A. Not in general, but if I remember rightly he dealt with personnel questions, and administrative department, because he was chief of the business section where these questions were dealt with.
Q. Did Schubert sign reports himself?
A. I definitely do not think so.
Q. In how far was he entitled to sign?
A. In general he did not have the opportunity to sign anything, but if he had to transfer a person to a command, and had given him a letter of recommendation, he certainly would have to sign "by order of" Schubert, ro "By order of", every time at my request.
Q. During the several service trips, did you always have Schubert with you?
A. I think only on exeptional occasions, once or twice. I can not remember.
Q. Was Schubert appointed to deal with special tasks into which the other members of your staff could not look?
A. Of course not. Unless they were personal questions.
Q. Did Schubert over receive an order from you to execute any persons, himself?
A. That was not his task, and he did not get any such order.
Q. Did Schubert ever receive such a report to be handed on?
A. He certainly did not hand on any such reports, because they did not exist.
Q. Why was Schubert given the Iron Cross Distinction?
A. For repeatedly taking part in partisan fights.
Q. Who conducted these partisan fights?
A. I think I have answered this question before. They were lead by unit leaders, and the distinctions were given by the commander-inchief of the Army personally, and only under very grave conditions.
Q. What tasks did Schubert have after he served in Einsatzgruppen at the time he was with you as adjutant in the RSHA?
A. He returned to Berlin with me immediately, and there again he represented me in my antechamber, that is, he dealt with the same tasks as in the Einsatzgruppen.
Q. Did Schubert ever have the power of giving orders during that time?
A. No.
Q. Was Schubert active as an advisor, or did he carry out any confidential activity?
A. Nothing other than being in charge of the ante chamber will answer that question.
Q. Why did Schubert stop working as your adjutant?
A. After he had been with no for about two years, as adjutant I considered it better for his development that he would now get another job in order to develop better in a professional manner. The reason washis marriage, and since Iris service with me took up nearly every evening, I did not think that he could conform with his duties as a husband if he had to work evenings.
THE PRESIDENT: Then we will terminate the days proceedings. The Court will now recess and will reconvene next Tuesday morning, October 14th, at 9:30 o'clock. hours.
THE MARSHAL: The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal No. II-a. Military Tribunal No. II-A is now in session. God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal.
MR. WALTON: May it please the Tribunal, during the afternoon session of tribunal II-A on 30 September 1947, Dr. Aschenauer interposed an objection to Book III-D, pages 39 of the English, 69 of the German, Document NOKW 628, offered as Prosecution Exhibit 160.
DR. ASCHENAUER (Attorney for Defendant Ohlendorf): The translation is not coming through.
THE PRESIDENT: Would you please repeat that? Apparently the translation did not go through.
(The interpreter repeated as requested.)
THE PRESIDENT: Very wall. Did you get that Dr. Aschenauer?
DR. ASCHENAUER: No.
MR. WALTON: I will repeat it.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Mr. Walton will repeat it.
MR. WALTON: May it please the Tribunal, during the afternoon session of Tribunal II-a on September 30, 1947, Dr. Aschenauer interposed an objection to Book III-D, page 39 of the English, page 69 of the German, Document NOKW 628, offered as Prosecution's Exhibit 160. In subsequent conferences with Dr. Aschenauer it was determined that pages 2, 3, 5 and 8 of this document were, in fact, missing, Under Your Honors' ruling that excerpts from a document which are introduced into Guidance, it can be presumed, therefore, that the entire document is admitted in evidence.
We immediately telegraphed Washington to forward the missing pages of this document. These pages, which I have already referred to, came by air courier after the Tribunal had recessed on 9 October and are now available, together with the proper certification attached. that it be allowed to place a photostatic copy of each of these missing pages in the archives of the Tribunal and respectfully request the Tribunal to instruct the Secretary General to add them to Document NOKW-628. copies of those pages and is prepared at this time to deliver them to Dr. Aschenauer. Counsel can therefore make the necessary comparison between his copy and the photostat, which, If Your Honors admit, will then be in the official record of the case.
THE PRESIDENT: The request of the prosecution is approved. The full statement made by Mr. Walton is selfexplanatory and the Tribunal need not take up each item detail by detail. The Secretary General is instructed to receive the photostatic copies and make them part of the official records of Case No. 9, now before Tribunal II-A.
Dr. Aschenauer, have you now completed with the direct questioning of the defendant Ohlendorf?
DR. ASCHENAUER: There are a few more defense counsels who want to put questions of Ohlendorf.
THE PRESIDENT: That is correct. Such defense counsel as desire to cross examine the Defendant Ohlendorf may now take up their cross-examination in whatever order Defense Counsel have agreed upon.
BY DR. SCHWARZ (Attorney for the Defendant Jost) : Were the Einsatzgruppen and Kommandos only active in the Army areas? area of the civilian administration? only meant for the Army area, while in the areas of the Reichskommissars and the General Kommissars, the regular agencies of the Security Police were active. active in the area of the civilian administration? the commanders of the Security Police and SD.
Q Were these authorities locally established authorities? or Sonderkommando in the Army area and the commander in the area of the civilian administration? units, no agencies. The have no definite garrison. They are not restricted to a locality but in fulfillment of their tasks they adapt their activities to the requirements of the Army. Their various strengths and their Sub-Units also do this, while the agencies of the commanders and the civilian administrator are restricted to a locality and are a definitely established agency, which, is suited to be operational for the administrative hierarchie.
SD, as compared to that of the commanders, an unrestricted and exclusive one or was it restricted?
A The title "commander" does not picture the condition correctly, The commander himself was under the Reichskommissar that is to say, the supreme administrative organ in a definite occupied area. This latter one had a power of command which cannot be compared to any other agency leader, He was immediately under the Fuehrer and the Chief of State. The commander of the Security Police was part of this hierarchy by reason of the fact that the commander of the Security Police as regional agency of a district or general Commissariate was again within the hierarchy of the general Commissariate. The commander was under the Generalkommissar, however not immediately, but the SS and Police Leader was in between. The Generalkommissars, for instance, of the Eastland, were relatively independent agencies, since those were three different areas, and, thus, the commander was actually more independent of his Generalkommissar than of his commander. Since the Generalkommissariats were independent areas, the Reich Main Security Office had, established the fact that, for example, in the Generalkommissariats of the Eastland, the commander there was also responsible to Berlin directly, that is, not by way of the commander. In the same way, the Reich Security Main Office issued orders to the various commanders without touching the military commander himself. In Eastland, for example, I would say that the commander is more an inspector than a military commander. In other occupied territories it was different.
the commanders ? commander. direct?
Q. You said that, if I understood you correctly, that the Reichskommissar Was the immediate representative of the Fuehrer and the bearer of the highest responsibility?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. Is it correct then, according to what you said, that the designation of "commander " actually does not picture the real condition, but is a mistake?
A. I thought I had described the various conditions which made the commander merely an inspector.
Q. From what time does the activity of the Einsatzgruppen cease in an area ?
A. At the moment when an area has been given over to the civilian administration.
Q. Do you know anything about the opinions of the Gruppenfuehrer Mueller, the Chief of Office IV of the RSHA, as far as Jost is concerned?
A. I think it can be said that Mueller hated Mr. Jost deeply. This was shown by the fact that he tried for many years to prejudice Jost, in which attempt Mueller used his power with the State Police.
Q. Do you know anything about the reasons for this hatred?
A. Not in detail, no.
MR. WALTON: If Your Honors please, I think it will appear from the indictment that the time when Jost was Commander of an Einsatzgruppe, it was after the death of Heydrich Mueller. Therefore, the prosecution objects to the questions concerning the attitude of Mueller toward the Defendant Jost as being immaterial to the issue involved in the indictment.
THE PRESIDENT: If thechronology as indicated bythe Prosecution is correct, the objection is sustained.
DR. SCHWARZ (Attorney for Defendant Jost): I have no further questions, Your Honor.
BY DR . HOFFMANN (Attorney for the Defendant Nosske):
Q. Witness, a few factual questions: During your direct examination, you mentioned the shooting at Belzen and you said that the 45 Jews who were shot there were shot byEinsatzkommando 12. I do not find any description of Einsatzkommando 12 in the document. Would you affirm whether this was actually Einsatzkommando 12?
A. Einsatzkommando 12 never was in Belzen. This is a mistake; in the document too it says 10a and not 12.
Q. Witness, where was the Einsatzkommando 12 in 1941?
A. Until the end of July 1941, Einsatzkommando 12 was in what was formerly Rumania.
Q. Can you say anything about the mission of Einsatzkommando 12?
A. At that time Einsatzkommando 12 was a rest area.
Q. It has not been made clear to me how Einsatzkommando 12 is connected with Anajew. Do you know whether Einsatzkommando 12 was in Anajew at all?
A. First Einsatzkommando 10 A was in Anajew. Later 10 B.
Q. The documents also show that a partial kommando of Einsatzkommando 12 was ordered to the Crimea. Do you know what the reason for this transfer was?
A. This transfer took place in the winter of 1941, 1942, after the returning of the Russians in the South and East and in the West, and this created a very difficult situation, since the partisans and saboteurs continually interrupted the railroad lines, and then a part of Einsatzkommando 12 was detailed to reinforce the kommandos on the Crimea. They were detailed to assist Einsatzkommando 10B.
Q. Then I still have one more question. You said that the Einsatzgruppe D was also active in Stalino.
A. Neither the Einsatzgruppe nor any Einsatzkommando nor a man of Einsatzgruppe D was ever active in Stalino.
Q. Witness, then I have one further question. If I understood you correctly, you said during your direct examination that a man of your Einsatzgruppe who refused to obey the order, if this happened in the front lines, would either be shot immediately or be put before a court-martial. Did I understand you correctly?
A. Absolutely.
Q. Witness, do you agree with me that if someone were to expose himself to such a danger of rather being shot than to execute such an order that such a person would have to have a definite moral inner attitude about this?
A. Yes, definitely.
Q. Witness, I heard you here on the witness stand - I am not of the same opinion as you are, but I would like to say that your deduction was open to disagreement - did you inform your men of the Einsatzgruppen of this deduction, and did you train them in this respect?
A. I believe that your words are too general for me to answer concretely.
Q. Another question, Witness. I would like to make it more concrete: Concerning the misgivings which the various men in the Einsatzgruppe D mighthave had in t his connection did you do away with these misgivings by telling them your explanations?
A. I cannot remember anything concrete about this, but I am convinced that in individual talks with the officers I talked about this and I am also convinced that I talked along these lines to the commandos during roll-calls.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Hoffmann, you asked one question whose purport I was unable to grasp. It came through this way: Did anyone objecting to an order have to have a definite moral attitude? That to me is a little vague.
DR. HOFFMANN: May I make it more concrete then.
Q. Witness, did you dissipate the inner resistance of these people against this order and did you tell them that this order was necessary?
A. To do this, such an inner resistance would have to have been evident to me and I didn't see any trace of this. Ho such resistance came to my attention on the part of the client of Mr. Hoffmann and to which I would have had to answer. I was concerned with making it easier for my men and then one had to make them realize the seriousness of their tasks.
Q. You want to claim, witness, that all the men, especially my client , did not object to carrying out these orders?
A. No, I didn't say any word about this. The question was -did such an open resistance -- was such an open resistance evident to me, and how did I act on such resistance. In two and one-half years I had sufficient occasion to see how many men of my Gruppe did not agree to this order in their inner opinion. Thus, I forbade the participation in these executions on the part of some of those men and I sent some back to Germany.
Q. But it is your opinion that this is merely a matter of nerves?
A. I have had no possibility to investigate the various psychiatric conditions of every single man.
Q. Witness, the question is too serious to just shrug it off. I hope you agree with me that everyone must have had a moral resistance against these orders.
A. I believe my answers to questions on direct examination did show that.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Hoffman, please ---- Kindly pause for a moment after Dr. Hoffmann finishes with his question before you begin to answer in order that we may get the full interpretation of his question before your answer begins. BY DR. HOFFMANN:
Q. Witness, in my opinion, you must have counted on such a moral resistance on the part of everyone of your men, isn't that right?
A. I don't understand your question.
Q. I May I repeat it. Can it be assumed -- or, I ask you .... Do you believe that everyone of your men simply agreed with this order and merely would carry out -- such as bringing water or carrying coal?
A. I will comment on your question. You want to hear from me that it was my duty to talk to everyone of my men and overcome the moral resistance widen he had against carrying out these orders.
I say again that - this would have been neither my job, nor did the men give me such an opportunity, by their conduct - for, in the final analysis it belonged also to the moral attitude of these men that they being soldiers should know how to obey, and that they applied their moral inner convictions to the carrying out of the orders.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, am I correct in assuming from your answer that the men at no time offered such distress or complaint with regard to executing theorders given them, that necessitated your speaking to them -- to calm their fears or inner resistance?
THE WITNESS: I think I have already said that I had repeated conversations with my men which had this problem as their content, but there was no genuine resistance which, in order to express myself more clearly, I would have had to break by force. But many men have suffered terribly under this task, and, therefore, had to be sent home for many, various , reasons; either that their nerves went to pieces, or they could not stand this morally, and they were sent back home for their own protection.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Any other questions by any of the defense counsel? BY DR. MAYER (For defendant Dr. Braune):
Q. Witness, since when have you known Dr. Braune?
A. Since May 1936.
Q. Where did you get to know Dr. Braune?
A. Dr. Braune was Department Head for Law and Administration of the SD, Central Department II-2, -- in this same Central Department in which I took over the Department for Economics.
Q. Do you know since when Dr. Braune was a member of the SD and how he got to join the SD?
A. As far as I recall he joined the SD in 1935 with Professor Hoehn.
Q. Were you, yourself, Braune's superior?
A. From 1937 on , yes; as Chief of Staff of the Central Department.
Q. Did Braune, during the time of your work with him, have anything to do with the Enemy Information Service? That is II 1?
A. No, he always worked in the Domestic intelligence service.
Q. Do you know whether he had anything to do with that field before you worked with him?
A. No, he got into the Domestic intelligence Service immediately.
Q. With what did Braune chiefly occupy himself in the SD Main Office?
A. With the questions of law, of administration, relation of Party and State, and the students.
Q. Did you talk with Dr. Braune of the aims and purposes of the Domestic Intelligence Serbice of the SD?
A. Very frequently. In this sector he was my closest collaborator.
Q. What opinions did Dr. Braune represent? Did he agree with yours?
A. He agreed with me so much that after Hoehn left he could not remain there very much longer, but was forced, in 1938 at the latest, to leave the Central Department II-2.
Q. Was it also Braune's job to deal with Party matters?
a. Yes, I just said Party and State was one of his departments.
Q. Did his activity include also reports about Party matters?
A. Yes, of course; that was the task of the department.
Q. What were the opinions of Heydrich and Himmler about this task?
A. They were officially forbidden by a decree of Heydrich.
Q. Was the activity then discontinued?
A. No, it was continued under a camouflaged designation.
Q. What do you know about Dr. Braune's leaving the SD?
A. In the dispute between the state police and the SD -especially about questions of administration and the state which belonged to the field of activities of Dr. Best in the State Police - Braune came to be so strenousuly in favor of the SD that he had to leave at the demand of Dr. Best. After his dismissal the work of his department practically stopped. That was the demand of Best.
Q. But despite these tensions with Dr. Best -- how did Dr. Braune get to join the Stapo, the State Police.
A. Braune together with a number of other assessors, at the demand of the SS Main Office, Department I, had been directed into the State service. The Budget of the SS Main Office was so small at that time that the SD was in no position to employ new people. This emergency was eliminated partly by the fact that planning agencies of the state were employed for this new personnel, which were then detailed to the SD Main Office; and thus Braune also was transferred to such a planning agency.
Q. Is it correct that Dr. Braune thus only belonged formally to the State Police -- but actually worked for the SD?
A. Yes, that is absolutely correct.
Q. How did it happen Dr. Braune was subsequently transferred to the Stapo state Police?
A. In 1938, two attempts were made, First, Best requested that the assessors who held planned positions of the State Police now should also be put at the disposal of the State Police; and secondly, Heydrich tried, in order to have his way with the StateProtection Corps, to effect an exchange of State Police and SD officials. Thus a successor of Braune, an official of the State Police, was detailed to the SD.
Q Do you know anything about the fact whether Dr. Best especially objected to some special work of Dr. Braune in the legal field? the dismissal of Braune from the SD. In the dispute between the State Police and the SD about the treatment of administrative questions - Braune on my order had written a report which was submitted to Heydrich, the SD Main-Office, by way of the Central Department I, and Heydrich gave it to Best, and Best thereupon demanded the definite dismissal of Braune. Police and his transfer to Muenster?
A No, no; he objected strenuously. He felt betrayed and he tried by all means to stay with the SD. in Muenster?
A Yes, he finally achieved that. He need not resign from the SD completely, but he got the SD sector in Muenster the State Police in Muenster. because of the almost exclusive activity of Braune for the SD in Muenster a row developed? Schoengast, demanded the recall of Braune from Muenster because Braune, as he said, did not do any work for the State Police. He only worried about the SD. That was psychologically understandable because he was chief in the SD Main Office, whereas the work of the Deputy State Police director corresponded to the position of an Assessor, that is of an expert referent.
support him in those attempts with the aim of getting him back to Berlin? 1939. When I got the order from Heydrich to make a reform suggestion for the future SD, I got Braune to come back from his furlough and he helped me in Drawing up the suggestion. And I had planned to give him the Gruppe A in the new office. Heydrich had agreed to this, however Best managed to prevent this again.
Q Is it correct that you even asked Dr. Braune to look for an apartment in Berlin so that he would get the idea that he could count on his recall to the SD? look for an apartment in the same area where I was living. That was about the beginning of October 1939.
Q Did I understand you correctly, that it was Dr. Best who strenuously objected against Dr. Braune's retransfer to the SD, and who finally prevented this retransfer?
Q When did Dr. Braune hear about these various actions? concerned in the dispute. But the fact that he finally did not come back to the SD in October 1939 he heard from me since Heydrich now told me this.
Q Did Dr. Braune have the possibility of leaving the State Police and returning to the SD? Heydrich, not on the will of Braune. Heydrich had decided against him.
Q But isn't the fact to be considered that war had broken out by this time?
happened, what I have already said: that any possibility of leaving the State Police was prevented be a decree of Heydrich. That is to say, Braune was not only prevented from joining the SD by the will of Heydrich, but he did not have the possibility of leaving the State Police either against Heidrich's will. Braune belonged and I want to ask you a few questions, Herr Ohlendorf, about Dr. Braune's activity in the Einsatzgruppen. Did you cause Braune to be detailed to your Einsatzgruppe D?
Q How is it to be explained that Dr. Braune came to join the Einsatzgruppe at all? were to be put in the Einsatzgruppen. Thus, in ways the loaders were released and now fuehrers were always committed.
Q When did you hoar about Braune's being detailed to your Einsatzgruppe D?
A In October I was in Berlin on an official trip. Braune looked me up and told me that he had been ordered to report to my Einsatzgruppe. We then left together in my car.
Q Then your garrison was in Nikolajev, is that right?
Q What job did you assign to Dr. Braune after you arrived in Nikolajev? Norway, who was to inform himself about my job. During his presence which lasted for about two weeks I had told Braune to take care of this Minister. At the same time Braune acquainted himself with the task of the Einsatzgruppe by reading the documents of my Einsatzgruppe.
After that, about the beginning of November, he then left for Odessa as the leader of Commando 11b. about his job as leader of a Commando? acquainting himself with the job, and I am sure I spoke to him about these jobs. Odessa? Braune acquainted himself with the job during about one week. For that period the preceding Commando leader still held the command. Odessa? all business in Odessa and to prepare the Commando for an advance into the Crimea.
Q Did Dr. Braune carry out liquidations of Jews in Odessa? Roumanians demanded liquidations from Braune. According to my directives Braune objected to this, but the Roumanians pressed him and threatened him with complaints, so that Braune asked me once more and received the same directives from me. He did not carry out any liquidations in Odessa.
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment, please. I am wondering if that answer came through in accordance with the statement of the witness. What nationality was involved there?
DR. MAYER: I didn't get the question, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: I have that the Ukrainians demanded liquidations from Braune, and then later on the word Roumanian was used.
DR. MAYER: In Odessa it was a question of occupational areas overlapping, and the Roumanians advanced beyond the Border-Lines of the occupied area. Thus they were given the power in their areas. It was the Roumanians who demanded from Braune the executions of Jews in that area. Dr. Braune refused these executions decisively.
THE PRESIDENT: I see; very well.