Will you tell that to the Tribunal?
A I did not know the Hitler Order. I was not told of it, and during my time no Jews were executed at all just because they were Jews. I repeat this one thing: Such a thing neither occurred nor was it mentioned, or was ever expressed in my presence. I now ask you to give me an opportunity to explain why I say this and what I found concerning this and how I can explain this on the basis of the documents and how this was possible. May I state very briefly, quite briefly -
THE PRESIDENT: Suppose that this explanation be given after the recess. The Tribunal will be in recess 15 minutes.
( A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The tribunal is again in session.
DR. LINK ( for the defendant Felix Ruehl): Mr. President, for the sake of order I would like to point out that I am missing my client, Felix Ruehl. He was excused yesterday afternoon. The last time I saw him was at eight o'clock last night. May I call your attention to this.
THE PRESIDENT: WELL -- he has already been reported ill, and that is the reason he is not in court today, so you need not fear that you lost your client.
DR. LINK: Thank you, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Proceed, please Mr. Hochwald.
MR. HOCHWALD: Thank you very much, your Honor.
CROSS EXAMINATION (Continued) BY MR. HOCHWALD:
Q. Before the intermission we spoke of the Hitler order, and I understood your testimony to be that understood your command, Sonderkommando 4-b never executed any Jews, is that correct?
A. I testified that no Jew was ever killed just because he was a Jew. I never found out what the Hitler decree was. I think I cannot remember, and I think I may say, that this was not the case -- that among the executions necessary during my time there wasn't any Jew, because he violated the laws of war. As I said, I cannot remember. I might be possible that a Jew might have been among them, but I don't know.
Q. But people who had committed crimes, or a crime, were executed actually by Sonderkommando 4-b, is that your contention?
A. Whoever committed a crime, and his guilt was ascertained beyond doubt, such person was made to bear the consequences.
Q. How did you obtain knowledge of such executions? Were reports made by the sub-commanders to you?
A. No. This concerns two executions within the sphere of my main command, and there the decisive word was said, under my leadership. Concerning both executions -- within the sub-commandos -- it was thus, that one took care of the Artemowsk sphere, and it occurred during an inspection trip on my part in Artemowsk that the sub-commander gave me information about these incidents. The sub-commanders were independent. I merely made an inspection of the sub-commandos. And the last execution, it was ture, - it was, as I said, in connection with this purification of the Russian break-in sector of the northern front, that is to say, in May, while I was in Prague, When I returned this frontal sector was in a flowing state, and, as I was told, there was a certain degree of insecurity, and I came there without any knowledge of the executions. I arrived when the local sub-commando had completed the executions. The execution itself had been completed, and the concerned persons, as the sub-commando told me, had been handed over to the sub-commando by the Wehrmacht after examination and decision had been made by that part of the Army concerned, with the order to carry out the execution; and in a discussion at the AOK I objected to this, that is to say, I requested that these executions not be carried out. My viewpoint was understood by the AOK -
Q. Do I understand you to say that all the time that you were in command of Sonderkommando 4-b only the four executions which you described to the Tribunal, in direct examination, were carried out?
A. Yes. Immediately, through the SK 4-b, these executions took place.
As I believe I said yesterday in direct examination, there were several large military partisan actions carried out against dangerous elements.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Hochwald, you needn't repeat -
MR. HOCHWALD: I only wanted to ask him whether these four executions are the only executions which were carried out during his activity with Sonderkommando 4-b.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, please keep in mind that when a question is put to you, answer it directly; and if you have already gone into the field, it isn't necessary to repeat it. Just merely answer the question, and stop there. BY MR. HOCHWALD:
Q. Yesterday you gave the numbers of people executed in these four executions. You have said that in April there were approximately 25 people executed in Gorlowka; and in the same month, between 15 to 20 in Artemowsk; and then again in Gorlowka at the end of May, six to seven; and in Barvenkova, on the order of the Army, there were approximately 10 people. Is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. So that would mean that all the executions carried out by Sonderkommando 4-b in the time between the middle of March and the middle of June 1942, would be approximately 60 people. Is that right?
A. Yes. Approximately. I cannot say the exact figure.
Q. Those, definitely, are all the executions which were carried out under your command?
A. These were all executions which became necessary, and of which I have knowledge, which were known to me; and I have no reason to assume that immediately from the Sonderkommando 4-b other executions were carried out.
Q. Let us speak now about the two executions in Gorlowka and the one in Artemowsk. Can you tell the Tribunal how you checked -- how, and by whom, these people who were executed there, were interrogated?
A. I think I gave an exact description yesterday, However, I can repeat it.
Q. You just tell the Tribunal whether you did check, or whether you did not check.
A. Yes, I knew exactly about the individual cases -that is to say, the decision in both these executions in the Gorlowka district. I also knew about the other executions and I was able to convince myself that these were only cases which occurred in accordance with law and order, and where the people concerned were actually proven violators against the laws of war and against security of the people.
Q. The decision about people to be executed in Artemowsk rested with the sub-commander, is that correct?
A. Yes, the sub-commander was authorized -- the sub-commander commands were independent -- and not only the sub-commander in Artemowsk. It happened thus, that I handled it in this way, that I received the information.
Q. The sub-kommando leader, as a matter of fact, was subordinated to you, was he not?
A. He was subordinated to me.
Q. And in principle -
A. That is not to say that we were responsible.
Q. In principle, then, you were the person who was ultimately to decide whether someone should be executed or not -- in the area of Sonderkommando 4-b, of course?
A. That is not quite correct. I was the final instance with the main commando in Golowka; the sub-commando leaders as such decided and could make independent decisions.
The whole situation and situation and structure showed this. They also cooperated with other military units and agencies.
Q. But you told the Tribunal just now that you got information about the execution in Artemowsk.
A. Yes.
Q. Would you have been able to reverse the decisions of the sub-kommando leader if you would have been of the opinion that the execution of a certain individual was not justified?
A. Yes, without any trouble. If I had become convinced that something was not quite in order, I certainly would have been able to do that.
Q. Can you tell the Tribunal how long, actually, the whole procedure -- and that means investigation, interrogation of the defendant, interrogation of witnesses, and decision of the officers, and the supreme decision by you -took, in the case of an accused? The whole procedure from the moment when a man was arrested, to the moment you made your final decision that he was to be executed or was to be set free?
A. I really can't set that down. Each case had a certain number of facts, and the facts differed. It might happen -- please, I only cite these examples from my memory I have no single case in mind -- it might happen, and it happened in most cases -- yes, in most cases this happened, where a man was found to be in possession of pieces of unauthorized weapons - something which often happened or he was caught when committing acts of sabotage on buildings, warehouses, and railroad installations... BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. Would the unauthorized possession of a weapon bring about the death sentence?
A. Whoever in the combat zone was caught with a weapon in his possession was to be sentenced to death, that is how the order was, yes.
Q. How many sentences did you authorize for that violation? How many executions did you authorize for that violation?
A. Mr. President, I can't say now which, or how many, of these cases were decided for this, or that, offense -or had to be shot for these offenses. That is why I emphasized before that I was only reconstructing these cases -- I know that in general it was that in Wehrmacht units over and over again it was pointed out, and it was discussed, with the reinforcement and the equipment of partisans, and the sabotage of civilians -
THE PRESIDENT: It isn't necessary to tell us that; I only asked you how many executions were ordered by you because the executees had been proven to have carried unauthorized weapons, and you answered you don't know. Stop. Next question. BY MR. HOCHWALD:
Q. How many officers did you have in you unit?
A. I estimate, from my memory -- together with subkommando leaders, eight to ten. I may be mistaken, though. Eight to ten.
Q. That would be more than 10% of the complete strength, would it not?
A. Yes. I can tell you these sub-kommands -- there were one, two, three and then four -- four sub-kommands. There were four officers. Then there was a communication officer in the main command. There were five. The head of the executive department, that makes six. The interpreter in the main command, to my recollection also an officer.
Furthermore, one or two officers, I don't exactly remember -which were also in the command with orders concerning this enterprise Zeppelin. that is, they had this task Zeppelin, but it was not carried out. It was in the Army sphere.
Q. May I interrupt you, witness. The question was only -- How many officers did you have in you unit. Eight to ten.
A. Eight or ten. Perhaps up to ten. That is correct.
Q. Were investigations carried out by all of these officers?
A. I have already testified that the proceedings were as follows -
THE PRESIDENT: Stop.
Q. (By Mr. Hochwald) It would be much easier if you would say so and so many officers carried out investigations and executions. Nothing else was asked of you. You have already explained how it was. I did not ask you about the way it was carried out. I only want to know how many officers took part in these interrogations.
THE PRESIDENT: Put your question very specifically, now. Now, what is your question?
MR. HOCHWALD: The original question was -
THE PRESIDENT: Put your question now, BY MR. HOCHWALD:
Q. Were investigations carried out by all officers of your unit?
THE PRESIDENT: Answer that.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: All right. The next question. That is enough now. The next question. BY MR. HOCHWALD:
Q. The Army passed the sentence. For instance, in the execution in Barvenkova, did you get any written findings on the part of the army authorities why these people actually were condemned to death?
A. No, just this was the reason why I went to the Army, to the high command. This sub-command had a local leader, a responsible local leader to carry out the orders of the Army unit. They had to carry out the orders for the execution. It may also be that the order came through from a superior office of the local unit.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, if you received no written account of the offenses, how did you review the evidence in order to determine whether the death penalty was justified?
THE Witness: Mr. President, I think there is a misunderstanding. I said that I was able to get the information, and to ascertain at the execution which took place in my sphere of the main command, which were at Artemowsk and at Barbenkova.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, Mr. Hochwald asked you if, when you were ordered by the Army to conduct an execution, you received at the same time a written record of the offense, and you said, no, is that correct?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
Q. Now, he asked you if you didn't receive a written record outlining the offense committed by the person, that you were now to execute, how did you know what was his offense, and how could you review the evidence to determine whether it justified an execution?
A. Mr. President, the facts of the penalty for the crime committed by them were named to the sub-commander by the military person ordered to carry it out.
Q. Then you personally didn't review the facts, but the Army conveyed the information orally to the sub-commander leader, and the execution occurred?
A. Yes, in this case it happened. This was the occasion why I went to the Army High Command.
Q. Witness, Mr. Hochwald asked you about sixty executions which you testified to. You remember that?
A. Yes.
Q. There were sixty people killed under your orders?
A. Yes.
Q. Allright. Four separate executions, and sixty people in all, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. Now in each one of these instances, were you satisfied that the person to be executed had committed an offense which justified execution?
A. Yes, Mr. President, but -
Q. Very well. You have answered that. We will give you an opportunity to explain. Did you give the final order for the execution of these sixty?
A. No, not in all these cases, but I gave the order in twentyfive cases of the executions in my main command in Gerlowka, and, at the second execution it took place at the end of May, or at the beginning of June, at the main command in Gerlowka, and this concerned a group of six or seven persons....
Q. No, do not give us the number. There were sixty executed under your orders.
How many of these did you know about yourself? Sixty were executed because you gave the orders for them to be killed, that you have testified to several times. Now, how many of these sixty did you investigate yourself, or reviewed the evidence on?
A. The evidence? I only looked through the evidence and made a final decision for about twenty-five case, and seven that -
Q. All right.
A. (Continuing) came there after.
Q. That is thirty-two that you investigated yourself?
A. Yes.
Q. So that means that twenty-eight went to their deaths under your orders without your having reviewed the evidence?
A. No, Mr. President.
Q. Sixty were killed under your orders?
A. Yes, Mr. President.
Q. Thirty-two you investigated?
A. Yes.
Q. What is the difference between sixty and thirty-two? What is the difference between sixty and thirty-two?
THE PRESIDENT: I didn't hear that, the switch was not on.
THE WITNESS: The executions in the Artimowsk district must be added. These were the executions where the investigation was not conducted by the main command.
Q. Now, don't let us get away from the question. You say sixty were killed by your orders. Thirty-two you investigated, that leaves twenty-eight. Why did you allow these twenty-eight to go to their deaths without reviewing the evidence?
A. Apart from the ten cases, the last execution at Barvenkova, I was informed of these cased in Artimowsk, that is to say, I personally informed myself of these cased a couple of days before the execution took place.
Q. Then you investigated the whole sixty?
A. Yes, apart from the group of ten persons which were executed in Barvenkova.
Q. Well of each of the sixty cases which Mr. Hochwald mentioned, you yourself were satisfied that they committed and offense which merited death?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, all right.
A. (Continuing) -- concerning the reports I had to assume about some things on the basis of the reports submitted to no by the sub-commander.
Q. very well.
A. I had to, because I had to depend on what the military persons authorized to execute the orders.
Q. Very well. Now we come back to the question which Mr. Hochwald put to you a long time ago. When the Army sent through a request, or an order that certain persons be killed, because they had committed certain offenses, Mr. Hochwald asked you, if a written order, or a written report of the offense was sent along. You said, no. Then the question was, how could you then determine whether these deaths were justified if you didn't have the written record. Now please answer that question and them lot us proceed to something also?
A. Mr. President, these cases of executions which I was question on in Barvenkova became known to me when by accident I happened to the place, and the corresponding report about the respective orders of the Army units were given to no for information today. I cannot state exactly, from memory or with certainty, that the sub-commander received this order from the military officer, who had the right to give this order, and he was also told the crime itself which had been committed by the defendants. I considered this type of handling not correct, and I expressed my opinion to this effect at the AOK, namely, that in my opinion the Army when it conducted the investigation and made the decision itself should carry out the execution by its own commandos.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Mr. Hochwald, proceed, BY MR. HOCHWALD:
Q. How many executions did you watch yourself, Dr. Haensch?
A. Three executions were watched by myself and inspected. The fourth at Barvenkova, which is the one where I happened to be when the execution itself had been completed and carried out, but I was a witness to the fact that its took place.
Q. You did attend this execution in order to check with the directive as to the way how these executions were to be carried out, or actually complied with, is that correct?
A. I was not there during the whole time in every case, but I considered it my duty to make sure for myself that the executions were carried out in accordance with official instructions, that is to say, under observance of regulations that every thing must be done accordingly...
Q. So you actually watched three of the four executions which were carried out in your time, is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Will you please turn to document Book III-C, Your Honor, that is, I want to refer to page 42 of the Document Book III-C, page 72 of the German. This is again the affidavit of the defendant and I quote from the bottom of the page, where he said: "I myself watched a few executions where possible. This was done in that manner so as to surprise the execution command with my sudden appearance," and, on the next page, in the middle of the next page, second paragraph, under the heading - - page 19 of the original, you said: "I myself watched three or four executions." Is it not apparent from the wording of this affidavit of yours, that much more executions than the three or four that you have been referring to must have been carried out according to your own statement?
A. I don't know how you - -
Q. I asked you - -
A. (Continuing) - - mean that.
Q. I asked you and you can say so; I just asked you your opinion whether you would not have had the feeling if you read the two passages, that you just made a check on the three or four executions in order to find out whether your orders were complied with, as to the way how these executions should be carried out, and, further, as a matter of fact, there were much more executions in that area than these three or four that you actually had seen?
A. I think this passage must be considered in connection with the whole.
Q. Was this your opinion that from your recollection only four executions were carried out in your time, is that right?
A. There was a special Sendercommando-IV-B. I already said I knew of no other which took place, or might have taken place.
Q. You had been twice absent during the time between the middle of March and the middle of June, 1942, when you were commander; you were twice absent from your commando, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. One was in April about fourteen days?
A. Yes.
Q. Yes, I was absent, either....
A. How long were you away in May?
A. I was absent in May for about, I believe, that was at least three weeks.
Q. And are you sure -
A. Yes, three weeks.
Q. Are you sure, as you said yesterday that you returned to your command between the 20th and 25th of May?
A. Yes I reckon so, that must have been around this time.
Q. So it can be assumed that you left Gerlowka in the first week of May, is that right?
A. Yes, to my recollection, if not, in the last days of April.
Q. In March - - from 15th of March to the first of April, you remembered having been with your commando?
A. Yes, to my recollection I must have been there.
Q. Will you tell the Tribunal when you appointed your deputy for the time or your absence?
A. That was automatic: It was the head of the executive department.
Q. Who was this officer?
A. It was an assessor by the name of Trieberg or Triebelt, who was substituted by another, namely, a Hauptsturmfuehrer, who was also a lawyer.
Q. I want to know the name now, do you understand? You didn't say the name?
A. Hussinger.
Q. What was the rank of the first deputy, I didn't catch the name?
A. To my recollection it was Obersturmfuehrer or Hautsturmfuehrer.
Q. What kind of orders in respect to executions did you give to these two deputies of yours during the time of your absence?
A. Mr. Prosecutor, I didn't give them any orders concerning the manner of execution, or any such thing. I would not know in what mannor or shape I should have given such orders. It is quite obvious that in a frontal sector immediately behind the lines, no one can know what can happen next, as it actually happened during my absence.
Q. I shall ask you the question again, in the orders you gave these people - - I'll ask you specifically what kind of orders in respect to executions did you give to the people. I may be possibly a little bit more specific. You have told the Tribunal you were the person who had to decide upon whether a person should be executed or not. Did you tell these deputies when you left; "you have this decision in My absence," or, did you tell then "The cases had to be deferred until I returned, as I want myself--"?
A. No, no.
Q. - - (continuing) "To know whether these people are guilty or not."?
A. No.
Q. That is the question.
A. No. I had orders, express orders, in every case in my absence that my authority would go to the head the executive department, and, in both cases when I went to Kiev the following happened: I received orders to make the official trip, but I had to return - -
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment. Just a moment, witness, just a moment. Don't give that long story about you receiving your orders. If you want to tell us something which happened while you were away, now tell us in twenty-five words, as to what happened, what happened while you were in Kiev, if you are so anxious to tell us about that, allright.
THE WITNESS: Mr. President, I only wanted to tell of the fact that I had to return. I inquired in Kiev as I could not come in time for the discussion which was to take place there, and I considered it suitable to stay with the command. But I was told to come in any case--
THE PRESIDENT: Now, you -
THE WITNESS: (Continuing) and both deputies were entrusted with these matters. I want to emphasize this again.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, it is emphasized. Proceed. BY MR. HOCHWALD:
Q. Did you get any reports from your deputies when you returned from your two journeys? Did they tell you what they had been doing in your absence?
A. Yes. I remember the incident in.....
Q. Now may I interrupt you again. I didn't ask whether they reported to you, or whether they told you what ahppened. Can you say first you or no to that question?
A. Naturally, of course.
Q. By next question. Did they report to you about any executions which were carried out in your absence?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes or no?
THE WITNESS: I was told - -
THE PRESIDENT: Please answer the question. Did they report any executions to you. Now answer that, yes or no?
THE WITNESS: No. executions were reported to me by SE-IV-B. just want to say something - -
THE PRESIDENT: Now, witness. BY MR. HOCHWALD:
Q. Can you tell the Tribunal exactly in which area your Sendercommando operated?
A. The frontal sector of the 17th Army, Which ended in the south on the border of Gerlowka. Gerlowka to my recollection is at most twenty kilometers north of Staline. May I Point it cut to you?
Q. First, may I ask you for the information of the Tribunal at the same time another question.
A. (The witness goes over to the map located on the wall and talks)
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. All right. Thank you.
THE WITNESS: The northern part ended and the frontal sector at the time of my service on the border of Kramatorskaya. Unfortunately I have no exact map but to my recollection, but it must have been there near Gerlowka. I reckon it was about 120 kilometers distant. It might have been 150 kilometers.. BY MR. HOCHWALD:
Q. Is it correct that Shitomir, Rovno and Vinis belonged to this area where Sonderkommando IV-B operated?
A. Mr. Prosecutor, I have already been asked during my interrogation about the cities of Rovno the Vinis. I never visited them, asked the cities never belonged within this sphere of Sonderkommando IVOB. May I ask you, Mr. Prosecutor, whether I may show you on the map where these cities are located.
THE PRESIDENT: You have indicated that these cities did no come within the area in which your Sonderkommando operated?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: I think that will be enough on it, thank you. BY MR. HOCHWALD:
Q. Will you turn to Document Book II-D, where I am referring to page 4 of the Document Book, I don't know for the moment just where the quote is in the German text, but in the English it started at page 1 of the Document Book. There it is said that Sonderkommando IV-B under you had operated and had location at Kramatorskaya, in units at Shitomir, Rovno and Vinnis. (continued with question)
Q. There it says that Sonderkommando 4b under you operated in the location of Kramatorskaya with units of Zhitomir, Rowno and Vinis, and the lines of communication Gorlovka? Is this entry in the report --which is in the report of 8 April at the time when you were in command, April 1942....
A. Yes.
Q. At the time when you were in command of Sonderkommando 4b. Is this entry incorrect?
A. Yes, that is correct, but the entry is false. The command-
Q. All right, you said it is incorrect. I do think that answers the question. Were you in Garlovka. Dr. Haensch. at the end of April and beginning of May? Try to remember.
A. As much, as exactly as I could, I endeavored to find out about it. As I said, it was either the end of April or the beginning of May that I left for Kiev the Prague.
Q. Do you think in late April or beginning of May a large-scale action against partisans and communication was carried out by your commando in the area of Gorlovka?
A. Yes, I testified to that yesterday in the direct examination It is correct that at the end of April and in the course during May, as I was told later on when I returned, that large partisan actions took place which were ordered by the Army and carried out by the Army and that officials of the SK-4b were requested to go along and took part in this action.
Q. Who took part in this action?
A. I can't say that. I really don't know that any more. With this action and executions, the commando and especially the commando leader had no decision and no investigation. This was a request for personnel, officials etc., for a purely military operation which was carried out by the Army.
Q. It is true or is it not true that members of a unit under
Q. Is it true or is it not true that members of a unit under your command took part in this action?
A. I already said that officials were requested.
Q. They were people actually under your command, or were they not?
A. Yes, they were otherwise part of my commando or my subcommando. For the duration of this action my commando powers expired and the officials concerned were under orders of the military units.
Q. Did you receive a report?
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Hochwald, the work is coming through "officials". Interpreter, is that the word? MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: Yes, it is the correct word. He said there "officials".
THE PRESIDENT: "officials" I see. Very well, thank you. port to you about this action?
A. Certainly afterwards the corresponding reports were made to the responsible superior or whoever it was, the officials or senior leader. whoever participated, who went along with these officials, certainly they made reports afterwards.
Q. To you was this report made? You was this report made? You have received this report?
A. Pardon?
Q. You have received a report from the senior officer, the question was.
A. I was orally informed about it afterwards.
Q. Can you tell the Tribunal from your own recollection, as you have received a report, some details about this question?
A. No, I really can't do that because it was thus, and I believe it was the same with other commands, that these military actions of a large nature and type which became necessary were carried out outside the jurisdiction of the command.