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.
Q. What aid you Earn concerning the tasks?
A. There I learned that it was the task of the Einsatzgruppen and Einsatzkommandos to combat enemy sabotage and terror, and to combat enemy intelligence and to carry partisan reconnaissance and SD reporting and information service, as It was done in the Reich; to look after the Ethnic Germans, as far as there were any in existence; and, finally, the difficult task of eliminating Jews, Gypsies, and Communist functionaries and active Communists, on the basis of a Fuehrer order, as far as they could be caught.
Q. Did you have any conversation concerning this task with your Chief?
A. Yes, I had a conversation with Ohlendorf as my superior, a few days later. On that occasion he confirmed these tasks about which I had learned from previous discussions with my comrades and from reading files and reports.
Q. Did he also confirm the order for the shooting of Jews, Gypsies, active Communists?
A. Yes, this also was confirmed by him as an order of the Chief of the state and Superior Commander, Adolf Hitler. Tales hears from him which I had already heard in discussions with comrades, that this order had been made known in Pretzsch and Dueben shortly before they left for Russia, by the Chiefs Streckenbach and Mueller, to all Gruppe chiefs and kommando leaders as an order of Adolf Hitler.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Meyer, would you mind deferring now until after recess for the continuation of the examination?
DR. MEYER: Yes, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will be in recess for fifteen minutes.
(A recess was taken)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. FICHT: Dr. Ficht representing Hoffmann for Nosske. his defense.
THE PRESIDENT: The Defendant Nosske will be excused all day tomorrow from attendance in court in order that be may prepare his defense.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY DR. MAYER: in Nikolaev, and you said that, apart from looking after the Norwegian Police Minister we who was there as a guest and that your superior, Ohlendorf, you received information concerning your tasks, and that Herr Ohlendorf also confirmed the Fuehrer Order to you. Did you believe in this confirmation by your superior? something that was not true. Apart from that, already during the first few days I got some definite instructions concerning this. All comrades to whom I talked about this remembered very well that Himmler had been in Nikolaev at the beginning of October. According to all my comrades, Himmler also talked to the leaders and the men there. Among other things he said that he knew very well how very difficult it was for every individual to carry out this Fuehrer Order, but this Fuehrer Order had been issued by Adolf Hitler as being absolutely necessary in the fight against Bolshevism, a fight for our very existence, and had to be carried through under all circumstances. Adolf Hitler and he, Himmler, alone were responsible for this order and its execution and not the individual leaders or the men who were forced to carry out these orders during the war at the front under martial law. This speech and this manner or speaking was confirmed to me by Herr Ohlendorf expressly, in his capacity as my superior.
issued by Himmler and not by Hitler?
A I considered it quite impossible, and I still do now. that Himmler could have issued such an order of such tremendous significance on his own authority, but it seemed quite impossible to me that he would tell all leaders and men in his speech that this order was definitely confirmed unless this conformed with actual facts
Q Did any other fact show, that this was a Fuehrer decree?
A Yes, several. First of all I thought it impossible that the office chiefs, Streckenbach and Mueller, should announce such an order before the leaders in Dueben and Pretsch unless it was a Fuehrer Order. Furthermore, already during the first few days, I saw from a few reports which I read in the group staff that this order was to be carried out along a front approximately two thousand kilometers long. Also, this order was to be carried out under the sovereign right and the executive power of four Army group chiefs, and fifteen German Army leaders In addition there was the fact that about sixty or seventy reports, contained in the reports of events were given to various agencies, which showed that this order had been carried out, and that reports even up to 100 copies were passed on to Reich Ministries. The prosecution submitted one here which shows that within one month more than twenty thousand Jews were shot. This report, as I saw myself from the original document was shown to about ten people in the Foreign Office. All this confirmed to me without doubt that this could only be an order by the Supreme Commander and head of the State. 6th or 9th of June, 1941, was given in writing, but the Fuehrer Order was not given in writing? Please comment about this question and refer to the documents NOKW-1076 and NOKW-484.
THE PRESIDENT: What page, please?
DR. MAYER: Your Honor, these documents were not submitted by the prosecution, but I shall introduce both documents in my document book.
I only ask the witness to identify them and to make statements concerning these documents which are of importance to the court.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Mayer, it would help very much if you could introduce them as you go along.
DR. MAYER: Of course, I only have the two documents at my disposal which belong to the prosecution and were only out at my disposal Actually I have to return both documents to the prosecution. I have so far not had any copies adds.
THE PRESIDENT: MR. Walton couldn't you assist Dr. Mayer in having these documents reproduced immediately so that they can be before the Tribunal while Braune is actually presenting his case?
MR. WALTON: Your Honor, I hesitate to answer that question until I know the length of the document.
THE PRESIDENT: I see.
MR. WALTON: I will have to make some estimate because our stenographic force is only so large.
THE PRESIDENT: I didn't mean your own personal staff, I meant in the regular procedure, if we could get the reproduction section.
MR. WALTON: I think we had better depend on the stenographic staff for matters of expediency from former experience with the regular channels of reproduction. In this connection, sir, the prosecution would have no objection to his introducing them or treating them in this way if the Court will reserve to the prosecution the right of objection, if such is pertinent, at such tine as the prosecution can examine the particular document.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, that right is always reserved to either side when the opposite side presents a document, but we are only saying for the benefit of the defense, in order that the Tribunal can follow the argument which is being presented at the time, it will be quite helpful if we could see the document.
MR. WATSON: Very well. I presume, sir, that Dr. Mayer got these particular documents from the photostatic copies which have been made available to all defense counsel and to all defendants through their counsel.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Mayer, how long are these documents?
DR. MAYER: Your Honor, there is only one very brief point I want to establish by this, and perhaps the witness could read this into the records so that these short notices be made known to the Tribunal. We merely want to establish from the headings of the documents that these orders, which are also extensive orders, only went to the very highest authorities but were not given to lower authorities in writing. That is all I want to prove by these documents. May I ask the Tribunal, with their Permission that the witness read our these passages into the record?
THE PRESIDENT: That is entirely in order, Dr. Mayer, I would only make this suggestion that if you have an extra copy it be given to the interpreter so that the translation won't need to demand entirely upon the oral hearing of the document.
DR. MAYER: That will be rather difficult since I myself did not have any copies made of this document.
THE PRESIDENT: I thought you said there were two copies.
DR. MAYER: No, two documents.
THE PRESIDENT: All right, Then release read very slowly.
THE WITNESS: This is Document NOKW-484. The heading is "High Command of the Wehrmacht" and there is a distribution list of about ten agencies. I now quote four lines of this letter signed by General Warlimont. I quote, "It is requested that distribution only be made to the highest commanders of the Army and the Air Force Chiefs, and the further announcements be made to the commanders orally." This is a letter which does not bear a date, but in the second document which has the head, "Commander in Chief of the Army" and which is dated 8 June 1941, there is a reference made and it says, and I quote: "The following order by the OKW of 6 June 1941 is announced." In this second document, NOKW-1076 the Commander in Chief of the Army now forwards this order again, namely this Commissar Order, to a certain circle.
The result is, and it is shown here, that the Commissar Order, to a certain circle. The result is, and it is shown here, that the Commissar Order of the Fuehrer again was only distributed as far as the Commanders in Chief of the Army in writing, but subordinate officers were only informed of this orally. to your highest officers, that is Himmler and Heydrich, in writing?
A Of course I don't know that, but I presume that the order about the shooting of the Jews, gypsies and Communist functionaries was made known to the highest authorities in writing, but apart from that it was to be made known orally, as Streckenback and Lueller had actually done in Dueben and Pretsch. had received a written order by Hitler? must have had this order made known to them, because otherwise the execution of this order would have fallen to the competency of the Armies, under the executive power of the commanders in chief, and the documents show in many cases, that active participation in the carrying out would have been unthinkable. I do not think the Army commanders would have helped to carry out such an order if it had not been a Fuehrer Order. over the commando in Odessa?
A Yes. When I arrived in Odessa during the first days of November, my predecessor confirmed to me that this Fuehrer Order had been announced in Pretsch. He personally was a close friend of Gruppenfuehrer Streckenbach, and he told me that Streckenbach had already expressed in Pretsch that he himself objected to this order but could not change it because it was a Fuehrer Order and that had to be carried out.
as well? me about this statement by Streckehbach, but I am not quite sure of it anymore. defenseless people, women and children?
Q What do you mean by humane reasons? having defenseless People killed and shot, and I cannot imagine that there is any human being who does not feel this inner struggle. this feeling within you? for me to answer this.
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q.- Witness, I would just like to refer to your previous answer, and of course, then you will be able to take up the question which your counsel just put to you. You said that you could, not imagine that any human being could execute such an order without having some kind of an inner objection to it. Did I understand you correctly?
A.- Yes, your Honor.
Q.- Do you exclude the possibility that there could be any human being at all that could execute such an order willingly and with entire assurance morally, inwardly, and in every way?
A.- Your Honor, that would nave to be a person without a heart and without a soul.
Q.- Well now, I am merely taking up this statement of yours, and I want to see how you appraise it. You say you cannot imagine a human being, Now, a human being in a walking anatomy. You know what a human being is, a person?
A.- Yes.
Q.- With a brain?
A.- Yes.
Q.- Very well. Don't let us deal in abstractions and say "without a heart and without a soul". You say you cannot imagine a human being affirming such an order. Now, do you stand on that statement?
A.- Yes, that is my opinion, unless it is a person whose whole mentality I cannot understand.
Q.- Well then, you do make an exception then, you say that there could be such a human being?
A.- Well, your Honor, after all there are people who are born as criminals who become mass murderes, these are, of course, exceptions.
Q.- Then if you mean you did not mean your statement when you said you cannot imagine a human being executing such an order without some inner revulsion, that statement is not correct, is it?
A.- I did not think of that exception, your Honor. That is right.
Q.- Then you say that there can be human beings who would kill defenseless people and yet not feel any inner remorse?
A.- Will your Honor permit me to gave an example, which I don't want you to misunderstand. I don't know whether there are cannibals in the world now who do such things which a normal man cannot understand.
Q.- But witness, you made the statement yourself, that you cannot imagine. You even put it into the realm of fantasy, that it would be even possible to conceive that there could be such a person who could kill without some inner revulsion Now, I am only asking you whether you affirm that statement which you made?
A.- No, I have to keep that mentioned limitation, I forgot to think of that.
Q.- All right, Then there are human beings who could kill defenseless people and go about their affairs and sleep of nights?
A.- Whether they can sleep quietly at night, I don't know, but -
Q.- Well, at any rate let us leave out the sleeping business. There are human beings who could kill defenseless people and not give any manifestation of regret in having killed defenseless people?
A.- Yes, I think that is possible.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY DR. MAYER:
Q.- Witness, may I repeat the last question? Was it the feeling of being unethical that caused these inner misgivings of yours?
A.- I already said it is very difficult for me to answer that question because it cannot be separated from the situation at the time and from the total events. I, therefore, ask that I may be permitted to say a few brief sentences about this. I do not hesitate for one moment in normal times to consider the killing of defenseless people unethical, but in modern warfare it is different.
In the First World War already the principle came up that not only armies fought armies but that the entire other people were considered enemies who were to be fought. Already in the First World War on the one side there was the famine blockade and on the other side there was the unlimited U-boat war. This development continued in the Second World War, They have one great line in common. Defenseless people, women and children, sick people and old men are the victims. They are sacrified for one aim in the war, namely the final decision of the war. Those people who believe that these events, starting with the hunger blockade down to the event of the atom bomb are unethical, should ball the events in the last unethical too, but I don't think I am in the position, after really serious considerations, to come to such a decision, We have on both sides measures which, after serious considerations were approved by the supreme war chiefs and the supreme chiefs of state. I am not in the position to decide upon the basic reasons and principles; I cannot judge therefore. Those supreme heads of state, after all, can only come under one judgment.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, just so that I may know your viewpoint on this, and not for the purpose of any way challenging your right to say what you choose, do I understand that you have summed it up this way, that since in modern warfare noncombatants are bound to be killed, and you have illustrated the business of the blockade and the bombing, even including the atom bombing, that because noncombatants are bound to be killed in the prosecution of a war, that, therefore, you could see nothing unethical about the killing of noncombatants in the East? Do I correctly represent what you said?
THE WITNESS: Your Honor, I believe I have to explain it a little further. As a comparatively unimportant man in these great events, I cannot judge what considerations and what last necessities moved Adolf Hitler to order that in the East the Jews, gypsies and Communists were to be shot.