A Your Honor* in my opinion this becomes evident from the difference in territories; I was most of the time in the industrial territory, like for instance, the rural territories in Germany, and one cannot say that here is a town boundary, and this is a town boundary of the other town, so that the roads in an industrial area are entirely different from roads in an agricultural area, that may be the reason. I don't know how it is that I was not a witness in such operations but in any case that is how it was. This is the reason I think it was. action at one tine. What was that episode? Security Police and SD at Stalino had only few leaders, and I was to become leader of a subcommando as an Unterfuehrer, that is, a non commissioned officer. I explained that I as a member of EK-VI had been detailed to Stalino, with the task to establish a Department-III, within the commando of the Security Police; if I were to be made a subcommando leader, I could not do so, that was not the purpose of my assignment, and the officer on duty thought that I was refusing to obey an order because of the fact he had given me an order that "You are taking over this and that task" and I said, "No, I had been appointed in order to build up Department III, and I will not take over a subcommando," so he said, "Therefore, you refuse to obey my order," and I said, "Yes, for this and that reason," he said, "You will have to face the consequences," and as a result of this discussion I was arrested, or at least I was locked up.
Q Who was talking to you there. Who was indicating the arrest to you?
A The then commanding officer was not present at the time. I can not say for certain what officer it was. In any case it was the representative of the commanding officer of the corps, who gave me this order.
Q And what were the consequences? a disciplinary procedure started against me with the police and SS court. the officer who subjected you to this experience. It certainly must have remained vivid in your memory? Domnick.
Q What happened to him?
Q Then when you were sent to Kiev, what occurred? already arrived, and I defended myself before the personnel Referent there, I said to him that I had not been detailed to the commando in order to take over a subcommando but in order to build up Department III. Then the natter was cleared up by the personnel referent of the department, that I was up for refusal to obey, but he admitted that I was right in saying I was assigned from Kiev in order to build up Department III, for that reason it was favorable for me, Also at that point I had already been released the commanding officer had not informed me about that. you were ordered by your commanding officer to perform a certain mission, to take over a subcommando, and you point blankly refused, and you tell us now that nothing happened to you after that very flagrant disobedience of orders? commanding officer, had given the order not to advance with Commando-VI to the East but to remain in Stalino in order to build up a Department III:
for me the order of the group was still valid, because I had not received another order to the contrary to that effect. officer, refuse to obey an order of a superior officer merely because he has an argument that an officer above that officer had told him to do something else?
Q Well, that is what you did. The officer told you to do a certain thing, and you in effect said, "Oh, no, I am not going to do that because an officer who is above you told me to do something else," that is what you are telling us? the superior agency, and I was not a member of the Security Police in Stalino, I didn't regard it as a refusal to obey. I merely explained to him that I had received this, and that order, and, therefore, I could not accept another order as long as the other one was still valid and had not been rescinded. do, and because of that you were placed under arrest? leader's order, and that is the reason that you refused to go along, and you took a chance?
A Yes, Your Honor. I knew that I was subordinated to Einsatzcommando VI, and not to this commander, and if somebody, is detailed from one former unit to another, then the old order has to be rescinded before neworder is accepted.
THE PRESIDENT: If there are no other questions by other counsel; you have a couple of questions Mr. Hochwald?
MR. HOCHWALD: I am sorry to take the tine of the Tribunal but there are two or three questions which was brought up from examination of the witness by the Tribunal. BY MR. HOCHWALD: emergency draft, is that correct?
Q And when was that? emergency service? fullfledged member, nor through my application for rejoining. yet. Did you become a member of the SD on the basis of this emergency service, a fullfledged member of the SD?
A No, Mr. Prosecutor. of this emergency service?
A No, Mr. Prosecutor. SS on the basis of your own application? Will you answer this question with a yes or no?
A Yes, Mr. Prosecutor, based on the fact that I voluntarily applied for my rejoining, I received my formal SS number in the formal formation of the SD.
Q Is it then correct, that you rejoined the SS voluntarily?
A Mr. Prosecutor, that is not and was not my view, because if I had not come under war emergency status, one was a logical consequence of the other, in that case I would never in my life have connected with the SS again.
the application for the entry into the SS? application, is that right? this second matter has a logical consequence of the first. If I had not been drafted on the emergency status I would never have thought of ever rejoining, or making application.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Hochwald, you and the witness are having a jolly good time, because both of you are exports in languages, and you both understand English and German, but the rest of the Courtroom has to get the dialogue, so please let there be a pause between you and the witness, so others not so gifted as both of you can keep up with the examination.
MR HOCHWALD: I beg your pardon.
THE WITNESS: Yes, I beg your pardon, my fault. BY MR. HOCHWALD: right?
A Of course nobody forced me Mr. Prosecutor, it was only that the personnel referent told me there that day, who used to be a member of this unit, in order to be relieved from that I would have to apply after that date and they would have to approve that; it was drawn out from January up to July. refused to take over the command of an entire commando in Einsatzcommando VI?
A No, Mr. Prosecutor, that is not how it was. I told the Tribunal that I was detailed from EK VI to Stalino; and that the officer asked me without rescinding my former order, to take over a subcommando, in the Kommando at that moment I would have been a member of the agency of the commando of the Security Police in Stalino, and I would then no longer had been a member of EK-VI.
I told this office that this was not possible, for I am only detailed for this or that purpose and as long as the other order is still valid, and this if this order is not rescinded I will not do so, and that was regarded as a refusal to obey.
Q Who was then commander of Einsatzcommando VI? Sturmbannfuehrer Mohr, who was the commander, or Sturmbannfuehrer Bieberstein, our co-defendant.
Q Can you tell the Tribunal the exact date when that happened? in any case, it was either September or October, but I don't remember the exact date, unfortunately.
Q September or October 1942?
take over the command of the subcomando? Departmental Chief III, that was the work which I knew; but at the moment of my taking over the job as a subcommando chief, I would have had to take over a task which was entirely foreign to me, a purely police task. I had no police training, police, and I did not have the qualifications for such activity.
Q Was that the only reason why you refused? from the very start I can not cope. carry out a military order in wartime? Didn't you have any other reason which up to now you have not told the Tribunal?
A No, Mr. Prosecutor, it was taken to be a refusal to obey, but in reality it was not such, because I had received the clear, which I had received from the group, "You are not advancing to the East, you are remaining in Stalino in order to install Department III, and, as long as I hold this order, such an order, I felt myself bound to it, because it could have been a case, Mr. Prosecutor, if I had agreed to such an appointment, I would have been punished by the Group for the reason, "You have had the unambiguous order, why did you not stick to it."
Q So you didn't refuse to carry out this order as you were reluctant to carry out executions yourself; that wasnot the reason for your refusal?
A Mr. Prosecutor, never in my life, not for one hour have I been a policeman, and for me police work was entirely strange and foreign to me. Why, therefore, should I take over a police task which I would have done if I had become a leader of a subcommando. Why should, I, therefore, do it if I had been ordered to do something else.
Q How long before 1940 had you been a SD man?
A Not a day, Mr. Prosecutor.
MR. HOCHWALD: No further questions, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: In view of the imminence of the usual recess period, the Tribunal will take this recess a little in anticipation, and during the recess the witness will be returned to the defendants' box and just before we reconvene the witness Fransiska Reimers will be taken to the witness box, and we will immediately begin with her examination when we reconvene. The Tribunal will now recess.
(recess)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. GAWLIK for Seibert: Your Honor, I ask instructions to be given that the defendant Willy Seibert be excused this afternoon so that his defense may be prepared.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant Seibert will be excused from attendance in court this afternoon in accordance with the request by his counsel, Dr. Gawlik.
DR. GICK, deputizing for Stein for the defendant Sandberger: I ask that the defendant Sanberger be excused from attendance in court this afternoon and ask that instructions be given to take him to room 57.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant Sandberger will be excused from attendance in court this afternoon and instructions are hereby given that he be taken to room 57 that he may confer with his counsel,
DR. KRAUSE for the defendant Haensch: Your Honor, I ask before the witness is questioned, that you permit me to give you some more information about the witnesses Schreyer and Reich.
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment. Will the witness please be at case - sit down.
DR. KRAUSE: First of all, I have the question whether Frau Schreyer, as she had been instructed, made the letters of her husband from the year 1942, if she kept them, available to the Tribunal. Also whether the sample of handwriting which the witness Reich made here in court is available. And, also, whether Frau Schreyer sent the negatives of the Wachtmeister who was in her studio to the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Negative of whom?
DR. KRAUSE: Negatives of a Sergeant, a Wachtmeister. I don't know the name - but either after or before the entry concerning Haensch he was mentioned as ordering a picture. May I inform the Tribunal again what the situation was. In the large book of customers Haensch was listed under No. 391 on 21 February 1942 for a photograph to be made of him. Before this entry or after this entry there was an order concerning a Sergeant, a Wachtmeister in German, and it was to be determined whether the negative of the photo of this Sergeant still existed and what lettering was on them.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, did you make inquiry about the negatives or pictures of this Sergeant before?
DR. KRAUSE: No, I did not.
THE PRESIDENT: What is your request now of the Tribunal?
DR. KRAUSE: I am only asking that the witness Schreyer be instructed that the request made by the Tribunal be fulfilled. I assume that the Tribunal had a purpose in asking this.
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment. Has anything been said up to this time about the pictures of the Sergeant?
DR. KRAUSE: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: What request did you make regarding those pictures?
DR. KRAUSE: Concerning those pictures I did not make any request but the Tribunal considered it important to obtain the negatives of this Sergeant as well.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Hochwald, can you shed any light on this situation?
MR. HOCHWALD: If the Tribunal please. As far as I can recollect I asked the witness in cross examination about her recollection of faces and in this connection the Tribunal asked the witness whether she would recollect the face of this German Warrant Officer whose name appears one or two days before the name of Haensch appears in the big book, and as far as I remember the Tribunal asked the witness whether she has the negative of this picture. The witness answered in the affirmative and the Tribunal asked the witness to hand over this picture, the negative of this picture, to the Tribunal. As far as I am informed, I don't think I am mistaken, the witness Schreyer has to do this date not complied with this request. I, however, can state that we have, with the permission of the Tribunal, sent a representative to see the witness Schreyer about the little book of December, and have received information that this little book of the end of December is not in the possession of the witness.
We have obtained a short affidavit to this effect from the witness and we have also obtained other of these little books of other months which we will submit to the Tribunal as soon as we have the expert opinion on the other exhibits ready.
THE PRESIDENT: But anything about the Sergeant?
MR. HOCHWALD: The Prosecution does not desire to put in the negative of the Sergeant in evidence and I personally do think that cannot shed very much light on the case by producing a second negative. Of course, if the Tribunal desires to have this negative I shall make arrangements that the same representative who received from Mr. Schreyer the little books will also obtain for the Tribunal the negative of the Sergeant.
THE PRESIDENT: Does defense desire the negatives of the picture of the Sergeant?
DR. KRAUSE: I would like to ask for it now, yes. Your Honor, I just heard that the witness Schreyer, with the permission of the Tribunal, was visited by one of the members of the Prosecution and again interrogated.
DR. HOCHWALD: That was not what I said, your Honor. With the permission of the Tribunal a representative of the Tribunal visited Mrs. Scheyer asking her for the handing over of the little books which contained the different orders for December.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, this is all immaterial any way, it doesn't make any difference who visits Schreyer. Anyone can talk to Schreyer. In the American forces there is liberty and anyone can talk anyone else. A representative of the Prosecution can go and talk to Schreyer, defense counsel can talk to Schreyer. She may even talk to her divorced husband. She can talk to anybody. She is free. So we are using a lot of talk here about something which is of no consequence at all. Now, to get down to the real issue of the matter, these letters which you have asked about have not come to the Tribunal, so either the Prosecution or the Defense will see that Schreyer hands over these letters if she still has them, if she preserved the letters sent by her husband, with regard to the negatives of the sergeant, if you have someone up there defense counsel who can get these negatives and can certify the negatives are properly preserved you can have that done or you can ask Mr. Hochwald to have his representative there do so, so there will be no more confusion, no more mystery and no misdirection.
DR. KRAUSE: I beg your pardon. I do not want to take up the time of the Tribunal unnecessarily about this. I only want to give one explanation. According to the information which I received, which possibly might not be correct, at Frau Schreyer's a search of her apartment is supposed to have taken place. Although Frau Schreyer is a witness of the defense I purposely kept away and since her examination here I have not approached her because it way my opinion that the points which the Tribunal considered still needed to be clarified could only be clarified by the Tribunal itself. Now if any further measures were taken concerning Frau Schreyer I only ask the Tribunal to tell me about the results of these measures.
THE PRESIDENT: Before Frau Schreyer appeared here in court I believe that the Tribunal indicated that she was not to talk to anyone about the case. But, she has now appeared in court and testified and, therefore, there is no injunction upon anyone not to talk to anyone else, I am refer ring to both witnesses, the original withess and the assistant.
Now the Tribunal is not aware of what has happened since the assistant appeared here in court. We do know that the letters which were discussed have not been presented to the Tribunal. We would suggest that you talk to Mr. Hochwald and between both of you arrange to obtain everything that you believe you need in the further clarification of this issue regarding the picture of the defendant Haensch.
DR. KRAUSE: Yes, Sir. Thank you, Your Honor. That will be sufficient.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. lows: BY JUDGE SPEIGHT:
Witness, raise your right hand and repeat after me: pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
JUDGE SPEIGHT: You may be seated. BY DR. BELZER for the Defendant Mathias Graf:
Q.- Your Honor, I have special reasons to ask the Tribunal to give instructions that no photographs be taken of the witness here. Until now with the assistance of the Prosecution and the Marshal I have been able to avoid it so far but I now ask the Tribunal to give special instructions on behalf of the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Although this is a very unusual request that an attractive woman does not like to be photographed. Since you make that request in behalf of the witness the Tribunal will be glad to see to it that your request is carried out. So, the photographers in the courtroom will please not take a picture of the present witness.
DR. BELZER: Thank you, very much, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: That doesn't mean that the photographer may now go home and forget about his work. We will do other work. He will do other work. BY DR. BEIZER:
Q.- May I ask the witness to speak slowly into the microphone in answering the questions I put; you are not to answer Immediately but let a little time elapse for my question to be translated by the interpreters first.
A.- Frau Franziska Reimers.
Q.- When and where were you born?
A.- I was born on 3 January 1911 in Kortiska, District Saporosje, in the Southern Ukraine.
Q.- Where are you living now?
A.- In Bonn on the Rhine.
Q.- Please tell the Tribunal briefly about your career, about your life until the beginning of the German-Russian War.
A.- On 3 January 1911 in Kortiska, District Saporosje, I was born in the Southern Ukraine. My father was a carpenter, and originally belonged to the Dutchmen who at the time of Catharine the Great settled in southern Ukraine. In my native town I graduated from all German Schools the German elementary s chool, intermediate school, and high school, and after that four semesters at the Ukrainina University in Odessa, After terminating my studies I married the land-owner Cornelius Reimers. He also was a high school teacher for mathematics and physics. After marrying in the year 1930 we were both moved into the country in order to be active as teachers there. Since my husband was of bourgeois origin the Soviets never treated him very gently and he had a lot of trouble with them. These difficulties culminated in his arrest on 4 November 1937 by the Russian G.P.U. or the NKWD; they transported him to Siberia as I was told he was expelled there.
I have never heard from him since. I myself had to stop working as a teacher. With my child, who was then 2 years of age, I was put into the street. Outside the prison of the GPU I saw so much misery that perforce I could no longer feel any sympathy for this so-called socialism although this had not been the case until then.
Having had quite enough of Bolshevism, of course, I joined those circles who were anti-Communist. When, in the year 1941, on 22 June the war with Germany started, I was called into the NKWD building and they gave me the choice either to leave my child and also to go to Siberia or to help in the intelligence service behind the German lines. Because of fear and worry about my child I accepted this suggestion. On 15 August, 1941, in the general staff of the southern front, Major Tschaikovsky gave me my mission and I had to leave my child alone who was then five years of age while raids and fighting took place.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, you indicated to us that you were given certain choices, to do one thing or another, or a third. You said that you were given certain alternatives: You could go to Siberia, or remain. At any rate, you were given three choices. Then you said, "I accepted the suggestion", but you didn't tell us which one of the alternatives you accepted. Please tell us which one you accepted and then relate what happened.
THE WITNESS: Since I knew the methods of the Russian GPU and the NKWD, I knew that if I did not accept the suggestion of working in the intelligence service, then I would never see my native land again.
THE PRESIDENT: Please tell us which suggestion you accepted. What did you decide to do?
THE WITNESS: I decided to accept the suggestion to join the intelligence service behind the German lines.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Proceed, Dr. Belzer.
Q Witness, was there a possibility for an existence in Siberia? Was there a means of making a living or would that have been your undoing? life?
A No. After having walked 500 kilometers towards Saporosje-Uman between Krawoy and Kriwoij-Roc, I was captured by the Germans.
I was taken to a higher commander of the German Wehrmacht and a major interrogated me. The major could understand my worry about my child and my emotional distress and he promised to ask his superior to pardon me. After interrogations which lasted three days, I was brought to Kriwoij-Roc to the Security Service, EK 6.
Q Do you know the defendant Mathias Graf?
Q Where is he sitting?
THE PRESIDENT: The last one to the right as you are facing the defendants' dock, is that correct? Because the last one could be on the other side too, you know?
THE WITNESS: Yes, on the right side.
Q How did you get to know Herr Graf? Please describe the first meeting briefly. taken for a walk of one or two hours by members of the Security Police every day. Sometimes there was one. Sometimes there were two members of the SD. On the 24th of September, or, it might have been the 22nd, I don't know exactly any more now, it happened to be Herr Graf and his comrade Schulze or Schulte or something like that.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Belzer, let's have the date, please, the year. BY DR. BELZER:
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. BY DR. BELZER:
Q It might have been on the 22nd too, did you say that?
THE PRESIDENT: Proceed. BY DR. BELZER: with Herr Graf? because he was particularly kind towards the Ukrainian population. I would like to give a small example here. When we passed through the streets of Kriwoij-Roc, we saw a Ukrainian woman who was crying bitterly. Herr Graf asked me to ask this woman why she was so deeply upset. I went to the woman and asked "Why are you crying?" She answered to this that her husband had been a miner in the Kriwoij-Roc Iron Ore Mines and had been denounced by the neighbors who said that shortly before the German troops came in he had dynamited the mines. As a result of this the SD had arrested him. Herr Graf talked to this woman in a very kind manner, to which I was not accustomed, by saying she should calm down, because if her husband was innocent, then after the case had been investigated, he certainly would return. These words consoled the women and I was also pleasantly surprised about that.
Q Do you know what happened to this man in the end? he an officer?
A No. At the time I did not know much about the insignia of the German Wehrmacht, but, as far as I can remember, when he was addressed by comrades, he was addressed as Unterscharfuehrer, an NCO.
Q How long did you stay in Kriwoij-Roc? my child was was no longer being shot at by Russian artillery. Then I was promised that, if possible, my child would be taken out of there and again it was Herr Graf who realized my emotional troubles and said he would speak to Standartenfuehrer Kroeger so that they would speed up this matter and I would get my child back as soon as possible.
Q Did you get back your child then? units went towards my home town on the Dnjepr River and I found my child in an air raid shelter where my brother had kept it.
Q Where did you go after Kriwoij-Roc? officials - Herr Graf was among then and I don't know the other people - brought me to Dnjepropetrowsk, again to the Security Service.
Q How long did you remain in Dnjepropetrowsk? Security Service until part of perhaps the entire EK 6 - I don't know which - was transferred to Dnjepropetrowsk and be chance Herr Graf and I met in the corridor of the Security Service building. Then he promised me again to intervene with Standartenfuehrer Kroeger as to whether my living conditions could not be changed, and that they would give me some work to do and that my child would receive medical care.
Q Did you see Herr Graf repeatedly in Dnjepropetrowsk? Russian language and Herr Schulze also and I did that in Kriwoij-Roc. At the same time Herr Graf gave me English lessons to make up for it. I Dnjepropetrowsk these language lessons were continued two or three times a week. Herr Graf?
A None, really. Of course, we only talked about private matters. to tak to the civilian population?
lived with a Ukrainian family. which were supposed to have been carried out by Einsatzkommando 6? with bundles on their back. What happened to these people I could not find out, but when I inquired about this from my superior, at the time in the Department of Agriculture and Food, I was told that the Jews were being resettled. That they were actually shot, I only heard when I came to Germany later on. Russian workers to Germany?