosecution witnesses, that at most of Rascher's experiments you were not present. Now, according to what you have just said, your presence in these three cases where there were fatalities is to be attributed solely to the fact that Rascher's experiments took place altitude and that for that reason you were still jotting down notes on these experiments and happened by accident to be still at the chamber, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. In this second experiment where you were sitting and making notes, did you see the electrocardiogram?
A. No, I did not observe it.
Q. Was this the only experiment that Rascher carried out at that particular time or had he performed other ones previously alone, one or two or three or four or five perhaps?
A. He had carried out others before, I think about three.
Q. And then in the fourth one on that day there was a fatality?
A. Yes.
Q. In this second fatality, did you warn him?
A. No, I didn't pay much attention to it. I couldn't see a fatality was imminent.
Q. Do you know for sure that you didn't warn him?
A. Since I didn't observe the experiment I certainly did not warn him.
Q. If you had observed it you would have warned him?
A. Certainly.
Q. Then am I correct in saying roughly the following: So far as you observed the electrocardiogram in this second experiment and realized that the experimental subject was in danger, to that extent you warned him, but you do not remember whether you realized it and whether you observed the electrocardiogram. Is that correct?
A. No, I did not observe it.
Q. And consequently you could not have warned him.
A. That is so.
MR. HARDY: May it please Your Honor, we are all fully aware that the bench has granted considerable latitude to both prosecution and defense counsel during the course of examination, but it seems to mo that defense counsel this morning has just been giving us a parade of loading questions and answering for the defendant. I request that the questions put to the defendant be put so that the defendant can answer them and not defense counsel.
THE PRESIDENT: Defense counsel has been asking leading questions. I suggest that the questions be asked in such a manner as not too closely to suggest to the witness the answer. Counsel may proceed.
Q Then, in this second case of death, witness, did you attend to the electrocardiogram or take an active part in the experiment in any other way?
A No, as I have already said, I did not.
Q And, how, how about the third fatal experiment of Rascher in your presence?
A The situation was similar, namely, first we had carried out experiments and then Rascher had carried out experiments and, for this reason, I was still in the low pressure chamber.
Q Do you know whether, in the case of this third experiment, you warned Rascher?
A No, since I paid no attention to that experiment, or rather to the electrocardiogram, I didn't warn him.
Q The prosecutor has charged you with not knowing the names of the experimental subjects. What was your training in the Wehrmacht?
A I had basic training in 1936 and 1937 for two months and subsequently was in maneuvers on two occasions.
Q Now, do you remember the name of the man who gave you basic training?
A No.
Q As I renumber, you took a trip through France with Lutz and the low pressure chamber. Can you remember anyone who, on the occasion of your trip through Franch with the chamber, made a high altitude experiment with it?
A No, I remember there were a couple of Knight's Cross bearers , but I certainly don't remember any names.
Q When did you conclude your maneuvers with the Luftwaffe?
A Summer of 1939.
Q And since than you have not been a soldier?
A No.
Q In other words, throughout tho entire war you were not a soldier but a civilian?
A That is correct.
Q In the three fatal experiments of Reseller's did you carry a weapon?
A No, I didn't carry a weapon nor did I even own one as a civilian.
Q Did you wear a uniform during these experiments?
A No, I didn't even own a uniform. I was a civilian.
Q Did Rascher wear a uniform in these experiments?
A Yes, of course, ho wore his Stabsarzt - Captain's uniform.
Q. Did he carry a weapon?
A Yes, ho always carried his revolver.
A Now, if you had wanted to interrupt these experiments for any reason, you, as a civilian, would have had to attack a Captain in tho Wehrmacht and hinder him by force in the execution of his duties? Is that correct?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q Is it correct that if you had wanted to interrupt this experiment, you, as a civilian, without a weapon, would have had to attack an officer who was carrying a weapon? Is that correct?
A Yes, that's what I should have had to do.
Q Before tho first fatal experiment, did hot Rascher say to you at various times that these were not the experiments that you were carrying out in common, but that these were experiments that ho was carrying out alone on Himmler's orders and which had nothing to do with you?
MR. HARDY: May it please Your Honor, this defeats me. Doesn't defense counsel know what a leading question is?
I suggest that the Tribunal instruct defense counsel in those matters.
DR. VORWERK: Mr. President, I an about to ask when, in what words, and on what occasion Rascher told the witness that these were his own experiments and not common experiments.
MR. HARDY: That's very true, Your Honor. He is about to ask that, but no evidence to date has brought out the fact that Rascher had said that.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel may proceed.
BY DR. VORWERK:
A To answer your question, I already said in my direct examination that when Rascher began experiments of his own in addition to our common experiments, and I asked him about them, he told mo that the experiments had been ordered by Himmler and that they were to be the moans through which ho hoped to qualify as a professor.
Q Did he ever threaten you - saying that if you tried to interfere in these experiments....
THE PRESIDENT: (Interrupting) Counsel, you're propounding a strictly loading question by asking the witness if Rascher said to him certain things. Ask him what Rascher said to him and then the witness can testify as to what Rascher said. That makes the question not a leading question. When you repeat Rascher's words to the witness, you are asking loading questions. Just ask the witness what Rascher said upon a certain occasion.
BY DR. VORWERK:
Q Mr. Romberg, did Rascher, on any occasion , say anything to you about his own experiments?
AAs I just said, ho told me that these experiments did not concern me; that they were his experiments and that he was carrying them cut on Himmler's orders.
Q When did ho say this?
A He told me this when he began his experiments while we were still carrying on our other experiments - namely, before this first fatality.
Q Did ho say this to you once or several times?
A He said several times that these experiments had been ordered by Himmler, and particularly, when I objected to these experiments after the first fatality, he said again that this did not concern me; that I should not bother myself about matters that were not my concern. Ho had the orders and ho had to carry them out.
Q Were there throats connected with what he said?
A Well, he didn't threaten me openly, but I do remember that he once said that if I didn't stop objecting he would cancel my passe while I was in the camp.
Q What would this have meant?
A That would have meant that I couldn't leave the camp any more.
Q What were your human. relations with Rascher? Is the prosecutor correct in his assumption that you were good friends; that you used the familiar form of the personal pronoun, and that you called him Sigmund?
A No, that is not true at all. I addressed him always with the formal personal pronoun. My relations with him were purely official and I called him Mr. Rascher.
Q Can you find anything in the correspondence or the documents that could substantiate this point of view of the prosecutor?
A No, I know of no evidence for that in the documents and, in fact, there are, in the documents, several statements of Rascher's - in the documents which have been submitted - which reveal that he was hostile to me.
Q Since you were opposed to Rascher's experiments, is one correct in assuming that you regarded these three fatalities as murder, pure and simple?
A No, I couldn't regard these experiments as just plain murder because he h.d boon ordered by the very highest authorities to carry out these experiments. I, however, wanted to have nothing to do with them, and that was why I reported to Ruff.
Q In cross-examination, the prosecutor said that it wouldn't have bothered you a bit if all the inmates of Dachau had died. Do you think you can prove the contrary?
A I certainly didn't expect that charge, because, subjecting myself to personal danger, I was the one who organized getting the chamber out of Dachau. I was the one who reported, and I refused to have anything to do with any subsequent experiments of Rascher's.
Q And why did you act in this way?
A My reason was that I didn't want to have anything to do with these experiments of Rascher's, and it was my opinion that these experiments were valueless and not necessary for the Luftwaffe or for aviation research, so that experiments which do not fulfill a pressing or urgent purpose should not be carried out under such conditions as these.
Q The prosecution is further of the opinion that no other fatalities could have occurred if the barometer which you had had repaired had not been repaired. Is that correct?
A Rascher would certainly have been able to got hold of such a barometer, perhaps he could even have got one in Schongau at the airfield in his office, or, at least, a similar instrument.
Otherwise, in view of the assistance and the top priority that ho was given by the SS, he certainly would have been able to get hold of such an instrument. In other words, the important thing wasn't that we repaired this barometer.
Q Now another question, Mr. Romberg. How long were you ordered to stay in Dachau?
A Until the experiments on rescue from high altitudes had been concluded.
Q After these experiments were concluded you would not have been under orders to stay in Dachau even if the chamber had remained there?
A I personally could have left, of course, just as the chamber was in Dachau before I got there; so after my experimental series was finished I could have loft and the chamber could have been removed from Dachau later, either by Rascher or the camp administration.