The SD mainly did auxiliary tasks, during the interrogation of prisoners, for a limited period, when a lot of prisoners came in. Transfer to the SD was always turned down, as can be seen from the documents.
This fundamental answer with regard to the taking of hostages, and the relation to the SD is given here on the basis of an inquiry from a division. This does not mean an alteration at all, in the views which had already been in existence, and in the customs of the corps.
Q. What was the purpose of 2-b of the order.
A. It had the one single purpose of helping in an emergency. As expressly mentioned in the order, transfer to the SD was forbidden.
Q. Who carried out reprisal measures on behalf of the Croatian troops?
A. Surprise attack raids on Croatian troops were retaliated for by the Croatian authorities.
Q. Who retaliated for surprise raids on the police?
A. The police, as far as I know and as far as I heard -- partly also Croatian police.
Q. I now come to the individual counts of the indictment, first of all to Count II of the indictment. During the period around the 15th of September 1941 were you in office?
A. No.
Q. Where were you during this period?
A. I was on leave.
Q. And where did you spend your leave?
A. In Wiesbaden.
Q. Did you hear about measures taken by the corps during this Period?
A. No.
THE PRESIDENT: Pardon me just a minute. Was there an error in interpretation or in the statement of the witness? Some reference was made in 1941. Is that the intention of the witness ?
A. No, your Honors, I didn't say that.
THE PRESIDENT: Members of the Tribunal are under the impression that the year 1941 was referred to.
DR. GAWLIK: It should be 1943. Perhaps, in order to make it clear, I should put the question again.
Q. During the period from the 15th of September 1943, were you in office?
A. No.
Q. Where were you during this period?
A. During this period I was on leave.
Q. Where did you spend your leave?
A. I spent this leave in Wiesbaden.
Q. And during this period were you informed about measures taken by the corps?
A. No.
Q. What communication had you during this period with the corps?
A. No contact at all.
Q. Who was in charge of the corps at this time?
A. At this time the eldest divisional commander was in charge of the corps. Major General Braune.
Q. Did he act independently or on the basis of orders and directives which you had given him?
A. Braune acted completely independently. I give him no directions and I had no need to do this because I had only been in the Balkans a few days while my deputy, Major General Braune had already been in the Balkans for a rather long time -- I think for more than six months -- I don't know the exact time.
Q. What were the rights and duties of the deputy of a commander while he was -
A. While he was on leave?
Q. Yes, while he was on leave.
A. He had the same rights and duties as the Commanding General.
Q. While you were on leave did you have any kind of power of command over the 69th Corps?
A. No.
Q. Did you ever give an order for the execution of 40 hostages for an attack on a railroad?
A. No, never.
Q. Did you ever hear about the fact that on the 15th of September 1943, 40 hostages were executed for an attack on a railroad of the 173rd Reserve Corps Division?
A. I cannot remember. The Chief of Staff, when I returned from leave, reported to me as usual. Whether he particularly mentioned this incident, I don't know.
Q. The prosecution charges you with the fact that troops of the 173rd Reserve Division under your jurisdiction on or about the 15th of September 1943 executed 40 hostages in Croatia. Can you give any explanation to this charge of the prosecution?
A. No, I can give no explanation about this at all.
Q. Why not?
A. Because no documents to prove this have been submitted.
Q. Does the war diary contain any entry about an execution of 40 hostages on the 15th of September 1943 for an attack on a railroad in the area of the 173rd Reserve Division?
A. There is no entry to this effect in the war diary.
Q. I submit to you Document NOKW-053. This is Exhibit No. 332 in Document Book XIII, page 117 of the English and page 84 of the German. Is this document signed by you?
A. No.
Q. Did you ever have any knowledge of this document?
A. I gained knowledge of it here for the first time in Nurnberg from these documents.
Q. On the basis of this document can it be seen that in the area of the 173rd Reserve Division 40 hostages were executed?
A. No, this is a teletype by the 2nd Panzer Army. The army has on found it out from the corps and there are no documents which show this.
Q. Can you give any more details about this?
A. We have here a teletype from the 2nd Panzer Army dated the 28th of September 1943 which talks about 40 hostages who wore executed because of attacks on the railway. In the daily report of the 2nd Panzer Army dated September or October -- the first one is the 28th of September; this is the 4th of October.
Q. General, the document dated the 28th of September is in Document Bock III, NOKW-053, Exhibit 332, and the one dated the 4th of October is Document Book XIII.
Please continue.
A. In these two reports from the Panzer -- that is the one from the 28th of September, the second from the 4th of October -- three paragraphs are contained under "III (German SS.)" That is the paragraph of the corps, the 69th Reserve Corps, the paragraph "173rd Reserve Division" which is the first paragraph of the 69th Reserve Corps and the following paragraph, "187th Reserve Division." Those three paragraphs are exactly the same in three different chronological reports.
Q. And what can be seen from it?
A. It can be seen that at least the reports are unreliable.
Q. Did you issue an order for the execution of the 40 hostages mentioned in these reports?
A. No, never.
Q. Did you know anything at all about this execution?
A. Well, this is impossible for me to say today.
Q. Can you comment on the question of whether this execution was carried out at all by the 173rd Infantry Division?
A. It is quite possible that this execution was not carried out by the 173rd Reserve Division.
Q. Can you tell us a little more about this, General?
A. The 173rd Reserve Division reported everything which happened in its area and everything which was carried out by the troop units which were not subordinate to it, also by the Croats and the police, without going into detail always as to who had ordered or carried out the executions.
Q. To whom were the police units subordinate in the area of the 173rd Reserve Division?
A. They were subordinate to the deputy of the Reichsfuehrer SS, Major General Kammerhofer.
Q Did you have jurisdiction over Major General Kammerhofer?
A No.
Q Could you have prevented any measures which were intended to be carried out by the police?
A No.
Q Did you have jurisdiction over the Croatian units?
A No, they were subordinate to the Ministry -- the Croatian Ministry of Armed Power.
Q In this connection I would like to draw the attention of the Tribunal to Dehner Document Book III, Page 17, Dehner Document No. 16, Dehner Exhibit No. 10. There -- the entry under the 15th of august 1943 (that is on the day when the Corps came to Croatia under Headquarters command). "173rd Reserve Division; 187th Reserve Division; 2nd Croat Corps General Staff." And then, three days later, on the 18th of August 1943, "Second Croat Corps eliminated from security police force--" I think it is already wrongly in the Document Book. It should be translated "The Second Croat Corps eliminated from the security area north of the Save." A security area north of the Save will be taken over completely by the LXIXth Corps. Then I would draw the attention of the Tribunal in this connection to Dehner Document Book III, Page 31, to the entry dated the 10th of September 1943, in which it states: "The Commander rejects subordination of Croatian units on the German commands on a larger scale than before." Here, again, I would like to say that the English translation is wrong in the Document Book. The word "Fuehrer" in the original is translated as "Commander But in this case it really means "The Fuehrer -- Adolf Hitler.
Could you have prevented any kind of measure taken by the Croatian units?
A No.
Q Was there a possibility of the executions mentioned in these documents not having taken place in the period of 28th of September 1943?
A Yes, there was this possibility.
Q Can you tell us a little more about this?
A Since two reports with different dates are completely the same in text in two paragraphs, one of the two reports could be wrong. It isn't exactly excluded that both reports are false, but it is also possible that the incident took place during my leave.
Q And now I submit to you, from Prosecution Document Book XVI, Page 27 in the German and Page 11 in the English, Prosecution Exhibit No. 375, Document NOKW-658. Is there any execution of this kind contained in any report of the Corps?
A It is true that there is a Daily Report of the Corps, dated the 4th of October 1943. In this is stated that for attacks on railways which took place in the last few days -
Q I would like to add here that this report is contained in Prosecution Document Book XIII, Page 121 in the English and Page 119 in the German, and in Prosecution Document Book XVI, Page 11 of the English and Page 27 of the German. Please continue.
A This Daily Report, dated the 4th of October, however, is incorrect, insofar as Figure 1, under "B", on the first page mentions the Daily Report of the 1st of October, Paragraph 2c. This cannot be correct because this Daily Report of the 1st of October is here, and this Paragraph 2c concerns a quite different troop unit, namely, the 173rd Reserve Division, not the 187th Reserve Division.
But if this questionable figure "2c" is not "2c" but "2b", then for the carrying out of the execution -- not the 173rd Reserve Division would be responsible, as it states in the Indictment, but the police. And the fact also speaks for this that in the original -- first of all the words "through police" are contained, and those words are crossed out. In any case to make the report as brief as possible. The Corps, however, had nothing to do with the police. In this Daily Report, dated the 4th of October, there is mention of another railway attack, dated the 3rd of October, and these 40 hostages are also mentioned in connection with this. This Daily Report, from the 3rd of October, was unfortunately not submitted by the Prosecution.
Q And what conclusions can be drawn from your statements?
A The results that the exhibits which have been submitted in no way give a definite, clear picture.
Q From the report can it be seen that there were no casualties during the attack on the railway?
A No, this cannot be seen.
Q Is there a possibility that if this execution took place at all the number of the people killed during the two attacks on the railway was larger than the-number of hostages executed?
Q Yes, there is this possibility. Quite apart from the fact of the military damage which was caused by the interruption in the railway service on this main line and the great material damage which could not be made up for during the war. A typical example that the casualties were not always completely given can be clearly seen from two or three documents.
Q Your Honors, these are documents, in Prosecution Document Book XIV, Page 24 in the English and Page 19 in the German, NOKW-509, Prosecution Exhibit No. 340; and Prosecution Document Book XVI, Page 19 of the English, Page 47 of the German, NOKW-658, Prosecution Exhibit No. 375.
Q Please, General, would you turn to these two documents, Book 14, Page 19 in the German and Book 16, Page 47 in the German? What can be seen from these two documents?
A Would you please tell me the page in Document Book 14?
Q Page 19 in the German; Page 24 in the English.
A I think there is a mistake. Oh, yes, I am sorry, it is Document Book 16. The only teletype dated the 21 of October, 1943, is a normal, daily report which, on the basis of reports which came in from the subordinate divisions and units to the corps headquarters, were compiled. I would like to say they were compiled by cutting and then they were sent as a teletype by Morse to the Army and in this way much was left out at the expense of clarity in the effort to make their own losses not so high and the reprisals seem more severe.
The other report in Document Book 14 concerns the same subject but here, as an exception, this is the copy of an original report. It went by courier channels from the division to the corps headquarters of the 173rd Reserve Division, that is, not through the teletype channels but through the usual post channels.
Q Which differences can be seen between the original report of the Reserve Grenadier Regiment 462 and the teletype daily report dated 20 October, 1943, although both reports have the same subject?
A In a normal teletype report of the 21 October 1943, the following can be seen; firstly, passenger train attacked near Bjelovav, plundered and burned; secondly, railway attack near Vukuslavlevica, and for these two cases, as a reprisal measure, 25 members of bands were executed after public announcement.
Therefore that is in the teletype report. And, thirdly, an attack on a passenger train near Severin: German losses 20 sergeants dead, one wounded, one Croatian gendarme wounded.
In contrast to this report, although the subject is the same, in the copy of the original report a quite different picture can be seen. It states in the original report, firstly, a railway attack near Pavlovac, near Bjelovav right here on the map (indicating); secondly, an attack on a railway near Vukuslavlevica -- this is the same place which I have just mentioned -- is also contained in this report; and, fourthly, there is also mentioned a railway attack near Severin, and then a second attack near Pavlovac.
Now comes the great difference. In these four railway attacks mentioned here the regiment reports, as its own losses, 30 dead, 20 missing 15 wounded; and the daily report of the corps dated 21 October, 1943, states that altogether 12 dead, 3 wounded and one missing.
Q And what were the reprisals which were taken according to the report at the regiment?
AAs reprisals for the 30 own losses, ten missing who were also regarded as dead, and 12 wounded for the great military material damage, altogether 25 bandits were executed. That is considerably less.
Q General, well that is just an accident that this can be found out so clearly because the correct documents are submitted for this, but can you state whether there is a possibility that also in a similar way in other matters this could have happened?
A Yes, that is quite possible. Sometimes the own high losses were not always given during these railway attacks.
Q Did you have the possibility to check the details about these matters?
A No, there was no possibility at all.
Q Can something similar be determined also with regard to the other daily reports?
A No.
Q Why not?
A Because only in this one case did the Prosecution submit the original order to the Court. It is significant that just this one case in which an original report was submitted the number of the hostages killed was very much smaller than the number of German victims.
DR. GAWLIK: That brings me to the end of this count of the indictment. I now come to Count I-m and in connection with this I submit from Prosecution Document Book 16, Page 13 of the English and Page 32 of the German, Document NOKW658, Exhibit No. 375, Page 88 in the English and Page 64 in the German; also in Document Book 16, Document NOKW-075, Exhibit No. 350.
I would like to draw the attention of the Tribunal to the fact that both cases are teletypes dated 10 October, 1943. They both concern one and the same document which has been submitted by the Prosecution under two exhibit numbers. I would like to draw the special attention of the Tribunal to this because otherwise there might be the impression that the number of the reprisal measures which were carried out were greater than they really were.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q Is this teletype which has been submitted signed at all?
A No, it is not signed.
Q Is it an original document?
A No, it is not an original document.
Q Can you comment on the question about the Figure 2a which mentions the execution of band suspects in the neighborhood of Vinkovci? Can you tell us whether this execution took place at all?
A This teletype which is not signed cannot give any conclusive evidence about whether this execution took place. We are not dealing with an original document here.
Q Is this execution noted in the war diary?
A No, it is not mentioned in the war diary.
Q Then what do you conclude from this?
A I conclude from this that this was not a measure carried out by the subordinate troops but a measure which was carried out by the police or the Croatians. From the documents which were available to me I cannot find this entry.
THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn at this time until ninethirty tomorrow morning.
THE MARSHAL: The court will be in recess until 0930 hours tomorrow morning.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 18 December 1947, at 0930 hours.)
Official Transcript of Military Tribunal V, Case VII, in the matter of the United States of America against Wilhelm List , et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 18 December 1947, 0930, Justice Burke, presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Courtroom will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal V.
Military Tribunal V 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 ascertain if all the defendants are present in the Courtroom?
THE MARSHAL: May it please your Honor, all the defendants are present in the Courtroom except the defendant von Weichs, who is in the hospital.
THE PRESIDENT: Judge Burke will preside at this day's session.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: You may proceed.
DIRECT EXAMINATION - Continued.
HERNST DEHNER, Defendant.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q. General, yesterday we stopped when we were mentioning Count I-II of the indictment, document NOKW 658, Exhibit No. 375 in document book XVI, page 13 of the English and page 32 of the German. This document is identical with NOKW 079, Exhibit No. 350, document book No. 14, page 88 of the English and page 64 of the German. General, I will show you these two documents again.
JUDGE BURKE: Well, Dr. Gawlik one on page 13 of Volumn XVI and what was the other page of the English of the two documents you referred to?
DR. GAWLIK: Document 16, page 13 of the English and document book 14 page 88 of the English.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Thank you.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q. Let us assume the execution mentioned in the teletype actually took place; did you order this execution, General?
A. No, I did not order it.
Q. Can you remember that you heard anything about the execution?
A. No, I cannot remember any thing about that at all.
Q. Can it be seen from the teletype that the execution was carried out by troops of the 187th Reserve Division?
A. No, it only took place and was carried out in the area of the 187th Reserve Division.
Q. Who then could have carried out the execution?
A. The execution could have been carried out by Croats or by the Police.
Q. Is this not in contradiction to the fact that this execution is contained in the daily report of the Corps Headquarters under the 187th Reserve Division?
A. No, that is not in contradiction to this, the division reported everything which happened in their areas, even if the incidents arose from troops which were not subordinate to the divisions.
Q. General, if you had heard about the execution previously would yon have been able to prevent the execution?
A. No, I would not have been able to prevent it.
Q. And does the report exclude the possibility that the execution was carried out for the killing of German soldiers?
A. No.
Q. Does the report exclude the possibility that the number of people killed on the attack on the goods train was greater than the number of band members executed?
A. No, the morning report dated 9 October , which is referred to in the daily report was unfortunately not submitted, then perhaps we would have found some more explanation.
Q. Does the report exclude the possibility that the killing of the hostages was not in reprisal for only one attack on 9 October 1943?
A. The following attacks and acts of sabotage for which reprisals were not taken preceded this incident: On 7 October there was an attack on the passenger train Bjelevar, there were 10 dead, I wounded and I missing -- this act was not retaliated; On 8 October there was a surprise raid on a transport train near Brod and no reprisal measures were taken for this; During the night from the 2nd to 3rd of October there was sabotage with mines against the main line near Gracenica, I spell it G-r-a-c-a-n-i-c-a, and the post wagon and engine were derailed and no reprisals were taken, on October 14th there was a surprise raid by night near the locality of Tovarnik, I spell it T-o-v-a-r-n-i-k, a guard was disarmed and plundered, no retaliation; On 28 September there was an act of sabotage near Mitrovika, I spell it M-i-t-r-o-v-i-k-a; on 29 September there was an attack on the railroad station near Jankovci, I spell it J-a-n-k-o-v-c-i, the railroad station was set on fire, there were 2 dead and 2 wounded , no reprisal measures were taken for this. On the night of the 29th to 30th of September there was a sabotage act near Antijevci, I spell it, A-n-t-i-j-e-v-c-i. On the night of 29 to 30 September there was a surprise raid on a train near karavce, there were three dead and three wounded. The same night there was an attack and no reprisals were taken for an attack near Girova, I spell it, G-i-r-o-v-a- and near Katalen, I spell it K-a-t-a-l-e-n. There were attacks on goods trains and there were others as well. These cases for which there were no reprisals taken were obviously taken into account by the agency concerned. In a similar fashion, as I mentioned yesterday, with an example by the submission of an original report and a teletype which concerned the same subject.
Q. I now show you the document of the 167th Reserve Division, dated 20 September 1943, it is document NOKW 1758, Exhibit No. 549, document book 24, page 253 in the English and page 165 in the German, page 253 in the English document book 24. Is this communication signed by you?
A. No, it is not signed by me.
Q. Did you have any knowledge of this communication?
A. No, the letter did not go to the Corps at all, but went from the 187th Reserve Division to the 1st Battalion, 466 Reserve Grenadier Battalion and furthermore I was on leave at the time.
Q. And when did you see this document for the first time?
A. I saw this document for the first time here during the submission of the documents.
Q. Did you issue the order for the shooting of hostages?
A. No.
Q. Did you know about this order?
A. No.
Q. Before this order?
A. No.
Q. Can you tell us whether the shooting of hostages was carried out at all?
A. No, I cannot say,I was on leave during that time.
Q. Well now I will show you from document book 16, page 6 of the English and page 14 of the German, document NOKW 658, exhibit No. 375. This is a teletype dated 21 September 1943; is this teletype signed by you?
A. No, this teletype is not signed by me.
Q. Is this teletype signed at all?
A. It merely has a typewritten signature, Corps Headquarters 69th Reserve Corps.
Q. Can you state to whom the hand-written remarks here belong? I withdraw the question until later. Did you order the reprisal measures?
A. No.
Q. Did you have any knowledge at all of these reprisal measures?
A. Probably not.
Q. Can you give us a more detailed reason for this?
A. This report also belonged to the time when I was on leave, which lasted until 26th of September.
Q. I will now show you again the teletype of the army, dated 28 September 1943 from document NOKW 053, exhibit No. 332 on page 118 of the English, document book 13 , page 24 of the German. What can be seen from a comparison of this teletype with the teletype dated 21 September 1943, document NOKW 658, exhibit No. 375 in document book 16, page 14 of the German and page 6 of the English?
A. There is the possibility that the ten hostages mentioned in the teletype for 23 September 1943 from the 69th Reserve Corps is contained in the number of the 40 hostages, the shooting of which the 2nd Panzer army in its teletype of 28 September which was reported to the 2nd Panzer Army.
Q. And what can be seen from this?
A. From this it can be seen that through this manner of reporting a double counting of reprisal measures is reported.
Q. I now submit to you the document in hand-writing, dated 1 October, 1943, NOKW 658, exhibit 375 from document book 16, page 24 of the German and page 10 of the English and draw your attention to the report under 2-b; was the execution of 15 hostages ordered by you?
A. No, this execution was not ordered by me.
Q. Who ordered this execution?
A. As it states here in the report, it was carried out by the police.
Q. Were the police units subordinate to you?
A. No, the police units were not subordinate to me, they were subordinate to Gruppenfuehrer Kammerhefer.
Q. Was Kammerhofer subordinate to you?
A. No, Kammerhofer was not subordinate to me.
Q. I now show you document NOKW 658, exhibit 375, document book 16, page 23 of the English and page 55 of the German.
JUDGE BURKE: If you will be kind enough Doctor to be a little more deliberate -- if you will be a bit more deliberate in giving the figures , then we will be able to keep an account of what you are giving the witness -- not quite so fast. The page number again of that exhibit 375, the page number of exhibit 375?
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q. Your Honor, it is document book 16, page 23 of the English and page 55 of the German, document NOKW 658, exhibit 375, teletype dated 5 November 1943. Does the document submitted have a signature?
A. No, it is not signed.
Q. During the period when you were in charge of the Corps did you hear about the teletype?
A. The teletype does not bear my initials, therefore it was not submitted to me. I think therefore that I might say that I had no knowledge of this document.
Q. Can you make any comments on the question as to whether the reprisal measure mentioned under figure 2 was ever carried out?
A. The reprisal measure mentioned under figure 2 was not entered into the war diary, therefore, I doubt very much whether the reprisal measures was carried out.