BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Did you have a great admiration for Himmler - Heinrich Himmler?
Q What did you mean that you had a great respect for him? Your Honor, it was like this, Himmler as Reich Commissar for the Strengthening of Germany practically laid down our manner of life for us. He gave all the regulations and made all the laws, and in 1942 or 1943 he issued a secret order in which he said that the Baltic Germans were politically unreliable and gave certain measures, I believe I have every reason to say that I have a certain amount of respect for Himmler, but what I mean by respect is a certain precaution towards a man who had absolute power.
Q You mean by that a certain fear, don't you?
Q Well, there is a vast difference between a "respect" and a "fear", isn't that right?
A I beg your pardon. Your Honor, I may have expressed myself incorrectly.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
BY MR. HOCHWALD: that you were prevented from joining the Wehrmacht as you were deferred for your position in this SS agency?
A Yes. That was in March 1940. with the RSHA? is that correct?
Q In which capacity were you drafted for the RSHA? that is what I was told at the time. for this service on the basis of the decree of 15 October 1938? a Mr. Prosecutor, I don't know the details of the regulations, I will have to read again what I told you.
Q A part of the decree is in your counsel's document book. I do not know if Your Honors have the document book before you.
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, yes.
MR. HOCHWALD: It is on the pages 21 to 23. Are you familiar with this decree?
THE WITNESS: Yes. Mr. Prosecutor, may I only add here that I have read them, I have seen them sometime ago, but I am not a lawyer to be able to compare all the paragraphs.
BY MR. HOCHWALD: the last time?
Q When did you see it for the first time? beginning of the year 1940 or during my second leave. did you say? yourself, is that correct? rights you had according to this decree to object to this draft? a I inquired about it and I was told there were no regulations in writing concerning this and that there was no point to object to the war emergency status as I was drafted by the RSHA.
I only read the actual paragraphs of the war emergency status during my leave, when I gathered information about this at the labor office. you had no right to make objections to this draft?
AAt the time I was told, I don't know exactly what the exact expression was, that there was a right to object, and as I have explained during the direct examination, I went to the appropriate office, which was that of the mayor of the city of Posen, and he sent me to the employees department office of the RSHA on behalf of which the war emergency status had been decreed and there Sturmbannfuehrer Trautmann refused to release me from my war emergency status. that, and I quote "This emergency war status had the same effect as a military order, it had to be complied with, whoever refused to comply with this had to expect the same consequences as the one who would have refused to do any war service." Is that what you still maintain? will find out whether you are still of the same opinion when you are reading the decree.
MR. HOCHWALD: Your Honors, I would like to quote from the German official law gazette, volume I of 1938, page 1441 I am sorry I have again to quote in German, "Third Decree for the Securing - -"
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Hochwald, are you now going to quote from a law - a statute?
MR. HOCHWALD: From the decree on the basis of which the defendant maintains that he had been drafted into it.
THE PRESIDENT: That is not what I am concerned about. I have the greatest admiration for the linguistic ability of our interpreter to expect her to translate extemporaneously a statute. It is really asking a great deal, don't you think so?
MR. HOCHWALD: I think so, Your Honor. Perhaps we can make it easier. I just refer that this is the same decree of 15 October 1938 which partly is in the document book of Dr. Ratz. I would like to read one article of paragraph 1 which is not in this document book.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, read it slowly then.
MR. HOCHWALD: It is Article 3 of paragraph 1 "Services due on the basis of the Reich Defense Law within the custom's border police."
THE PRESIDENT: Well, Mr. Hochwald, I think that is asking too much to expect a translation of a document which is phrased in the most technical terms. Why don't you -
MR. HOCHWALD: It is only two sentences, Your Honor, but I will have it tomorrow.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I think so.
DR. RATZ: Your Honor, I believe the prosecutor is arguing about the results of a refusal to obey this call-up, the draft. I believe that this argumentation here is not at the right place as part of questioning the witness. I will have to comment on this in my argumentation as to whether in the regulations which the prosecutor has talked about penalties are contained, penalties which would justify the witnesses testimony.
MR. HOCHWALD: If the Tribunal please, I have only been referring to a decree which was quoted by the witness himself on the stand. I do think I am entirely within my rights to ask him whether another part of the decree which is not in the document book of Dr. Ratz but is a part of the same decree is not in contradiction to what he said on the stand.
He is at liberty to say that it is not in contradiction, but I do think this question is perfectly admissible.
THE PRESIDENT: Let me make it very clear on the record that there is no doubt in my mind that Miss Juelich, the interpreter, is thoroughly capable of translating this statute, but I think it is a heavy burden to put upon her at this hour after the examination which you have given us now for some time, so that the Tribunal will be in recess until tomorrow morning at 9:30.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 17 December 1947 at 0930 hours) 0930-1630, Justice Michael A. Musmanno, presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats.
Military Tribunal II is now in session. God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal.
DR. ROHR: Dr. Rohr, deputizing for Dr. Gawlik for the Defendant Naumann. Naumann be excused from attendance in court tomorrow, Thursday, all day, in order to prepare his document books.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant will be excused from attendance in court all day tomorrow, Thursday.
DR. ROHR: Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: You are welcome. Mr. Hochwald.
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: May it please the Tribunal, I have tried to secure translations of the parts of the decree which I want to read to the witness but unfortunately I haven't got the translation yet in the courtroom, so if the Tribunal please, I shall proceed with another line of questioning, and as soon as I get the translations I shall come back to the subject.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
CROSS EXAMINATION (Continued) BY MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: 4a from the beginning of the Russian campaign until when?
is that correct?
Q What was your duty in Sonderkommando 4a during the war? a reporter. In my work as interpreter I mainly dealt with documents. Then I became liaison officer and reporter. I would like to interpolate here that, temporarily, I was liaison officer for Einsatzgruppe C. were informed by Blobel about your tasks?
Q What exactly did Blobel tell you? deal with the evaluation of documents and to make reports and also observations of all the Ukrainian questions. He also told me that I did not have those qualifications which the other officers had before joining the kommando and I would not be assigned like the other officers.
Q He did not appoint your chief interpreter, did he?
A No. He merely told me that I was to take care of the other interpreters and supervise them, but this never happened.
Q Blobel has not appointed your interpreter at all? seizing and evaluating of documents on one hand, and reports on the other hand. kommando as such, about the Fuehrer Befehl?
He just talked about the Fuehrer Befehl in general, which he announced. that all Jews and undesirables were to be killed in accordance with the Fuehrerbefehl?
Q What did you think would happen to the Jews? known, that Security Police tasks would be carried out ruthlessly against Communist functionaries, and he said on that occasion that it was expressed in this Fuehrer Order that Jews were to be considered the bearers of Bolshevism. Therefore, at the time when I heard this, I tried to distanciate myself, but I never realized the consequences of this order, in particular as it was said at the time that this was done for the sake of security of the troop. information of Blobel's, that there was a ruthless - they were to take ruthless measures against the Communists and that the Jews were to be considered the bearers of Communism. You must have understood something by that. What did you think would happen on the basis of this order? particular. At the moment I realized the ruthlessness and the unambiguousness not fully, although it struck me. I had received the information in Schmiedeberg that it would be a war assignment, that is a military assignment, and police tasks were also mentioned here.
Q I do not think that you answered my question. I asked you, what did you presume would happen now on the basis of these orders to the people named? In this order to the Jews and to the Communists; did you think that they were to be arrested or did you think that they were to be killed, or did you think that they were to be left alone, or what did you think?
Somebody gives me such an order, which certainly is an unusual one. I must have some impression what the order means. That is my question, what did you think was to happen to these people? but I fully realized that when the expression "ruthless" was used, that they would not treat them sparingly; they would arrest them all, but not eliminate them. At the time I did not quite realize its full extent. Blobel what this order means, as you objected against the order and did not want to have anything to do with it? Before I can object to something, I must know what I am objecting to. Why didn't you ask Blobel what it is all about?
A I don't know Mr. Prosecutor, I don't want to give you a reply now which I might have constructed. All I know is that I did not want to have anything to do with police tasks, because I saw before myself an activity which merely contained the seizing of these elements and I did not like this kind of work. in which Hitler provided for the killing of all Jews, Communists, gypsies, and undesirables?
Q When did you learn first about this order? Lublin to Lutsk.
Q And when was that?
it was never said that "all" Jews were concerned. It merely said "Jews". At the time I did not know that possibly women and children might be included.
Q Who told, you about this order? who said that Jeckeln, who also lived in the Army billet, that he had expressed this.
Q And when you heard the expression "the Jews" you did not know that they were all Jews?
Q Isn't that clear if somebody says "the Jews", without making any differentiation, that it must mean all Jews? If somebody says, "the Jews are to be killed," what does that mean? Does it mean that only a part of the Jews are to be killed, or all Jews are to be killed?
A Mr. Prosecutor, at the time I did not think of that. It did not occur to me that all Jews would include women and children. were to be shot, is that correct? would only concern the men.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Hochwald, it isn't clear now whether he did or did not protest to Blobel. We were of the impression yesterday he said he did protest to Blobel. Now, I don't know.
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: I just wanted to -
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Q (By Mr. Horlick-Hochwald) What did you tell to Blobel in Sokal after he had announced this order about the ruthless measures against the Communists and Jews, what did you tell him? do with these tasks.
Q Why did you want to evade this task?
of people, no matter what people they were, because I did not want to have anything to do with the police tasks connected with it - because it said ruthless Security Police procedure would be required.
Q But you wanted to stay in the East; you did not want to be released from your assignment with the Sonderkommando?
A Mr. Prosecutor, at that moment I did not yet realize this and only did ten days later.
Q Let's go a little further. You have told us that in July, in Lutsk, you learned that all male Jews were to be killed, When did you learn that all Jews, male, female and children, were to be killed?
A I did not hear that. I realized this in practice.
Q When did you realize this?
Q At what time was that, Witness? of October, 1941. at that time approximately forty to fifty thousand people already had been killed, to find out that also women and children were killed by this unit in which you were one of the highest ranking officers, is that what you want the tribunal to believe?
A Well, I cannot say anything else, Mr. Prosecutor. It was like that. chief interpreter of Sonderkommando 4a. Do you remember having made a statement in your affidavit to the effect that you were actually chief interpreter of Sonderkommando 4a? I am referring to Document Book III-C, -Page 20.
This is NO-4438, Prosecution's Exhibit 132, That is the last sentence of the first paragraph, your Honors. "I held the position of chief interpreter with the task of screening documents which were seized during the activities in individual towns and compiling those documents in cooperation with the counter-intelligence, for evaluation in Berlin." Is that your statement, Mr. Radetzky?
A Yes. May I say something about this? my direct examination, at the suggestion of my defense counsel I talked about this question, and I said that I don't want to talk about it at all because I consider it of no importance. This is not an expression by me, but this expression originated in an interrogation which CIC carried out. They said "Who was the senior interpreter, or the interpreter who held the highest rank?" and we could not quite find a title which would be the simplest to express this, because I repeatedly had difficulties in explaining my rank, and, therefore, the expression, chief interpreter, was started then, and, therefore, it was put into this affidavit. I even believe, but I am not certain, that Mr. Wartenberg first brought up this expression again, perhaps based on a former interrogation. Wartenberg on this subject? chief interpreter?
A It is possible. I do not remember the entire interrogation. In the same sentence it is said that you worked in cooperation with the counter-intelligence. Was that correct? of your reports and of your tasks by saying, and I quote, "There were questions of economical nature, cultural matters, education, theater, religion, etc." Will you tell the Tribunal in what the counter-intelligence would have to collaborate with you on these things? on those subjects. counter-intelligence collaborated with you? with the counter-intelligence because they were looking for their military documents, and I chose those documents which interested me, and I thought of Lutsk in particular here, where we looked through the material together and the counter-intelligence took that part of the documents important for them. existed. Will you tell the Tribunal what your actual collaboration with the counter-intelligence was, was it in the way that you have been carrying out interrogations and investigations for the counter-intelligence, wasn't that your task?
A No, Mr. Prosecutor, that was not my task.
Q So you have only been looking into the theaters. Can you tell the Tribunal how many theaters there were at that time in the area where you were active?
A Mr. Prosecutor, may I come back to the document? It says here, to screen the documents and in collaboration with the counter-intelligence to make reports for Berlin. there was no collaboration. In your affidavit you state there was a collaboration. I have been trying to find out how you reconcile your statement on direct examination with your statement in the affidavit, and I have quoted your statement in direct examination where you say that you were that your tasks were only cultural matters, theaters, religion, etc., and I asked you, and I ask you again - possibly you can give an information now - how was this collaboration with the counter-intelligence carried out in these matters? kind of cooperation existed there with the counter-intelligence, and I said no to that question. Concerning the screening of documents I did cooperate with the counter-intelligence in the sense as expressed in the affidavit.
intelligence? than the evaluation of these documents existed between the Abwehr and you? the screening of documents was done by us together, that is, each one took what interested him, that was the collaboration with the counter-intelligence. was no collaboration, that everyone took his part, you did not collaborate, is that correct? one room one takes the documents, from one file cabinet, and the other takes the documents from the other file cabinet, one does not know what the other does, but they are only collaborating for the simple reason that they are in the same room, is that what you want the Tribunal to believe?
A No, just the opposite. Everybody seizes documents and everybody puts them at the disposal of the other, that is, if they had documents which might interest me, they gave them to me, and if I had documents which interested them, I gave them to the counterintelligence; the military documents went to the counter-intelligence.
Q Witness, isn't it patently clear that if these documents were of interest to the counter-intelligence, you had to evaluate them first? August you changed jobs, you ceased to be an interpreter and became a liaison officer to the army, is that right?
interpreter--highest ranking interpreter, and carried out only the liaison job?
A No. I continued to make reports.
Q You stayed an interpreter then, did you not?
Q You were in charge of Office 3?
Q Who was leader in 3? and for the commando the responsible man was Hauptsturmfuehrer Kalson. Kalson himself hardly worked on this because he in practice did not have time.
Q How many interpreters were with Sonderkommando 4A? in time there were 10 to 12. Those were interpreters which had been gotten in the country.
Q But how many were there who were German officers? third interpreter who was not an officer but had the rank of an NCO.
Q What was the rank of Mueller?
Q And you?
Q You were the higher officer, weren't you? time when you were iwth this commando?
A I cannot answer that, Mr. Prosecutor, because I don't know all about it.
Q You should have. Witness, you have told the Tribunal yesterday that when you were liaison officer with AOK 6 from August 1941 on you reported these executions to the army authorities, therefore, you should know how many executions were carried out.
A I don't think so. Mr. Prosecutor, that I said that.
Q I do think that you are mistaken. I do think that when the Tribunal questioned you, you admitted that you had reported killings to the army authorities. You even have said that in your economical reports you deplored these things, don't you remember?
A Yes, I do remember that, Mr. Prosecutor, but I did not mean executions. What I was trying to refer to, as I said yesterday, was the economic potential because in my opinion this was the only form at all to discuss that question. were carried out by Sonderkommando 4A when you were with this commando.
A Mr. Prosecutor, I answered to you to that question. I said I don't know because I cannot overlook this.
Q Do you have an approximate estimate?
Q You were liaison officer with the army, were you not? were carried out by Sonderkommando 4A were ordered by AOK 6 or respectively by the chief of AOK 6, Field Marshal Reichenau. Did you hand down these orders for executions to Sonderkommando 4A, Witness?
A No. I said so already during the direct examination. The department to which I was attached did not have any such orders massed through them. I also said that Blobel personally often negotiated with Reichenau and I also said that in my opinion, not the army, what I mean to say is that it was not the operational department, which looked after the carrying out of these operations, but there were the army commanders in the various territories, that is, the division commanders who induced this or caused this because the sub commander on his own could not carry out or cause an collective measure to be carried out.
He was not able to do this. in connection with orders issued by the army, and you have never seen reports about it-is that correct, is that what you want the Tribunal to believe?
A I cannot say that, I never saw report?. I can only say that it was not my task, it was not customary to inform the army through these channels about executions which had been carried out or to receive orders for executions through these channels. reach the Einsatzgruppe directly, that the reports from the subcommandos of 4A and from 4A itself went through the liaison officer to the army headquarters and to the Einsatzgruppe C. You were the liaison officer, were you not?
A Yes. I was liaison officer. It is possible that mail from the subcommandos passed through, I recall top secret matters or secret commando matters which passed through in that manner, but these were not informations meant for me, this was information which was sent to these officers, but utilizing these channels.
Q How many reports did you receive here, Herr Radetzky?
A I cannot say. I cannot recall. can remember from these reports?
Q You refuse to answer?
A No. but I may be mistaken, and I do not want to give a false reply.
Q You have no estimate? were were so much a matter of course for you in 1941 and 1942 that you have no recollection about them?
Is that right?
A No Mr. Prosecutor, on the contrary, they were not a matter of course at all, and I think I explained this during my direct examination, what my attitude was. If you were so much distressed about the things, you certainly must have a very good memory about these facts. commandos to the army authorities? and sometimes from the subcommandos.
Q You had nothing to do with that? I believe only in one case.