There was no other collaborator in the staff, no interrogating officer.
Q. Who was Chief of Einsatzgruppe D during your assignment?
A. The Chief was Ohlendorf.
Q. When you were transferred, were you designated to become the deputy of Einsatzgruppe Chief Ohlendorf?
A. No.
Q. Who was designated as the Deputy Chief?
A. Office I Gruppenfuehrer Streckenbach had designated the senior Commando leader, commando Leader Setzen, as Deputy Chief of the Einsatzgruppe.
Q. Whey was Setzen designated as the Deputy Chief?
A. I can not imagine, because he was an old experienced executive officer.
of Einsatzgruppe D? and gypsies and communist functionaries? other commando leaders. BY THE PRESIDENT:
A On the trip to the garrison called Piatra Neamt. That is in Rumania.
Q Did you not go to Pretsch first?
A No. I was not in Pretsch, Your Honor. BY DR. GAWLIK: Ohlendorf, too, and with the commando leaders about this order,
Q When was that? July 1941. announced to you in Pretsch? Einsatzgruppen had been called together in Pretsch. I was not even asked to participate in that.
Q Well, did you go at all to Pretsch? I was in Pretsch School once or twice. being given and preparations were being made for the mission to Russia? the middle of June, and I retained my residence in Berlin and merely went to Dueben by car not every day because I still had to complete my affairs in the department economics.
being made for the mission?
Q You were in Dueben during the preparation for the mission? say any more exactly. I went to Dueben for several hours and when the advance was at hand, one day before I remained in Dueben.
Q Was Ohlendorf there?
Q Did you see Ohlendorf in Dueben?
Q And didn't he talk with you about the mission which was to be performed in Russia?
Q No one mentioned the Fuehrerorder at all to you in Dueben?
Q Did Ohlendorf tell you what the purpose of the mission was? Jobs in the occupied areas; I did not get to hear the Fuehrerorder until we left Dueben by speaking to commando leadersand with Ohlendorf.
Q When did Ohlendorf tell you about the Fuehrer order? today whether we spoke about it already on the way when I spoke about It to the commando leaders.
Q Did you travel with Ohlendorf from Dueben?
Q Did you travel in the same car with him?
A No. There ware 180 vehicles and a fewdays before Ohlendorf gave me the job to carry out this motorized advance and to see that it was correctly carried out; therefore, I was on a motocycle during the entire advance.
Q When did he tell you that you were to be his deputy?
Q Well, now, you were his deputy, weren't you?
A No. I wasnever his deputy. I merely was representative for my sphere as chief in department III.
Q Do you remember when you left Dueben, what day? you exactly.
PRESIDENT: Very well, I am sorry to have interrupted you, Dr. Gawlik. BY Dr. GAWLIK: you did not attend this gathering in Pretsch when the Fuehrerorder was known? whom this order was given for its execution. As the future head of Department 3 I was not even asked to participate in this meeting. to which persons? Tint is to say, to those people who had something to do with the execution of the order. order?
A No. This did not belong to the missions of Leader 3. it in this first garrison?. killing of defenseless people and because I considered the killing of defenseless people generally as incorrect no matter with what weapons it is carried out.
carrying out of the order as Director 3. Can you motivate this answer a little more in detail? out reports, of gathering material, of maintaining constant contact with the local agencies, and not of the carrying out of this order.
Q Where was the garrison of the group staff -- during' the time you belongedto the group staff? the 11th Army or nearby.
Q How large was the number of members of the group staff?
A The group staff consisted of eight officers. The administrative officer for the Departments 1 and 2, that is, Personnel and Administration, the Director 3, that wasmyself; the adjutant; the interpreter; the doctor; the chief of the police company; the motor pool expert - I think that is all.
Q What was your job and mission within the group staff? Ohlendorf had told me to keep up liaison with the 11th Army and he made that my field, too, Director 3, just a few brief examples? members of the commando. Every commando had either an officer or an appropriate non-commissioned officer, but unfortunately only one person usually who had the same mission in his area. That is to say, he had to make reports about the morale of the population, about the situation in the spheres off public life which I have mentioned before, and to report to his agency, that is, the Division of Corp and keep them informed currently and also to pass on these reports to the group.
These could only be symptomatic reports about such large areas. I would merely like to mention that the expert 3 of the commando 10A, for example, had to work in an area which is half as large as Bavaria.
receive their money? population, that is to say, from the Ukrainians and the Tartars, who because of their political opinions voluntarily put themselves at the disposal of such work, and also from the agriculture leaders so far as they were available and other agencies. authorities. That is, a report as to the harvest for instance went to the Food Ministry by way of the RSHA, and, moreover, these reports went to the various staff sections of the 11th Army. For example, to the Chief of Staff, and to the Commanding General himself if it was important, and to the C-II; to the Economic Commanders, to the agriculture leadership, to the Quartermaster with C-IV, and to I-B, that is also C-IV. in these reports during this time which you made them out? there is only one or two reports which are concerned with those missions, but such reports were currently made out, and the were included in the Situational Report to much a greater extent. Furthermore, more extensive special reports, for example, asreport which I made out myself about the entire economic structure of the Crimea, or about the Tartars. Such reports are not included in these Situational Reports. Furthermore, the almost daily reports which were sent to the local agencies are missing in these Situational Reports. In order to give only two or three examples, in every report there was something said about the morale, not once but in every locality which was newly conquered; and the food, situation of the population, the re-establishment of industry, and so forth. The reports show that all phases of public life were considered, so that I don't think I need give any other examples.
DR. GAWLIK: Your Honor, in order to prove the activity of the witness in Einsatzgruppe, I shall submit parts of these documents as exhibits in order to prove what the defendant actually did in the Einsatzgruppe.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you submitting it now, or will you submit them with your document book -- I am sorry. Do you intent to submit them now, or with your document book?
DR. GAWLIK: In my document book.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q What mission did you have as an expert for Army matters? which I don't want to go into detail again. Furthermore, the reports about partisan intelligence, which were always given to Einsatzgruppe by the kommandos, I had to make out these partisan reports, and sent them to the 11th Army in care of the staff for combatting partisans. Furthermore, I had to take care of the military decorations for members of the Einsatzgruppe-D, and I had to discuss these with the G-I, and to submit them to him. commando? Communist functionaries?
Q Did you ever give an order to kill such people?
Q Did you ever pass on such an order to kill these people? execution of these people?
the English, I submit to you Exhibit 28, Document No. 3055, which is Schubert's affidavit. In this affidavit Schubert states the following: In December 1941 I was ordered by Ohlendorf-Seibert to supervise the execution of about 700 to 800 people, and to inspect it, which was near Simferopol," Are these statements correct? say how Schubert came about to make this statement, for I was not in Russia at all during this period of time, I was in Berlin. Only for this reason I could not have given this order to Schubert; whether he formulated the statement, I don't know. group-staff? Einsatzspecial-commandos?
Q When did you hear about the individual executions? learned about then through the reports which the Einsatzcommando sent to the Einsatzgruppe. on by the Einsatzcommandos and special commandos?
A I didn't see this possibility because the chief of Einsatzgruppe himself didn't have this possibility. I had a lower rank, a lower ranking position. Once I witnessed when the chief of Einsatzgruppe tried to do something about this order. This was in Nikolajew, the occasion of Himmler's visit at the beginning of October 1941, during a dinner which took place at that time in which I participated. There were in attendance about twenty or twenty-five persons, and these were officers from the offices of commanders in the vicinity who had been called together for this occasion, and, there were several escorting officers of Himmler's present.
I was a witness on this occasion when after the dinner Ohlendorf addressed Himmler concerning this order, mentioning especially the difficulty of carrying it out; the difficulty for the men who had to carry out this order. I was sitting across the table, Ohlendorf was sitting next to Himmler, and I waited with, great expectancy of what Himmler mould answer to this, but Himmler did not react at all on this. I personally saw no possibility of speaking to Himmler. He was constantly surrounded by high ranking officers.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't quite understand what you mean, witness, by saying, "That Himmler didn't react at all," Did he say anything?
THE WITNESS: No, he said nothing, Your Honor. I notice from his reaction that he was unwilling, and didn't want to go into a debate.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, now, going into a debate goes far beyond a mere answer. Did he not say something; to Ohlendorf who had addressed a proposition to him?
THE WITNESS: No, he didn't say anything, but he turned to his righthand neighbor in order to discuss something with him.
THE PRESIDENT: He didn't say a word to Ohlendorf?
THE WITNESS: About this subject nothing, but, of course, later they discussed something about other things.
THE PRESIDENT: When Ohlendorf presented his proposition to him, was it a long statement or a short statement?
THE WITNESS: It was not much longer than I just described it. He especially pointedout the difficulty of his men when carrying out this order.
THE PRESIDENT: Did Himmler apparently listen to Ohlendorf's statement?
THE WITNESS: By all meanshe listened to it. He must have heard it, because I heard it, and I was sitting across the table.
THE PRESIDENT: And you say Himmler made no reply?
THE WITNESS: That is right, Himmler made no reply, and I considered that as an answer.
THE PRESIDENT: Did Himmler by any action, by any facial expression, reprove Ohlendorf for having made the suggestion which he did?
THE WITNESS: He was evidently dissatisfied by turning to his righthand neighbor, and he didn't react at all.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, you say he didn't react at all. You mean he didn't react favorably?
THE WITNESS: I mean by this, Your Honor, that he merely didn't give an answer, but turned definitely to his righthand neighbor in order to discuss something else.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, he turned to his righthand neighbor and spoke about something else?
THE WITNESS: Yes, that is right. That I must assume.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. The Tribunal will be in recess until tomorrow morning. Do you have something to say, Mr. Walton? No. The Tribunal will be in recess until tomorrow morning at 9:30.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is in recess until 0930 tomorrow morning.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 0930 hours, 17 November 1947) 0930-1630, Justice Michael A. Musmanno,
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats.
Military Tribunal II is now in session. God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q Witness, from Document Book III_D, Page 34 of the English, Page 60 of the German book I submit to you Exhibit 158, Document No-2859. This is your affidavit. In this affidavit you have said the following: "Since I took an officer's training course in the Army, my chief, Ohlendorf, ordered me to concern myself with questions of training within the unit." Can you explain these statements in detail? two days before, I assembled the drivers of the entire Einsatzgruppe in order to organize a motorized march column, because these drivers were not trained for driving in a motorized column. For this purpose I conducted several driving tests. During the advance of the column to the garrison I also saw to it that this motorized column proceeded in good order. After reaching our garrison I no longer had anything to do with this training since the commandos were now distributed. The men were all trained. The members of the Security Police had been trained in the school in Pretsch. The members of the Waffen-SS had been trained in their units, and the men of the police had also been trained, in their units.
Q What do you mean "by the expression "training"?
Q What kind of training is this? column, for every officer who was in a motorized unit knows that this is not taken for granted.
Q Were you ever deputy of the Chief of Einsatzgruppe D?
Q From Document Book III_D, Page 1 of the English Document Book, Page 1 of the German, I submit to you Exhibit 148, Document NO. 2856. This is Ohlendorf's affidavit of the 2nd of April, 1947. In this affidavit Ohlendorf has made the following statements: "Since he" -- and this means you -- "was the senior officer in point of service after me, he was entrusted by me with the duties of a deputy during my absence." When Ohlendorf was examined on the witness stand he said the following about this point. This is the transcript of the 9th of October, 1947, Page 577 of the German transcript. I don't know the page in the English transcript. "This means that he was my deputy in the staff of the Einsatzgruppe, "but not the deputy for the entire area of the Einsatzgruppe." Please comment on this. commando leaders Seetzen and Mueller had higher ranks, and two commando leaders had the same rank, As far as my sphere 3 is concerned I represented Ohlendorf in it in the staff of the Einsatzgruppe. That is, for the SD reports and for the liaison with the Army, As far as any executive missions are concerned, I was not competent for them during my time. Page 141 of the German text. I submit to you Exhibit 28, Document NO3055. This is Schubert's affidavit. In this affidavit Schubert states the following: "In October 1941 I was assigned to the Einsatzgruppe D. Ohlendorf was the chief of the Einsatzgruppe and Willy Seibert his deputy."
Are these statements correct? to my position in the staff, which he must have been thinking of when he said this, but this does not include a competence as deputy as far as dealing with the commando leaders was concerned. German. I submit to you Exhibit 4, Document NO. 2716. This is Schubert's affidavit of the 4th of February, 1947. Under No. 8 Schubert said the following: "When Ohlendorf was absent from the staff of the Einsatzgruppe no reports were sent to Berlin. As a rule his deputy Seibert accompanied him on these tours of inspection and I was ordered to look after the house', without, however, being allowed to solve any problems which might occur. I have never been initiated into secret orders and when Ohlendorf and Seibert were absent from the staff, no decisions could be made." Is it correct that no decisions could be made when Ohlendorf and you were absent from the staff? himself when he said this, for if Ohlendorf whom I usually accompanied was absent from the staff of the Einsatzgruppe, then no decisions could actually be made by Schubert in any manner, but this also shows that no current decisions were to be made in the staff, for otherwise the chief of the Einsatzgruppe would have had to appoint an authorized deputy during his absence. D with other agencies in the Army? the senior regimental commander. This regimental commander cannot worry about the usual business transactions in the staff, but in the staff the divisional commander is represented by the senior staff officer for these transactions.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, do you not have in the German Army a vice-divisional commander?
THE WITNESS: No, as far as I know there is no vice-divisional commander.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
Q. (By Dr. Gawlik) From Document Book III-D, Page 34 of the English, Page 60 of the German, I submit to you Exhibit 158, Document NO-2859. This is your affidavit of the 1st of April, 1947. In this affidavit you have said the following; "I never was appointed Ohlendorf's deputy for Einsatzgruppe D." Is this statement correct?
A. Yes, the statement is correct.
Q. In this affidavit you further stated, "However, I regarded myself as his deputy in all matters which Chief 3 had to work cut. As senior officer on the staff of the Einsatzgruppe I took over all tasks within the group whenever Ohlendorf was absent from the group." What do you mean by tasks of the group?
A. Tasks within the group meant within the staff. That was not the usual, customary use of the word, but an inclusion of the commandos would have been a wrong conclusion.
Q. In what matters were you the deputy of Ohlendorf within the staff during his absence?
A. In the staff I was the deputy for my sphere, for the SD reports, and for the liaison with the Army, and during his absence I was deputy for the current transactions of the staff.
Q. Were you also the deputy for my executive missions?
A. No, I have already said that for executive missions I was competent neither when Ohlendorf was present nor when he was absent.
DR. KOESSEL: Dr. Koessel deputising for Dr. Hoffmann for the Defendant Nosske.
The Defendant Nosske is sick and asks that he be excused for a moment.
THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal will take Defendant Nosske out because of his illness.
Q. (By Dr. Gawlik) the staff when Ohlendorf was absent from the group?
A. For this purpose the missions of the staff would have to be described briefly. It was not that current requests of the commandos had to be handled which would have made it necessary to come to immediate decisions.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Gawlik; the Defendant Schulz will be excused for a few moments.
A. (continuing) This was especially true of the executive missions. The orders had been given clearly. The additional orders of the 11th Army were known to the commandos. They were announced publicly everywhere, and the directives for carrying out executions had been regulated by the chief of the Einsatzgruppe at the beginning, May I briefly describe a day as it passed, as it went on when Ohlendorf was on leave between March and the second half of April, 1942? I had to collect the reports coming from the commandos. I had to discuss these reports with the agencies, Thus, every day appointments for conferences were made, for there was not only one Army agency but five to six. Visitors from these agencies had to be received. In the meantime the Army had called up and asked for an immediate submission of the result of the partisan reconnaissance mission of the last few days, and may I add that these months were the climax in the partisan warfare in the Crimea. I had to compile these reports too, and to submit them to the Staff for Partisan Warfare of the Eleventh Army. Just in these very weeks it happened that I was ordered to three or four front assignments of the Army, and often I was not with the staff for about two or three days myself.
I can prove these front assignments. After my return reports which had come in in the meantime had to be worked on again.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, these reports which you received, from the commandos, did they cover all activities of the commandos?
THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: That would include executions?
THE WITNESS: I also received reports and passed on reports which included executions, where it was reported that commandos had carried out executions.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
Q. (By Dr. Gawlik) Was during Ohlendorf's absence the group staff active at all in reference to executions?
A. The group staff hardly became active when Ohlendorf was there, and when Ohlendorf was not there any work with executions or any inspections of executions did not take place.
Q. Perhaps you can comment in this connection on this: Were the executions missions of the staff or were they in other fields?
A. The group staff, during my entire presence in Russia., did not have to carry out any executions. Therefore, it never occurs in documents. We did not have to deal with such questions in the staff.
Q. Did you ever during Ohlendorf's absence give any executive orders to the leaders of the special and Einsatz Kommandos?
A. No, I did not.
Q. According to page 236 of the German record, the prosecution has interpreted your affidavit as follows: Seibert says in his affidavit that in certain questions he was the deputy of Ohlendorf. Is this interpretation correct?
A. I agree to this interpretation by the prosecution, for it is not said that I was complete deputy of Ohlendorf but only for certain questions. For certain questions means for those fields which I have already listed in my own affidavit, namely, for the SD reports and for the liaison with the Army.
Q. Did executive questions belong to this list of questions which you had to deal with?
A. No, as I have already said, they did not.
Q. Who was deputy in the place of the group staff when you accompanied Ohlendorf on his trips?
A. At the garrison of the staff there was no authorized deputy in the staff during these official trips for the entire Einsatzgruppe, If Ohlendorf was on official trips I usually accompanied him, and it certainly would, have been senseless to take along his deputy on all these many COURT II CASE IX trips, for just during these periods of absence a deputy in all matters would have had to remain at the garrison or at the headquarters of the staff, especially since these official trips often lasted one week.
Because of the large distances in Russia and becuase of the bad road conditions, may I add here that if it rained we could not proceed for one or two days because 80% of the roads were merely field paths.
Q. Who was Ohlendorf's deputy at the end of April and in May, 1942, when Ohlendorf was in Prague?
A. When Ohlendorf went to Prague, end of April, beginning of May, 1942, I accompanied him. I participated in the conference in Prague which lasted several days. In this time too there was no deputy for all questions with the headquarters of the staff.
Q. According to page 236 of the German record the prosecution has said that you were Ohlendorf's chief of staff for security questions. Is that statement correct?
A. There was never a chief of staff for security questions with Einsatzgruppe D. Therefore, I could never have been it.
Q. Were you ever chief of staff of the Einsatzgruppe D?
A. During my entire presence in Russia there never was a chief of staff or a leader of the staff in the Einsatzgruppe D?
Q. Did you ever handle any security questions in Einsatzgruppe D?
A. I do not know exactly what is meant by security questions. As far as any orders or measures are concerned about the security of the operational area, I did not deal with such. Of course, I worked on reports from the Kommandos which also concerned the security in the entire area.
Q. What do you mean by working on reports?
A. The Kommandos sent the reports to the group, that is, the staff. What I mean by this is that these reports were compiled, by me and were submitted to the chief of the Einsatzgruppe as a draft. As far as they were concerned with summarized activity reports all reports were, as far as I remember, signed by the chief of the Einsatzgruppe and they were then sent on to the RSHA.
Q. Did I understand you correctly that you meant by working on reports that you compiled the reports from the Kommandos and then passed them on to the superior agencies; is that correct?
A. I must distinguish between my own work and the SD reports. Here, whenever reports came in I questioned the Kommandos, I laid down directives, I decided what matter was to be treated in the reports and how it was to be treated. These statements, which also included executions, were included by me in the situation reports in many cases. Otherwise, I had nothing to do with handling this matter,
Q. Is it correct then that your work was only concerned with making out the reports?
A. That is correct, for I would not have been in a position to make any inquiry or to even make decisions about facts in these reports, because I was not trained for this and because there were no other trained officers in the group. The staff did not have one single interrogating officer.
Q. Did your work also include the ordering or carrying out of security measures?
A. No, I heard about these measures afterwards through reports.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, I don't understand your statement. The staff did not have a single interrogating officer.