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?
"Hamburg". Now write "Dr. Haensch". Write "391".
THE PRESIDENT: Page, give her another sheet of paper now. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. May I see them now, please.
A. (The sheets were handed to the President).
Q. And what is your explanation as to why you used different script while you were working with Frau Schreyer?
A. In those days I did not have any English correspondence and I was not used to Latin characters, because one did not use them in those days.
Q. And what caused you to write in this way today?
A. What exactly do you mean now, Your Honor?
Q. Why do you now use the different type of typography today?
A. You mean another kind of handwriting?
Q. Yes, that's right. Why do you write differently today from the way you wrote in 1943?
A. As I have said, because I now have a lot of English correspondence and I must write in Latin characters in order not to get back to the German kind of handwriting again.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Hochwald, do you want to examine? Do you want to examine the witness?
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: Certainly, I do, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed. BY MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD:
Q. Witness, do you remember having sworn to and having signed two affidavits in the time between 3 December and today?
A. Yes, I do. Two affidavits.
Q. Did you sign and swear to two affidavits in the time between December 3 and today?
A. Well, once at the interrogation and then I had to make a short statement in handwriting, and the next day somebody else came to me and gave me something which I signed again.
Q. Did you make these affidavits voluntarily and freely?
A. Yes.
Q. Well, is it therefore true? Is what you said in your affidavit the truth?
A. Yes.
DR. KRAUSE (ATTORNEY FOR THE DEFENDANT HAENSCH): May I object to this question. I think it is impossible to question a witness whether what he has stated some time ago is true. It is possible that a witness when further considering has come to a better recollection of an event.
THE PRESIDENT: That is the only way you can find out, by asking whether it is correct and true.
MR. HORLICK-HOCHWALD: If the Tribunal please, I do not want to comment on the objection on the part of the defense.
Q. (By Mr. Horlick-Hochwald) Are these two affidavits the truth?
A. Yes, that is what I stated at the time.
Q. Were you convinced on the 3rd--I am sorry, the 4th--I am sorry, I cannot find the date -- on the 3rd of December when you signed this interrogation that you have said the truth to the interrogator?
A. Yes, at that time I was of the opinion.
Q. May I ask you, who did speak to you about this matter in the time from the 3rd of December until today?
A. You mean who was in charge of the interrogation?
Q. No, with the exception of the interrogator, with the exception of Mr. Sachs, who interrogated you in this case, with whom else did you speak about this matter?
A. No, I spoke really to nobody. I discussed it briefly with my friend with whom I share a room, I did do this because Mr. Sachs came and as he had no time then, I said she should go into another room and she asked me what was the matter, and I told her that I could not give her further information.
Q. So you spoke to nobody else?
A. No.
Q. The Presiding Judge has interrogated you about paragraph No. 7 of your interrogation. Do you have the interrogation before you?
A. Yes.
Q. I want you now to turn to paragraph No. 12. Mr. Sachs asked you, "Do you have anything else to add?" Will you read to the Tribunal please, the answer which you gave.
A. (Reading) "I only want to point out that I consider it improbable that the name of Walter Haensch is in the cash book, because I was supposed to transfer the names from the appointment pad to the cash book and because of this I would have remembered the name."
Q. Are you still today of this opinion?
A. No.
Q. Why not?
A. Because I have first of all convinced myself of the contrary.
Q. When?
A. Just now when you showed me the pad and the cash book.
Q. But is it not true, Witness, that you changed your statement in this respect before you had seen these two books?
A. No.
Q. But that was just a routine question. Is it correct that you worked for Mrs. Schreyer, usually only in the evening?
A. With the exception of Saturdays when I was generally there in the afternoon already.
Q. Did you ever work for her in the morning?
A. I cannot remember really.
Q. Please try to remember.
A. Yes, it is possible, of course, on days when I had a day off, given me by my firm, when we had air raid precaution practice.
Q. Will you turn to paragraph 9 of your affidavit and you said, "In general, the appointment pads were only kept by Frau Schreyer. On Saturday afternoons, when I was in the place and clients were actually finished, I often made entries in the appointment pads. Aside from the two of us, no third person made entries, with the exception and so on" That is enough, and it is definitely said that you worked only in the evenings and afternoon.
Do you change this statement?
A. Yes, then I did not think, that I did have days off owing to air raid practice.
Q. So, you think it is correct that--did you look at the pad, 391 the little pad?
A. Yes, I looked at it.
Q. 391? Did you write that?
A. Yes.
Q. Would you look at the entry 391 in the big black book?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you write all of it or only part of it?
A. May I have another look at the book. I don't remember exactly. Yes, I wrote all of it.
Q. When did you write that?
A. It is possible that I wrote it on the same day or one or two days later.
Q. Will you explain the fact that two addresses appear in this book, one address in Berlin and another one in another place, which I don't recall, but you can tell the Tribunal, as you have the book before you?
A. Yes, the first one, the address in Berlin was the living quarters of the person concerned and then it was the remark to be sent to Mrs. Dr. Haensch Renfelde via Zittau where the pictures were actually sent.
Q. Do you remember actually sending the pictures there?
A. I saw on the pad that I made a remark "sent" and then the date.
Q. May I ask you another question who used to write the names, numbers and dates on the negatives?
A. Frau Schreyer did.
Q. Always?
A. It is possible that I helped her occasionally when I was there and she had a lot of work to do.
Q. I want to tell you what Mrs. Schreyer said about this. It is very interesting. She did not find either name or number on the pictures. I asked her, "Will you just examine these two pictures?" I am quoting from Record 3356, Your Honors. "Will you just examine those two pictures. Can you tell the Tribunal whether on these two negatives" -- and she interrupted me by saying, "No, there is no number on them." I asked her for the name --"Is there a name on it?" and she said, "No, no name either, unfortunately."
The Presiding Judge asked here, "Why do you say, 'unfortunately' Why did you add that? What difference does it make whether they are there or not?"
And now says Mrs. Schreyer, "Because my employees did not do this properly when they wrote on the negatives. It really should not have occurred."
Isn't it clear from this statement that these names and numbers were usually written by you and not by Mrs. Schreyer?
A. No, it was generally the work that Frau Schreyer did, because there would have been a mix up if the photographs, and prints had been left until the evening.
Q. Mrs. Schreyer even goes farther, when the Presiding Judge asked her, "Well, therefore, you are the one who should have added the name and number-" She said: "No, I developed and printed them and the next day when the employee came she handled these writing matters." And the presiding Judge asked here again, "And she would write on the negative?" Answer: "Yes, she would have written the name and the number on it." Can you explain why Mrs. Schreyer made this statement or who of you according to your opinion is mistaken on this point?
A. I really do not know why Frau Schreyer said that.
Q. It is then true that you were supposed to do this to put these names and numbers on the negatives, is that right, and not Frau Schreyer?
A. No, it was really the work that Frau Schreyer did herself, because, as I said, when she developed the photographs and prints and when I arrived in the evening, the prints and photographs would have been mixed up.
Q. You have no explanation as to why she gave this explanation under oath in court?
A. No.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Hochwald, we will have the recess. Witness, during the recess, which will last fifteen minutes, please do not speak with anybody of the prosecution or of the defense.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, when were the pictures usually taken, in the daytime or in the evenings?
THE WITNESS: During the dry, but sometimes during the evenings. That is, during business hours.
Q. Until what time was the shop opened in the evenings?
A. I cannot say. It might have been six or seven o'clock.
Q. Well, you would come to work at seven o'clock, wouldn't you?
A. Yes, seven o'clock, sometimes already at six.
Q. Now, did you recognize your own entry in the appointment pad?
A. Yes.
Q. Well, if you would come to work at seven o'clock and no pictures were taken after seven o'clock, how could you have made the appointment?
A. It might have been on my day off, after my air raid service.
Q. I don't understand that.
A. I already said if I did air raid service for the firm, then I had the next day off.
Q. Which firm?
A. That was with the Aluminum Sales Company.
Q. In your affidavit, or rather in your interrogation you say, "I ordinarily worked for Frau Shreyer from six to seven o'clock in the evening until ten and later. Saturday , I worked in her business from three to six or seven o'clock." You did not indicate any exception in that answer?
A . At that time I didn't even think of that fact, that I had days off.
Q. Have you thought of anything else since you answered these questions and wrote up your affidavits, which in any way changes what you told the interrogator and wrote up?
A. I merely determined that the beginning date was not 1939 but it was 1941.
Q. What did you tell the interrogator, what year?
A. I told him I didn't know exactly any more whether it was 1939 or 1940, but it was already during the war.
Q. Well, you tell us now that it was in 1941?
A. Yes.
Q. Just before we recessed you said that you told the interrogator 1939?
A. Yes, 1939 or 1940.
Q. Well now, which was it? What did you tell the interrogator, 1939 or 1940?
A. I think 1939.
Q. Will you please look at your affidavit, Document NO 5718?
A. I don't have it with me here.
Q. Well, will some one please show it to her . In the second paragraph, what do you say there, about working for -
A. Since November 1940.
Q. Yes, you wrote that out yourself, didn't you?
A. I wrote it by hand.
Q. Yes. Well, how was it now that you say it could have been '39 when you yourself wrote 1940?
A. Well, I must be quite honest, and I must state that I always mixed up the years.
Q. Then when you were questioned -- do you have Document 5698 there?
A. Yes.
Q. The interrogation under oath. Look at question 2-B. Read the question and read the answer?
A. "Since when? Answer: Since November 1940, shortly after -since November 1940. "
Q. Yes, that is enough. So that is twice you have indicated 1940, isn't it?
A. Yes.
Q. Then in your affidavit, Document No. 5718, -- no, you did refer to that. I am sorry. Well, you were confused about the time that you started to work for Frau Shreyer?
A. Yes.
Q. How was it you remember it so clearly now, that it was 1941?
A. I once more thought about the matter and, then it occurred to me that I still must have a picture which Frau Shreyer had before the time that I started to work for here, and on this occasion she asked me whether I can remember working for her, and, that I still must have this picture at home. I looked once more and I found the picture, and I saw that it was in November 1941.
Q. Let me have the transcript, please, of Frau Shreyer. Witness, do you know Frau Haensch?
A. No, I cannot remember.
Q. Did she come to you and ask you to locate the negatives of the pictures of her husband?
A. I cannot remember that, either.
Q. well, if that happened, it would have happened recently.
A. No, it was certainly not recently.
Q. Shortly before Frau Shreyer came to Nurnberg?
A. No, I didn't see any one there, nor talked to any one.
Q. How do you identify these negatives as being plates which come from Frau Schreyer's studio?
A. I noticed it from Frau Shreyer's handwriting on the top of the negatives.
Q. You don't remember the picture itself, do you?
A. I got a superficial recollection of it when I saw the negative.
Q. Do you remember having seen the subject in the studio, Haensch himself?
A. No, I cannot really remember that.