DR. DOETZER (Counsel for defendant Nebelung): May it please the ** Court, a comparison of Page 74 in the German document with the first page of the photostatic copy shows certain errors. According to page 74 of the German document book, the defendant Nebelung is supposed to have been Gruppenfuehrer in the Staff of Brigade 58. On the photostat one can see that he was Trupp-fuehrer on the staff of 58th Brigade.
The word "Truppfuehrer", which is written on a typewriter, has, moreover a word written over the "T", and I can not decipher that word. It is evident, however, that a correction was made there.
Moreover, from the German document book, one can not see what is under Number 12-C on the photostat. There are lines. One can not see whether the statements made there have been crossed out or whether they have only been underlined in part.
I want to mention this merely for the clarification of the record. I emphasize that, apart from that, I have no objection to the submission of this document.
MR. KING: The possible errors in the German text to which Defense Counsel referred, we will examine to endeavor to straighten out. However, I wish to point out that the corrections to which Defense Counsel referred did not relate to the entry opposite 12-A, in other words, the defendant Nebelung's membership in the Party Leadership Corps and the rank that he held in it. That is the particular point to which wo are addressing ourselves at the moment, and as to that I assume there is no objection from Defense Counsel. As to the other, we will, at the very earliest time, make an attempt to straighten out the possible errors in the German transcript, so I think that, if the Court is so disposed, we should offer now the document NG 600 as Exhibit 409, subject to the corrections mentioned by Defense Counsel being made, if in fact they are in error.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
JUDGE BRAND: Was there any change that you suspect is necessary in the English book? It says Obertruppfuehrer instead of Obergruppenfuehrer in our book.
MR. KING: There is the possibility that the English is also in error. However, with the corrections, the little hand-written notation which is made on the photostatic copy, if we can determine first that is a change which affects the meaning of the word, it may also follow from that that the term "Obertruppfuehrer" used in the English is correct If some other conclusion is the result of our investigation of that change, it may be that the English is also incorrect, but I think we had better remain silent on that until we have checked the German.
The next exhibit, 410, will be document NG 587. That document contains the personal record of the defendant Joel. The defendant Joel is charged in Paragraph 32 of Court IV with being a member of the SS and in Paragraph 34 as being a member of the SD. On Page 83 of the document NG587 we find reference to the defendant Joel's SS and SD activities and membership.
We also refer in the case of these records to certain letters which are included in Document NG 587 which relate to the defendant Joel's activity in the SD and SS. Without going into each letter extensively, I would like to point out that on Page 88 of the English text, there is a reference to the appointment of Dr. Joel as the liaison officer to the SS, including the SD and the Secret State Police. That letter of appoint meat is signed by Dr. Guertner and was made on 19 December 1937.
Then on Page 89 in a note signed by Heydrich we find that on 30 January 1938 the Defendant Joel was admitted to the SS and promoted to the rank of SS-Lieutenant.
On Page 91 Dr. Freisler is in this note, communicating with the Chief of the Security Police and the Security Service and protests the pending appointment of Joel as Reichfuehrer of the SS and Chief of the German Police because he says he is doing extremely important work at the ministry and can not be replaced. That note is signed by Freisler.
Then on Page 95 We find. Bormann's approval, which we assume was Necessary, of Joel's appointment as Attorney General the Supreme provincial Court of Appeals in Hamm in Westphalia.
That approval was given as of May 12, 1943.
We at this time do not wish to refer further to documents in this personnel file and, therefore, offer the document NG 587 as Exhibit 410.
DR. HAENSEL (for defendant Joel): The document forces me to make several remarks. Page 1 of the document, Page 85 of the German book and Page 83 of the English, states that Guenther Joel in the next to the last line, is member of the NSO, since 1 March 1936 Sturmbannfuehrer.
This note is not clear, nor what a Strumbannfuehrer of the NSO means; the copy contains mistakes. The photostat shows the following picture. Under small "e" of the membership, affiliated organizations of the party, the photostat says NSV welfare organizations since the 1st of March, 1936; that means National Socialist People's Sacrifice; that is quite clear. Then, there is a handwritten notice in pencil, Sturmbannfuehrer; this pencil note cannot have anything to do with the NSV; how that can be explained is not clearly evident. Perhaps the person who wrote this word Sturmbannfuehrer in this place thought that Joel was Obersturmbannfuehrer of the SD which the preceding line is talking about, promoted from Sturmbannfuehrer to Obersturmbannfuehrer. This, however, was not the case. I, therefore, ask that this penciled note be stricken, which does not belong to this document. Further more, the sixth page of the document, in the German book 89, is a note which is not signed in handwriting, and it is a page which has been cut out from the personnel file; the entire document is typewritten, with the exception of the letterhead, where in handwriting it says from the Ministry of Justice, one, thirty-seven, colume five, page one hundred seventy-seven. This shows that Joel evidently had five volumes of personnel files, and this is an excerpt from these five volumes. This shows how much Joel, in complaints and other notations in his personnel files, was charged very heavily in the Ministry, since this is something in his defense, in this trial. I will make a written request that the rest of the personnel file be put at my disposal. Here I object at this time against this cut-out, photostat of a clipping which cannot be interpreted in any other way; if has been cut out with a scissors from a file which is not otherwise mentioned in this document. The same applies to the next page, German document book, page 90, page 89 of the English, page 7 of the original document.
MR. KING: Concerning the question raised, perhaps the Court did not got the page numbers in the English book. The first reference, page 83; the second reference, page 88; and the third reference, page 89.
As to the meaning of the handwriting on the personnel records, I am sure the translators did as well as they possibly could. If Defense Counsel and his client are not able to throw any light on the matter, I don't think we can penalize the translators for failing to make it clear. On the other hand, perhaps Defense Counsel and his client can help us in this matter, if and when he takes the stand. In any event, I think that the record is clear from the photostatic copy which we are going to submit; it is clear to this extent: That the word "Sturmbannfuehrer" written there and to what it applies is the only question. In any event, I do not think we are in a position to say that it is either right or wrong; wo merely offer it for what it is, and we can argue about what it means later. Now, as to the second objection; on page 38 in the English text we have been told that this represents this note which is signed, in which the typewritten signature of Doctor Guertner appears, and dated Berlin, 19 December, 1937; this is not a. deliberate editing job on our part, and that four or five volumes of correspondence relating to Joel has been omitted, this is certainly not the case. The personnel files bearing the number NG-587is the entire file which we found in the Personnel Section of the Reich Justice Ministry. We do not deny that there may be other personnel files of the defendant Joel elsewhere, but certainly what is represented here is all that were contained in the file pertaining to Guenther Joel which were found in the Personnel Section in Berlin. The same objection deserves the same answer. On page 89 there is no editing on our part; if material was cut out, it was cut out by some one prior to the middle of April or the first of May, 1944, 1945. We have no further comment on the objections raised, and at this time offer the Document NG-587 as Exhibit 410.
THE PRESIDENT: No objection has been made that reaches to the probative value of the document. It will, therefore, be admitted.
MR. KING: That concludes the presentation of documents from the Document Book IX-A; and also the extent of the Prosecution's preparation here in the courtroom this afternoon.
THE PRESIDENT: There is nothing further you have to offer this afternoon?
MR. KING: No.
THE PRESIDENT: We Will, therefore, adjourn at this time until 9:30 o'clock tmfrrrr morning.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 30 April, 1947, at 0930 hours.)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America, against Josef Alstoetter, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany,on 30 April 1947, 0930-1630, Justice Carrington T. Marshall, presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal III.
Military Tribunal III 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 please ascertain if all the defendants are present in the court room?
THE MARSHAL: May it please Your Honors, all the defendants arc present in the court room, with the exception of the defendant Engert, who is absent due to illness.
THE PRESIDENT: Lot the proper notation be made.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: If Your Honors, please, the first witness this morning will be the witness, Josef Hlavac. The witness speaks Czech or prefers to testify only in Czech, and we present Mr. George Martin who will interpret from English into Czech and from Czech into English.
JUDGE BRAND: You will take the oath of an interpreter.
I solemnly swear to perform the duties of an interpreter to this Court, so help me God.
(The interpreter repeated the oath.)
MR. LAFOLLETTE: Now, if the Marshal will get the witness.
(The Marshal brought the witness into the courtroom.)
MR. LAFOLLETTE: The witness desires to take the American oath, if Your Honors please. I do not need to tell the Tribunal if it is given to Mr. Martin he will repeat it to the witness.
(Mr. Martin then repeated the oath to the witness.)
JUDGE BRAND: will you repeat the oath the witness took for the record?
MR. MARTIN: I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, to tell the pure truth here, and I will omit nothing and add nothing to it.
MR. LAFOLETTE: It might be well so the record will be clear - I am assuming that the defendants through their counsel are satisfied with the interpreter, and with the fact that the witness is now testifying under oath. I think if there are no objections it should be noted at this time.
May we have the record note there are no objections?
THE PRESIDENT: It seems to be satisfactory.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. LAFOLLETTE:
Q Will you state your name.
A Josef Hlavac.
Q And, your place of birth and citizenship?
A 18 March 1901.
Q In Czechoslovakia?
A I am a Czech citizen.
Q And, you were, and you have been a Czech citizen continuously since your birth, and are now?
A Yes.
Q Will you toll tho Tribunal at what you were employed just prior to January 1941 and in January 1941?
A I was an employee of the State railroad.
Q Of Czechoslovakia?
A Yes.
Q State whether or not you were arrested in January 1941, and, if so, by whom?
A On January 7, 1941, at 9 o'clock in the morning my director called me up by telephone in the cashier's office of the railroad station where I was employed - that I would have to go at 9:30 to the Gestapo headquarters for an interrogation and to testify.
Q Were you kept in custody from the time you reported to the Gestapo until your trial in September 1941?
A I came there and they let me stand against the wall with my forehead against the wall, and they told me to wait. During about 30 minutes eight other people came. Shortly before noon they made a protocol with me and the Gestapo officials took mo away - put me into a motor car and drove me to my home so they could search my home.
Q I want to come back to that, but I want to establish this fact: From the time you were arrested until you were tried, in September 1941, were you continually in the custody of either the Gestapo or the police?
A From January 7 to 13 March 1941, I was in a Gestapo headquarters in Tohecovica. On the 13th of March they led us, by bus to the Gestapo headquarters in Prague where wo waited from 3:30 in the afternoon until 5 o'clock next morning in a corridor. During that time about three further transports arrived so that finally there were about 80 of us. In the morning at 5 o'clock the SS came with trucks and led us to the Wilson railroad station in Prague. We were put into railroad cars and they took us to Munich to Stadelheim prison. In the Stadelheim prison I saw the researching judge. On 1st of August 1941, five of us were transferred to Prague to a special court, Sondergericht. The trip from Munich to Prague lasted ten days.
Q Now, witness, what were you charged?
A I was charged - that I worked against the German occupation of Czechoslovakia.
Q State whether or not that was high treason or preparation for high treason?
A That was preparation for high treason.
Q Was that against the Czechoslovakian government or against the German government?
A That was against the government of Germany because against Czechoslovakia government, it could not be.
Q What acts had you committed upon which the charge was based?
A In Prague there was the so-called group that issued a legal newspaper and information about the Czechoslovakian government in London. I, too, received this news, and that was about all.
Q How many were charged with you at the same time?
A Ten.
Q Describe your initial examination by the Gestapo?
A When they arrested me on 7 January 1941, I had my first interrogation on the 13th; they led me from the prison at 7:30 in the morning and led me to the Gestapo. The Gestapo agent who had arrested me wearing a uniform, came in a civilian suit. I was already there in that room when he came; he took of his coat; he had his revolver under his arm in a leather strap.
He took that off. He opened the drawer of a table, put his revolver into the drawer, and took out a whip of bull skin - a rubber truncheon. He put it on the table; and after a short time, he started the interrogation. First, they made me stand against the wall, took one paper, and I had to hole that sheet of paper with my nose against the wall.
Q Ask him if he will demonstrate for the Tribunal.
A Yes. (And the witness demonstrated.)
Q How long did he have to stand that way?
A Until he was tired.
Q What happened if tho paper fell?
A When the paper fell down, a Gestapo agent came and kicked us against our legs, and slapped our faces from behind.
Q Did he have to hold anything else against the wall, besides the paper?
AAnd later, I had to hold a thick book.
Q In the same manner?
A In the same manner, yes.
Q Ask him whether or not, as a result... I withdraw that... How long did that first interrogation last?
A That interrogation lasted from eight o'clock in the morning, over noon, until four o'clock in the afternoon, without any interruption.
Q Ask him whether or not he suffered any injuries as a result of beatings he received at that interrogation.
A I was slapped in my face, and as a result of that, my right ear suffered; I don't hear well.
Q Now, I think he said he was brought from Munich to Prague in August of 1941.
A Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Lafollette, it would make a better record if you addressed the question to the witness rather than to the interpreter.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: Yes.
Q Did you have a defense counsel at the trial?
A Yes. Without my knowledge, my wife took a defense counsel.
Q Were Czechoslovakian lawyers permitted to defend before the Special Court at Prague?
A They had no right. They were not permitted.
Q Was your attorney, then, a German attorney?
A Yes, he was.
Q Were you tried on the 26th of September 1941?
A Yes, I was.
Q How long before that did you see the indictment approximately?
AAbout four days prior to that.
Q Was that... When did you see your defense counsel before the trial? About the same time?
A I saw my defense counsel about fourteen days before the trial.
Q Did you have any witnesses at your trial... for the defense?
A I told the Gestapo the names of witnesses who could testify that I always behaved well, and I mentioned only German witnesses, Chief Inspector Gutwirt, Chief Inspector Tuschil, Chief Inspector Wurma, and Strnad. They were all Germans.
Q Were they called at the trial in your defense?
A They were not.
Q In any of the papers that you saw, that were submitted to you, did you find any statements by them?
A No, nothing at all.
Q Did you advise your defense counsel of these men's names?
A Yes.
Q What did the defense counsel say to you, when he first talked to you?
A Counsel told me that my wife had been to see him, and she asked him to take over my defense, and that I could count on a punishment of about a year, or eighteen months.
Q That was your defense counsel that told you?
A Yes, that was the defense counsel.
Q Were you tried, and what sentence did you receive on this charge?
A State's Prosecutor asked for a punishment of one year, and I got a year.
Q Did you serve it?
A Yes.
Q I believe that you said there were approximately ten, originally, in this group.
A Yes, five were tried on the 26th of September, in Prague; and the second group of five came later, and they were tried in 1942 before the People's Court, "Volksgericht", in Dresden.
Q Do you know whether or not one of the men tried in September 1941, was not convicted, was acquitted?
A Yes, there was one.
Q What happened to him?
A He was acquitted by the court, and the court transferred him immediately to the Gestapo in Prague, and the Gestapo sent him to Auschwitz, in Poland.
Q What happened to him in Auschwitz?
A He died, in February 1942.
Q Do you know what happened to the five who were tried before the People's Court in Dresden?
A These five, they were tried by the People's Court in Dresden, they received up to two and three quarters years prison terms in prison.
Q What happened after the prison term?
AAfter they served their time, they were not released home, they were transferred into a concentration camp. One of them died there.
Q Do you know the name of the man who was tried with him, and who was not convicted, and died in Auschwitz?
A Yes, I know it; his name was Jaroslav Cvrtnik.
Q Will you spell that for the record?
A C-v-r-t-n-i-k.
Q When was Heydrich shot?
A Heydrich came to Czechoslovakia on 27 August 1941; on 28 August he took over the power of a Reich Protector; and the same day he was shot and executed... No - I am sorry - wrong translation... The same day the execution and shooting started.
Q You were tried two days before that?
A Yes.
Q What happened to you after you finished your imprionment?
A When I finished my term, the States Railroad opened a disciplinary action against me. I was pensioned as of 1 April 1942, and my pension fund was reduced by five percent.
Q Were you later on taken into Germany again?
A. In July 1942, a comrade came to see me and told me that there would be a general mobilization for work, so he wanted to get me a job in Czechoslovakia. He got a job for me in Budweis, Ceske Budejovice, with a firm called Henzel; it was a brokerage firm. I was employed there until the 3rd of September 1943. From there I was mobilized and brought to Germany, to the Mitteldeutsche Stahlwerke in Groeditz near Riesa.
Q. Now, the court that tried you in Prague, was that a German special court?
A. That was a special German court, a so-called Sondergericht.
Q. The judge and the prosecutors and the officers of that court -- of what nationality were they?
A. They were only Germans.
Q. Do you remember the name of any one of the persons, either the judge or the prosecutor?
A. I remember one name, a man who called himself Ludwig.
Q. Do you remember whether he was a judge or a prosecutor?
A. I think he was a prosecutor, but I could not say it with certainty.
Q. Were you charged with a violation of a German law, as a result of which you were tried and convicted?
A. Yes, that I prepared high treason against the German Reich, of course.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: That is all.
THE PRESIDENT: Do any of defense counsel desire to crossexamine this witness?
DR. DOETZER (Counsel for the defendant Oeschey): May it please the Court, I would like to cross-examine the witness.
CROSS - EXAMINATION BY DR. DOETZER:
Q. Witness, at your interrogations by the Gestapo, you certainly had some terrible experiences. Do you remember the name of the Gestapo official?
A. Yes.
Q. What was his name?
A. Willi Wassersteiner. The other one was called Bambule. The name of the interpreter was Jiskra, and the chief Gestapo official present, his name was Zimmer.
Q. You were interrogated in the Czech language?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you make statements to the Gestapo which did not correspond to the truth?
A. I simply answered their questions.
Q. Did your answers state the truth?
A. Certainly.
Q. As far as I understood the German translation, you were charged with having taken part in the work of a resistance group; the resistance group distributed illegal newspapers which were compiled on the basis of news broadcast by the Czech broadcasting station in London.
A. Yes.
Q. What did you admit about your own participation?
A. I received those newspapers and I kept them in my home. Afterwards I destroyed them, so that nobody should get hold of them.
Q. Did you canvass, or did you admit having canvassed for your resistance group?
A. I did not tell that to the Gestapo because they did not ask me about it.
Q. Did you know that being a member of a resistance group in Czechoslovakia was prohibited?
A. Well, that was forbidden; that is obvious.
Q. Did you know, from placards or from announcements in the press, what punishments people who committed such acts had made themselves liable for?
A. At the beginning I did not know about that.
Q. I did not understand the answer.
A. At the beginning of the occupation.
Q. At the beginning of the occupation?
A. Yes.
Q. When you began to be active, you did know that you were violating rules or prohibitions of the Government of the Protectorate and of the German authorities?
A. Yes, I did know that.
Q. You were under Gestapo arrest for a long time?
A. From the 7th of January until the 13th of March 1941.
Q. After that, if I understood you correctly, you were brought before a German judge, or a Czech?
A. I was brought before a German investigating judge at Munich.
Q. The German investigating judge at Munich?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you know that man was a judge?
A. We were told that he was, and also his signature appeared on the warrant for our arrest: Dr. Arndt.
Q. Was that investigating judge in the Gestapo building or in another building?
A. No, he was not in the Gestapo building; he was in the prison building.
Q. Did the judge immediately show you the warrant for your arrest, or did he first interrogate you in detail?
A. First he interrogated me, and after that the warrant was presented to me.
Q. With what was the interrogation concerned?
A. I had to confirm the statements which I had made to the Gestapo.
Q. Did he tell you what law or what legal rulings you had infringed, and why you were going to be taken into custody?
A. Yes; he said that I had been charged with having worked against the German Reich, and on the warrant a paragraph 139 was quoted; 139.
Q. What kind of a paragraph was that?
A. I don't know what sort of a paragraph it was; I did not know the German laws.
Q. So it was a German law?
A. Yes, it was a German law.
Q. Did the newspapers, or other public announcements in your home-land -- did they introduce German laws into your homeland? Did you know about that?
A. With us the Protectorate laws were enforced so far as penal matters were concerned. By that I mean thefts, etc. However, as concerned political matters, I was under the impression that the German laws were enforced.
Q. You don't know it exactly then, do you?
A. I assume that, because we did not have such laws in Czechoslovakia.
Q. Certainly you had laws against high treason in the old Czechoslovakia.
A. Yes, we did have those, yes.
Q And in Czechoslovakia you had also legal provisions, if I am not wrong.
A But we were not punished under the Czechoslovak laws. They were Czechoslovak laws, and I never did anything against Czechoslovakia.
Q You do remember for certain that warrant quoted a German provision, and that it was Paragraph 139?
A Yes.
Q Were you told what legal means there were against the warrant?
A I could do nothing against that. It simply quoted Paragraph 139 and I could do nothing about it.
Q I believe the witness has misunderstood me. I wanted to ask him whether, when the judge opened the warrant did he draw attention to the fact that you would be able to complain, to register a complaint about the warrant?
A No, he did not say that, but I signed the record and I received the warrant. I was taken back to the cell.
Q Did you express your agreement with the warrant?
A There was nothing I could do.
Q Were you pleased that the warrant of the judge had released you from the Gestapo custody?
A Well, I was glad that at last I had finished with that interrogation.
Q When did you receive the indictment?
A I never received a indictment.
Q Did the defense counsel receive the indictment, by any chance?
A I do not know whether he received it. He didn't show it to me. I only received a summons about four days before the trial which said that it was to appear there, that the trial in fact would be held.
Q Did the defense counsel discuss the matter with you in detail?
A The defense counsel knew of the indictment, and he told me when he advised me that I would have to expect a sentence of one year to eighteen months.
Q Did he speak to you in Czech or in German?
A Czech.
Q He was a German attorney who had been a resident in Czechoslovakia for a long time, who had formerly been a Czechoslovak national?
A I do not know but very probably.
Q Did you discuss the point whether paragraph 139 did apply to you as a Czech citizen?
A I didn't know.
Q Well, I want to know whether you discussed that point, whether you discussed it with the defense counsel.
A I did not discuss that point with the defense counsel. He merely told me that I would have to expect one year to eighteen months. The defense counsel told me, my case was a light one. If I had come under Paragraph 80 or paragraph 83 it would have lasted until the end of the war.
Q When was the trial held?
A Yes.
Q When? When?
A On the 26th of September, 1941, in Prague on Pankrac.
Q Witness, you said that you were tried before a German Special Court. How many judges were on the bench? How many judges were on the Bench?
A I believe there were three judges.
Q How many defendants were sitting in the dock?
A I was alone.
Q Was your defense counsel present from the opening until the end of the trial?
A Yes, from the beginning.
Q Do you remember in what way the trial was held?
A Yes, I do remember.
Q Did the presiding judge open the trial, or what happened?
A The presiding judge open the trial. He read the indictment to me.