(DR. EUGENE ALEXANDROVICH VLACHA took the stand) BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q What is your name?
Q Will you repeat this oath after me? I, and then state your name, a citizen of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, summoned as witness in this trial, do promise and swear, in the presence of the Court, to tell the Court nothing but the truth about everything I know in regard to this case.
(The witness repeated the oath). THE PRESIDENT: You may sit down, if you wish. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Will you spell your surname? BY COLONEL SMRNOV: Hitlerite attack on the Soviet Union? 44th Infantry Division.
Q Did your regiment take part in the battle against the Germans? the Germans from the very first day of war.
Q When were you captured and under what circumstances? district of the City of Uman of the Petrograd region. I was captured at the moment when our unit and two Russian armies, of which our unit was a part, after many battles, were surrounded by the Germans. these Red Army men who were captured by the Germans; what was their position, their situation and condition? torture which the German army and the German authorities applied to the Soviet prisoners of war. The facts are known to me because, for a long time, I myself was a prisoner of war. On the very first day of my capture I was transported together with a large group of other prisoners of war, to one of the transient camps.
Enroute, talking to the other prisoners of war, along side of whom I marched, I learned that the greater part of the prisoners of war were taken prisoners three or four days ahead of the time when I was taken prisoner, together with a small group of other persons in my unit. been captured three or four days ago, were under strict and careful guard of the Germans and all these days they were completely deprived of ford, or water. Subsequently, while we were passing through villages, the prisoners of war, when they saw wells of water or water in any shape, when they licked their tongues when seeing the water and made actions towards the water, the Germand did not let them have any water. During the same day, late in the evening, our while column consisting of about five thousand persons, was quartered, in the cattle yard, where we had no way of resting from our journey, and all night long we had to stand in the open sky, and that went on the second day and the next and the next. As before, we had no food and we had no water. water wells, tried to get at the water?
A Yes, I remember a few cases of that kind. I shall specifically narrate an incident of the kind on the first day of our journey. It occurred like this: We were passing in the suburbs of a little village. The civilian population saw us. They tried to give us water and to give us bread; however, the Germans wouldn't let us get near them; neither would, they let the rest of the population come anywhere near us. One of the prisoners lead the column to a distance of five or six meters and without any warning he was shot by a German soldier. Some of his comrades went to his side, hoping he was still alive, but they too were immediately shot at without any warning. Some of them were wounded and two of them were dead, were shot on the spot. journey from one place to another, did you witness any other incidents of the kind? journey from one camp to another saw the same type of incidents, the same type of shootings.
severe measures to the citizens who tried to give bread and water to the prisoners of war? war, they were also applied to those who tried to help them. I remember how, on one of the journeys, a group of women and children saw us. They tried to give us water and food just like all others who saw us, but the Germans would not allow them to come anywhere near us. Once a woman and a little girl, about five years old, came to us, evidently her daughter. The little girl came pretty close to us -- it occurred to me -and when she was five or six steps away from us she was shot on the spot by German soldiers. population tried to get to them; perhaps they got enough nourishment from the Germans?
lock of food. They were not supplied with any food or water enroute. the only food the prisoners of war received enroute? food?
Q In what camps of prisoners of war have you every been yourself? Name them. Tarnovka. Second, there was a camp on the territory of the brick plant in the suburbs of the City of Uman. Third, there was a camp in the vicinity of the City of Ivangored. The fourth camp was in the territory of some military unit in the City of Gaisin. The fifth camp in the region of the military settlement called Vinniza. The sixth camp in the vicinity of the City of Jmerinka; and the last camp, where I spent most of my time, was in the village of Rakove, not far from the City of Proskurov, in the Tarnovka region. which existed in a number of camps?
Q Are you a physician? aid to those prisoners of war who were in these camps? general group of prisoners of war and together with other physicians of the Russian army, I was taken, or rather separated from the other prisoners of war and sent to work, to the so-called hospital. This hospital was situated in a barn. The floor was made of earth. There was no equipment for the wounded, and on the floor there lay a large number of wounded Soviet prison of war, who were there twelve days prior to my arrival. During all that time they received no medical help, although many of them needed surgical aid, needed bandages, a whole lot of them needed some very special and even ordinary treatment, none of which they received.
They were systematically deprived of water: they were fed unsystematically, at least when I arrived in the camp. There was no evidence that food was ever prepared for these wounded. In the camp where I arrived, the second day there were from 15,000 to 20,000 wounded prisoners of war. Most of those could not move of their own accord but they lay in the open air. Food was given to them in the same manner as these other prisoners of war. They had not received any medical aid up to that time. They were lying on the ground and their bandages were soaked with blood and push There was no special equipment special aid of any kind in Uman camp, though the wounded and the sick were housed in one of the barns which had a wooden floor. There was no special equipment or special aid of any kind in Uman camp, though the wounded and the sick were housed in one of the barns which had a wooden floor. There was no special equipment to keep them clean, to wash them, or to feed then. As in all other camps, they gave them no care whatever, not even the minimum medical care, no bandages, no instruments, no surgical aid.
Q You mentioned the Uman camp. Look at this photograph and tell me, is it a photograph of one of the camps that you were an innate of? the City of Tarnovka. I know it very well.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: I must report to the Tribunal that I have here submitted as evidence, the photograph of the Uman camp. I submit it as USSR No, 345. It shows the camp with regard to which the witness Bingel already testified. BY COLONEL SMIRNOV: photograph?
Q What was the regime of the Uman camp? Tell us just the main points and, please, very briefly. The food was very poor, and there was very little of it. In the Uman camp, where I spent eight days, twice a day, on open fires, pea soup which was very polluted, was cooked. There was no special routine for feeding the prisoners of war.
The soup thus cooked was fed to the whole mass of people in the most uncontrolled, manner. The prisoners all rushed to the soup, each trying to get even a little bit of that soup which was the only food or practically so. Then there was disorder, crowding, while the German guards, all armed with clubs as well as automatic and sub-machine guns, would casually and wantonly strike any prisoner of war who came within the distance of that club, and then they would laugh and throw insults at the hungry people who rushed to the little bit of food there was.
Q Tell me, witness; in the camp situated near Rakovo, was the food better or was it the same as in other camps; and how was the food situation with respect to the health of the prisoners of war? other camps, which I previously witnessed or rather was an inmate of, in just this way. It consisted of cabbage, potatoes and turnips, which were usually served semi-cooked. From this poor quality of food, the prisoners of war developed stomach trouble of the most violent kind which was accompanied by bloody diarrhoea and exhausted the people very quickly, and caused practically mass mortality. provocation or without provocation. What character of injuries did the prisoners of war receive as a result of these beatings?
Were they serious or were the injuries minor? surgical section. Frequently, after dinner or supper, there were brought to the hospital persons with the most serious physical injuries. I frequently had to give first aid to persons injured during the crowding that occurred during meal hours; in fact, some of the injuries were so serious that men died. I remember when two prisoners of war were beaten by some hard object on the head which broke the skull in such a way that the brain owed out. I remember another incident too well, when one of the prisoners lost an eye after one of the beatings, after which he suffered an inflammation of the brain. war?
A The history of the Rakovo camp can be broken into two periods; first, the two years preceding November 1941, when there was still a very small number of prisoners of war in camps; and the second period, from November 1941 up to March 1942, during this period I myself was in the camps. This period is noted for particularly large number of prisoners of war and a very great mortality. There were from 700 to 950 cases of death daily.
Q What disciplinary measures were taken in the camp; what were the punishments imposed and for what violations of the rules? Do you know?
A Yes, I do know. There was a solitary cell in the camp for the violators of the rules, for the violators of the rules of the terrible regime which was created there. The violations usually consisted of stealing food somewhere in the kitchen or something like that. The prisoner was then placed into the solitary cell on the ground floor, and the windows had no panes but iron bars. The prisoner was undressed. He was deprived of food and water and for fourteen days he was there alone. I do not know of a single occasion where any prisoner survived solitary confinement. number of persons suffering from exhaustion.
in the decreased number of persons capable to work? What was done to those prisoners who could not work? adapted for human living. At first all the persons were utilized for work. Some of this work was entirely aimless, I can say definitely, because the work consisted of destroying or demolishing private residences or clearing debris from camp grounds. people began to report for work. Many persons lost their capacity to control their movements and could not even leave the barracks or rather the stables where they were housed to receive food. When there were a great many such persons in the stables, that is, persons who could not work, they established what was called quarantine. Then all the exits and entrances were sealed. Then the persons, those incapacitated, were completely isolated from the rest of the camp, and they were kept like that in complete confinement for four or five days, after which the stables were opened again, and always corpses were taken out of there. used in the camp?
A We were not used for any similar work in camp. The only thing they did medically was to divide those who could work from those who could not, but we were not allowed to give any medical aid.
Q Did you duty or functions change from camp to camp? Was there any camp where you were asked to render medical aid? the physicians among the prisoners of war should be on duty in the vicinity of the public toilet. That meant nothing else than to dig the ditch used for the purpose. We had to clean the toilets too, of course, we, the physicians. That was considered sanitary aid. you consider it straight mockery on the part of the Germans?
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Mr. Chairman, I have no more questions to ask this witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Do the Prosecutors have any questions to ask?
COLONEL SMIRNOV: No, sir.
THE PRESIDENT: Do any of the defendants' counsel wish to ask any questions? BY DR. LATERNSER:
THE PRESIDENT: Please give your name and for whom you appear.
DR. LATERNSER: Dr. Laternser, defendants' counsel of the General Staff of the OKW. BY DR. LATERNSER: the district of Uman. Do you know whether at that time from the side of the Germans many prisoners were taken? had advanced very fast in Russian territory?
A I cannot say about this. The German armies moved very fast, but before our units were surrounded we fought and we retreated, fighting, during the period which began the war up to the 9th of August. marched?
Q When did you get the first food from the German troops? were first fed?
A I don't understand the question. time? know something about the fact that the feeding of troops is not a simple thing.
A I couldn't have given that impression in my testimony, particularly since the Germans had all the facilities for supplying the prisoners of war with food. It was the civilian population that tried to give the Soviet prisoners of war whatever food there was, not the German authorities, and not the German Military Command. Incidentally, they gave no permission to feed us. They not only didn't give us food and prevented anybody else from giving us food, they shot anybody who tried to give us food among the civilian residents of any district. great difficulty if in a certain area, the area of Uman, 100,000 prisoners had been taken. in the same spot. There were several concentration camps, although in Uman there were more prisoners of war than elsewhere.
Q I have not spoken about the feeding in the Camp of Uman. We were talking about the feeding during the first days after having been captured.
A I was not separated in any way from the other prisoners of war. I was fed and supplied in exactly the same way as all the others. I ate in the common mess and was housed together with the others. The German Command did not give us physicians any special treatment.
difficulties concerning feeding if all of a sudden a column, like yours, of 5000 men is captured and has to be fed by advancing troops. had difficulties in feeding us, they could have allowed the prisoners of war to receive the products which the civilian population among the Soviet citizens was willing to give it.
Q I will talk about that later. You say that you were in a column of 5000 prisoners. Could, you tell me how strong the guards were for this column of 5000 men? many Germans. I cannot give you exact figures; not now.
Q All right. I understand that you cannot give me this answer in correct figures, but would you describe to the Court just how the distance was between individual guards which were marching alongside the column on either side? group, five or six steps behind. That is how the distance was covered. one side, German troops marching, and also two or three individually, if I understood you correctly.
Q Were these older troops, older people, or young soldiers?
A Those were soldiers of the German Army. They were of all ages. the Russian prisoners that they would be shot in case they broke out of the column?. no warnings of any kind.
Q Not even before the column started to march?
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps we should break off now.
(A recess was taken until 14.00 hours.)
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has made its decision upon the witness and documents to be called and produced on behalf of the first four defendants and that decision will be communicated as soon as possible this afternoon to counsel for those defendants and will also be posted in the Defendants' Information Center. for France with reference to the calling of two additional witnesses. The Tribunal would wish that if it is desired to call any witnesses after closing the case of behalf of any of the chief prosecutors, that a written application should be made to the Tribunal for the calling of such witnesses and the Tribunal also desires me to draw the attention of Counsel for the Prosecution and Counsel for the Defense to the terms of Article 24, Subsection (e), which refers to rebutting evidence. In the event of Counsel for the Prosecution or Counsel for the Defense wish to cal rebutting evidence, when the proper time comes after the case for the Prosecution and the Defense has been closed, such application to call rebutting evidence must be made to the Tribunal in writing,
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: My Lord, I wonder if the Tribunal would allow me to say something on a matter on which I promised to get information yesterday?
Your Lordship will remember that Dr. Horn asked for a withdrawn edition of the "Daily Telegraph" of the 31st of August, 1939, and I promised the Tribunal I would make inquiries. I have had a telegram from the "Daily Telegraph", which I received this morning and it says:
"No edition of the "Daily Telegraph" withdrawn on 31 August, 1939 or any other day thereabouts. The "Telegraph" of the 31st gave a brief paragraph saying 'Meeting Henderson-Ribbentrop had taken place' but without details.
"On 1st September carried summary of German sixteen points for Poland as broadcast by the German radio. Actual text of the note did not appear until September 2, when extracted from the Foreign Office White Paper of all relevant documents."
that I should nut it before the Tribunal and I propose to send a copy of that to Dr. Horn.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Sir David. I think that may necessitate a slight variation in the order which the Tribunal was proposing to make.
DR. NELTE (Counsel for defendant Keitel): Regarding the question of Generals Halder and Warlimont, Mr. President, permit me to request that you answer a question for me, namely, whether the Court has already decided that Halder and Warlimont, whom I have already named as witnesses, and whose relevancy has been admitted by the Prosecution, will be approved as witnesses for Keitel so that we can count with certainty on their appearing in Court.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, certainly. What I meant to state this morning was that the Defense Counsel should decide whether they wanted to cross-examine them now or call them as witnesses on behalf of one of another of the defendants and therefore, that was a decision that the Defense Counsel would be able to call them on behalf of one of the defendants if they determined to do so. Therefore, they can be called for Keitel, unless of course they are called before. If the defendant Goering wanted to call them then they would have to be examined on behalf of Keitel when they were called for Goering because of the fundamental rule that a witness is only to be called once.
DR. NELTE: Defense Counsel, so for as Generals Halder and Warlimont are concerned, is satisfied if these generals are called during the course of the Defense case.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, very well.
Now Dr. Laternser -
DR. LATERNSER (Counsel for the General Staff of the OKW): I have only a few more questions to ask.
(Eugene Alexandrovich Vlacha resumed the stand and testified further as follows:) BY DR. LATERNSER:
Q. Witness, you said this forenoon that the four to five thousand Russian prisoners during their march to the camp were accommodated in a stable.
Was this stable roofed?
A. It was a usual village barn and as a result of the fact that the farm had been evacuated by the inhabitants this barn had not been cleaned and was completely abandoned and if one can add, during the course of that day it rained and I will add that it was half covered with mud and it was, of course, impossible to lie down in the barn as the floor was covered by manure and most of the people remained outside.
Q. In this case was there any possibility of accommodating these prisoners better?
A. It is very difficult for me to answer that question for I am not at all acquainted with the locality where I was taken prisoner and on the other hand, we were brought to this village late at night and I do not know whether there were more convenient places where we could be quartered.
Q. That is to say, on this evening on which you reached this village, you yourself did not see any possibility for better accommodations?
A. It is not because I did not see better quarters but it was dark and therefore, I could not observe the village, although it was a rather large village and there was certainly a certain number of houses where four, five thousand people might have been easily quartered for a more convenient night,
Q. I have, one last question. You said that in the prisoner camp you were not employed in your capacity as a physician. Have you even known that the Germans placed medical materials at the disposal of prisoners in camps so that they could be treated?
A. At first being evacuated from one camp to another we did not receive any medical equipment from the Germans but later on, when I was in a stationery camp, Camp 35, medical equipment was issued but in quite inadequate quantities to fully cover the needs of the wounded.
DR. LATERNSER: I have no further questions.
DR. BABEL (Counsel for SS): I have only one question. BY DR. BABEL:
Q. Witness, you have stated that the stable was evacuated. What do you mean by that term?
A. I mean by that that the entire herd of cattle that were in the stable were evacuated out of the zone of military operations.
Q. By whom was this done?
A. This was carried out by the inhabitants of the village, who had been evacuated to the east, together with the Soviet troops who had not been surrounded.
Q. That is to say, you were brought back to Russian territory?
A. From this village, yes.
DR. BABEL: Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Do any other defendants' counsel wish to ask questions? BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. Witness, were any SS unites used in guarding the prisoners of war while you were a prisoner of war?
A. In the camp of Rakov in the district of the Town of Proskurov where I was interned for the major time, the convoying of the labor commandos was carried out by units which were called SS.
Q. Was that a stationery camp?
A. Yes, Camp 105 was a stationery camp.
Q. But SS units were not used to guard you until you got to that stationery camp?
A. I cannot, say anything definite on that subject as I did not know the distinctive insignia of the German Army.
THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Smirnov, do you want to ask anything in reexamination?
COLONEL SMIRNOV: I have no further questions to ask.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness can retire.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: May I continue? Hitlerites in the prisoner of war camps, documents which I would like to submit to the Tribunal upon request of our British colleagues. The Soviet Prosecution does this all the more readily in that it considers this documentation of the British Prosecution of very great importance in ascertaining the criminal character of the treatment inflicted by the Germans on prisoners of war, contrary to the usual treatment afforded by all civilized nations of the world.
documents of the British delegation, regarding the cruel murder of fifty prisoners of war, officers of the Royal Air Force, who were captured while trying to escape from the prisoner of war camp, Stalag III, Luft in Sagan during the night of the 24th to 25th of March, 1944. These documents are an official report of the Hitlerite crimes, certified by Brigadier General Chapcott, representative of the British Military Forces and the minutes in question, which were taken in Sagan upon the order of the Senior British Officer in Prisoner of war Camp III and submitted to the Protecting Power. We find also the statements of the following prisoners: Wing Commander Day, Flight Lieutenant Tonder, Flight Lieutenant Dowse, Flight Lieutenant van Wymeersch, Flight Lieutenant Green, Flight Lieutenant Marshall, Flight Lieutenant Nelson, Flight Lieutenant Churchill, Lieutenant Neely, D.S.M. Hicks The evidence is corroborated by the testimony of the following Germans:
General Major Westhoff, Higher Government Counsellor Wielen and Colonel von Lindeiner. perished, handed over by the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs to the Swiss Diplomatic Mission in Berlin and the report of the representative of the Protecting Power during his visit to Stalag Luft III on 5 June, 1944. lerites by quoting from the report of Brigadier General Chapcott. The first excerpt is on pace 163, second paragraph of the document book.
"On the night of the 24 or 25 of March, 1944, 76 Royal Air Force Office escaped from Stalag Luft III at Sagan, Silesia, where they had been confined as prisoners of war. Of these fifteen were recaptured and returned to the camp, three escaped altogether, eight were detained by the Gestapo after recapture. Of the fate of the remaining fifty officers the following information was given by the German authorities:--" cape. Actually this was a lie, as a very thorough investigation carried out by the British military authorities proved indubitably that the British officers were vilely murdered after having been recaptured by the German police.
Goering and Keitel. I will furnish proof of this I quote a report submitted by the British Prosecution.
This extract is on page 168 of the document book.
Dr. NELTE: The Tribunal will recall that the question of the hearing of the witness General Westhoff has already played a role heretofor. The Prosecution. I do not have the document here -- submitted a report regarding the interrogation of General Westhoff, that is to say, the High Court Refused to hear the reading of this report. General Westhoff, whether this is the same document as was reviously refused by the Court or whether this is a new document which I do not as yet know of. I should therefore like to draw your attention to the fact that General Westhoff is in the prison here in Nurnberg; in other words, could be called as a witness on these questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Smirnov, you heard what Dr. Nelte said, As i understood it -- I am not sure I got the name right -- but he referred to General Westhoff's evidence, which had been tendered and which had been rejected because the Tribunal thought that if that evidence was to be given General Westhoff ought to be called. General Westhoff at all?
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Yes, Mr. President. It is mentioned in a part of the official British report.
THE PRESIDENT: But it isn't General Westhoff's report, is it?
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Mr. President, I am here submitting an official report on this crime. The text of the British report mentions Major General Westhoff, but it has nothing to do with the questioning of Major General Westhoff whose evidence will be given later.
MR. G.D. ROBERTS: My Lord, perhaps I might speak on this matter-because I am partly responsible for that report--with the kind indulgence of my learned friend, my Russian colleague. government report under Article 21 of the Charter. The original is properly so certified. My Lord, it is quite true that General Westhoff's name is mentioned in the report, but it is quite a different document than the document which my French colleagues tendered and which the Tribunal rejected in evidence.
It is an official government report.
THE PRESIDENT: Why do you say that it is an official government report so as to come within Article 21 of the Charter?
MR. ROBERTS: Because the original has been handed in and it has been certified by Brigadier General Chapcott of the Military Department of the Judge Advocate General's Office. I think you have the original.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I have the original.
MR. Roberts, to whom was this report made?
MR. ROBERTS: My Lord, it was made in connection with the collection of evidence for this Tribunal. As my Lordship sees, it is headed "German War Crimes. Report on the Responsibility for the Killing of 50 RAF Officers" and then it states the sources on which the material has been based. Your Lordship will see on the last page of the report the appendix; "Material upon which the foregoing Report is based:
"1. Proceedings of Court of Inquiry held at Sagan.....
"2. Statements of the following Allied witnesses.....
"3. Statements from the following Germans.....
"4. Photostat copy of the official list of dead transmitted by the German Foreign Office to the Swiss Legation in Berlin .....
"5. Report of the Representative of the Protecting Power on his visit to Stalag Luft III on 5 June 1944."
THE TRIBUNAL (Judge Biddle): Mr. Roberts, was this made for the Tribunal or for the War Crimes Commission?
MR. ROBERTS: It was made for this trial.
THE TRIBUNAL (Judge Biddle): Made for this trial?
MR. ROBERTS: For this trial.
THE TRIBUNAL (Judge Biddle): By a general in the army?
MR. ROBERTS: Yes, my Lord.
THE TRIBUNAL (Judge Biddle): And he reported to whom?
MR. ROBERTS: My Lord, it was then submitted to the British delegation for this trial.
THE TRIBUNAL.(Judge Biddle): You mean the Prosecution?
MR. ROBERTS: Yes, my Lord.
THE TRIBUNAL (Judge Biddle): The report is the report of a British general made to the British Prosecution:
MR. ROBERTS: My Lord, I wouldn't quite with respect accept the phrase "report of a British general". I would say "a report of a Government department." It is signed and certified, by a British general.
THE TRIBUNAL (Judge Biddle): Yes.
MR. ROBERTS: My Lord, I submit most respectfully that my Lords may read in Article 21: "The Tribunal shall take judicial notice of official governmental documents and reports of the United Nations." a report made by a department of the Army in London, a government department, for the purpose of this trial.
THE TRIBUNAL (Judge Biddle): Then any evidence that was collected and sent in by the Government will be official evidence.
MR. ROBERTS: I think that is so under article 21, that is, as I read it and as I respectfully submit to your Lordship.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you wish to add anything, Dr. Nelte:
DR. NELTE: Yes, I should like to make a few further remarks.
In other words, a report was drawn up on the grounds of witnesses' testimony, and mentions the name of General Westhoff. I do not challenge the fact that this document has official character, and it is admissible as evidence under the terms of the Charter and consequently must be so admitted, but it seems to me that it is a question of something else here, namely a question of more adequate proof. or rejected because his testimony is to be found in an official report, then the process of proof would not meet the wishes of the Court, namely that the best method be used which can be discovered. The witness is at your disposal, but the report does not contain literally what he would testily before the Court, but simply conclusions drawn in the report which are subject to doubt, but which need not be doubted. It is simply a matter of the Defense Counsel being able, in their turn, to hear a witness, to interrogate him, if it is so easily possible as it is in this case.