And then under date of 4-10, 4 October, "A total of 40 hostages executed as reprisal for the attacks an railroads of the last few days.
..."
And below that on page 4 of the German, page 2 of the English, there appears the signature of Steinbeck, Colonel in the General Staff Corps, who was Chief of Staff for the 69th Corps, and Dehner, General der Infanterie, Commander of 69th Res. Corps.
Then on 17 October.
"Reprisal measures reported executed for attack on Novska by 187th Res. Div. That is one of the corps units. "After the arrests of 27 male hostages, 50 to 60 years of age (1/3 of these were railroad personnel in Novska) who were proved to have been members of bands, and after the evacuation of the population, the villages of Paklenica and Vocanica were burned down."
This has to do with the particulars of Count 2, Paragraph 9-G, in the indictment.
Then 19 October, Mopping up of the Fruska Gora by police in the area of Rakovac.
75 people suspected of belonging to bands were arrested. 5 enemy dead. Village burned down because nest of the band.
And then on the 11th:
At the same time, band attack by approximately 3 to 4 hundred men against the bridgehead of Broke. Both attacks miscarry. In many cases hand to hand combat occurs.
For the next entry, this is a time entry, 15.30. It is submitted, it is still under the date November 11:
173rd Res. Div. reports hanging of 20 hostages and shooting to death of 20 hostages, as reprisal for railroad sabotage near Stara Pazova, where an SS transport ran on to a mine and as reprisal measure for an attack on railroad patrol 40 Km. Southeast of Vukovar.
And then for December 2:
"In the sector of the 173rd Res. Div. --" which is also one of the subordinate units of the 69th Corps.
"4 inhabitants of the bandit village Ugrinovei were hanged in the village, 2 dugouts which were destroyed and 5 fleeing bandits were shot dead as a reprisal measure for railroad sabotage."
And at the end appears the signature of Steinbeck, Chief of Staff, and where it is typed "General of Infantry, and Commanding General of LXIXth Res. Corps, there is no signature above that.
We will pass this up to Your Honors. Above that appears the signature of defendant Behner. Then if you will give it to Major Hatfield, after you have read it, please.
On page 5 of the English and page 11 of the German, NOKW 658, which becomes Exhibit 375. This entire exhibit is all typed. There is no signatures on it at all. There are various pencilled notations, and we see "War Diary", and there are various initials, and various interlineations, and reports from the 69th Corps to the 2nd Panzer Army, and the 2nd Panzer Army at this time was commanded by the defendant Rendulic, and the 69th Corps by the defendant Dehner. There are information copies that go through out to the Military Commander Southeast, Belgrade, and at this time that was the then General Felber; and also to Corps Headquarters IV Corps, Banja Luke, and Commanding General IV Corps, then at that time was General Leyser, and also copy to the German General - Plenipotentiary in Croatia, and I would like to call the court's attention to the statement "only for the personal information of the Chief of the General Staff."
The first report for the 20th September, and is one for the 173rd Reserve Division, and it recites the activities for the previous day:
Band base raided and destroyed during the partial operation SS-Gruppenfuehrer Kamerhofer. Own casualties: 3 wounded, 36 enemy dead, 21 members of band shot to death, about 60 prisoners brought in.
Then the report for the 21st but including the 20th of September, 187th Reserve Division:
"10 hostages hanged on the scene of the incident in further reprisal for the attack on truck of Croatian Panzer Regiment 202."
Then there is a reference to an earlier report.
Then the report for the 23rd, submitted the 24th, for the 173rd Division:
Search of the eastern part of Pruska Gora on 22.9 during operation SS Gruppenfuehrer Kammerhofer near G R G E T E G, search also of B U K O V A C and of K L O S T E R (Monastery) R E M E T A (northeast of Grgeteg). Grgeteg and Bukovac and villages burned down.
(Last 3 words struck out).
During these operations 2 wounded of our own. 13 enemy dead, 18 members of bands executed, 40 hostages taken.
For 187th Reserve Division:
Attack on G R A B O V O (9 southeast of Vukovar) during the night of 22.9 at 2130 o'clock. 1 German and 2 Hungarian farm managers shot to death. Grain was taken away. Leader of the band was a former manager of the farms, who had been dismissed. Continuation of operation Kammerhofer on 23.9.
All male inhabitants of K R U S E D O L - P R N J AV O R (16 northeast of R U M A) had fled. 84 persons arrested, among them 20 men and 6 women, unmasked as bandits.
187th Reserve Division:
a) During the night 22./23.9. attack on V I R O V I T I C A repelled. 100 hostages taken because shots were fired from private houses."
Then for the 25th, the 187th Division, still reporting through the 69th Corps, through the 2nd Panzer Army, with information copies to the same headquarters which were initially noted:
"While advancing in preparation for the operation, parts of the 5th Battery of the Artillery Reserve Regiment 96 with infantry cover were attacked by a strong band in the forest 1 km northeast Vranovci." and then they recite their casualties.
"Only minor contacts with the enemy during whole operation."
And then they refer to "The noted band case of Busnjevci, was burned down in reprisal for the attack.
Under d) "100 men forcibly recruited in Prestovak."
Then for the 30th of September, 173rd Division:
"15 hostages executed by police on the scene of the incident for the mine attack on Wehrmacht transport train which caused the death of 1 man of the escort personnel - as reported in the daily report 28.9. paragraph IIa.
Then for the 3rd October, to the 173rd Division again, "At total of 40 hostages executed on the scene of the incident by the police (last words crossed out) as reprisal measure for the attacks on the railroad of the last few days."
And that which is submitted is the same one referred to under entry in this report. The operation by and SS Officer named Kammerhofer.
173rd Reserve Division:
Police Operation Kammerhofer:
"The forest terrain west of OBB R E Z was combed on 7.10. No contact with the enemy. The summer camp and the band were destroyed, as well as the village of V I T O J E V C I, which was burned down, No losses of our own, 25 prisoners and hostages.
And on the same day 187th Division:
"100 hostages taken in reprisal for the attack on the main railway line near Novska. The villages of Paklenica and Vocarica were evacuated and burned down."
"Residents of Koritna --"
This is a reference to the same section of the report which appeared earlier in the prior exhibit at page 2 of this book. The report in that instance went from Corps to Army, and here is another copy of the same report from the Corps to the Army:
"--were found to be infected with communism and to be looting the neighborhood. Reprisal measures are started. Communist courier detained, hanged after interrogation."
Then on the 9th October, 187th Division:
"20 people suspected of belonging to bands were executed from the neighborhood at the locality of the incident in reprisal for the attack of the 9.10., 01.30 o'clock, on the freight train on the main railroad 12 miles southeast Vinkovcias reported in the morning report 9.10."
This refers to Count I of the indictment, Paragraph 5-M, In the report for 12 October again 187th Division: "2 bandits arrested in Koritna. 1 of them hanged immediately. Hostages taken."
I would like to hand this to the interpreters. I will mark the sentence and ask that they translate it, if that is agreeable with Dr. Laternser. I can't seem to figure out what it is in the English here.
JUDGE BURKE: It may be handed to the interpreters.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: To what line, on what page are you making reference?
MR. DENNEY: It is the 1st line under 173rd Division, on page 15, your Honor, and it is page 36 of the German, the last paragraph on that page, the first line which begins with: "In the villages--"
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Thank you.
MR. DENNEY: Just the one sentence, the sentence I have marked.
THE INTERPRETER: The translation from the original German is as follows: "In the villages through which the calvalry passed, only old people and children."
MR. DENNEY: "In the villages through which the calvalry passed, only old people and children. 11 fleeing bandits shot to death. According to reports of confidential agents, parts of bands with women and children had fled in a southwesterly direction across the Save between the villages of Bosut and Jamena during the last days."
And then the report for the 15th of October under the 187th Reserve Division:
"Band group in strength of about 1,000 men reported near Bezje. Majority of population of the villages of Paklencia and Vocarica taken hostages. Villages burned down as reprisal measure for the band attack on Novska."
And again we have the same reference to which we earlier referred, both in this report and also from the War Diary of the 69th Corps.
"Outside of the security sector: Panzer train 23 hit a mine between Blinski Kut and Sunja. Railway line 15.10. Road reopened for traffic 15.30. As reprisal measure village of Kinjacka burned down."
And a report for the 17th of October, still from the 69th Corps and still going to the same headquarters, the Second Panzer Army, and the same information copy, 187th Reserve Division report:
"Arrest of a woman teacher as hostage in Kapela whose husband, a Croatian captain, deserted to the bandits and who wanted to persuade soldiers of his company to desert also."
Report for the 19th:
"The area of Rakovac was especially searched during the moppingup of Fruska Gora by police troops Kammerhofer 18.10. Enemy contact with small band groups. 5 enemy dead. Several dugouts and hideouts in Rakovac were destroyed. The village which was a pronounced nest of bandits was burned down. 75 people suspected of belonging to bands arrested."
"187th Division: 3 bandits lured into ambush by patrol of the VI. Ustasha Battalion near Ljeskovica shot to death during the night. Among them were communist village leaders. Important documents captured."
Then for the 20th for the 187th Division:
"Passenger train 12 northeast Bjelovar hit a mine. Bandits attacked train, looted and "burned it. After action by parts of the Res. Gren. Battalion, 2nd Battalion of the 482nd Regiment they withdrew in the direction of Sandrovac. 25 members of the band were executed and their execution made public as reprisal measure for this attack and the attack on Vukusavljevica on the 16th."
And for the 30th for the 187th Reserve Division:
"7 bandits in German uniforms were given battle by a patrol of Str: Topolje. No losses of our own. Enemy losses: 3 dead, 9 people suspected of being bandits, shot to death."
The 1st of November for the 187th Reserve Division:
"During reconnaissance in the area of Potocari 6 bandits shot. Captured material: 3 rifles. During reconnaissance by Ustasha troops stationed in Krizevic in the area northeast Krizevci, 7 bandits shot, 4 captured."
For the 2nd of November for the 187th Reserve Division:
"3 bandits hanged by the 1st Battalion of the 130th Regiment during reconnaissance in the forest area around Vrbanja and Drenovci."
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honors, unfortunately, at the moment I can not follow the proceedings. The fact that the numbers of the pages are not given in German -- I cannot find the page which is being read.
MR. DENNEY: I am sorry, your Honors, I will give the pages in German. Excuse me, Dr. Laternser. This is on page 53 of the German and page 22 of the English, report for the 2nd of November for the 187th Reserve Division. It appears on the bottom of page 53 of the German.
"3 bandits hanged by the 1st Battalion of the 130th Regiment during reconnaissance in the forest area around Vrbanja and Drenovci."
And then under the date of 1 November:
"2nd and 3rd Battalions of the 8th Mountain Regiment surrounded and searched C. Daruvar and Sibovac. 1 supply commissar and 1 bandit shot to death."
I again direct your Honors' attention to the use of the word, "commissar."
"34 bandits and people suspected of belonging to bands arrested. Captured material: 2 rifles, 2 vehicles horses drawn carrying bandages, food, tools, equipment and courier mail."
On page 23 of the English, page 55 of the German, report for the 4th of November, 1943:
"173rd Reserve Division: 100 bandits hanged for the attack on railroad Ratkovac-Ledinci, railroad attack Mitrovica, and attack on Police forces near Grgurevci."
"187th Reserve Division in the Brcko Area:
"Gradacac and Modrica occupied by 2 Communist brigades (approximately 1200 men).
And over on the top of page 56 of the German and still on page 23 of the English: and still for 187 Res. Div.:
"664 hostages taken by SS-police sector leader Osijek -- for 180 missing during attack on labor service camp Josipovac. These hostages were from Bundimci and BijeloBrda. Bandit leaders and the police are discussing exchange."
And then I would like to direct the Court's attention here to the part with reference to the exchange negotiations about these prisoners, the 664 taken by the SS in retaliation for the 180 people missing and that the police reports here to the army about it and the army makes a note that the SS are negotiating with the bandits with an eye to a possible exchange at some later date.
And then on page 57 of the German and 24 of the English, report for the 5th of November for the 187th Reserve Division:
"After railroad sabotage 3 kilometers east of Nova Gradiska the terrain north of the location of the detonation combed. Bandits and people suspected of being bandits hanged on the scene of detonation. 3 or 4 bandits shot to death during reconnaissance northwest of Koprivnica. No other contact with enemy."
Page 59 of the German and page 25 of the English, for the 6th of November, still from the same unit, the 69th Corps and directed to the 2nd Panzer Army with the same information copies:
"173rd Divisions: 19 Communists hanged at scene of detonation in reprisal for railroad explosion Mitrovica-Lacarak on 1.11," and that is the same one that is referred to in an earlier section of this same exhibit.
"187th Reserve Division: Jamena after evacuation as a pronounced bandit next partly burned down."
Page 61 of the German and page 26 of the English -- this should be the "8th of November" up here at the top, your Honors. There is nothing in the English. However, on the original it says: "Teletype dated 8 November 1943." It is a daily report for the 7th of November:
"173rd Reserve Division: 21 hostages shot to death as reprisal for the attack on the freight train between Lacarak-Martinoi as reported in the daily report of 7.11. paragraph II"; and that, of course, refers to the paragraph which appears in the prior page, page 25 of the English and page 59 of the German.
And then on page 65 of the German, page 27 of the English, report for the 11th of November:
"Operation 'Ferkel': Subsidiary operation. The night of 10.11. Band attack of 1500 men supported by anti-tank guns, trench mortars and artillery against the entire front south of Brcko. Simultaneous band attack of 3 to 4 hundred men against bridge head east of Brcko. Enemy had good leadership.
"173rd Reserve Division: 20 hostages hanged and 20 shot to death in reprisal for railroad sabotage near Stara Pazova" -- and then it refers to the daily report of the 4th under paragraph II with reference to the same division, the 173rd -- "and for attack on patrol 40 kilometers southeast of Vukevar," which refers to the daily report of the 9th, paragraph III, also the 173rd Reserve Division.
And then we have an entry for the 1st Cossack Division which was the 3rd division operating with the 69th Corps at that time:
"9 bandits shot during reconnaissance operation on Punitovci."
(Mr. Denney) Then on page 68 of the German, 28 of the English, there is a report for the 14th of November, and then if defense counsel will turn to page 69, your Honors, there, the 187th Reserve Division:
"13 hostages hunged in reprisal for attack on passenger train 2 west Okucani, see daily report of the 13th".
Then on page 70 of the German, 28 of the English, report for the 16th of November, and then turning over to page 71 of the German:
"187th Reserve Division: During reconnaissance on Soljani 14 Northeast Broke, skirmish with bandit group three to four hundred men. Escaped Volksdeutsches girl reports: about 500 bandits attacked Soljani in the afternoon hours. Volksdeutsche murdered, families of members of the Ustasha kidnapped."
"1st Cossack Division: During reconnaissance operation in area northwest Djakove 2 bandit leaders, 1 courier with records of the communist detachment Esseg and 12 bandits were captured. 24 bandits and 1 Cossack deserter shot to death."
I would like to call the court's attention to the fact that the First Cossack Division is appearing, operating again under the command of the 69th Corps.
If your Honors will recall, this latest division was under the 69th Corps, and later we had some reports where it was reporting to the 15th Corps, and the 15th Corps was sending their reports on, and now, starting with the entry of the two days before this, the 11th of November, again we see the first Cossack Division returning apparently to the 69th Corps.
It is submitted that if they are reporting to them, if they are not an organic part of the Corps, they are at least attached to the Corps, or assigned to the Corps for this period.
On page 72 of the German, page 30 of the English, report for the 26th of November-
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honor, May I look for a short time at the English document book? Your Honor, after just a fleeting glance at this, may I say, the German document book is much more extensive.
In our German Document Book we are on page 71, and in the English Document Book, at the moment, 29 is being heard from; normally this should be the other way around. Since the translating notes take about one page, so that if the document books have always the same contents, the English Document Book, because of these certificates, must be more extensive. This was the usual situation which I found in the former document books.
Now it seems that things are quite different. The German document book is much more extensive. It seems to me that in the English document book something is only entered in order to be more exact; it seems to have been entered if there is something which the prosecution wishes to present as an incrimination, but if the reports are so picked out, and only, the last part is submitted, why, the Tribunal does not see the basis for this evidence, and then the court cannot judge what it is all about.
I think that I will ask the Tribunal, -- must ask the Tribunal, to have a break here so that I and my colleagues can examine the two document books a little more closely than I was able to do now.
It is really so that the German document book is two or three times larger than the English document book, and then I would have to protest against this. I would therefore ask your Honor that the Court have a recess for a short time so that we can compare the two document books.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Is your difficulty, Dr. Laternser, concerned particularly with the fact that you have so much more volume that it become difficult to follow the observations made by the prosecution?
DR. LATERNSER: No, that is not the real reason. The real reason is that something which I have not been able to check yet, -- the way in which the English document book seems to have been compiled, can give a false impression. Thus, for instance, when the reports contained in the German document book say that the bandits have had great activity, then, of course, measures have to be taken by the occupation forces, but the Tribunal gets a quite wrong impression if the prosecution leaves out the activities of these bandits, which, for instance, are contained in the German document book, and only enters those measures which are taken against the bandits.
So, your Honor, it is not that we cannot follow, but in my opinion, from my first impressions, this English document book is not so compiled as it should be from the point of view of the defense, in order not to give an entirely wrong impression.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: It seems to me on that subject, Dr. Laternser, we are not assuming to take for granted any observations or conclusions stated by counsel for either side, but will require some formal and more definite type of proof, so I think that you need not be concerned with its effect upon the Tribunal.
And as has been pointed out to me by my colleague, Judge Carter, you can cause any other matter to be translated and offered on your behalf or on behalf of the defendant.
DR. LATERNSER: I see that, but I also think that if the defense then at some other stage of the proceedings wants to get parts translated which seem to us important, then the translation department will have an awful lot to do, and then it will not be possible to that extent which in our opinion we think necessary.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: The translation department will have to bear the additional burden that may be placed upon them.
DR. FRITSCH for the defendant Rendulic: Your Honor, I would like to support this application of my colleague, Dr. Laternser. In my opinion the difficulty in this question is as follows: If it is as Dr. Laternser states, then the Tribunal will have completely different documents, that is, more or less than the defense, so that the defense is not in a position to assume that these documents which the defense has, also go to the Tribunal. From this, difficulties may arise.
JUSTICE CARTER: Mr. Denney, the fact is, that this whole exhibit if offered in evidence isn't it?
MR. DENNEY: Yes, your Honor.
JUSTICE CARTER: You are reading a part of what has been offered in evidence?
MR. DENNEY: Yes, your Honor, we submitted the whole thing, everything that is in their book. The only point is we do not translate every part, and I disagree with Dr. Laternser's statement that we just present our side of the case. There are certainly plenty of things being read in here to show activities by the people opposed to the German forces down there.
We just finished stating about attacks on railroad trains, and things like that. He has had the document book, -- this particular one, -- for three or four days. I have no objection to his reading anything in, in addition, that he wants to.
JUSTICE CARTER: It seems to me that the prosecution can read what they care to read from an exhibit and then anything that the defense wants to read in addition thereto, it is up to them to get it, and have it read into the record.
MR. DENNEY: That is the way it also seems to us, your Honor.
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honor, I understand this regulation, but how should the defense be in a position - that is, how is the defense to show to the Tribunal in a proper way - the connections that exist between what the Prosecution reads and what the defense has to say to this. In my opinion, regarding the extent of the material submitted, this is an impossibility because if, as the Prosecution has just said, it submits the whole of the documents, of course they can do that, but the Tribunal can't really take in the whole of the documents, because I must assume that the Tribunal has not complete command of the German language, and it is simply impossible, and it doesn't help the Tribunal if the documents are submitted in German. And, therefore, if we are to point out the connection to the few lines which the Prosecution has read, we must be able to give the reason for this. May I please quote another small example from which the Tribunal can certainly see what I mean? For example, the Prosecution states that Village X was burned to the ground; and then in this they say, or they think they say that this is a war crime. But there is certainly no war crime when the troops were shot at from this village. Under these circumstances it constitutes no violation of International Law. The Prosecution ...
MR. DENNEY: It isn't proper to start arguing the law now. Your Honors have directed before that the document be submitted, and the law will be argued later. Dr. Laternser's view of the law and ours are substantially different.
JUDGE CARTER: Well, Dr. Laternser, it seems to me that if you have something in one of these documents that you want offered in evidence as part of your defense you can say that you want to offer additional parts of exhibit number so and so, found on page so and so, and put it in the record. But why can't you handle it that way and connect it up that way?
DR. LATERNSER: I really don't see that this is possible, Your Honor because then the Tribunal would have about twenty document books which the Prosecution has submitted to them, and then come the German additions for about twenty or twenty-five document books.
How then should the Tribunal find out what belongs to what, and for this reason, I think that it is extremely dangerous if the Prosecution only reads the few lines from which something is to be assumed, while the reason for this, the basis for this, the basis for this, is in the German and remains completely ignored. I don't think this procedure is right.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: It is the feeling of the Tribunal, Dr. Laternser, that we have no desire to prevent you from offering such portion or portions of the various documents or exhibits as you may feel may be material or competent on behalf of the defendants. But at this time to attempt to segregate the views of the Prosecution and the defense in such a fashion that the cause for that might be given, I think will be difficult if not impossible, and we will not be unmindful of the fact, when you come to present your case, that you have the right to supplement such observations or proof or alleged evidence as may be offered to this by the Prosecution.
DR. LATERNSER: Yes, Your Honor, but may I please point out something else which I have just been told by my colleague? Since the document books -- the German and the English Document Books - are not the same, then the defense must be given the English Document Books first of all in order to find out which passages the Prosecution has included in the document books, and then there's a further difficulty - not all of the defense counsels, or only a few of them, have a good command of the English language so that they could find out to which passages they would like to make additions. And there's a difficulty which arises from the discrepancies in the two document books. We wouldn't have to point out only small additions, but such important differences, as in this case, the defense thinks they ought to point out.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Let me inquire of Dr. Laternser, do you not also receive a daily record of the proceedings of the Tribunal?
And are there not available for your use competent interpreters from German to English, and English to German - or have members of your staff?
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honor, it is true that we receive the protocol of the session, and we also receive them in German, it's true.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I think it is the view of the Tribunal, Dr. Laternser, that we will proceed as we have in the past, with the suggestion that was made by the presiding judge on the second day of the hearing of the Tribunal, and you will be given full opportunity to present such testimony or proof or such competent or material evidence as may bear upon the proper defense of any of the defendants in this case.
DR. GAWLIK: Your Honor, then I would ask that, first of all, a regulation should be made that if the English Document Book contains only part of the events, it should be made sure that this particular parts are contained in the German document book. Then, we can assume that what we have in the German document book is also contained in the English document book. For otherwise in our closing speech we could refer to the German Document Book - a certain sentence in the German Document Book - and then perhaps that sentence might not be in your Document Book, Your Honor. The two document books must be the same.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I thought the Tribunal had made it clear that you are privileged to use any part of the document book that you desire to make available for the information of the Tribunal?
DR. GAWLIK: Yes, Your Honor. Yes, we don't know which parts; we would have to compare the English and the German Document books to see that the same exhibits are there.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Have you not been presented by the Prosecution with all of the papers or documents making up the document books in German?
MR. DENNEY: Your Honor, in their document books sometimes when we have translated them ourselves and not sent them to the Translation Department, the complete German text does not appear. However, in cases like this, when they have been sent down to the Translation Department, it is merely a matter of mechanics. They translate everything. When they translate one it goes in completely. They have available in them, it is true, the complete text.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: That is the inquiry that I directed on behalf of the Tribunal as to whether all of this materials is available for counsel of the defense.
MR. DENNEY: Yes, Your Honor, it is all available. Part of it is in their book, and sometimes a complete exhibit will appear in our book and sometimes it won't be in the document room. They're certainly entitled to see any of these, and then, of course, any exhibits which Major Hatfield may have on the complete paper.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Has any difficulty been experienced by you in securing the material or the information to which Mr. Denney has just referred?
DR. GAWLIK: No, Your Honor. It's not a question of whether we have difficulties in obtaining any kind of material, but that a false impression arises with us. We assume by reason of the German Document Book, that the whole document book is submitted to the Tribunal, and, therefore, by reason of this mistake we will not submit the additions to the Tribunal, and then, in the final plea, differences will arise. I am working on the assumption that what is submitted to the Tribunal in the English Document books is only that which is contained in the German document books. Both document books must be exactly the same. If not, we get the Prosecution's reading only parts. But the German document book must be a literal translation of the English document book, or the other way around.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: In that event, aren't you dictating the method in which the Prosecution should present its case?
DR. GAWLIK: No, Your Honor, we only want to know. We wouldn't dream of telling the Prosecution how to present its case, but we only want to know what is submitted to the Tribunal. And this should be seen from the German Document Book because the one document book should be the translation of the other. One document book shouldn't contain more than the other. That's where the difficulty arises.