THE PRESIDENT: Yes, but Dr. Hoffmann never asked him so far as I remember the very specific question, did you kill any Jews in Russia?
MR. WALTON: That will be the crux of my examination. BY MR. WALTON:
Q. Then, from what you said in answer to the comparison between Duesseldorf and Pretsch and Dueben you had more opportunity to sabotage the order in Duesseldorf than you did in Dueben. Is that what we are to assume from your answer?
A. Not to sabotage but I could achieve a modification of this order and I would not do that in Russia or before.
Q. That's what I wanted to find out. Now, when and where were you given command of Einsatz Kommando XII?
A. I was put in chage of Einsatz-Kommando XII after the units had been set up and that was one or two days after the proclamation of the Fuehrer order in Pretsch by Streckenbach.
Q. And the approximate date, was it June of 1941?
A. Yes.
Q. And was it a few days before the beginning of the campaign against Russia, before the 21st of June?
A. Yes.
Q. Then roughly you would estimate it between the middle of the month of June and the beginning of the Russian campaign, some date?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you ever make a speech to your Kommando in Schaesburg? It is spelled S-c-h-a-e-s-b-u-r-g. Before your Kommando in which you are alleged to have said and I quote: "The Fuehrer has ordered that all elements who endanger or undermine the fighting troops in the rear must be destroyed."
Or words to that effect?
A. That is correct. Yes, I spoke to the men with words to this effect. I can give you a further explanation concerning this. The days before we left in Dueben were so short and were so filled up with necessary tasks of a technical and organizational manner that I could not talk to the men immediately and could not get to know them properly because these were a lot of people entirely new to me. The first place where we remained for one or a few days, was in Schaesburg in Siebenbuergen. I lined up the men in order to introduce myself, as it were. The essential words which I spoke at the time were that I appealed to their sense of duty and to their comradeship. Apart from that, of course, I pointed out their tasks and said that we had to do everything in order to safeguard the troops.
Q. Did you further state in this same speech the thought that your Kommando would carry out this order in such a way that no criticism would ever be directed toward the Kommando by anyone?
Court No. II, Case No. IX.
A I don't remember having put it that way. I certainly said, and what I meant was, that there must be cleanliness and order, and especially that nobody should act for selfish motives. That means that as far as his character and his own person is concerned, he should remain clean. the essential Fuehrer Order certainly in your own words. Isn't it natural that you should next take up the question of how the men under your command would carry out this order, and were you not anxious that it should be carried out in a military manner, in a complete manner, so that no criticism would attach to your command; isn't that the natural sequence in a speech of this kind? the purpose were certainly different. Obviously, I don't know whether it was at this time or later, I acquainted my unit with the Fuehrer order.
Q Well, as a matter of fact, since you think back on it, weren't you anxious that your command actually carry out all its orders so that no criticism could attach to your command?
A No, no, not in this sense. My own attitude was different from this. What I wanted to achieve was that these men should follow my leadership, that they should not act on their own initiative and break out, but they should only do what I had ordered them to do or carry out special orders which I had given them. only act under your orders and carry out your special tasks as you ordered them during the time that you were in command; did they follow your ideas in your speech generally? the discipline was in accordance with this.
Q We will return to this at a future time. How many Gestapo officials did you have of officer rank in your commando?
Court No. II, Case No. IX.
Police, who held officers' ranks, I think there was only one, as far as I remember, at the most, two. self? commando?
Q Did you have a Leiter 3, or Department 3? to the offices 3 and 4. In view of the special tasks which the commando had, this was not necessary. When special tasks had to be dealt with I detailed those leaders who seemed to be best acquainted with the task ahead of them. an inspection tour? on inspections, with conferring with Leiter 3 of each commando. To whom did you refer him when he came on an inspection to your commando?
A He only came on an inspection tour once. That was in November, 1941. That was in Mikailowka where he was in the staff of the Einsatzgruppe Chief. They arrived at night, and they left the next morning. He spoke about special matters with myself and other people who were competent in this particular activity. At that time, I had asked the officer Klaus to deal with these matters. I don't know what his rank was at the time. In Nikolaev I had ordered another officer to deal with special jobs. Seibert only made one inspection in your commando, and that was when he was with the staff of Ohlendorf?
Court No. II, Case No. IX.
Q Now, who was your chief of Leiter 4?
Q Weren't you, from your previous experience and your work in the Gestapo, competent for being the chief of the Leiter 4, to write that type of report? were you not? the latter half of August, 1941? approximately.
Q How far is that from the group headquarters in Ananjev?
A Mr. Prosecutor, may I first say that in the garrison Tscharnomin the Einsatzkommando 12 was stationed in one garrison, with the group staff. The group staff left Tscharnomin a few days before I left, in the direction of Ananjev, while I myself, on order, went into the Ethnic German area, in another direction. headquarters staff of your commando left for Ananjev, and you went off on an inspection tour. Am I correct in that statement?
A No, I think I misunderstood the question. Perhaps it wasn't quite clear, but it wasn't that I had a staff; it was only a matter of the staff of the group. I, myself, did not have a staff. If, of course, the staff of the group is meant, then it is clear that I was not on an inspection trip, but I was stationed in the garrison Tscharnomin, and the group staff left on its own, went to Ananjev, and I made all the preparations in order to march into the other area.
Q How far from Tscharnomin was Ananjev?
A I couldn't tell you exactly, but it may have been about eighty Court No. II, Case No. IX.
or one hundred, even more, kilometers, perhaps even one hundred to two hundred. I cannot make any statement concerning this. It would be incorrect. It can be established from the map.
Q You don't know?
A It is at least this distance, but I don't want to state a definite figure.
Q Were any elements of your Commando 12 ever in Ananjev?
A No, but I don't know, of course, whether when I reported to the Einsatz group chief personally and went to Ananjev whether there wasn't an officer or some person accompanying me, but apart from this, that is,nobody of my Kommando ever went to Ananjev.
Q Well, I will ask you this question. Did your Commando 12 make reports to the Einsatzgruppe? made regular reports, every two weeks, or every week, to Einsatzgruppe D, is that correct? There was no deadline so that on the 1st or the 15th I would have to issue a report, but it was whenever there was anything to report.
Q Who wrote these reports to the group?
A Most reports were made out by myself. When I was not in charge of my own commando because of illness, I presume the deputy must have made out the report. That was Hausmann. But it is, of course, possible that during that time the subkommandos sent their independent reports to the group because they were nearer. activities also? I should like to say that I didn't have subkommandos at any time everywhere. If I may make that clear very briefly again, when the commando was at rest during sometime it only carried out a few activities. Then Court No. II, Case No. IX.
it was distributed in the form of subkommandos and small units in the Ethnic German area. Then again it was assembled. Parts were separated which were not under my leadership from then on, and the part that was to join the 17th Army under my command remained under my command as a unit.
Q let's consider an example. Let's say, for instance, that you sent an officer and ten men on a special mission, regardless of what this mission is, and this mission consumed about five days, and your orders to him, as soon as he had completed his mission, he was to return to where your headquarters of the commando was stationed at that time, where you were with the rest of the kommando. At the end of the five days, or the ten days, the officer and the ten men reported back. Would you have him make out a report of his activities during the time he was away from you? me, he, of course, would have had to report on his return. report which went to the group headquarters, would you not?
A Yes. I wouldn't have done so only with this report, but all reports, all situation reports which I received from other places concerning events which happened in my sector, and even outside.
Court No. II, Case No. IX.
village or a particular area, they were gone sometime. Whenever you would receive a report from them about any particular happening, would you include that in your report to Einsatzgrupee D?
Q Now, let's consider Document Book II-D, page 49 of the English, page 54 of the German, which is Document NO-2841, Prosecution Exhibit 94. This is a harvesting action document about which you spoke this morning. There are a few questions which I would like to ask concerning the document. The report in this situation report originated from your commando, did it not? report which I sent to the group staff concerning this particular event was twice or three times as extensive. It has been condensed here, that is evident to me here. Who, however, condensed it, whether that was the Einsatzgruppe or the office at Berlin, and what changes were made, I do not know. even though they are not all the facts, but these facts in connection with the others, came from your commando originally? Jews in this area were guilty of keeping people from the fields to gather the harvest, and in addition to that somebody was guilty of destroying farm machinery. Is that the type of resistance which is mentioned here? machinery when it was not in use; couldn't you stop this sabotage of machinery? in other villages and localities. If we should have put a guard at every bit of machinery, then we wouldn't have got very much further. But re Court No. II, Case No. IX.
garding this particular thing, that even in these territories where there wasn't always a German soldier, the basic German measures were not sabotaged, it was proclaimed by the Wehrmacht that any one who would resist the regulations as proclaimed by the Wehrmacht, would be severely punished. where your commando was? at least not in that form, because the harvest was over, and I did not experience another one. to the harvesting? tachment found out through investigations and reports from the populations and by interrogating the perpetrators, as he reported to me.
Q All right. What directions did you give him when he reported to you that Jews were sabotaging the harvest in the Babtschinzy area: what directions did you give the commando leader?
A I did not tell him anything at all. He carried out the measures. He carried out investigations, found out about the perpetrators, and he had them executed, and he came to me reporting these facts. ing out these executions he was under your command, was he not?
Q All right. Now, from the same or similar sources, couldn't this unnamed Commando Fuehrer have determined exactly who it was that fomented this resistance? was decided upon for execution.
Court No. II, Case No. IX.
that they had violated an order which had been issued and proclaimed by the Wehrmacht. It was a deed which had been carried out contrary to the Wehrmacht orders and it was punishable by death according to Wehrmacht regulations. satisfied that every single one of these 94 Jews had actually formented resistance to the orderly harvest of the crops? sume that it was right.
Q You presumed; you never tool steps to satisfy yourself that it was correct?
AAfter it had been carried out, I couldn't convince myselfafter all it had happened. I couldn't again start investigations. your orders to take care of the security were followed 100 percent, could you not? Jews and had turned them all loose or sent the others out and had just executed 94, or did he report to you that he had arrested 94 and executed 94 Jews? those arrested was larger than the figure mentioned here; the figure of those who were actually punished, shot.
Q Were there any women and children included in these 94 Jews? possibly have been the perpetrators. In any case, a report to that effect was not made, and according to what he reported to me, women and children were not included. up there in the Babtschinzy army?
A I don't now for certain, but I think it must have been Court No. II, Case No. IX.
twelve to fifteen, possibly eighteen. made was the execution of the 94 Jews carried out?
A I don't remember that. arrests were made that the executions happened? ment of these detachments lasted only two weeks, but I have already said that the officer of this particular unit reported to me saying that he had arrived in Babtschinzy, and this Babtschinzy had been one of the first villages he had arrived at.
Q Now then, in two weeks' time, eighteen people, some of whom, I am sure, could not speak Russian, thoroughly investigated 94 cases of sabotage, and the commando fuehrer passed sentence and had them executed, all in two weeks' time? 94 Jews? these suspects to offer proof of their innocence to him?
A Certainly. They were interrogated. I am convinced that some of them were interrogated, and they could exonerate themselves through witnesses who proved their innocence. I can only say what he reported to me, and I can only refer to his careful report which he also gave me in writing even at the time. to supervise the harvest, and he was acting in your stead, was he not?
Court No. II, Case NO. IX.
Q. And as your military subordinate, he was in effect carrying out your duty for you in the Babtschinzy area, wasn't he?
A. Yes, by order of the Wehrmacht -- because it was a Wehrmacht order and I myself visited the area and I convinced myself of the order and the condition in this area.
Q. Was the fomenting of this type of situation such a heinous offense against the Third Reich that is deserved the sentence of death?
A. This sabotage was one of the offenses which was regarded a major offense by the Wehrmacht just as the carrying of arms, for instance, was also punishable by death, although he fact in itself in other times -- normal times, that is -was not an offense to be punished by death, in my opinion.
Q. Well, couldn't this particular situation be controlled in view of thefact that it was near the end of the harvest season by apprehending these 94 people or 94 Jews who were fomenting this resistance and putting them in prison or behind barbed wire -- couldn't they have controlled the situation?
A. For this, one must know the Russian sector, Russian conditions. There was no barbed wire nor could any measures have been carried out there. Regarding these special conditions, it seems to me that the Wehrmacht leadership was forced to issue such strict directives or warnings to the population because this large Russian sector could not be manned with soldiers at each little corner.
Q. Then is was expedient to control the situation by shooting people when they had done anything against the orders of the Wehrmacht or the Einsatzgruppen, is that correct?
A. If special cases were involved, yes, and if the warning as in conformity with such special cases.
Q. Now, according to this report, it mentions that these same 94 Jews were guilty of spying on the population and had already created a basis for numerous deportations to Siberia. Did these deportations occur under the Russian Government or under German occupation?
A. That was when the Russians were still there, but these people were not arrested and convicted for that reason, but the results established by the staff leader were mentioned in his reports, in order to confirm the thoroughness of his searches and investigations, perhaps it was that he wanted to show me in this connection that the people concerned were perpetrators who would be capable of carrying out such a deed in such times.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Walton, I don't draw from this document what seems to be implied in your last ---- I don't gather from this document what seems to be the basis of your entire cross-examination on this particular episode. The report indicates a certain situation in this area, that Jews were interfering with the harvest, that other Jews had apied on the population, that as a result of that there had been deportations to Siberia, then comes this statement, "as a countter-measure, 94 Jews were executed". It doesn't say that these who had been interfering with the harvest and those who have been saying on the population were executed. It indicates that 94 Jews were seized and executed in the nature of a hostage business.
MR. WALTON: I am coming to that, sir. He testified, however, that through investigations this Teilkommandofuehrer had determined that 94 Jews were guilty of these two offenses.
THE PRESIDENT: But the report itself says, "as a counter-measure", it doesn't say, "as a result of investigations and as a result of apprehension of certain guilty elements that there were executions".
MR. WALTON: That is right. That is what I want to ask the witness, how does he reconcile his statement that these careful investigations were made over a fortnight by this commando fuehrer and 18 men, and that 94 Jews -- no one else in the population, but 94 Jews -- were found to have either sabotaged the harvest or to have reported these people and had had them sent to Siberia. How does he reconcile these executions with the fact that this was a counter or hostage me asure? Now, I have just come to that, and I wanted to establish the deportation before I ask him that question.
THE PRESIDENT: He has indicated that this report was made up from his own report, so call his attention to that actual language. BY MR. WALTON:
Q. Witness, according to this report which is lifted out of your report, did you state in your report that as a counter-measure 94 Jews were executed?
A. I don't know whether this formulation was contained in it. I only know that important and even supplementing parts in this report are not included this report, and the context is not very clear, as it was clear in the summarized report. I would also like to draw the attention of the Tribunal to the fact that also in the original, that is, in the photostat, that is the original text, the original document from Berlin, the sentences are not complete, that one sentence does not ale sense -- I am just looking for the sentence. The sentence reads, "These Jews had" -- well, this really doesn't make any sence "had supplied documents concerning this agent for the guarding of the population". In the original it says, "These Jaws had supplied documents for these deportations to Siberia via this agent, was the agent for whom" -- this again shows that the report has been made either in a hurry or that it just doesn't actually show the facts. It isn't complete.
THE PRESIDENT: Read the sentence that follows the word "Siberia".
THE WITNESS: "As counter-measures, 94 Jews were executed".
THE PRESIDENT: There is no trouble about understanding that sentence, is there?
MR. WALTON: No, not at all.
THE WITNESS: This sentence is not in immediate connection with the preceding sentence, and I must point that out. BY MR. WALTON:
Q. I will ask you to state to the Tribunal according to your best recollection and belief, was every one of these 94 Jews guilty of sabotage in that harvest and of having people deported to Siberia or not?
A. Aiding the deportation is only a supporting element. It is mentioned, and I know that it is mentioned in another connection, in the original report. I can only remember the report as given to me by the unit officer. In his report he showed me the circle of perpetrators whom he punished in this way. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. Now, Witness, we are getting the Siberian deportation and harvesting business intermingled in a way, but it's not clear why these 94 Jews were executed. Let's put it very directly, why were these 94 Jews executed, what had they done? Let's put that in one sentence.
A. Only because of having taken part in sabotage acts and because they were later convicted.
Q. Yes, They had nothing to do with this Siberian deportation?
A. The punishment did not have anything to do with it BY MR. WALTON:
Q. Then why does the report state that a number of 94 Jews were executed as a counter-measure, why didn't it say, "The guilty ones were executed"?
A. This must have been contained in the complete report in another context.
Q. Now, Witness, as a matter of fact, isn't the basic reason that these Jews were executed, that they came under the provisions of the fuehrer order?
A. No. The subcommandos were only sent out in order to carry out their measures in connection with the harvest. I am convinced -- I don't want to maintain anything specific because I myself had never visited these villages, and it was never determined whether there were any Jews in these villages other villages where the harvest had been organized there should have been no Jews. In this connection, I would like to emphasize that at that time, that is, until the Reichfuehrer in Nikolajew refused to give consideration to the Wehrmacht in the plains, especially to its needs until then the Hitler order was not generally carried out, and was even suspended.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will be in recess for 15 minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed, Mr. Walton. BY MR. WALTON: were absent from your kommando because you were in the hospital in Nikolajew, is that correct? absent from kommando because you were in the hospital in Nikolajew, is that correct?
A Not in Nikolajew. I was in the hospital but in Novo-Odessa on the Bug River at the time from the first days of September until about 24 or 25 September.
Q To whom did you relinquish command of your unit when you left? sturmfuehrer Hausmann at the time.
Q That is former SS-Hauptsturmfuehrer Emil Hausmann, is it not?
Q How long did you know Hausmann during his lifetime?
Q Did you know his general reputation for truth or varacity? although I don't like to talk that way about a dead man.
Q No. No. Just a moment. Did you know it? That's all I asked you. him -
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, please answer the question. He merely asked you if you knew him. Now "yes" or "no".
MR. WALTON: I asked him did he know his general reputation for truth or veracity.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Did you know what his reputation was for being a truthful person?
THE WITNESS: When the kommando was being set up - not yet, but later on... BY MR. WALTON:
Q Just a moment, witness. Witness, answer the question "yes" or "no", end wait for my next question. You will be given an opportunity.
A May I ask the time you are referring to? time that the kommandos were being set up in 1941, and the next question I ask you I assume that you continued to know him all during the service in the kommando and I assume that you still knew him up to the time of his death. Certainly you knew who he was. My question was did you know his general reputation for truth or veracity since June of 1941. Now I would like for you to answer that question "yes" or "no".
Q Was is good or bad? discuss the duties of a kommando leader with Hausmann?
A What do you mean by Kommando chief? I was kommando leader, and after me Hausmann was in charge of the kommando while I was in the hospital. actual command of the kommando to go to the hospital? did you have any discussion with him concerning the duties of a kommando leader?
Q Hausmann was a member of your kommando, was he not?
Q And what was his usual duty in Einsatzkommando 12? while en route to Roumania I gave him the task of keeping the column together when we marched in close unit.
But later on, until the end of August, Hausmann was in reserve together with a kommando. The work only started when we came into the Ethnic German territory, and, therefore, the activity extended only to a few days. Apart from that in my personal relationship I had already gained a personal impression.
Q. Now what was his usual function when you reached the territory of the Ethnic Germans? What generally did he do? What duties did he perform in the kommando? the few days which remained for this -- he was the chief of a small detachment which was located in Speyer, as successor of the kommando 10-A which had been there previously. were turning over to him the temporary command?
A I don't quite know whether I discussed reports with him, but I do know that he objected to the manner of reporting, and that during my time in the hospital he used to say bad things about me to the Einsatzgruppe chief behind my back.
Q Isn't it a fact that you showed him one of your reports where a total of three hundred to three hundred fifty executions had been performed by Einsatzkommando 12 in Kantakuchinka, Speyer, Hoffmanstal and NikolaJew?
A No. That is quite impossible because, during that time in particular, not a single man of Einsatzkommando 12 was in Nikolajew, and in the few days in which I was still in charge of the kommando I could not possibly have been in the out-of-the-way places. Such a measure could not have been carried out.
Q I am not speaking of you personally, but weren't units of your command in Kantakuchinka, Speyer and Hoffmanstal? Speyer did not know anything about such executions, you soothed him by telling him that he had eternal conscientiousness, or words to that effect, didn't you?
A No, that is not at all clear. I can't make sense of that question. That Iremember is after I had handed the kommando over to him -
THE PRESIDENT: I didn't quite catch that phrase, Mr. Walton, eternal conscientiousness?
MR. WALTON: That is the way it is translated, sir. I will make it clear in a minute.
BY MR. WALTON: all, because I did not find it at the usual place. The reason was because the territory was now Roumanian sovereign territory, and all the German offices had withdrawn from this territory beyond the Bug River -
Q Well, witness, we are not interested in this. Just a minute; just a minute.
Q Just a minute. Did you have a conversation with Hausmann concerning executions prior to the time you left the actual command of EinsatzKommando 12?
A No. No.
Q You did not. On this occasion when Hausmann was talking to you about taking over the kommando, didn't you request him to sign a report of executions in Speyer of ninety-one persons which he know the true number to be nineteen, and he flatly refused to sign such a lying report?
A Matters were slightly different. That is just what I was trying to describe. I did not personally hand the kommando over to him. That means I did not travel to him and tell him about it, but I had the order handed over to him in a suitable manner. He now travelled around in the area as the new kommando leader and came to the location in particular where I had been with my unit. The radio equipment which I had there he wanted to take over as kommando leader.