of war who was a Jaw, or a Communist functionary, and, what orders would you issue concerning him?
A I had no orders to that affect. My instructions from Office-VI were to find suitable people for this operation "Zeppelin", to select them and to recruit them and then to report to the office that they were ready. This task, in order to clarify this, I carried out in such a manner, that first of all I talked to the commander of the camp about the matter; then I would talk to the counter intelligence officer who existed in every camp, and who knows his people, and then he suggested a number of them to me, and I then talked to these people individually. A general screening of the entire camp could not be talked of, I, as an individual, would hardly have had the time to do this.
Q Did you ever select a Jew for this espionage activity?
A No. Mostly I selected Caucasians and Mongolians. functionary?
Q How many prisoners of war did you interview? was a Jew, or a Communist functionary?
AAt least no one told me, and I didn't notice it if any one might have been among them. you get for your "Action Zeppelin"?
A I personally? There must have been a few hundred I should think, whom I suggested. for their duties?
A No, unfortunately, I didn't know sufficient for such.
Court No. II, Case No. IX.
performed from July to September 1941?
Q Now you are familiar with the document books, aren't you, familiar with the documents that show that by the first of September Einsatzgruppe-D had executed 35,000 people?
A Whether this figure is right, I don't know, and I think I would like to remind you, it has been said repeatedly here, that this figure does not mean at all that all these people were executed by the group, but that these were supposed to have been executions which occurred in that territory at some time and by some one. that can be accounted for by Sonderkommando X-B were three?
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Walton, please make it clear whether "three" refers to three people or three collective killings.
MR. WALTON: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Because you are using the question -
MR. WALTON: I am sorry, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: -- in contradiction to the 35,000.
MR. WALTON: I'll withdraw the question and rephrase it, Your Honor. BY MR. WALTON: three persons were killed by Sonderkommando X-B from July until September?
A Did you say three persons?
Q Isn't that what you told me?
THE PRESIDENT: That is what I want to clear up. He said three executions.
MR. WALTON: All right. All right, I shall re-ask the question. BY MR. WALTON: to Sonderkommando X-B?
Court No. II, Case No. IX.
A I can not tell you, Mr. Walton.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, witness, how many were included in the three executions?
THE WITNESS: That I can not tell either quite exactly, because I only heard about the third execution afterwards, without hearing any figure about it on that occasion. two executions. twelve to fifteen people.
Q And in the second execution?
Q You have no idea how many there were in the third?
A I really can not say. It must have been -- it must have been a limited number of persons, I think.
THE PRESIDENT: Proceed. BY MR. WALTON: Ohlendorf?
Q How many?
Q Did Seibert ever make an inspection of Sonderkommando X-B? he came together with the group-chief.
Q Did he ever make one alone?
Q Who was the chief of Leiter-III in Sonderkommando X-B? Buckert?
Court No. II, Case No. IX.
been there, but I can not say really.
Q Did you have any official contact yourself with Seibert? vestigation concerning two German villages.
A -- but I didn't get any instructions from him.
Q Did you ever receive any correspondence signed by Seibert? Seibert to hold while you were a member of Sonderkommando X-B?
Q Did you consider him a deputy of General Ohlendorf? roll call, which the group-chief himself conducted there, and if I am not very much mistaken, and my recollection is not wrong, that he appointed as his deputy, if necessary to do so, Obersturmbannfuehrer Setzen.
MR. WALTON: Your Honor, I have only a few more questions but I want to go into the statements made by him yesterday concerning the signing of his affidavit,
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we can do that after lunch.
MR. WALTON: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Hoffmann?
DR. HOFFMANN: Your Honor, I can only get a definite reply between two and three o'clock. The Secretary General will inquire by phone whether the witness has set off or not.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we will hold it in obeyance until you report to us, Dr. Hoffmann. The Tribunal will be in recess until 1:45.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will be in recess until 1345 hours.
(Whereupon recess until 1345 hours, 19 December 1947.)
(The hearing reconvened at 1345 hours, 19 Dec 1947)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. KOESSEL FOR HOFFMANN: Your Honors, the defendant Nosske was excused yesterday to take part in a conference with his counsel this afternoon but he is still at the moment in the room here. I would like your Honor to arrange that he be excused.
THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal is directed to take the defendant Nosske to room 57 where he may confer with his counsel.
DR. KOESSEL: As the defense counsel of the defendant Schubert I would like to trouble the Tribunal with one question. According to rumors there is supposed to be no session tomorrow morning and the whole state of affairs seems to be rather difficult, especially as a witness has appeared for the defendant Haensch. There is the danger that the examination of the defendant Schubert in the witness stand will be cut into two parts and will not be finished before the Christmas holidays. I would, therefore, ask the Tribunal because of this danger not to call the defendant Schubert to the witness stand. There are a number of colleagues who want to submit documents books. I am one of them. I should like to submit my document books, also for the defendant Haensch and for Dr. Hoffmann. So I think there is quite a lot that has to be done.
THE PRESIDENT: What you are really trying to do is to have the rumor include this afternoon some time.
DR. KOESSEL: No, it wasn't that. I only wanted to be certain that I shall not have to call the defendant Schubert to the witness stand.
THE PRESIDENT: Tomorrow?
DR. KOESSL: That one would come to an agreement, to a ruling, that the examination will not be interrupted, not that part of it will take place before the Christmas holiday and the other part after the Christmas holiday.
THE PRESIDENT: If a rumoris repeated often enough it becomes a fact and if two or three or more defense counsel tell me about this rumor there will be no way to hold court tomorrow. Suppose we see what developes during the next hour and perhaps we can have the rumor crystalize into some kind of fact.
DR. KOESSL: Very well.
MR. WALTON: Your Honors, before I conclude the cross examination of the defendant Felix Ruehl I should like at this time to answer to the ruling of the Tribunal made on 9 December that on the question of the admission of the affidavit of a deceased witness the Prosecution and the defense should file suitable briefs. At this time and in open Court I desire to tender the brief in the required number of English and German copies to the Secretary General for filing.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you know whether defense counsel have prepared a brief in reply?
MR. WALTON: It is my understanding, sir, that they are working on it. They have had English copies two days or so but I want to give them as I can the advantage of the copies prepared in German - that they have both as of today.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. BY MR. WALTON: to the date that you received the Indictment in this case. At the interrogation in which you signed the affidavit which appears in Document Book III-D you stated in your examination that you objected to errors and inconsistencies contained in this affidavit and Mr. Wartenberg stated that you would be given an opportunity to make corrections, is this true?
do you again state that you objected to signing an erroneous affidavit and only signed on the promise that you would be given an opportunity to make corrections?
A I have already said, Mr. Walton, that in the first affidavit which was shown to me I asked for so many corrections to be made and that I myself dictated one paragraph as Mr. Wartenberg kept on dictating something quite different from what I stated, so that a now affidavit had to be made out. The now affidavit was again not entirely according to my statement and I told Mr. Wartenberg so. Whereupon Mr. Wartenberg told me "You still will have an opportunity to do so if this is going to be used against you." was prepared and only signed on the promise that you would be given the opportunity to make corrections? Is that a true statement of facts? the first or second draft but I want to persist to say that Mr. Wartenberg stated that if this should be the source of any errors whatsoever and if this is going to be used against you there is enough opportunity during the procedure to clear this up and I was convinced of this affirmation.
Q Do you remember the date that you signed this affidavit?
Q Of June?
Q Was there a stenographer present when you signed this affidavit?
Q A female stenographer? Did she take notes?
A I did not observe that. As far as I know she did not write. stenographic notes from 26 June 1947 from 1500 hours to 1530 hours. "The interrogation 1243-D was conducted on 26 June 1947 from 1000 to 1030 hours. In this interrogation the affidavit was submitted. Due to the many corrections the affidavit had to be re-written and could not be signed."
And then the stenographic notes go on:
"What is your name?
"A Felix Ruehl.
"Q Are you the same Ruehl whom I have interrogated often before? I remind you that you are still under oath.
"A Yes.
"Q I have had the affidavit re-written. Please read it and sign it." these wores:
"The witness reads the affidavit and signs it."
Did those events transpire? am absolutely certain, you may believe me or not, that I discussed this affidavit with Mr. Wartenberg. addition?
examination I assume from what you have stated that you were given a certain function in Sonderkommando 10-B and you were effectively blocked off from all other activities as if Persterer had put blinders on your eyes and you saw nothing that transpired either to the right or to the left and your whole attention and your whole eyesight was directed at your own task and that the executions of which you have any knowledge whatsoever are those which you found out only in casual, conversation with your comrades, is that the substance of your testimony? dealt with within the frame of my own competence and I told you those things that I learned about myself. I cannot tell you any more. Mr. Walton.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any re-direct examination? Dr. Linck? BY DR. LINCK: membership in the organization of the SS. Were you a member of the General-SS? Police? Then I was taken into the Reich Security Main Office and I was then kept on the files of the SD and thus I left the General-SS. SS, the SD?
Q Did you do any service?
Q Did you pay membership fees?
Q Was there any SS service in this special SS formation, the SD?
Q What was this formation then, your service? What was its function? was wearing the uniform. organization of unifomred men of the SD? I had nothing to do with that.
Q Thank you. Your Honor, I have no further questions. myself and in order not to appear as stupid, that I raised no objection during the whole cross examination because my client made me promise him to let him answer all the questions even thos which seemed inadmissible. It wasn't easy for me to comply with this promise, but I kept my promise.
MR. WALTON: If the counsel wants to testify let him testify and take the stand and be swonr. I don't think the matters have any bearing on the issues in this case, nor does the information add one bit to the duty or the ability of the Tribunal to decide the case. I don't think it is a proper remark for the Tribunal. I don't think counsel is acting in his place as counsel to reveal confidential communication between himself and his client.
THE PRESIDENT: I am sure that Dr. Linck did not intend to offend any one by the statement which he volunteered and which was sincerely made but I don't think it necessary to pursue the statement any further.
DR. LINCK: Thank you, your Honor. May I on this occasion ask the Tribunal whether it would be agreeable if I would answer the question which I have received about the IMT. It was a question which was asked by the Tribunal in connection with my opening statement.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, you had stated in your opening remarks that the witness had appeared and I asked you if you could refer the Tribunal to the page in the transcript.
DR. LINCK: There is a small error in my opening statement. I had raised the point that my client did not hide a Civilian Internee camp hut followed the call of thedefense for the organizations in IMT and he arrived in Nurnberg on his own accord. It did not come to an examination as a witness before the IMT but the following happened, which I saw myself with my own eyes as I was active myself then in the International Military Tribunal for the organization of the political leaders. The organizations defense counsels were locking in the camps for men whom they could present to the court, and on this occasion a co_defense counsel found the defendant Ruehl as a witness for the defense. He helped to compile the documents for the defense and then came to Nurnberg as a witness. As the number of those who would be heard before the Tribunal was extremely limited the defense had him merely submit an affidavit instead of examining him and after a few months he was brought back to Nurnberg. This is the only explanation that I can give.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, well that clears it up completely. The transcript showed that you had said that the International Military Tribunal chose him to be a witness and we naturally assumed that he had appeared. But now in view of what you said naturally we don't need to have any reference to the transcript.
DR. LINCK: Yes, your Honor. the case as concluded. I have no witnesses.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, the witness will now be returned to the defendants' box.
DR. HOCHWALD: If the Tribunal please, before the witness takes the stand I would like to ask defense counsel for the defendant Haensch, a question, the Tribunal will certainly recall that the witness Weinmann appeared in behalf of the defendant Haensch. It is the contention of the Prosecution that the witness Weinmann is the wife of the then Obersturmbannfuehrer Erwin Weinmann who replaced the defendant Blobel as commander of Sonderkommando 4-A. There is no proof in the record as yet to show this fact.
We want to ask defense counsel for the defendant Haensch whether he contests this contention of the Prosecution or whether he will admit the witness Weinmann who appeared here in Court is the wife or was then the wife of Erwin Weinmann, Sturmbannfuehere or Obersturmbannfuehrer, who replaced the witness Blobel as a commander of Sonderkommando 4-A.
DR. KRAUSE for the defendant Haensch: I am glad to give the explanation and certify that the witness Weinmann who was examined here in the witness box was a wife of the then Obersturmbannfuehrer Erwin Weinmann with whom Haensch at the time had been assigned to the East simultaneously. That altogether was the reason why the witness Weinmann was called by us.
DR. HOCHWALD: If your Honors please there is only one thing missing, whether the defense counsel contest our statement that it was this Erwin Weinmann who replaced the defendant Blobel as commander of Sonderkommando 4A.
DR. KRUASE: May I have a short discussion with the defendant Haeusch concerning this. I am not in a position to make a statement concerning this without discussing the matter with him.
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: I beg the Tribunal's pardon, but I do think it is much easier to ascertain this fact in this way.
DR. KRAUSE: Whether Weinmann happened to be defendant Blobel's successor the defendant Haensch cannot state. He only knows of the fact that Weinmann was the assigned kommando chief of the SK 4a.
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: If your Honor please, this statement seems entirely sufficient to the prosecution, and the prosecution thanks defense counsel for the defendant Haensch for his statement.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you want to say something else?
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: As the witness Reich will be called to the stand, I would like to submit two affidavits which were sent down to the prosecution which were executed by the witness Reich, Document NO-5698 and Document NO-5718, which I introduce as Document 192-A and B. Your Honors, I will have these documents distributed by the clerk.
THE PRESIDENT: Will the witness now be called in?
FRIEDA REICH, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
JUDGE DIXON: Witness, raise your right hand and repeat the oath after me. pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
JUDGE DIXON: You may be seated. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Witness, do you know Gertrud Schreyer?
Q Were you ever employed by her?
Q Do you remember the months?
1943, but I do not remember the month.
Q Are you sure of the year when you began employment in Schreyer's office?
A Yes. When I was interrogated at Berlin I made a mistake. I said 1939, but in the meantime I found a photograph, on the basis of which then I went to Mrs. Schreyer and I found the date, 1941.
Q Well, have you seen Mrs. Schreyer recently?
A I have not. It is about ten weeks ago that I saw her last.
Q Did you talk to her about this matter? the date as to when you first became employed in her establishment. sent to my husband at the time in the field, and on this I found the date.
Q What was your activity with Frau Schreyer? the customers, and I issued the photographs and helped her to cut, to dry the photographs, and sometimes develop, and so forth. them into the books. Then when the prints were ready, I had to dry, cut, I put the names on, and then I passed them on to the customers when they arrived.
Q Who took the photographs in Frau Schreyer's studio?
Q Do you know Walter Haensch? Frau Schreyer's studio?
A I am not certain; I couldn't say. If I saw the prints I might remember, but there were so many customers that I can't remember individual ones.
THE PRESIDENT: May we have those exhibits, Secretary-General.
(The exhibits were handed to the President.) BY THE PRESIDED: of negatives whether the pictures indicated by those negatives were taken in Frau Schreyer's studio? Tribunal is trying a certain exhibit which consists of a black bound book which I am now exhibiting to you. I would like to have you look at this book.
Are you familiar with this book?
Q Did you keep this book?
Q Do you find the name of Walter Haensch in there?
Q Yes. While you are glancing through it, Witness, let's ask you another question. Are you familiar with this other exhibit which has been referred to as an appointment pad book?
Q Did you keep this also?
A Yes, but Frau Schreyer also did so because I wasn't always present.
Q Are the entries in this appointment pad book in your handwriting?
THE PRESIDENT: Page, please show this to her.
A This, for instance, is Frau Schreyer's handwriting.
BY THE PRESIDENT?
Q Is it her handwriting all the way through?
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Hochwald, do you remember the number of the entry in the cash book?
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: To the best of my recollection, your Honor, it is 931, but if I can have the exhibit for a minute I can -
THE PRESIDENT: Well, would you please look at the black book. I don't think that is the number.
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: 391. I said 931, I am sorry. BY THE PRESIDENT: in the case book and tell us if you wrote that entry.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Hochwald, do we have the original in German of her interrogation?
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: There are two documents in evidence, your Honor. One is typewritten and one is handwritten.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, Document No. 5698.
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: 5698, the original is with the SecretaryGeneral, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you have the original there?
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Please show that to the witness. answer? Read it aloud. Read it slowly, please.
A "Do you know whether a photograph was taken of this man in Frau Schreyer's studio? Answer: I do not remember. I consider it unlikely because I was supposed to transfer the names of Frau Schreyer's clients from the appointment pad into the cash book. It is, of course, possible that Herr Haensch was an acquaintance of Frau Schreir and that she photographed him privately. In this case his name would not have appeared in the appointment pad."
Q Just what do you mean by that statement?
A I said at the time that I don't remember having seen a photograph of his, and I don't remember an entry. I said at the time that there were so many customers whom I had to enter into the book that I could not remember the details.
Q Well, just what do you mean by the statement, "I consider it unlikely" - or "impossible" as it has been translated here - "because I was supposed to transfer the names of Frau Schreyer's clients from the appointment pad into the cash book?"
A Well, I can't really say anything to this. (Your Honor, this is a mistranslation. It should be "unlikely" because the German is "unwahrscheinlich."*
Q I see. Very well. You were asked, "Do you know Walter Haensch?" And you say, "The name is familiar but I don't know in what connection I heard it, and I cannot remember a man of this name." Then you were asked, "Do you know whether a photograph was taken of this man in Frau Schreyer's studio?" and you answered, "I don't remember. I consider it unlikely." Why did you say considered it unlikely?
ferent way perhaps when I was questioned there. Perhaps I said that it was possible that a photograph was made, but that I personally didn't remember. making the appointment, taking the picture, writing the reference in the cash book?
Q Did you take the appointment?
Q Did you write up the reference in the appointment pad?
Q You wrote up the appointment?
Q You said in that same answer, "It is, of course, possible that Herr Haensch was an acquaintance of Frau Schreyer and that she photographed him privately." Did she or did she not photograph him privately?
A I shouldn't think so because if I made this entry here, there he must have been a regular customer.
Q And did you also make the entry in the case book?
Q Do you remember the instance yourself; do you recall it? tion?
THE PRESIDENT: Let us have the document please, the book and the pad.
(The exhibits were returned to the President.) BY THE PRESIDENT:
Would you please tell us whether those were made in Frau Schreyer's shop?
THE PRESIDENT: All right, let me have them back.
(The exhibits were returned to the President.) BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q How do you identify the negatives?
A I have recognize on the top Mrs. Schreyer's handwriting, and it is, customary that we made notes in writing.
Q How do you identify negatives when you put them in your files?
A We put them into envelopes. We wrote the name on this and then, according to letters, sorted them, filed them.
Q Is the name written on the negative itself?
Q Is that done in every instance?
Q Does the number always appear too on the negative?
THE PRESIDENT: Page, please show her these negatives again. the name and number on the negatives?
A On this negative, on this photograph, there is a name. The number is almost illegible. Yes, on this one too.
THE PRESIDENT: May we look at them too?
(The exhibits were returned to the President.) BY THE PRESIDENT: you see the name and number.
A Yes, here, and here is the number. (Indicating.)
THE PRESIDENT: Do you have that famous magnifying glass of yours, Mr. Hochwald?
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: I haven't got it, your Honor, but I shall try to get one for you.
THE PRESIDENT: I thought you always traveled with a magnifying glass. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Just where do you see the name?
(The witness indicated the name.)
Q Oh, yes, I see it now. In whose handwriting is that?
A Mrs. Schreyer's.
THE PRESIDENT: You may take the witness stand. Page, please hand to the witness a blank sheet of paper and a pencil. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Will you please write your name? letters, and now I use Latin letters, that is characters.
Q Well, I know that women don't like to go back to the old days, but let's go back to those days and write the way you wrote then. Why have you changed your style of writing since nineteen-forty--- When was this, 1942? 1943? I cannot use German characters. I have to use Latin characters, and, therefore, I got used to it.
Q Were you married when you were working for Frau Schreyer?
AAt the beginning I was not married. I married only on Christmas, 1941. Frau Schreyer. 1941.
Q Well, you were married when this transaction occurred?