Sometimes some mistaken statements might appear so that the files were not in every way correct. Certainly they could not guarantee not to make mistakes.
Q: Did mistakes occur frequently?
A: Yes, very frequently. Since you ask me that, I remember one case when a man was refused promotion by Himmler because after having been married for a long time lie had only one child. I tried to clarify this matter and I found out that this man had four children already, but he himself had forgotten to list those four children on his files so that there was a mistake.
A: That is enough for this point. What ran: did members of the Police get when they were taken into the Security Police and SD?
A: May I have the question again?
Q: What rank did members of the Police and Army get when they were transferred into the Security Police or SD?
A: The later service decree was basic. They were taken over in the same rank which they held in the police.
DR. KLINERT: Thank you. I have no further questions. BY DR. FICHT (FOR THE DEFENDANT HAENSCH, not for Defendant Biberstein -- in the absence of Haensch's counsel):
Q: Witness, I have a few questions which refer to your activity as a representative of Office I in the RSHA. While in your activity as Office Chief later on, what did you know about the Defendant Haensch? Do you know that in June 1942 Haensch was already back in Berlin with the RSHA?
A: Yes, I can remember this, because it belongs to the general activity of the Group Chief I-A, because in June I took this group over, after my predecessor had assumed his new duties.
Q: Is it correct that Haensch down to the time he left the RSHA in August 1943 stayed with this Office I?
A: Yes, Haensch was Chief of Group I-D, which was dissolved after he left there and Haensch then went to Denmark.
Q: I would like to ask you about this later. Did the Defendant Haensch in July 1942 ask you in a written form to give him a furlough? Do you know anything about this?
A: Yes, this correspondence is in my recollection, because I asked Streckenbach whether there were any objections to this and because I personally answered his letter and I granted him his furlough.
Q: Can you say anything about Haensch's earning the Merit Cross Second Class and that he told you that he had already been awarded this by the Army, and when was this?
A: I also remember that case, for Haensch belonged to Office I and I was glad to be able to give him a decoration and I was very much disappointed when he told me that he already had the Order of Merit, Second Class, because he had gotten it from the Army.
Q: Is it correct that. this happened about August or September, 1942?
A: Yes, that might be possible.
Q: Was Haensch's activity only in Office I of the RSHA?
A: I don't know any other activity of his.
Q: What activity did he perform in what field?
A: He was in charge of Group I-D, Disciplinary and Legal matters.
Q: Were welfare matters concerned with that?
A: Partly, yes.
Q: What about the cooperation that Haensch carried on with the other detriments of the RSHA? Did he have anything else to do with other offices? Did he have any insight in other offices?
A: He had actually nothing to do with the activity of the other offices, since he only took care of disciplinary matters.
Q: AS personnel expert, you probably could say something about the manner in which the defendant Haensch worked. What was his manner of work? What kind of a man was he?
A: Haensch was very correct, sometimes exaggeratedly conscientious and as his job demanded of him, he was not open to bribes and he had the best will to be just, as far as he could.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Ficht, when you use the phrase which you did, namely, "How was the Defendant Haensch in his work" or words to that effect, we are speaking very vaguely and guardedly. We are not talking about a streetcar conducor or a police man. We are talking about someone who is charged with the execution of an order which involved the killing of human beings. Now, if you ask him if he was conscientious in the discharge of his duty, if he did his work well, and this witness replied, "Yes, he did it well, and sometimes even did better than was expected of him", and if we are thinking of that order, we must assume that he killed more people than the order required him to kill, so I merely want to call to your attention that when you use generic language of that kind that it is capable of an interpretation not so favorable to your client. I would therefore suggest, to be very specific and not to use general terns what sort of a man was he and did he do his work well, because if in the eyes of his superiors, if we accept this order as it has been given to us, here in court, the more women and children who we re killed, the better the work was done.
DR. FICHT: I beg the Tribunal's pardon. This was merely to be an introductory question to my next question. Therefore, the special purpose was not evident. May I perhaps ask my next question so that you can sec what I am driving at?
THE PRESIDENT: By all means, but just let me suggest to you and to other defense counsel that this is a very unusual type of a case and we can't use general terms in appraising a man's character. You say, "What is his character?" "His character was a good character"! "How did he do is work" "He did it well". Keep in mind what his work was, andin the eyes of his superior what was regarded as good character.
Q: (By Dr. Ficht): Witness, is it correct that the Defendant Haensch made many enemies in the office, because he refused to whitewash mistakes!
A: Yes, I know of such cases.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, now, there is another question which is absolutely meaningless and if one would want to take an interpretation unfavorable to the defendant, he easily could. "Did he whitewash mistakes?" Now what kind of mistakes? A mistake in the eyes of his superior might be the killing of only 500 instead of 1,000 that would be a mistake in the eyes of the superior, would it not? Your questions have to be very specific. Otherwise they either mean nothing or they mean something that you don't intend they should mean.
BY DR. FICHT: Haensch. Is it correct that he tried to get out of the RSHA, and by his own initiative got a position with the Reich Commissar in Denmark?
Q Do you know... were any offers made to you by Kaltenbruenner in order to keep you in your former position. When by order of Kaltenbrunner Gruppe 1-D was dissolved, Kaltenbrunner had the intention to have the disciplinary expert under his immediate supervision, and he had already selected a person for this position.
Q Make it brief, witness. The whole story is rot necessary.
A But this is how the offer came to be made. Because Haensch had to get out, Kaltenbrunner offered him a position as commander in the General Government. This position Haensch refused at the time, and according to his wish he was employed by the Reich Commissar in Denmark. Office I, including Haensch's office?
A Do you mean the reports in these document books? known. did they discuss the Jewish executions in any way?
A I cannot remember any case. I don't think see however, for Streckenbach would not have found such conferences to his taste. returned to the RSHA from his Russian assignment, had asked the severe punishment of a Gestapo man because he had mistreated a Jew?
A Yes: I know this case because I passed it on to him. It was an assessor of the State Police, Berlin: the message was given to me by telephone that this assessor had conducted himself in an inacceptable way -- where and how I don't know anymore. the proceedings were immediately started by Haensch, and severe punishment was asked. If I remember correctly this assessor was punished very severely. At any rate he was dismissed immediately from the service. BY THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment, now, You say someone was punished because he mistreated a Jew.
Q what did he do; how did he mistreat this Jew? gated -- where it was, I don't know, your Honor....
Q How did this assessor mistreat the Jew? Now, give us a direct answer to that question.
Q He struck a Jew out in the street. That is what he was charged with?
Q Yes. Now, did this assessor participate in the execution of any Jews?
A No, it had nothing to do with that at all. This incident took place in Be lin, your Honor.
Q Oh, this incident took place in Berlin?
Q And when was this, what year? in Berlin to strike a Jew? It can be proven at any time that several such cases did happen.
Q What was a Jew doing in Berlin m 1943? I thought they had been sent away long before 1942, to Treblinka, Lublin and Auschwitz... Jews in Berlin. Not individual Jews, but quite a number. It was evident because just at that time the markings of the Jews with the so-called Star of David has been instituted.
Q Do you know of this incident yourself? Do you have personal knowledge of it?
A I don't know who it was, but somebody called me up. I immediately sent for the Berlin agency chief of the State Police and I gave the order that that assessor was to be interrogated. I immediately sent this correspondence to Mr. Haensch, and then they duly investigated it. May I point out that some time later proceedings were inititated against other State police agencies in Berlin--this was also in 1943-when even death sentences were meted out because such people had committed offenses on Jewish property. It would not be very difficult to bring proof of this by witnesses. Death sentences and large prison sentences and downgrades were given out. of Berlin, yourself?
Q You don't know the name of the Jew, do you?
A Noo I don't, your Honor, but it can be determined who was the assessor.
Q Yes, but it is important that we we know more than that. We want to know why this assessor was punished, if he was. I would suggest, Dr. Ficht, that if you intend to make anything of this episode that you will have to submit evidence a little more specific; not merely that this witness overheard something over the telephone, and then he sent someone out, and finally someone was punished.... It would be very interesting to the Tribunal to get some direct evidence that a Jew was struck on the streets of Berlin in 1943 and that this assessor-- was he a member of the SS, this assessor?
-
WITNESS: The Gestapo.
THE PRESIDENT: (continuing) Gestapo? Yes; that is even more interesting -- that a member of the Gestapo was punished because ho struck a Jew in Berlin in 1943. Very well. Proceed. BY DR. FICHT: My last question. the Security Police and the SD, Haensch was in Prague?
A Yes, I know that. At that time 1 was ordered to see that this conference was taken care of, and that the guests. were housed.
DR. FICHT: No further questions. BY DR. RATZ (for defendant Radetzky):
Q Witness, do you know Radetzky?
Q When, and where, did you get to know him? 4a at that time?
Q You were later Department Head in the RSHA. What time was that? I, and I remained in that capacity until the first of April 1944.
Q Was Radetzky with you in Berlin at that time?
Q What did he want from you? ceased and that he be relieved from the Security Police. He told me especially that the service in the Security Police was not agreeable to him. Radetzky was a Baltic German and knew Russian conditions very well, and in Shitomir already he told me that he considered the war measures in Russia as very wrong.
Q What did you tell Radetzky as an answer to this? old office of the repatriation of Germans, but this refused by the Chief. earlier date? wishing to be recalled, and that the man in charge of personnel came to see me, and brought the police along and from this I could tell that Radetzky made such en attempt before. I don't know exactly how it was done, but he did make an attempt to leave the Security Police.
Q Thus your help for him had no success? teletype.
Q Do you know what activity Radetsky wanted to get into?
A What exactly hewanted to do. I don't know. I merely conversed with him, and I tried to get him into Office-VI, where there was a possibility for him to work in his field. In Office-VI they were locking for a liaison officer for liaison in the Russian Vlassow Army.
Q Do you know whether he was later transferred to Office-VI? elapsed. He actually did get in Office-VI later on. to-wit, that RAdetsky might get a different job. For what reason did you do this? which he assumed to talk about these things frankly. I knew Radetscky as a very profound human being, and I wanted to help him to be able to follow his wishes. you know how he got into the service of the RSHA? furherer Dr. Kroeger, who at that time was ableto leave the Security Police. Dr. Kroeger himself was a Baltic German, and interpreters were needed for the Russian Campahign, and, thus, Dr. Kroeger had commanded a few of his fellow countrymen to be used as fellow interpreters. Among these was Radetsky. to the RSHA? obligated to serve. service means in reference to membership in the RSHA and the SD. Was he a member of the SD, or how is this matter of emergency service to be explained?
emergency service, nor of the State Police or the SS. He joined as a civilian, and he was used in the agency as he was needed. If he was to be used in the war, he had to wear a uniform corresponding to his position, his rank and his salary. A cording to theses he then was assigned to the rank, and thus, he became a so-called "Uniform wearer," It might sound very strange but that is the way it was. These "Uniform wearers" were addressed by the SS rank but could not designate themselves as SS-members. that these are in Document Book III-O. Document NO-4771. Exhibit No. 139, which is on page 45 of the German text, the last document in this volume-- (hands document to the witness). Here it says in the text that SS-Sturmbannfuehrer (NDV) Haldemos von Radetsky is to be transferred." Please tell the Tribumal what this designation means?
A You mean this desgination "NDV"?
Q Yes? under war emergency.
Q Why is this designation added immediately after the "Sturmbannfuehrer"? not an active member of the SS. If he had been one obligated to serve under war emergency, and at the same time an active SS-Leader, then this designation would not have appeared.
Q If I understand you correctly, this designation "NDV" is to mean that Radetsky only got into the SS by way of this emergency service status?
A Well, that question is not correctly put. He did not get into the SS, but he merely wore a SS-uniform.
Q In this document there is a handwritten note "File, Sturmbannfuehrer is not needed." After you signed the document, orsince you signed the document, you can perhaps say what this note means? as a Sturmbannfuehrer, because he only held this rank as in this emergency service status. by the commando. the SS, by the Reich fuehrer. Please tell the Tribunal what you have to say about this note? the matter of the Vlassow Army in his own staff, and for this purpose he was looking for a liaison officer who spoke Russian, that was Radetsky, but this assignment to that field did not come off, because Office VI took over the matters concerning the Vlassow Army. Thus, there Radetsky went directly to Office-VI.
Q DR. RATZ: Your Honr, I would like to state something in connection with this personal file. It is actually outside of the examination of this witness. Photostates of the documents have been made available, among them a photostatic copy of this document which we are just discussing. I have now found out that one page has been torn out of this collection, and therefore, I went to the document room and the document room explained that this missing page would not be handed over by order of the Prosecution. I, therefore, tried again to secure this missing page but this was refused once more. I believe it is not right to tear out one page from this document which belongs altogether, especially since the Prosecution in their letter 4 September 1947, told us expressly that the document room was to deliver to any defense counsel complete photostatic copies.
THE PRESIDENT: We don't argue the matter as to whether it was right-- We don't need to argue the matter as to whether it is right to tear out a page because it is obvious that a page should not be torn out.
Let us find out first whether a page was removed, and, if go, why, and then we will consider the situation.
MR HORLICK-HOCHWALD: If Your Honor please, I can possibly give the information in regard to this matter. In between the personal file of the defendant Radetsky there are different independent letters. One letter which had nothing to do with the file itself was removed from the file, and will be handed in by the Prosecution at another time. But I can now inform the Tribunal that this is a completely independent document; a letter which not a part of these forms which the Tribuual sees here.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you intend to submit it later into evidence?
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: I doo Your Honor, at another time.
THE PRESIDENT: And do you intend to submit that letter in evidence?
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: We do, your Honor, but at another time.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you intend to submit it as rebuttal, or how do you intend to get it into evidence?
MR. HORLICK HOCHWADL: We want eventually to put it to the witness either in cross-examination or put it in as rebuttal.
THE PRESIDENT: You do not regard it as part of your case in chief?
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: No, sir; we did not. We put in this document entirely only to show that the Defendant Radetzky was a member of the SS and of the SD, of course. If Defendant Radetzky denies that, I do think this document is proof enough to show that be was a member of the SS and of the SD, so it is not a part of our case in chief.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Ratz, the Prosecution has the right to present its case as it sees fit, just as defense counsel have the same right. Now, you were assured that that document will be available at a later date, so therefore I don't think it is necessary to spend any more time on that document, especially in view of the fact that you are not now presenting the case of von Radetzky. You are merely cross-examining this witness. You have not yet reached your client's case. BY DR. RATZ:
Q Witness, a few further questions. Later you were commander of the Security Police and SD in Salzburg. In this capacity did you meet Radetzky again?
A Yes. Radetzky came to Salzburg. At the time it was in the last few weeks before the capitulation. He came there in his capacity as liaison officer of the Vlassow Army. At the time I spoke to him, and I told him that I considered the defense of Salzburg under the circumstances as very senseless, but there was still one more difficulty to be overcome. That was the development of a tremendous activity by Russian Generals who were active in volunteer armies. These Russian generals wanted to set up a new corps around Salzburg because they did not want to be used in the fight against their own countrymen.
They wanted to be used to fight the Western Powers. It was very difficult to regulate this matter since a liaison with the leading agencies in the north of the Reich was very difficult. This was difficult because the Gau-Leader of Linz was prepared to use this volunteer corps.
THE PRESIDENT: Now, Witness, you are going into a history of the Vlassow Army and the strategy of the letter days of the war. Now, Dr. Ratz merely asked you if you saw von Radetzky at Salzburg and what you talked about or what you had to do with that defendant, Now, let's get directly to that point, and you can give us the other background only in the event it becomes necessary in your discussion of whatever transpired between you and von Radetzky.
THE WITNESS: Yes. we have to thank Radetzky for preventing these plans from maturing. This army was not formed, and the Russian generals, if I remember correctly, were at the disposal of the American commander after the capitulation.
Q (By Dr. Ratz) At the end of the war was Radetzky still a uniform wearer or had his relationship to the RSHA changed?
A I can't tell you any more than the fact that he had come to the Security Police on an emergency status. this emergency service or to evade the orders given him? he was in the Security Police on an emergency status he was also under the jurisdiction of the SS and Police and he would have had to account for it before a court martial.
DR. RATZ: I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, just for the clarity of the record, when you spoke of the Russian generals, you, of course, meant those Russian generals who were fighting on the same side as Germany?
THE WITNESS: Yes, those who were on the German side in the Vlassow Army and other volunteer corps.
If I remember correctly there was General Tokol and General von Manteuffel, and other names. I don't remember.
THE PRESIDENT: I thought it might be better to have that clarified on the record.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. BY DR. HAEHN (For Defendant Ruehl):
Q Witness, during the direct examination and today's cross-examination by Dr. Fritz, you have described a course for candidates of the executive service whose members were then detailed to the Einsatzgruppen as a group. You have also testified that you succeeded in getting the participants of this course, recalled, and that this course again continued in October 1941 in Berlin. course? that since 1941, at the latest October, 1941, he was away from his unit, the detachment 10-B of Einsatzgruppe D, that he left it finally. course returned.
Q Before this you mentioned in the cross-examination of Dr. Fritz that the candidates for this executive service, after completion of the course, were used as their qualifications and their potentialities indicated. Were there any exceptions for reasons of emergency service? of persons has to be distributed, and too high a percentage expresses the same wish, not all these wishes could be satisfied. the course, expressed the desire to be accepted in the Criminal Police?
A I can't say it with certainty, but I think it was the case for I listened to the wishes personally.
DR. HAEHN: I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Do any other defense counsel desire to crossexamine?
(No response.)
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Hochwald, due to the lateness of the hours, perhaps you would prefer to begin your cross-examination tomorrow morning.
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWASD: Yes, your Honor, I only have two questions about the same document as was put to the witness by defense counsel for the Defendant Radetzky. Perhaps I should be permitted to ask this now.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, by all means. BY MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD:
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: I, your Honors, again refer to Document Book III-C and to Document No 4771, which is on Page 22 of the English, I shall quote from Page 26 of the English, 29 of the German. Radetzky was not a member of the SS?
A Mr. Prosecutor, I gather this from the document which was submitted to me.
Q All right. Will you look now on Page 29 of the German, Page 26 of the English, and I would like to read to you. a letter to the Chief of the SS Personnel Main office, Berlin SW-11, Prinz Albrechtstrasse 9. This letter is dated 13 December 1939.
"I would ask so promote SS Untersturmfuehrer Waldemar von Radetzky, SS No. --" and so forth, "leader of the staff of SS Upper-Section Marthe, to the rank of SS Obersturmfuehrer, SS Untersturmfuehrer v.
Radetzky was personally accepted into the Schutzstaffel by the Reichfuehrer SS."
Do you still maintain that Radetzky was not a member of the SS?
A Mr. Prosecutor, I don't know these incidents. I ask you now whether you still maintain that Radetzky was not a member of the SS. Please answer this question.
A I don't believe this is necessary. I don't know in what form he got into the SS. somebody who was accepted by Himmler himself into the SS could not be a member of this organization?
A If he was personally accepted by Himmler?
THE PRESIDENT: It isn't necessary. It is very clear.
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: That is all I have to ask on this document, your Honor. May I then start my cross-examination tomorrow?
THE PRESIDENT: Then, Witness, to that extent you modify your previous statement about von Radetzky? You would say then from this letter that he must have been a member of the SS?
THE WITNESS: I didn't read the letter yet, but if the things are as they were described, that he was accepted by the Reichsfuehrer, SS, I cannot deny it. I don't know anything but what was submitted to me, I first met Radetzky in 1939 when he was already Sturmbannfuehrer and already in an emergency status in the Security Police.
THE PRESIDENT: When you described the system of allowing certain individuals to wear uniforms, even though not members of the SS, you were describing a general situation?
THE WITNESS: Yes, that was a general situation. These men received a spedial identification card that was a temporary identification card. The men had the obligation that if they were returned from the occupied territory where they were uniform wearers they had to hand in their uniform again and could not consider themselves as SS members.
This was the third class of officers.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. The Tribunal will be in recess until tomorrow morning at nine-thirty.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 21 October 1947, at 0930 hours.)
Otto Ohlendorf, et al., defendants sitting at Nurnberg
THE MARSHAL: The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal II-A.
Military Tribunal II-A is now in session. God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Any other defense counsel to cross examine the witness Schulz? If not, Mr. Hochwald, you may continue with your crossexamination. BY MR. HOCHWALD: in May 1933, is that correct? earlier?
Q Not earlier that that?
Q Why did you join the Party before 1932? of the State Police in Bremen.
Q Was that the only reason?
Q Wasn't it the reason that you being a member of the Political Police were able to render much more valuable service to the Party and to the SS if you were only a comouflaged member; I mean that you were not a member actually, but that your superiors didn't know that you were a member of the Party, and in this way was it not possible for you to help the Party much better in this position?