loose bundles, and five or six men carried on the work in three attic rooms in the Prinz Albrecht Palais.
DR. MEYER: Your Honor, I have finished, one phase, and shall now come to the acceptance in the SD, and I think it is a splendid time to have the noon recess.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I think that is a very good idea. The Tribunal will be in recess until 1:45.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will be in recess until 1345 hours.
(The court recessed until 1345 hours, 25 November 1947.)
Court No. II, Case No. IX.
(The hearing reconvened at 1355 hours, 25 November 1947)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. RIEDIGER: Your Honor, the Tribunal has granted me that in the case of Haensch, Mrs. Elisabeth Reimann will be heard as a witness. The witness is present. She is in a very delicate position because her father, who is 75 years old has to be operated upon. It is a complicated operation, and the father only wants to be operated upon if he can see his daughter again before undertaking it. The physician cannot wait the operation, and I would, therefore, like the Tribunal to grant me to hear the witness, Reimann, in the witness stand tomorrow morning. The prosecutor and also the defense counsel of the defendant Braune agreed to it. The examination will only take a very short time as the witness is only supposed to be asked when Haensch left fot the front.
PRESIDENT: Yes, especially in view of the fact that you tell us that the examination won't take too much time. I don't think that that little interruption will unduly spoil the continuity of the present defendant's case; so that it will be entirely in order for you to present that witness tomorrow morning.
DR. RIEDIGER: Thank you.
PRESIDENT: Yes. We might make an announcement to the defense counsel now about the weekend. Thursday is a holiday known as Thanksgiving. It is an American holiday. It comes the fourth Thursday of each November, and since it comes toward the end of the week and many like to avail themselves of that continuous three or four day period, we won't have court on Friday either, so that when we recess tomorrow afternoon we will reconvene the following Monday at the usual time. And while we are discussing things of this character, it might be well that the defense counsel who have already completed their cases see to it now that their document books are presented without undue delay to the defense information center so that the translation and the mimeographing may be done now, because if you wait until later there will be such a congestion Court No. II, Case No. IX.
that it will be impossible to get out all the document books. So, please, those who have completed their cases, get their document books in as soon as possible.
DR. MAYER: Your Honor, before I begin with the direct examination of the witness, I would like to make one little observation. When before the recess I asked the witness for the subject of his thesis, he mentioned that the subject of his thesis was the Distraint. This was not contained in the translation of the interpreter. In order to prevent any doubts or any distortion, I want to mention here that this thesis from civil law, it dealt merely with the question, how a sentence, resulting from a personal action of an obligee can be carried out in practice. It has nothing to do with the police matters or with the subject of police.
PRESIDENT: That explanation is very clear and it will now appear in the transcript, of course.
Court No. II, Case No. IX.
DIRECT EXAMINATION - (Continued) BY DR. MAYER: and you explained to us the situation which you found after your arrival in Berlin. With this, we now want to come to the subject of your activity within the SD, and I ask you to explain to the Tribunal your activity in Berlin during the first months. practically nothing, therefore, the first month was spent in organizing, in creating the technical organization and the general organization. We started files, and a card index. Apart from that, in the rural districts, in the sectors in the then prevailing SD sectors, people had to be found who were capable of dealing with such tasks and problems. After this was done, in March or April 1935, these new collaborators were called together in Berlin and here for the first time the new collaborators were told about these new tasks and the purpose of this new department. ceived by the old SD man? fight difficulties. These difficulties varied from the lack of understanding until open refusal. As people who had studied, we were called members of the intelligencia.
Q What was Heydrich's own attitude concerning this new assignment? judging from the situation at the time, I presumed that he was in favor of this particular department, at least at the time. men?
A No, unfortunately not. In the course of years, I began to realize that Heydrich did not do anything about these contrasts but on the contrary that he supported them. He did not want unity but he was of the opinion, Court No. II, Case No. IX.
divide and rule. with Heydrich. Is that quite true in spite of your activity of three and a half years in the SD main office?
A Yes, that is correct. I never reported to Heydrich officially, although I was for almost four years in the SD main office. I only heard Heydrich speak on bigger meetings.
Q Is the same true for Himmler?
Q What, was your actual work in the SD? istration was my task. In addition I was given the department education where I had to deal with student and university matters and also the department party and state which, however, never got over a sort of embryonic state. of the SD?
A I shall illustrate it with a few examples. On the legal field, the problem of the contrasts of the legal institutions of the state and the legal institutions of the party was dealt with. The contrasts, for instance, between the Reich Ministry of Justice on the one side, and the National Socialist Lawyers League, that is the Academy for German Law under the later Reich Minister Frank were so strong that I experienced that the Minister of Justice officially prohibited his own officials to participate in dealing with legal problems which the Academy of German Law had taken up and forbade them to participate in any of the work of the German Academy of Law. We also reported about the training problem. While until 1933 numerous assessors were without work, in 1935 already there were the first symptoms of a lack of lawyers. This again has had as its consequence that for the new generation of lawyers, conditions were made easier which were looked upon in a critical way for the purpose of agood legal training. This also was reported about. Generally, reports were made about new laws and their practical Court No. II, Case No. IX.
effects and their reception in lawyers' circles, and in larger circles of the population. In the field of administration there was the problem of the Reich reform which was dealt with mainly. The question of the increasing subdivision of the administration and in this connection the problem of a unified administration, here again, contrasts were pointed out of the lower authorities, for instance, I think in particular about the contrasts in district areas between the local counsel and the area leader, the kreisleiter. In the field of education, I remember in particular a detailed report concerning the Adolf Hitler schools. I am still convinced until this very day, that is, thanks to the SD, that these schools were not as largely as was planned,before, instituted in all districts and areas, but that it was only one of the experiments on the way to a final school reform and was also regarded as such. We reported about the problem, Hitler Youth, Parents and School, which concerned larger circles, especially after 1933. On many occasions we pointed out how unfortunate it was that the then Reichsjugendfuehrer, the leader of the German Youth, Baldur von Schirach, did not try to achieve a cooperation between the parents and school and Youth Leader, but by attacking the teachers increased these contrasts. We were of the conviction that he did not do a good service to the German youth with that. criticised the existing institutions. Did you want to say that you worked against national socialism?
A No, on the contrary. If we criticized, for instance, the Adolf Hitler schools, then this happened for the reason that we were of the conviction, and this was clearly expressed from all the voices coming from all over the country, from national socialist circles as well as from educators, that these Adolf Hitler schools were, if expressed in a slightly exaggerated manner, were very bad for national socialism. I don't want to maintain in any way that we worked against national socialism as it was understood by us. Just the contrary was true.
Q Did you deal with matters of students and universities at that time?
Court No. II, Case No. IX.
A Yes, I was particularly interested in student problems. And I believe that the information service of the SD contributed to the fact that at the end of 1936 or 1937, I don't remember exactly, that the then student leader was released and that that was the end of a very unfortunate development which had taken place until then. training?
A Yes, but it was not easy. I either had to do my work in the evening or at night, or if I was working in the law courts in the daytime, I had to do my SD work at night.
Q What salary did you receive when you were in the SD? per month. Later on 300 RM gross amount. My first salary when I was married in 1936 was as chief of a department just under 300 reichsmarks net.
Q But you were in charge of the main department, were you not?
A Yes. From April 1945 I was practically in charge of a main department which, however, was in its early stages at that time. I am sorry, that was 1935. The salary as chief of a main department, I never received. Until '37 or the beginning of '38 I was paid as a referent, and later on I was paid as a chief of a department.
that it could not pay its officials betters.
Q When did you pass your assessor examination?
A On the 11th of May, 1936. I graduated as assessor at the Reich Legal Commission in Berlin.
Q What was the course of your official career? official.
Q But you were an Oberregierungsrat finally?
A That is correct. That, perhaps, I may explain very briefly how this came about. After I had left the state service for one and a half years, the budget was cut down and the SD came into financial difficulties so that it could not pay its officials any longer. At that time the personnel chief, and I also thing the staff leader of the Main SD Office, approached my and asked me to have myself appointed as assessor formally with the Gestapo but only for a short time. I was assured that it was only a matter of form in order to save the SD from paying my salary. My practical activities would not change. I would work in the SD as I had done before.
Q Did you agree to this arrangement? which was done for financial reasons in the interest of the SD, not in my own interest, I agreed.
Q Was this promise then kept?
A No, unfortunately, if was not kept. As early as spring, 1938, Dr. Best, the deputy chief of the Gestapo Office, requested that after all, since I was paid by the State Police, that I should also serve in the State Police.
Q Were there any other reasons which moved Dr. Best to take up this attitude?
the authorities, between the department law and administration in the Gestapo Office, which was subordinated to Dr. Best, and between my department, law and administration. Perhaps I may, in order to throw light on this development, in order to make these conflicts understandable. From the very beginning, that is, from early 1933, Heydrich on one hand was Chief of the SD, and on the other hand, he was first of all inspector of the Gestapo, but only in Bavaria, because both these agencies were in Munich at the time. It autumn, 1934, the SD Main Office was transferred to Berlin and became an independent office of the SS, and Heydrich became chief of the Gestapo Office in Berlin. The situation at that time was such that the SD, through its intelligence service, was legitimised by the party but not through its activity in the domistic service information which were dealt with at the time by Professor Hoehn. The next stept of development was, I think in November, 1936, when the Main Office Security Police was created after the appointment of the Reichsfuehrer SS as Chief of the German Police. At that time, there were certain tensions between the State Police and the SD in its enemy intelligence service, because the State Police, which dealt with the problems of opponents of the Reich, wanted for reasons understandable that they should also have to deal with the intelligence service in this particular field and thus it came about that eventually even the intelligence service was taken over more and more by the State Police. The decree concerning the separation of these two spheres from 1938 was to a certain degree only the confirmation of a state of affairs which had already been largely created before, and only 1939, when the RSHA was founded, brought a clear and final solution of these problems. All the activities concerning enemy intelligence became the task of the State Police, and Office 3 became an office merely dealing with domestic spheres. In the course of this development, the Secret State Police Office went further and expressed their misgivings and claimed authority in the field of law and administration.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Mayer, a certain amount of background is not only in order, but really necessary; however, do you think that it is necessary to go into a great deal of detail on these various office ramifications?
THE WITNESS: I think I may answer this. I had, just finished. I only wanted to say now that Dr. Best claimed tasks for the State Police which we claimed for the SD, and those were the conflicts which I tried, to explain, and therefore I tried to display the development. Dr. Best used this pretext and tried to solve the problem by insisting that I be appointed to the State Police Office, and therefore the source of all the trouble was once and for all eliminated. these promiese, without objection?
A No, I did not. In autumn, 1938, I was transferred as the Deputy State Police leader to Muenster.
Q Why did you not leave the SD at that time? of the opinion that one must go on with a task which one has recognised as justified, that one must not give it up just because one doesn't succeed, the first time. Furthermore, I succeeded, with the aid of Herr Ohlendorf to be appointed the Chief of the SD office in Muenster, so that I practically remained in the SD service. combined when you were in Muenster?
A No, it could not. I did not want to combine these two tasks because I wanted to force my remaining in the SD, and therefore I did not indulge in any activities as Deputy Chief in Muenster, but I only dealt with my SD work.
Q Did you Stapo chief approve of your attitude?
A No. After, a few months, I think it was in February 1939, he left for Berlin. He complained about me, said that I was not doing any work, and he asked for my release.
Q Were you then transferred? Instead of returning me to my SD activities, I was taken out from the SD completely and I was transferred to Koblenz as Deputy State Police Chief without giving me an SD office.
Q Were you content with this transfer?
A No, I wasn't. I tried again to return to the SD, and in summer, it was in July 1939, I had actual hopes that I would be eventually succeed. In the course of the planning of the new Office III in the RSHA, which was founded in September 1939, I was recalled from my leave by Herr Ohlendorf, in order to assist him with the working-out of an organization plan of the new Office III. During this collaboration, Ohlendorf told me that he had asked Heydrich to transfer me into this office which was to be created and that Heydrich had agreed to it. It had already assumed, such concrete shape that Herr Ohlendorf asked me to look for a new apartment in Berlin and to prepare my moving.
Q Why did this plan fail? this re-transfer and he achieved his aim, which was that I should remain in Koblenz. This I found out shortly after the outbreak of the war, when the new Office III had. already been created and I was not called to Berlin. I went to Berlin, and there I found out through Ohlendorf that Dr. Best had prevented my recall.
Q Why did you then not leave the State Police?
A War had broken out meanwhile. I was appointed for the Security Police for a war essential task, and all attempts to go back to the SD had failed and now I could not do anything because during the war there was only one motto for all of us, which was to obey and do one's task where one was put.
I may add I did not try to be re-transferred to the SD from the State Police, not because I was against this work as such, because I regarded it as necessary and absolutely legal, but from the very first beginning of the SD I was so interested in this vital task of the SD that I wanted to go back to it. Police activity was not my line. as having joined the State Police voluntarily?
A No, I must reject this. Concrete promises were made and assurances which induced me to join the State Police formally, but no actual activity was connected with it. One had promised me expressly that I would remain in my SD work. This formal joining of the Stapo in connection with certain promises, was then used in order to command, to order me about. I tried to have these orders revoked, and in summer 1939 I had concrete hope that this was really only a temporary state of affairs and that I would he able to return to the SD very soon, but now I found out shortly after the outbreak of the war that this effort had failed and I was under the war law assigned to State Police work, and I had no possibility now to leave the Stapo and return to the SD. This was made impossible by the legal decrees from Berlin at that time. I think this was confirmed explicitly during the IMT. return to the SD Hauptamt, Main Office? What consequences did it have for your SD membership? ship because I remained SD Abschnittsfuehrer -- that means leader of a section -- in Muenster, and therefore I was still in the SD. Also, my transfer to Koblenz in April, 1939,I did not regard, as an actual leaving of the SD but only as a temporary state of affairs, as I expected to be called into the newly created Office III to Berlin. As my final leaving the SD, I regard that moment when Dr. Best presented my being recalled to office III. That must have been August or September, and I found out about it in the end of October when I was in Berlin. That was actually the date when I left the SD. From that moment on, as every other member of the State Police in my position. I only were the SD uniform I had no function within the SD and no activity. I only were the uniform, the SS uniform with the SD insignia.
Q When were you transferred to Wesermuende?
April, 1940, If I remember correctly.
Q For how long were you active in Wesermuende? to Halle on the Saale River, also as the Chief of the State Police Office.
Q What were the reasons that Caused your new transfer to Halle?
A I never learned the reasons. I can only say that I wasn't very pleased about this new transfer, but I already said that I was unable to protests. We had to obey. questions. First of all, the one -- were you ever favored as an official promoted by favor?
A No, I think I can say the contrary. According to the regulations of the Ministry of the Interior, I could have claimed as a Praedikatsjurist, an honor graduate to be promoted to government councillor (Regierungsrat) after two years. I may explain here, of course, that the word "praedikatsjurist" is difficult to translate. I must point out here that it means that both exams are passed with honors, above average. As such a lawyer, I could have become a government councillor after two years, but I only was appointed Regierungsrat, government councillor after three and a half years, and until my promotion to the chief government councillor, senior government councillor, it took more than four years. Even there, it took exceptionally long.
Q What do you think are the reasons for this? Berlin and then later in Muenster provoked a certain anger with Heydrich and Best and also the Chief of the Office IV. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q What were you angry about? silence, but that I objected, I put up a fight, and also that in Muenster I did not carry out any activity.
Q Put up a fight against what? in Muenster, and I put up a fight and I tried therefore to suceed by not doing anything in my job; therefore the chief went to Berlin and said, "Braune is not working, therefore he must berecalled," and that contributed towards my transfer and I was no longer in charge of an SD sector. The State Police was then my main job in Koblenz, and even there I made efforts supported by Ohlendorf to get away, contrary, to the order from Berlin.
Q You were transferred to the State Police in April, 1939?
A No. First in August or September 1938 I was taken from the SD office and I became Deputy Chief of the office in Muenster, of the Gestapo office. There I achieved that I should at the same time get the SD sector, and with this, of course, they were not pleased.
Q But you finally were transferred from the SD into the Gestapo?
Q All right. Then you worked In Muenster, you worked in Koblenz, and you worked in Halle?
A In Muenster, I did not do any work. Through the very fact that I did not do any work I tried to achieve my re-transfer to the SD and therefore people were angry with me. sent you to Koblenz, is that right?
Q And how long did you remain in Koblenz?
Q Well, one year is a long time. You say "only one year." Now, in your whole one year, did you do any work in the office of the Gestapo?
Q Then what were they angry about? You said that you were constantly fighting with them? What was the fighting about?
Heydrich did not like it.
Q How were you fighting? This word "fight" is rather a broad term. Just what did you do? You were there in Koblenz and you were carrying out the duties of your office, weren't you?
A Perhpas, Your Honor. I should say I tried very hard to come back to the SD.
Q Yes, but in Koblenz you carried out the duties of your office? which was not without reason because I had told him that I wanted to come back to the SD.
Q. Yes, we understand that, that you were always eager to get back to the SD, out at the same time you were holding the office as Chief of the Gestapo, and you worked at that for a whole year.
A. In Koblenz I was not Chief; I was Deputy Chief.
Q. All right. AS Deputy Chief, then, you worked for a whole year.
A. Yes.
Q. Then you became Chief of the office in Wesermuende.
A. Yes.
Q. How long did you remain there?
A. There I remained one year.
Q. Yes. That was another year there. So that in two years you worked at Gestapo work?
A. Yes.
Q. And you threw all your energies into that job as a public servant would?
A. I think I have done my duty there.
THE PRESIDENT: That is all I want to find out. Proceed, Dr. Meyer.
DR. MEYER: Your Honor, I want to point out a mistake in the translation. The witness said in his examination that his promotion to government councillor took three-andone-half years. The translation said three years. I should like to rectify this mistake.
THE PRESIDENT: That it took him three-and-one-half years to get the promotion, instead of three? Very well, the record will show that correction.
DR. MEYER: With this, your honor, I come to a new set of Questions.........Questions dealing with the assignment of the witness in the East.
Q. (By Dr. Meyer) Witness, how did it cone about that you were assigned to the East?
A. In Halle, I think during the first days of October I received the order iron RSHA that I had been assigned to the eastern assignment and that I had to report at Nikolajew; and there I was to report to the Chief of Einsatzgruppe D, Oberfuehrer Ohlendorf. The original document of this order will be submitted in my Document Book.
Q. What did you do when you received this order?
A. After I had concluded all my affairs in Halle and passed them on to my Deputy, I went to Berlin, where I tried to get some transportation to Nikolajew.......after all, it was more than two thousand kilometers.......I tried with the assistance of the commanding officer of the Wehrmacht to get courier plane passage.
Q. Were you informed by the Reich Security main Office about your new tasks?
A. No, I received no information about my tasks in one East.
Q. Had you been informed by somebody else what tasks you would have to carry out in the East?
A. No, I was not informed by any one. When I left for Russia I did not know any detail of the tasks I was to deal with. The picture I had of at was the usual SD and Security Police work, as it had been carried out in the Western occupied territories. When I left I did not even know what my position would be, because not even that was contained in this order.
Q. Was not the task of a commando chief the only possible one for you?
A. No, not at all. I could have been a liaison officer with the Wehrmacht, apart from kommando chief; or I could have obtained a position in the staff of the Einsatzgruppe.
Q. How did you get from Berlin to Nikolajew?
A. When I tried to get some transportation to Nikolajew in Berlin I met, I think it was in the anteroom of Ohlendorf, Ohlendorf, who happened to be in Berlin to carry out some official tasks..........I told him that I had been assigned to his Einsatzgruppe.
Q. If I understand you correctly, Ohlendorf did not know at the time about your assignment to his Einsatzgruppe?
A. No, he was just as surprised, and I think that I can say that he was as pleased as I was that I was to join him. He had not known about it. But he only learned about it from me.
Q. Did you then go to Nikolajew together with Oberfuehrer Ohlendorf?
A. Yes, I even remember the day. On the 18th of October we left Berlin, with three cars altogether, and arrived in Nikolajew in the night of the 20th or 21st of October. Ohlendorf had with him the Norwegian Police Chief Lie, who inspected the East for about a fortnight in order to get acquainted with the conditions prevailing there.
THE PRESIDENT: Please let me have those dates again. You left Berlin October 18th, and you arrived in Nikolajew when?
WITNESS: In the morning of the 18th we left Berlin, your honor, and we arrived either in the night of the 20th or 21st, or in the night from the 21st to the 22nd of October.
THE PRESIDENT: And when had you met Ohlendorf in Berlin?
WITNESS: That was two or three days before our departure, when I tried to get a plane passage. Of course, when this new situation came up I got a car with a driver in order to be able to accompany Ohlendorf by car, because it was at that time that he assigned me the tasks of taking care of the Norwegian Police Minister Lie, and he attached particular importance to my going with him.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. BY DR. MEYER:
Q. Therefore, after your arrival in Nikolajew your first task was to look alter the Norwegian Police minister Lie?
A. Yes, after we had arrived in Nikolajew, Ohlendorf asked me to look after the Norwegian Police minister and to acquaint myself with the tasks in the Eastern assignment by asking comrades, or by reading files and reports, and so on.
Q. Had you meanwhile learned what position you were to take over?
A. Yes, a few days after our arrival, Ohlendorf told me that I should take over the Kommando 11-b as the Kommando Chief who had been Chief up to now had been transferred to Berlin. Whether my appointment from Berlin had already been received at that point I cannot say now; it is possible that it only had been officially received from Berlin a few days later, but I am not quite certain about this.
Q. How did you find out about the tasks you were to deal with?
A. During the Vary first days I found out about the tasks of an Einsatzkommando from discussions with comrades in the staff of the kommando; also through discussions with the two kommando chiefs, Bersterer and Zapp, who were present at Ohlendorf's office for the purpose of reporting; also by reading files and reports.