DR. GAWLIK: It could be submitted in evidence. The Prosecution can state what they want to prove by it. I don't see the purpose of reading it out, why the witness should read it. We can read that ourselves, and so can. the Tribunal.
MR: FERENCZ: Your Honor, we will submit it as evidence. However, it is his own handwriting, and there are some parts that are difficult to read, and it is a short statement, about a page and a half, and it is all very pertinent and I am unable to read his handwriting, and that is one of the reasons I have asked him to read it himself and, to explain it to the Court.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I would recommend that the defendant read it, as he has been doing it, but read it slowly so that we can got the benefit of the translation.
Q (By Mr. Ferencz) Continue, please.
THE PRESIDENT: May I ask, Mr. Ferencz, if you have a typewritten copy for the interpreter. It might be easier to give us the translation if she had the German before her.
MR. FERENCZ: We have just made a translation, your Honor, and it now is in the hands of the interpreter.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Now please, witness, read the document slowly.
THE WITNESS: Where from, Mr. President?
THE PRESIDENT: I would suggest from the beginning. First, to whom is this directed?
THE WITNESS: I addressed it to Klingelhoeffer.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
THE WITNESS: "Don't let them bluff you. Always be careful, even with the friendliest face. My statements until now, you were the leaders of the VKM, at first in Gsaitsk or Moshaisk, later in Roslawl. I cannot give dated. Whether you carried out executions, I don't know. The beginning of my duty, and of November, 1941. At that time there were no ghettos left in my area.
The large-scale executions fell into Nebe's time. I then brought you to my staff, firstly, because of your knowledge of the language; second, I had to be frank here, because your inclination to drink deemed it necessary. You then spent sometime with the preparation of a plan for Moscow and you worked for the SD in the staff, mainly because of your knowledge of the language. Troop Smolensk was led by some small Sturmscharfuehrer or Untersturmfuehrer whose name I do not know any mor. Troop Smolensk belonged to the EK 9. The number of persons executed by Einsatzbruppe B was not registered in the group staff. I therefore could make no statements on this. I did not give any execution orders because these were already given by Heydrich and Nebe to the SK and EK. B received two or three gas vans from Berlin which were not used by B and were, therefore, under directions of the RSHA given to C.
"Written reports went to Berlin about every three weeks. There was no count of executions contained therein, but it contained mainly a description of the situation from a security police point of view and a voluminous SD report. Beginning in spring, 1942, the main activity of Einsatzgruppen B changed to partisan reconnaissance and to the formation of police forces of indigenous persons (OD). This court has no original report of Einsatzgruppe B nor other records, only information reports issued by the RSHA, and these are not complete. These reports were first issued in 1942. About your activity in Gsaitz and Smolensk the court has no records.
"I have identified the following persons as belonging to Einsatzgruppe B and stated that I knew them:
"Staff: Schroeder, Schirme, Hoele, Eckstein, Rath, Mueller, Kiesewalter, Mahnke, Koch, Holste, Fischer, Pfeiffer, Gatz, Siegling, Lehmeyer.
"7a. Steimle, Rapp, Matschke "7b. Rausch, Ott, Schiefner "8. Bradfisch, Richter, Schindhelm.
"9. Schaefer, Wiebens, Burchardt "VKM Klingelhoeffer, Blume.
"There names were known here already for the greater part. Further I know nothing about the fact that executees had their clothing taken away from them before the executions and that the clothes were given to the NSV.
"An agent of Office IV, who has said to have had the mission of removing mass graves, was not with me." End.
MR. FERENCZ: If Your Honor please, we will do the same with this document as we have done with the last. We are having some difficulty having it photostatted because it is in very small writing and the paper is bad, but we will make it a document as rapidly as possible and will submit it then as Prosecution's Exhibit 176.
THE PRESIDENT: That number will be assigned to the document.
Q. (By Mr. Ferencz) Naumann, will you please explain to the Tribunal why you thought it necessary to tell the Defendant Klingelhoefer the date that you took command and what he did and what you did, as well as who were membersof your kommando, and to warn him not be, be bluffed.
A. I gave these statements to Klingelhoefer and they were the same as those I made during the interrogation. Why I did this? Klingelhoefer was my comrade. I know him. I know that Klingelhoefer gets easily upset, and I considered it my duty as a comrade to tell him what I had said during my interrogations. Other reasons concerning this information did not play any part except the comradely attitude.
Q. Then as I understand you, because of your comradely attitude you told him not to be bluffed, and to say the following things, is that correct? As I understand your answer you are saying---
A. That is right. From a comradely attitude.
Q. Tell me, what is your opinion about the Defendant Klingelhoefer?
A. I stated yesterday when I was questioned by Klingelhoefer's defense counsel.
Q. You stated yesterday that he was a fine fellow and you were glad to have him as a major interpreter in your headquarters, is that correct?
A. Yes, that is right.
Q. Didn't you once state in an interrogation where you were under oath that he was no man and he didn't know much and since he was a heavy drinker you couldn't rely on him for very much?
A. No, I never expressed myself In that form. I only expressed exactly what was written in that note.
Q. I will hand you now the question and the answer which was put to you by Mr. Wartenberg concerning the Defendant Klingelhoefer, and I ash you in it is correct to read it to the Court.
A. "15 Question: Was his rank not too high to be an interpreter?
"Answer: If you ask me about his personality he was not a hardworking and clever man. I could not leave him in an independent position either because he liked to drink, and therefore I kept him with me.
"16 Question: Did the VKM, during Klingelhoefer's time, carry out executions?
"Answer; I can answer neither yes nor no; I think probably."
Q. That is enouth, thank you,
A. May I add something on this?
Q. If you wish.
A. The reply 15 is such bad German, which I don't usually use, not even during an interrogation, obviously the stenographer was not very clear about this, I have noticed this has happened repeatedly during interrogations. Very often I had to ask, during the interrogation, "Can you follow this?" And she often answered, "Please go a little slower."
Q. Do you wish to make any corrections to your answers there? If so, please do so.
A. I certainly did not say, did not use the phrase, "he was not a hard-working and clover man." Also I did not use the phrase, "I could not leave him to work independently because he, liked to drink too much," This phrasing was not used. As far as I remember, I said much more, in detail, about Klingelhoefer. These are only a few words or sentences about the Whole interrogation.
Q. In other words, you say that the transcript of that interrogation, which purports to be a verbatim transcript, is inaccurate and is much shorter than what you actually said, and is not in your own language?
A. It is inaccurate.
Q. Thank you. Will you return it, please?
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, do I understand that although the language as reproduced in that document is not your phraseology, and although you said more than is contained in the document, yet the thought which you expressed is reproduced in the sentences which you read?
THE WITNESS: No, Your Honor, my opinion was expressed-much more in detail and more to the effect as I said yesterday. However, I told Interrogator Wartenberg at the time that Klingelhoefer was inclined to have a drink every now and then. That is exactly that I said, because that represents more approximately Klingelhoefer's actual character. He was not really a heavy drinker, he just liked to have a drink occasionally. That is a phrase I used verbatim and it is not mentioned here.
Q. (By Mr. Ferencz) As my last question, Naumann, I ask you, in regard to your activity as commanding officer of Einsatzgruppe B for a period of approximately fifteen months, do you feel any guilt or remorse?
A. I believe the reply to this question can be seen from previous answers I have given. I have Said that the order, state order, which was given to us, and which ordered that certain categories of people, were to be killed for the purpose of maintaining order and security. I also said that this order, with all those who had anything to do with it directly or indirectly, caused considerable moral difficulties of conscience, but that all those who were directly or indirectly connected, realized that this order was given by the Supreme Commander and head of the state and that this order had to be obeyed.
Q. What is your answer then, do you feel any guilt or remorse?
A. Guilt and remorse I can only feel for crimes I personally commit. If I myself had carried out killings and cruelties then I would have to feel guilt and remorse. If I have carried out an order then I have no guilt at all, and therefore I cannot feel remorse for a guilt that does not exist.
you did while commander of Einsatzgruppe B, is that correct?
A. I have already given my explanation to that effect.
MR. FERENCZ: Thank you, No further questions, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Any redirect examination, Dr. Gawlik?
DR. GAWLIK: May I first ask the interpreter to give me the English translation of this letter. I believe there is a mistake in it.
THE INTERPRETER: The court reporters have it now.
THE PRESIDENT: Whoever has the present custody of the English translation of the note in question will please allow Dr. Gawlik to have it.
MR. FERENCZ: If Your Honor please, we may save time, if he will point out any correction we will concede to it. BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q. Witness, I ask you to read the one sentence in this letter which starts, "I".
A. "I do not know that executees had their clothes taken from them before the execution and their clothes were given to the National Socialist Welfare Organization, the NSV".
Q. Please read the English as far asyou can, what has been translated in the English.
MR. FERENCZ: Your Honor, the defendant has read it. We have received a translation. Are you satisfied that the translation we have now received is correct?
DR. GAWLIK: I only wanted to show that the interpreters were given a translation which said exactly the opposite. The translation says, "I do know about it."
MR. FERENCZ: We will concede the correction, Your Honor. The original document was going to be offered to the Court, The translation was made only this morning and quickly passed forward. If it is corrected, there should be no further discussion on the matter.
DR. GAWLIK: I only wanted to correct this in order to inform you on this important point in the future.
THE WITNESS: Shall I read the sentence again:
DR. GAWLIK: Yes, please do.
THE WITNESS: "I know something about the fact that executees had their clothing taken away before their executions and that they were given to the NSV.
Q (By Dr. Gawlik) Did you write that in the letter? executees before their execution were robbed of their clothes and these clothes were handed over to the NSV.
DR. GAWLIK: I ask that the English translation be corrected in the record, because I presumed that the original text was wrong.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Gawlik, the Tribunal's impression is that the interpretation came through that the defendant knew nothing about those facts. So, therefore no harm was done, so that you will see that what actually came to the Tribunal was the correct translation. after the end of the war hide. I therefore ask you did this happen because you had committed any crimes or were there other reasons, and what were they? officer to avoid captivity. It happened on the evening when I took off my uniform, that was my decision. Any other reasons or even any other thoughts than this I never had, particularly at this time. I could not have known how things would continue in Germany and until a few hours ago I has the impression that the Western Allies would give us the opportunity to continue to fight against Russia.
discussion with Heydrich. This order of Hitler, did you pass it on at all? beginning the units had been given exactly the same order. ask you did you have the possibility to object at all. opportunity to protest and object. I myself interrupted Heydrich and I was rebuked in that manner. I have described. were also discussed. please describe briefly what connections between the staff and the Sonder and Einsatzkommandos existed. Chief, is that it? I was Chief of the Einsatzkommando and, as such, I took a lot of time to talk to my Kommando leaders and the subkommando leaders, subordinate to these and to go out to them, because in the whole area, there were twenty-four garrisons, which were very hard to reach. Therefore, I could not visit every individual garrison very often. Beyond that I was visited by Kommando leaders when they thought that it was necessary to discuss something with me or members of the staff who wished to discuss something or to regulate something with me. These were mostly members of the staff and on this opportunity those gentlemen of course, visited me. Beyond that the Kommandos reported every two weeks always on the 1st of the month and the 15th or the 1st and the 16th, about everything that had occurred in the reegion in every branch and field and therefore gave reports on organizational matters, about questions of personnel and billets, about the fuel situation, about the vehicle situation and the effusive SD report and the report about police actions, report about cooperation with the Army and other things.
in to be identified. I ask you can you remember that you gave this order mentioned in the document? "Zeppelin" was not subordinate to me. Office VI of the RSHA in Berlin was in charge of it and directed it and the chief of this unit with one or two men worked with their own agency in Russia, immediately connected with Army agencies. They had immediate contact. Einsatzgruppe B merely had to help him if he needed material to carry out his task. I just now recall that it had its own fuel quota from the Army. It very closely cooperated with the Wehrmach, the German Army, and especially with the Air Force, the Luftwaffe, because agents were brought over frontlines by land as well as by air ways and such mutual assistance was necessary.
Q Please describe to the Tribunal what the enterprise "Zeppelin" was.
A The enterprise "Zeppelin", as far as I got to know about it, had the task to take Russians who had anti-Bolchevist ideas and bring them Across the frontier lines an either to help them return with news, which occurred only rarely, but up take them to the territories close or far away from the front from where they broadcasted together with them, the news to the German stations, by means of signal outfits which, as far as I know, belonged to the Wehrmacht, with other words to *o espionnage. I know that further orders were given that capable people were given the task not only to send the news reports, but also to carry out expoonnage acts. Details about this I do not know, because for the men of operation "Zeppelin" secrecy applied accordingly only these were allowed to know anything about it who were concerned with it.
Q Were the members of operation "Zeppelin" sobordinated to you as Chief of Einsatzgruppe B?
A No, I already said so. They were under Office VI. only in case they were not sure of something they had to be supported by a letter of the Einsatzgruppe.
If they could work it out themselves, they did not need the assistance of the Einsatzgruppe and this was mostly the case, letter? I merely want to clarify in advance as to the phrase (Sonderlager) Special Camp Wissokoje. The Prosecutor asked me whether I knew a camp in Wissokoje. With good faith, I said, "no" because there was merely a house, which was a Russian farm house, a wooden house, covering about 15 square metres. This wooden house was inhabited by the agents and there they received their reports. I do not consider this house to be a camp, because it was a house with two rooms, which was put at their disposal. The phrase an SS Special Camp, Wissokoke, I learned about only for the first time here. I had never heard about it and a house of 15 square metres, can hardly be given, the bragging name of an SS Special Camp. Also the Signature that is written here I do not know. It is Obel or Gobel. I know the man mentioned in the letter, SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Sakut. this?
A I don't know any such person.
Q He did not belong to your staff either? that it was actually written like that, is based on a mistake. orders to to that effect, for "Special Treatment" as it says here. I would have remembered it and I already said that I could not have given such orders, because I was not in charge of these Russian men. Once or twice I saw these men. There was a colonel among them who performed very good tricks on horseback, but apart from that I didn't know anything about these men.
when you were Chief of Einsatzgruppen B? security in the rear of the fighting forces. The activity itself extended mainly to the search for partisans as mean task, then there was also SD reporting and setting up local police force. These three subjects were the most important tasks of the Einsatzgruppe B. far?
DR. GAWLIK: Then I have no further question.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you have something, Dr. Hoffman?
DR. FICHT (ATTORNEY FOR THE DEFENDANT BIBERSTEIN): Your Honor, I only want to ask that the Defendant Biberstein be excused tomorrow from attendance because I want to prepare him for his defense.
THE PRESIDENT: The Defendant Biberstein will be excused from attendance in Court tomorrow and, incidentally, the Tribunal will announce that there will be a session tomorrow, even though it be Saturday. It will begin at none o'clock and will terminate at twelve O'clock.
Do you have something, Dr. Hoffman? BY DR. HOFFMANN (Attorney for the Defendant Mosske): Einsatzgruppe independent? gruppen. as Ohlendorf? gruppe B were the same as those with Einsatzgruppe D?
D as in Einsatzgruppe B I cannot say, because I could not see in what manner Ohlendorf was in charge of his Einsatzgruppe. commitment were the same?
A If you don't express yourself too generally by referring to the Fuehrer Order, that was the basis of all Einsatzgruppen and all Einsatzkommandos, in the same manner.
Q There is one thing I don't understand. you said the Einsatzkommando leaders received the Hitler order and carried it out. You only notified the Hitler decree that was all you did were you then, as functionaries necessary at all? assigned and according to what Ohlendorf said, during the last few days and what I said yesterday And today. it is obvious that there had to be Einsatzgruppen Chiefs. Because the territory was so vast there had to be a connective system, even if only a loose one.
Q Witness, perhaps I am stupid, but I still don't understand why you interrupted the line of orders which you followed concerning the Einsatzgruppe Chiefs, the Hitler decree the Einsatzkommando leaders and any the channel of command was, Hitler decree - Einsatz leader. cutiond, a number of actions occurred. This includes me and also the kommando leaders. That is obvious, but if in Schmiedenberg, Pretsch, and in Dueben, in one of those three places, an order was not only given in the Einsatzgruppe Chiefs but also Sonderkommando and Einsatzkommando chiefs, I cannot help that. the Einsatzkommando carried it out?
DR. GAWLIK: I want to object to this question. I don't see the relevanty of this question to the line of defense of my colleague Hoffmann.
THE PRESIDENT: If it is in the nature of cross-examination, which it is, Dr. Hoffmann has the right to extract as much benefit as he can from the witness for the benefit of his own client, so that it's entirely up to the witness as to whether the statement by Dr. Hoffmann as put to him is correct or not, so the objection is overruled.
Q To explain Dr. Gawlik's attitude, I wanted to say that I act as defence counsel for an Einsatzkommando Chief and therefore it is important for me to know whether he is made responsible for the Hitler Decree immediately or whether you come in between. Up to now this has net been shown and that is why I ask you. neither a kommando leader, nor an Einsatzgruppen chief. That is my opinion.
THE PRESIDENT: Do I understand from that answer that Adolf Hitler is now charged with all the war crimes no one else is responsible? Is that what I get from your comment?
THE WITNESS: No, Your Honor, what I mean is the decree was issued; for the fact that it was issued, Hitler as Supreme Commander is alone responsible because he gave it.
Q (By Dr. Hoffmann) Let us leave this subject. Obviously we cannot agree, witness, Another question: You said you cannot state how many executions were carried out in your Einsatzgruppe? manner; Did you know how many Jews, gypsies, and other people to be killed were in the territory of your Einsatzkommando?
A I say "we" expressly. We knew as little about this as about the total figures of the population there.
Q Do you know how many remained afterwards? this decree out to the full extent. To repeat my question, did you know how many survived, yes, or not
A To this clear question I can only say, "no." opinion that no Einsatzkommando leader did not carry out the decree to the full extent, but he did, in fact, carry it out fully? Fuehrer did not carry out the decree completely.
Q But you are not quite sure?
A I might mention that I didn't look through all the woods in Russia to see whether any Jews remained. the individual kommando leaders, yes, or no? were just as obedient soldiers as I was.
Q Do you consider it obedient to carry out such a decree? can help to win the war against an enemy, which at that time and even now threatens not only Europe, if that order was given to us as soldiers, we had to carry it out. of the Einsatzkommando leaders had this same opinion as you, you think therefore that that order was carried out to the full extent, is that right?
Q But apart from that, you don't know?
A What the others did I don't know. BY THE PRESIDENT: as you know?
A I don't know, Your Honor, of anywhere it was not carried out, I have no proof that it was carried out to the full extent, because a kommando leader might have said for some reason or other, "I won't do it, and nobody will find out." I don't know that anything like that happened, but I cannot say now that it actually did not happen. Decree was aimed at Bolchevism and that therefore you believed it to be just? and the Soviet Officials were to be executed? You agreed with that?
A Your Honor, please don't take it amiss if I can't say yes fullheartedly. After this decree had been given by the Fuehrer I considered it necessary to carry out this decree. you believe you had to obey orders, is that the interpretation I am to get from your answer? Socialist I heard the speech of the Fuehrer on the 22d of June, 1941, when he described the opponent in the East And I realized the meaning of his speech and when the decree was given I carried out this order in order to win the war against the Bolchevists. was the way to win the war and you believed the war to be just, because you had heard Hitler say so in this famous speech on July 22d, 1941, or whatever date it was? might be of vital importance.
Q It doesn't need to extend far. The question is simply, "Did you agree with the order and did you execute the order, because you believed that as a National Socialist man, as a patriot, as a soldier, it was necessary to execute this order in order to win the war against Bolchevism against Russia, did you agree with the order"? essary to kill hundreds of thousands of defenseless people, men, women, and children unarmed, did you agree with that?
no misgivings about it? it seriously. I have said that repeatedly, but opposite to the personal misgivings and the weightof these thoughts, there was the order and my personal misgivings and my personal ideas for me as a soldier would become inconsistant for me being a soldier, I was not allowed to follow my personal misgivings and ideas.
Q Did you have any misgivings at the time?
Q Then you did not agree with the order? and it was contrary to my nature to kill defenseless people.
Q And you believe it was wrong to kill, especially women and children? so, because there was Fuehrer Decree. to shoot down women and children.
A No, I did not hold that opinion owing to my convictions. It was my conviction that it had to be done.
Q Then you were in full accord with the order?
Q You either did or din not have misgivings. Did you have misgivings?
to the carrying cut of this order, but owing to the situation at the time -
Q Answer the question simply. Did you have misgivings? Did you have some reluctance? Did you feel some revulsion in the execution of this order? to carry it out.
Q Did you have misgivings? Answer that question.
Q Then you did not agree with the order? You had misgivings. You were reluctance You felt that there was something wrong; therefore, you had misgivings; therefore to that extend, you did not agree with the order. Now please answer that question. it was inhumane and unjust to strike down defenseless woman and children, is that right? it a terrible duty to have to shoot these women and children.
Q Now let us stick to the issue. I asked you a number of times whether you did or did not have misgivings and now I get the direct answer from you; you did have misgivings; you did not like this job.
A. No.
Q Very well. Then to that extent you believed there was something wrong with the order? and that it was necessary. I also know for sure -to execute the order in order to destroy the enemy in order to win the war, why did you have any misgivings?
something morally wrong? and these helpless women and children. You saw nothing morally wrong in that?
Q You saw nothing morally wrong about it? I do not hesitate to answer.
Q It isn't a question of being decisive. It is a question of telling the truth. Now you either thought this order was right or it was wrong. Now if it was wrong tell us it was wrong. If it was right, tell us it was right. Tell us if it was right or wrong. There is certainly no disposition to coerce you to give one answer or the other, we want the truth because you must understand that this is certainly a very pehnomenal thing for people to be shot down without an opportunity to defend themselves, to explain their case, there was no opportunity given at all. Therefore, it is a very phenomenal situation so that it is entirely in order that we ask of you who was in this operation whether you thought it was right or wrong and that is all there is to it. Now you either agreed with this order or you did not agree with it. because you agreed with it?
A I already said that I had misgivings. It was with reluctance and it was a fight between duty and conscience add the realization that this measure was necessary in order to fight Bolshevism.
Q Then you did not agree with it completely? Let me point out to you witness, that when a soldier goes into battle, he has no misgivings.
He is going in to fight. He knows that his opponent is armed. He knows that he is fighting for his country and he may kill. Further, afterwards, when he comes back and goes home he sleeps tranquilly that night, if he comes out alive, and he has no misgivings, no reluctance. On the contrary, there is enthusiasm for the combat. Now, here you say you did have some misgivings; you did entertain some reluctance, so therefore, I ask you whether if you did entertain That reluctance, If you did not believe at the time that there was something wrong with the order. was part of our aim of the war and therefore it was necessary.
Q Very well. Then the Tribunal will accept from your answer that you saw nothing wrong with the order, even though it did involve the killing of defenseless human beings. That is what we draw from your answer.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, the Tribunal will be in recess until two o'clock.
(A recess was taken until 1400 hours.)