I recall it, that you thought 27,500 was incorrect.
Q And that in your estimate it couldn't have been more than 12,000 to 15,000. made to 1,265 Jews shot. say was probably only 12,000 to 15,000. Now I ask, do you make any observation on the 1,265? Do you think that number is correct? my opinion, the retrans port which I experienced, and which took place in Mogilew and about which I had passed on the order -- that this retransport has nothing to do with this figure, 27,500. I rather believe that it refers to the report of the 26th.
Q Well, why did you comment on this document at all? trying to get it straight from you. As I recall it, you looked at this document and your attention was called to the figure of 27,500 and, still as I recollect, you said this number was incorrect; it was probably from 12,000 to 15,000. Now, the question which I put to you is this, witness: Since you looked at this document and made a correction in the number of Jews who were driven back to Rumanian territory, do you want to make any reference to the figure of 1,265 to have been shot? myself clearly. I did not want to say anything about this document and say that this figure is incorrect, because I merely remember that figure.
I merely tried to reconcile my memory with what I found here in the documents. Jews, some of them young ones, shot? Do you know anything about that at all?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, that is all I am asking, proceed, Dr. Linck.
Q I will show you the following, witness. You had knowledge of one Jewish re-transport only in Mogilew-Podolsk? Can you solve this riddle, and say whether you know whether there were several Jewish transports that took place during your time and according to your knowledge? Mogilew only one such transport took place. Therefore only one report can refer to that and the report of the 26th seems to me the more probable one. On the one hand for the reason I have already mentioned, because they speak here of a number of 13,000 homeless Jews who had been driven out, and also the date of this report seems to be in favor of my contention because the transport of which I knew took place, as far as I can reconstruct and sofar as Mogilew is concerned, during the days from the 18th to 20th of August, and about on the 23rd we had already left Mogilew-Podolsk.
Q I think I don't have to ask you anything further about this. But before you leave Mogilew-Podolsk I want to submit one more thing to you. In the report of the 26th of August just mentioned, that is Volume III-D, the English page 24, the German page 46, there is another sentence and I quote: "It is intended to collect the Jewish population in one area of the city". End of quote. Furthermore, I quote: "Jews fit for work were detailed to clear away the rubble in the town, as well as to bring in the harvest." Do you know anything about that? Did you execute these measures, or did you order them, or did you receive the order to carry them out? measures, or carried them out. Moreoever, I would like to point out that it says in the report: "It is intended to assemble Jews there in one quarter of the city". Sofar as I know anything about Mogilew, this never happened. In any case I can say that I neither saw a ghetto or labor camp in Mogilew, nor did I ever hear of any such camps there.
Whether a similar order existed I can not say. That able-bodied Jews were used for labor I consider possible, since the entire population was used in clearing the rubble, and in bringing in the harvest.
Q Now, Herr Ruehl, I don't want to offend you but it is my intention to clarify everything which could have any connection with you during this time in this area, and, therefore, I want to confront you with another sentence from this report of 26 August. That is the report from which I quote: "In Czernovitz and by combing through the area east of the Dnjestr River, 31,006 Jews and 34 Communists were liquidated - correction, 3,106 Jews and 34 Communists were liquidated.
THE PRESIDENT: What page is that?
DR. LINCK: I do not have the English page, Your Honor. It is the report of 26 August.
THE PRESIDENT: There is only page here of the report in our book.
DR. LINCK: Page 24.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you find it, Mr. Walton?
MR. WALTON: No, Your Honor.
DR. LINCK: Can you help me, Herr Ruehl?
THE WITNESS: I don't have the English text, either. It would have to be the English page 24?
THE PRESIDENT: Are you referring to the report of August 29, Document 2837.
DR. LINCK: It is my mistake. Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: I think that was more than a mistake, that was an error.
DR. LINCK: Thank you for your patience, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: You are not even in the right house. It is Book II-B.
BY DR. LINCK:
Q Can you comment on this report? questioned by several people. I can not say anything about how this report came to be made out. So far as Czernowitz is concerned, I would like to point out once more the fact that according to the order of the group chief, no such measures could be carried out in Rumanian sovereign territory. Therefore, I hardly believe that such a report was ever made out by Persterer to the group, because without a doubt this would have brought inquiries from the group chief as to what caused Persterer to act against this specific order. There, too, I would assure that Berlin laid down the final regulations about it.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, you say that it would have been impossible to kill Jews in Rumania. Didn't you tell us this morning that you took orders from the Rumanian authorities?
THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honor, I consider that as an exceptional case in which at the express order of the Rumanians the commando in this one case became active in their own sovereign territory, because an independent activity of the commando would not have been possible in this area according to the order of the group chiefs.
THE PRESIDENT: Proceed. BY DR. LINCK: knew anything about the 3106 Jews and 34 Communists. Did you answer all of that, or do you want to add anything to it? concerned, it does not only refer to Czernowitz but this is a report from the entire area, which at that time already extended to the Bug River, sofar as I know. I , therefore, ask also to be able to correct an error which evidently the Prosecution made, when in the order of presentation, which is contained in Volume III_D, it is said that these 3,000 and odd Jews and so many Communists were executed in Czernowitz.
To come back to Czernowitz once more, I would like to refer to the report of 7 August, which is in Volume II-D.
Q Page 35 in the English, I believe, Your Honor. That is document 10-2948 Exhibit No. 89. What is this document supposed to show? commando was in Mogilew-Podolsk. That is, it was no longer Czernowitz at that time. From my own knowledge I could add that the major part of the commando was in Camonitz-Podolsk or Mogilew-Podolsk since the beginning of August. I myself left Mogilew the 7th or 8th of August.
Q Mogilew, you mean? and I can only say that during this time I didn't hear about any other executions. May I also point out the following: Apart from the report of 7 August, namely that the garrison of the commando was already in Mogilew, there exists a situation report of 9 August, in which Einsatzgruppe C reports that in agreement with the Chief of Group-D.
Q This is Volume II-C, English page 67 on the top, Document 2947? gruppe Chief D, a small squad was transferred to Czernowitz in order to take over the assignments there.
Q I don't think that I have overlooked any document, Herr Ruehl, in which the Prosecution has implicated you in any sense so far as time and area are concerned. I merely would like to ask you a few concluding questions about the tine of your assignment, before I come to Count C, membership in criminal organizations.
You said that you left Mogilew on 23 August, is that correct?
Q Did your missions remain those of an administrative officer; did they remain as such, until you were recalled, or was there an essential change in your assignment and in your position? function of an administrative officer, and afterwards I was neither given the deputy ship of the commando nor was I given the leadership of a Teilkommando.
Q Were you a staff officer with executive powers?
Q And when did your assignment end?
A The beginning of October. I don't remember the exact date.
Q What year?
Q And what happened then? Did you get sick or what? service, were recalled to Berlin, and I took up my studies once more.
Q Then you went back to the University of Berlin?
Q And later you passed the State examination?
DR. LINCK: Your Honors, I now come to the third main subject, that is, Count-C of the Indictment, as I have already said, membership in organizations which the IMT has declared criminal.
THE PRESIDENT: A question I would like to ask just out of curiosity. Was the University of Berlin functioning in all departments in 1943?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: It has nothing to do with the case. I was just curious. Thank you.
DR. LINCK: The witness is charged with membership in two such organizations, first the SS, secondly, the Office IV of the RSHA. First of all, I shall deal with membership in the SS. BY DR. LINCK: 1932 you transferred from the SA to the SS, and you said that on 1 October 1933, you left the SS in order to go into the Prussian Secret Police. Did anything change in this later on? That is, until the collapse? other unit. SS ranks? police official. The Reichsfuehrer-SS and Chief of the German Police originally had the intention to make a so-called State Protection Corps out of the SS and Police. For this purpose all police officials were supposed to be transferred to the SS, and thereupon they would be given the ranks which were equivalent to their ratings as officials. According to the so-called Decree for the assimilation of ranks, which was the Decree of 1938, and which I think has already been submitted as a document here, the corresponding ranks for the various official ratings were established, and every promotion in the SS was the automatic results of a promotion as an official. the defendant Blume?
A Yes, I think it is Blume's Document No. 10.
Q It is in Blume's Document Book, therefore, I don't want to ask you anything further about it, but I would like to know, Herr Ruehl, whether the circumstance that before you joined the police you were an active member in the SS, is not significant?
A Well, one could hardly say that. To explain this, I would like to give the example, which shows to what strange results this assimilation of ranks led. When I came to the police in the fall of 1933, I was an SS-Scharfuehrer, that is a sergeant, but since my first position in the police only corresponded to an SS Unterscharfuehrer, I was downgraded. so to speak, to an Unterscharfuehrer, and only when I became a candidate for assistant in criminal matters, I was once more promoted to SS-Scharfuehrer, because this SS rank corresponded to that position as an official. I think this shows the relationship between the police rank end the SS rank most clearly.
Q Well, you don't have to go into such detail, because only the time after the 1st of September 1939 would play any part in this. But I would like you to describe to the Tribunal the relationship between your official ranks and the SS ranks during the later years. Please take up Document Book III-D. This is the personnel file, Your Honor, page 90 in the English text, and page 136 in the German text. This is NO-4808, Prosecution's Exhibit No. 171. Is it correct when I conclude from this that according to page 1 of the original, you received the rank of Unterscharfuehrer, 2nd It., on 2 July, 1938?
Q What did that have to do with your position as an official?
A. As I have already mentioned when describing my professional training I took a training course as a candidate for Police Inspector from 1 October 1937 until 30 June 1938. After I completed this course of study, on 2 July, we were appointed Police Inspectors on probation. On the same date and on the same occasion, corresponding to this newly achieved rank, we were promoted to the equivalent SS rank which is Untersturmfuehrer which is 2nd Lieutenant.
Q. Does this correspond to your biography as stated in the personnel file?
A. Yes.
Q. German page 144, page 96 in the English, your Honors.
A. May I point to the end of the first paragraph where it says "and after I attended a nine months course at the Leader school of the Security Police, I passed on 2 July 1938 the Kommissar examination."
THE PRESIDENT: August. The says says August.
A. 2nd of July, your Honor, in the German text.
THE PRESIDENT: There is a question mark after August in the English, so the record will show that it should be July. It is not very important, Dr. Linck, July or August.
DR. LINCK: Yes, your Honor, and the photostat shows it correctly. I don't want to go through this dry matter any further even concerning the higher ranks, 1st It and Captain. It will suffice if I ask you the following question. Is this description which you have given here valid for the higher ranks, that is, 1st Lieutenant and Captain, that is 1939 and 1942?
A. Yes. They were the automatic result of my promotion as and official.
Q. Well, if I want to concede to you that these SS ranks had nothing to do with an active membership in the SS then I must know one more thing. Wouldn't you have had the possibility to get out of this SS membership if it was only a formal one?
A. Theoretically this would have been imaginable but it would have presupposed my Leaving the Security Police and that such an action was not possible, at least after the beginning of the war, I may say that that is well known.
Q. The second membership to an organization declared criminal is that you were a member of Office IV of the RSH... Here also the period after the first of September 1939 is the only period we are concerned with. Is the assumption correct? *ere you a member of Office IV of the RSH.. at that time?
A. No.
Q. That is the end of my questioning, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: any defense counsel desire to cross-examine?
You may begin, Mr. Walton. BY MR. *---*:
Q. May at please the Tribunal I have, before I begin, one request which I should like them to grant. It appears that the regular member of our staff whose duty it is to assist the Prosecution in handing document books to the defendant is not here. However, I notice that another member of our staff assigned to me, a German-speaking stenographer, is in the audience. I'd appreciate it if the Tribunal would instruct the Marshal to let her pass to the floor of the Courtroom after the recess so that she might assist me in handling the books.
THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal will please see that that is done during the recess period. BY MR. *---*:
Q. To recapitulate and to get it clear in our minds, I should like to take you back over your testimony concerning your membership in certain organizations. You have testified that you joined the Nazi Party on 1 December 1930, have you hot?
A. Yes.
Q. And on 1 October 1932 you became member of the SS?
A. Yes.
Q. In fact, you requested your transfer to the SS, did you not?
A. Yes.
Q. And in September 1933 you became a member of the Gestapo, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, was this a voluntary act on your part to become a member of the Gestapo?
A. without a doubt I did not need to obey the order which I received.
Q. I don't think that that answer is responsive.
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly it is. It is very responsive.
Q. At least I didn't get the connection.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, he wasn't required to respond in other words, he could have refused.
Q. If that is the answer, it is clear to me now. You state that you could have refused to join the Gestapo at the time you received that order?
A. Yes, of course.
Q. Nov; you continued to belong to the SS, the Nazi Party, and the Gestapo on 1 September 1939, did you not?
A. Yes.
Q. And you made no effort to sever your connection with any of these organizations on that day, or since, have you?
A. Yes, I said so. May I distinguish between the following. First, the SS membership, second, membership in the Gestapo. As far as SS membership is concerned I think I have already made clear that it was the automatic result of my other promotion, thus it was not an independent action which I could have given up independently. As far as membership in the Gestapo is concerned I can only say that already on the first day of the for I reported to the Army or rather asked for my release to join the Army; that in the spring of 1940 I repeated that; that in both cases it was rejected; and then there were general directives that it was not possible to get out and that releases from the Army were forbidden.
Q. Now, according to your SS personnel file it shows that you have, or had, the rank in the Reserve Wehrmacht of Obergefreiter or private first class, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And at the time that you made those requests you were in the SS a 1st Lieutenant or Obersturmfuehrer, were you not?
A. May I correct? When I made the first application on the first day of the War I was a 2nd Lieutenant but I guess that is not important.
Q. At least you were an officer in the SS. If your request had been granted what rank would you have had in the Wehrmacht if you had been given service?
A. Of course I would have gotten the rank of private first class which I had achieved thus far in the Army.
Q. So it was quite a disadvantage for you to volunteer for service in the Army, wasn't it?
A. I wouldn't have considered it as such because these are two completely different matters.
Q. A least the pay would have been much less as private first class than as 2nd Lieutenant, wouldn't it?
A. May I point our, Mr. Walton, that at that time I was not yet active in the operational area and did not yet got any pay as 1st or 2nd Lieutenant and, therefore, I wouldn't have had any disadvantage.
Q. Well, you got paid for what you did based oh your rank, didn't you?
A. According to the usual regulations this would have continued. I wouldn't have had any disadvantage.
Q. Your pay would have been the same as private first class in the Wehrmacht as it would have been as 2nd Lieutenant in the SS? Is that what you say?
A. Yes.
Q. You were convinced, however, that you could render more valuable service to the Reich as an SS officer than as an ordinary soldier, were you not?
A. Repeat the question please.
Q. You were convinced that you could render more valuable service to the Reich as an SS officer rather than as a line soldier, were you not?
A. No, I think Mr. Walton, I have said very clearly that I personally did not think it was correct that a young able-bodied man sits at home and that old people are sent to the front. This reason alone made me decided to report to the Army. I was brought up that way. My father was an officer. My brother was an officer. And I felt ashamed to sit at home by myself.
Q. Now can you tell the approximate date in May of 1941, that you actually reported to duty with the Einsatzgruppen?
A. I don't know how I am to understand this question. I didn't report. Thus the question isn't quite correct.
Q. All right. I will rephrase the question. Will you state the approximate day in May 1941 that you arrived in Pretzsch?
A. I cannot give you the exact date but as far as I recall it was the middle of May.
Q. Did you perform any other service in Pretzsch than with the Einsatzgruppen?
A. No.
Q. Then you reported for duty with the Einsatzgruppen some time around the middle of May 1941, did you not?
A. Yes, but on the basis of the experiences I have made I must object to the word "melden" in German which has two meanings. One meaning is to report to an agency where ordered to appear. Another meaning is that I voluntarily reported there and I would like to be sure that the matter is clear.
Q. That is all right. All we want to know is the approximate date you got to Pretzsch and the approximate date you reported for duties with the Einsatzgruppen, that you entered upon your service with the Einsatzgruppen. That is all. It does not connote how you got there or how you were sent there. I merely want to know the fact of when you started your service with the Einsatzgruppen. Do we understand each other.
A. But just to be quite careful I would like to correct one more thing. because at that time Einsatzgruppe D did not yet exist. Einsatzgruppe D was not set up until we got to Dueben and that was the beginning of June. As far as I remember, until that date we were in Pretzsch without knowing at all what is the matter and without any Einsatzgruppen being formed.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. The Tribunal will not be in recess for 15 minutes.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. LINCK: Dr. Linck for the defendant Ruehl.
If Mr. Walton will permit me to disturb him for a few minutes for cross-examination in order to establish the right connection again, my attention has just been drawn to the fact that in the translation, the English translation, the answers upon the questions about the pay of a corporal in the Wehrmacht or Sturmfuehrer in the SS was not quite clearly expressed to the effect namely that it is always the same pay. That is the official pay, the pay that officials receive, the corresponding payment, that is, no matter what unit or what rank be would have had. I only wanted to establish this.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Your statement is sufficient, Dr. Linck. BY DR. WALTON:
Q. Mr. Ruehl, prior to the afternoon recess we had arrived in Pretsch, and Dueben, where a collection of police members and others was made, and where later on the Einsatzgruppen were formed. In your direct examination, if my memory is correct, you testified that you first assumed, or at least guessed, that you were being assembled for an action for the invasion of England. However, at a later time when you began to receive lectures on Russia, you felt that the action of this group would be directed toward Russia. Am I right so far? wasn't an actual lecture in classes, but it was just a matter of two or three lectures concerning Russia, its people, and its country.
Q. At that time you stated, I believe, that the Chief of the Security Police and the SD appeared before the group of men which later became Einsatzgruppen, and told them of the Fuehrer Order. Did I understand you to say that?
A. No.
Q. I will ask you this question, did you see Heydrich in Dueben or Pretsch while you were there?
Q Do you know for what purpose Heydrich was there?
A Heydrich? For what purpose I could not say. All I know is that he appeared in front of the men and officers who had collected there, and he took leave of these people before they were assigned. This is what happened, and it happened in the manner in which I related it.
Q I am sorry, Mr. Ruehl, I didn't quite understand two words of the translation. Heydrich appeared before a formation of all personnel who were assembled? satzgruppen personnel; what did he generally speak of? That is what I didn't get on the translation.
A I cannot express it in another way. I can only say it was a general farewell, took leave of us. During which he said that, of course, we would be confronted with heavy tasks and he appealed to our sense of duty, and he said that he requested that we would be obedient there and we would do our duty in the assignment. I cannot give you the exact wording, but that was the general tenor he was talking about.
Q Did you assume from Heydrich's remarks that the Einsatzgruppen and their subunits would have to exterminate people? now that you had not heard of the Fuehrer Order, is that correct?
Q And that the first time that you heard of it was in Chernowitz? Persterer gave me the Fuehrer Order in the wording which I have mentioned before.
out this Fuehrer Order and exterminate Jews and gypsies, and Communists, when Persterer first mentioned it to you?
A I said, Mr. Walton, that he did not mention this at all. there was a Fuehrer Order to exterminate these people, didn't you? That is, the remarks he made in Chernowitz?
Q All right, I will ask you a question. When did you first hear of the Fuehrer Order for the extermination of Jews, gypsies and other racial undesirables, when was the first time that you heard of it? when I was transferred back, and on my return at the beginning of October, I reported to Nikolaev, and there I learned that a few days ago the Reichsfuehrer had been there and had proclaimed an order to the effect that all Jews should be executed, but I really cannot remember having heard about the same, about gypsies or other groups. as an active member of Sonderkommando 10b you never heard the Fuehrer Order at all? the first units of an Einsatzgruppe committed to action, that is, first units of Einsatzgruppe D committed to action, have you not?
A For an action? I would not like to call it that, but Kommando 10b was the first one, as far as I can judge it, which was assigned to its own garrison, apart, of course, from their unit.
Q You didn't make that qualification in your interrogation of 8 May 1947. Can you remember generally what your remarks were on that day? lowing concerning this examination, that there was no opportunity to formulate it in any really understandable manner, that such possibility was altogether excluded.
was one of the first committed to security actions in Chernowitz?
A No. All I would like to say is, I would like to clarify this in order to exclude any misunderstandings as far as I know the kommando was the first one which received an order for their actual assignment, that is, they received a locality garrison which was assigned to them, but what particular activity was connected with it I cannot say. officer on the staff of Alois Persterer who was the commanding officer of Sonderkommando 10b is that correct? rations, military training, personnel matters and motor vehicle supply, is that correct?
A Yes. Again I would like to make the limitation. military training was practically only valid for the first time while we were in Dueben, that is during this military training which only took one day in the vicinity of Chernowitz, as I already mentioned.
Q But the other duties that I have outlined are generally correct?
Q what was the total strength in men of Sonderkommando 10b? billeting or food rations or personnel matters, motor vehicle supply; could you act for Alois Persterer in these matters? motor vehicles or to requisition gasoline or to requisition personnel or food?
A. No, that certainly was not the case and such situations never arose, and anyway, I do not know anything about such a situation, because our vehicles and our fuels we received on request from the unit or the agency to which we belonged, or even, sometimes, from the group itself.
