In any case, he wasn't more than a corporal.
Q. Do you know for what reason Biberstein was disignated indispensable, and was transferred to the SD?
A. Yes. One day I was ordered to report to Heydrich, and Heydrich told me very harshly, "Hartel, what do you have against Biverstein? Why do you want to see him out of the Church Ministry?" I told him that I had nothing against him, but that he himself had personally expressed the wish to leave the Church Ministry at the very next opportunity. Heydrich thereupon told me, "Good, I will get him out of there," and shortly afterwards Biberstein was made indispensable for the Reich Ministry, or the Gestapo. I don't know exactly what it was.
Q. Did Biberstein apply for such a transfer?
A. Biberstein told me at the time that he didn't know anything about it previously.
Q. Is it correct then that this transfer resulted merely from a conference between Heydrich and you, in your opinion?
A. Yes, but I never heard of the reasons by which that question of Heydrich of what I had against Biberstein could have been caused.
Q. But you understood the question to mean..or, how did you understand the question, whether Heydrich wanted to keep Biberstein in the Church Ministry, or whether he wanted to get him out of there?
A. First when Heydrich wanted to know whether I had any objections against Biberstein, or was he my enemy, or if I had anything against him. He must have heard from somebody, or sother, a remark to the effect that it would be a good idea if Biberstein would leave the Church Ministry, but I don't know the exact background. In any case, the result of this conference was that Heydrich immediately planned on his part to get Biberstein out of the Ministry.
Q. What job or position did Heydrich want to give Biberstein?
A. Heydrich wanted to make Biberstein a Police President, or at least a Police Director.
Q. And what position did he get?
A. There were continuous tensions at the time between the regular police and the security police, and, therefore, as he told me later, Heydrich didn't succeed immediately to get Biberstein a position as Police president, because there were many applicants for that position within the regular police ranks, and Heydrich explained to me that until a position as Police President became available, he would make Biberstein the head of a State Police Agency.
Q. Was this command to be his final position, his final mission?
A. No. Heydrich told me from the beginning that this was only a temporary solution until he would get a position as Police President.
Q. Because of his former profession as a Priest, did Biberstein have difficulties among the Gestapo people, or didn't his early profession make any difference?
A. Biberstein had great difficulties. I was a witness when the then Chief of Office I, Streckenbach, told the then Chief of Office IV, Mueller, by telephone that he had received the order to give Biberstein a State Police position, and that both were angry due to the fact that Biberstein had no previous training in the police department, and that in view of his soft attitude it was senseless to give him such a position.
Q. Did you see Biberstein again during the war?
A. Biberstein was commanding officer of an Einsatzcommando in Rostov, and I do not know exactly whether it was the name of Einsatzcommando, or a special commando, or a commander I don't know, and his job was of two-fold mission, Information Service and Executive; the two missions which in the Reich were subdivided, one to the Gestapo and the Criminal Police as Security Police, and the other to the SD, as the Information Service.
Q. Did he thus become a full time member of the SD through this activity?
A. Through this activity he didn't. There were a number of people from other agencies who had been detailed for the Einsatz, but through the fact of the Einsatz they didn't automatically become members of the SD.
Q. When you met Biberstein again in Kiev, did you hear from him that he had made an application to be transferred back to Germany?
A. Whether he told me about this, I don't know. In any case, he was very unhappy in this position, was very angry, and explained again and again that he wanted to get out of this "pig-sty".
Q. Did Biberstein have a deputy in his office?
A. Originally he had not, but in the course of time, I don't know exactly when, so far as I recall, a Sturmbannfuehrer or Obersturmbannfuehrer Nehring was given to him as a deputy.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, just what was Biberstein referring to as a "pig-sty"?
THE WITNESS: Well, I had used the term "sauladen", but it is about the same. I think he was disgusted.
Q. Well, naturally, he was disgusted, but just what did he mean by a "pig-sty"? When you call something a "pig-sty" certainly you are disgusted, but just what were you referring to?
A. He referred partly to his chief or commander of the Einsatzgruppe, Dr. Thomas, with whom he had very violent differences, and then it referred to his entire activity. It did not agree with his character to carry out executive measures.
Q. What do you mean by executive measures?
A. Execution of sabotuers, or other cases, I didn't know what were the individual cases.
Q. Well, did you understand that Biberstein was conducting executions himself?
A. Whether persoanlly, I don't know, but he gave the order, to rather, sofar as I remember after a through investigation he probably had given the order.
Q. Did he himself give the orders for executions?
A. That was the mission of a commander, to decide these things so far as I know.
Q. How many executions did he order, do you know?
A. I don't know. BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q. Witness, did you see or did you observe Biberstein in his ac tivities in Rostov?
A. No, at the time he was in Rostov I was not in Rostov, but I observed the activity of his predecessor in Stalino, or rather I heard people tell about it.
Q. You only saw Biberstein in Kiev?
A. Yes.
Q. As you say, in June 1943?
A. Yes, that is right.
Q. Is that the correct year? He then went back to the Reich with you?
A. Yes, that is right. We travelled together for a short distance, and somewhere in Rovno we separated.
Q. Do you know whether in the District of Biberstein, mass executions took place at any time?
A. I didn't hear anything about this.
Q. What job did Einsatzgruppefuehrer Thomas have primarily?
A. From the Spring on, when I could observe his activity, Dr. Thomas considered the partisan warfare as his basic mission. The partisan problem in 1942 was the center of his whole activity.
Q. Do you know anything about Thomas' motive for such a specific activity?
A. That was a two-fold motive: For one thing the partisan danger in the north of his area, and in the forests, in the Pripjat marshes, in the upper Dnjepr River, was very great; whereas, in the south, in the plains, where there were no forests, there were, of course, no partisans to this extent, and in the south, therefore, the partisan danger was actually very great and the Army, complained about the interruption of the supply lines by the partisans, and the civil agencies, especially the agricultural leaders, had very much to suffer from the partisans; that was a very objective necessity. At the same time Dr. Thomas was very ambitious, and he wanted to earn his medals, he had a "sore throat", as we used to say.
That also probably played a part, but the basic reason which was the objective necessity.
"sore throat" means in German War language. which one wore around the neck. keen nature of this partisan warfare?
A Yes. Dr. Thomas set up his own partisan combatting staff into which a number of officers were called and the higher SS and police leader Pruetzmann also set up his own partisan combatting staff. Then they took care of the ordnance supply which was necessary to fight partisans, for instance mortars. During the second half of the year 1942 I had the temporary direction of the supply of arms which belonged to Department 2, and I had to worry about mortars and heavy arms in order to combat the partisans. The people of the partisan staff always had access to Thomas, whereas the other people often had to wait very long to see him. Then he himself flow around with an airplane, or he travelled in a special train in the especially crucial partisan areas.
Q Such arms which you have just mentioned weren't they usually with the Einsatzkommandos or Einsatzkommando groups? the army.
Q Is it true or don't you know whether Thomas had a special partisan fighting staff within his staff?
A Yes. I think I have mentioned that he had his own partisan staff. The chief of his partisan staff was simultaneously the G-2 of the partisan fighting staff of the Obergruppenfuehrer Pruetzmann.
units in order to fight the partisans. any statements from Thomas on the subject? he did not like the former theologians and because Biberstein was much too soft for him. Furthermore, Biberstein had a disciplinary proceeding at the end, but what the matter concerned was, I don't know exactly. It was some kind of a complicated matter, but Thomas was very furious and even threatened to have Biberstein shot for military disobedience at the front, but afterwards this proceeding must have been pigeon-holed.
Q Who was Biberstein's predecessor in the EK-6? not know. I know the predecessor in Stalino. I think that was EK-6 but I cannot say this exactly. I was in Stalino twice and there I met Sturmbannfuehrer Moor. Perhaps he was his predecessor, but I do not know exactly.
Q That is correct. Did you have a conference with this Moor about the executions? through southern Russia, and make an extensive report about the spiritual situation in the Soviet Union. At this occasion I visited hundreds of artists, scholars, bishops, etc. and I visited all the scholarly institutes in this area, and I also visited the Einsatzkommandos and asked their commanding officers about the spiritual life in their area. During this conference Moor also told me about his activity, and he told me that after very thorough investigations, after exact examinations he frequently had to have executions carried out. I also remember a statement made by Gruppenfuehrer Dr. Thomas that he was not very sympathetic to this method.
He once objected very strenuously to it that once could not get anywhere with these pedantic legal methods as practiced by Moor .... BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q We don't know who the "he" is. You spoke of Thomas and Moor. Then you have been using a pronoun since, "he". Now, do you mean "Moor" or "Thomas"?
A The last time I meant Thomas. Thomas told me that he had no patience with the correct methods of Moor, and likewise with the correct methods, the way Herr Ohlendorf carried them out, that he did not agree with these methods. Thomas had great antipathy for Ohlendorf just because of his bureaucratic pedantic correctness, as he called it. Thomas said that in Russia one would have to be more generous. BY DR. BERGOLD: explained that he was carrying out executions only after exact investigations? second time in June, I think. The second visit was occasioned by a report which the local SD expert, Graf, had made about the orthodox theologians and their various contacts with the NKVD or to the monarchists or other circles. And this report of the intelligence man at that commando, Graf, interested me very much, of course. So that I visited Stalino once more. Whether the conversation took place during the first or the second visit, I cannot say any more. there were Ukrainians -- Ukrainian militia competent for investigations?
commanders that members of the Ukrainian militia were in the office of the commanding officer and handed in reports about certain occurrences. activity in Russia altogether, did you get to know the so-called Jewish Order, that is an order by Hitler according to which Jews, according to their membership in the Jewish race had to be executed? an order, but on the basis of various facts I concluded that somebody, namely, a very high instance, had given such an order. within the RSHA? BY THE PRESIDENT: spiritual life in Russia? my report. I made out a very extensive report at the time.
Q Did you see him from time to time in Russia?
A No. I only saw him in Russia in 1943 when he had his proceeding against him.
Q Where was this? and he was also in Kiev at the same time because of a disciplinary proceeding. He had been called away from his headquarters. He was inactive in Kiev at the time, and I was inactive and because of our former acquaintance we, of course, talked about various matters.
spiritual things, did you not? specific problem which we might have discussed. each of you found it through your own theological eyes? any specific details about this conversation because I talked with many people about my observations. churches in Russia, the different denominations? there were still smaller groups, such as the Baptists, the Mennonites, and similar groups, but the Orthodox church was subdivided into three main tendencies.
Q I don't mean for you to give me the description of the various churches, you also naturally discussed the Jewish religion, didn't you - the Jewish church? out of my sphere. There was a completely independent Jewish department. It is true that, before the beginning of the war, I was supposed to direct the Jewish Department 2, but .....
Q Well, now, just a minute. You went to Russia to study the spiritual attitude of the people, and you called on various commando leaders and asked them what they found among the population from the spiritual point of view, that is correct, isn't it?
of the Jewish attitude would come up, would it not, from the spiritual side? it would be the natural thing talking about these various churches, the Orthodox Church, the Baptist Church, and so on, also to say something about the Jewish spiritual attitude in Russia? remote because as far as I know there were very few Jews in this area. had many discussions with him, you were both there awaiting some further orders. You had leisure time, and you talked. Now, in these various conversations it would be a natural thing in talking about those churches, the different religions, to say something about the Jews also, wouldn't that be the natural thing, especially for two theologians in conversation? the Jewish problem was such an unpleasant problem for all of us, and such a delicate problem that if one had nothing direct to do with it, one evaded it. interesting subject to you, would it not, your discussing the spiritual values of a people and there are many Jews among those people - wouldn't you naturally, especially in conversation with a brother theologian, say something about what you found among the Jews, or what people said about the Jews?
Q No, No. We are talking about your conversation with Biberstein. I cannot remember that we discussed this problem in detail.
Q In your report did you talk about the Jews? you did not discuss the Jewish situation in detail, but you did make some reference to the Jewish situation in Russia, didn't you?
A I did not say that I didn't say anything about it, but I merely cannot remember any specific detail. conversations?
A Yes. We discussed various things, but whether during my conversation with Biberstein, I do not know, but in various conversations I had.
Q I am speaking about Biberstein. Now, please, in your conversation with Biberstein, did you not, as two brother theologians, make some reference to the Jewish situation and talk about it, it would be the most natural thing in the world, I see nothing illogical about that? natural, of course, it is very probable that we talked about it.
Q All right, now, if you talked about it, wouldn't the most logical thing in the world be to discuss this business of the execution of the Jews? Wouldn't that be natural? That would be the biggest subject, the Jews were being killed and you didn't approve of it, and wouldn't you mention that to him, you know about this, you didn't see the order, but you had heard about it as you have told us, on the basis of certain facts you came to the conclusion that someone in high office had ordered the Jews be killed, and here you are with your brother theologian discussing things leisurely, and you talk about Jews.
Now, wouldn't it be the most logical thing to talk about this order, about killing the Jews? rather I would have to lie if I said we talked about it because I cannot remember that we did, but it is very possible, in fact, very probable that we talked about it. BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q Witness, but you know nothing definite? basis of what the president has said? talked about it, but I cannot remember details. was housed in a special building separate from all the others?
A Yes. It was in its own building under the leadership of Eichmann. This building in the Kurfuerstenstreet was completely separate and was guarded, and no member of any other department of the RSHA was able to enter if he had no proof that he had some official business there. RSHA about the so-called "Jewish Order"? about this order and didn't hear anything. I didn't see the order myself nor did I read it, nor did I hear its wording, but I knew from various facts, or rather, I could conclude from various facts that such an order had been given.
of the RSHA told you positively about the order.
Q Then I have a last question. When did you see Biberstein the last time in Russia?
Q Thank you. Oh pardon me, I have another question. Witness, please give a picture of Biberstein's character as it appeared to you. This is a question which you didn't answer before. I knew from people who know him in his capacity as dean, for example, Brigadier General Hahn, who lived in the same community in which Biberstein was dean, that Biberstein was a great idealist, and he was a national socialist because of full conviction and idealism. I do not consider him as a more ambitious man, but as an absolute idealist. On the basis of the conversations in Kiev, this picture became a little more complete. If I want to mention this, I must go into some detail. I got to know three main groups of people in the Einsatzgruppen. The one group consisted of those who carried out their orders correctly and exactly and for whom the authority who gave the orders was valid, who were very conscious about exact investigations and proceedings the way Thomas reproached Ohlendorf, who either because they were accustomed to comply with the orders exactly or because of their blind adoration of Adolf Hitler carried out the orders and who did not consider themselves competent to criticize these orders in any fashion.
The second group were people who received their orders, but, because they were somewhat different people, soft people, they immediately developed conflicts between their conscience and these orders, who suffered very much, because of these orders and because of their activity. I got to know people who went completely to pieces, who were completely broken and sometimes there were even individual catastrophes. Certain cases -
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Bergold, now he has mentioned Group No. II. Now if he is going to start to give us a lot of individual cases, I think we might be drifting quite far afield, don't you think? He mentioned a third group. I should like him to start on group 3.
THE WITNESS: The third group consists of people who also developed conflicts about these orders and immediately tried to got out of the kommando as soon as possible or who knew how to evade the orders and who very soon were relieved because they were too soft, as one was telling in general about Brigadier General Schulz. It was said that he was relieved because he was too soft. Whether this is correct I do not know, but that is what people were saying.
Q (By Dr. Bergold) Witness, now it would interest me to have you say something about Biberstein.
A Biberstein belonged to this third group. He tried by all means to get out of these conflicts and to get into some other activity.
DR. BERGOLD: Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: I would really like to say, Dr. Bergold, I think we ought to inform Dr. Mayer for the Defendant Braune that in the event the Defendant Biberstein is not well enough to take the stand for the cross-examination which is still pending then, when you have completed with this witness entirely, Dr. Mayer will take up the defense of the Witness Braune.
Very well. The Tribunal will be in recess for fifteen minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. RIEDIGER (for defendant Haensch): Your Honor, I would like you to permit me to put a few questions to the witness, for the defendand Haensch.
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly you may do so. Just before you begin, I would like to make an announcement for the benefit of Dr. Bergold. Dr. Bergold, it seems that your client will be in condition to come to the courtroom to testify and I think it would be much better if we could dispose of the cross examination today rather than put it off to a later time.
Very well. You may proceed. BY DR. RIEDIGER:
Q Witness, do you know the defendant Haensch?
Q Where did you meet him? Office.
Q When and how, and in what capacity, was he active in this office? my memory, joined the SD Main Office. At that time he was in charge of disciplinary and welfare questions in Office I. If I am not mistaken this department was formed into a Gruppe later on.
Q How long was he in this office, in your opinion? campaign.
Q Do you know when that was? because when, in the beginning of January, I arrived at Kiev he was not yet there. That was during the first days of January. Reich Security Main Office went to the Gruppe leaders of Office I.
A I do not think so. Reports from the East, according to my memory, were only submitted to those people who had something to do with the contents of those reports - that is, the Eastern situation. I myself received the Eastern reports as long as I was active in the Berlin office because on various occasions notices were brought in about connections of the NKWD and the Orthodox clergy and other problems. These were mentioned quite shortly, by the way. According to the secrecy decree, I consider it impossible that a sub-department chief, or Referent of Office I, ever received these reports. Even later, during the first half of 1942, when I was, very briefly, in charge of Departments I and II in Kiev, I did not receive these reports any longer, but only during my activity in Berlin, that is, until the end of 1941. As I said, therefore, according to my experiences I deem it impossible that these department chiefs and Referents of Department I ever received these reports. Russian campaign. Will you please do so now.
A That was in the end of 1941 end the beginning of 1942. At the end of 1941 I received the order to go to Russia and in the beginning of 1942, the beginning of January, I arrived in Kiev.
DR. RIEDIGER: Thank you very much.
THE PRESIDENT: Any other defense counsel desiring to cross examine the witness will please step to the podium. BY DR. HEIM (for the defendant Blobel): examination, you arrived at the end of 1941 or the beginning of 1942.
Q Where were you during the first half of 1942?
A I was partly in Kiev, partly on the way; but I always arrived back in Kiev.