I would like to emphasize that this is an absolute necessity of life, for the security of the fighting forces. But I would like to emphasize again that you said I decreed the same which you read from the letter of Terboven. I did not ask villages to be fired I did not ask for the shooting of hostages. We are concerned with two diametrically opposed matters. them out. fighter personal was becoming serious? on the subject of fighter aircraft and the losses of fighter personal did you not? ticated them, your interrogations?
A It is not minutes of the conference. It is a summary of a meeting which took place in two days and it is summarized in just a few sentences.
Q I will ask to have you shown Document L-166. It is entitled, "Most Secret Document ," isn't it?
Q And it is also entitled, "Minutes of conference on fighter aircraft with the Reichsmarshal on the 15th and 16th of May, 1944," the is correct, too, is it not? discussion.
Q Notices, you translate it notices?
A Notes. Notes of conference on fighter aircraft. Lasting two day regarding fighter personal, that took place, didn't he, and reviewed the losses?
Q And reviewed the losses?
Q And then he reviewed at some length under Item 2, "Remedial Measures," is that right?
A According to the notes, yes, but whether that actually took pla-
ce I cannot say.
Q This conference took place, didn't it?
AAbsolutely, yes. For two days, not? tain proposals, Items 12 and 13, is that right?
A It must have been so. It is so according to the notes. Staff and as the chief of artillery as soon as possible, did you not?
Q And General Schmidt's recommendations and requests appear in It 14 and 15 and 16 and 17 and 18 ?
Q Then you decided, "The Reichsmarshal decides that only the three groups of the fighter squadrons can remain in the rank by the drafting of those pilots and planes operationally fit in accordance with or ders Already given."
That correct, did it not?
Q Then "the Reichsmarshal wishes the testing of defense and dispersal measures on low level atteack on air fields causing considerable loss in personnel and material." No. 19. That accurred, did it not?
Q Item 20 reads, "The Reichsmarshal will propose to the Fuehrer that American and English crews who shoot indiscriminately at times moving civilian pianos or parchuting soldiers will be shoot immediate ly on the scene of action." Have I correctly read, that?
A It says so here. And I objected at entreat that time that this was not correct; from the whole connection of these notes, 1921, this passages has no connection, but beyond that the expression,",pa rach ting soldiers" is entirely misleading and is not properly used.
got into the notes, which I never saw. which was, how it could get into a summary of two days' activity, and could explain it only in that I referred or pointed out that we could gather from other testi mony that the Fuehrer could have given a directive in this respect, that there must he mistake, not that the Reichsmarshal will wish to propose to the Fuehrer, but that I suggested that the Fuehrer had are such intention.
But about this we would have to talk to and have to consult the author of those notes. No other point is contained in th notes. Even the next point is entirely different. Everything else is in connection and is coherent, but this one point seems to be extran ous. say is mistaken.
(Paper handed to the witness ). followed within, a week by the order, 731-PS., was it not, the memorandum, 731-PS., which reads: "The Fuehrer has rendered the following decisions in regard to measures to be taken against Anglo-American air crews in special instances: Downed airmen are tobe shot without court martial proceedings"-
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Justice Jackson, didn't you refer to a passage four lines above that, after "Report of the Reichsmarshal"?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Iddid not, but perhaps for the record it ought to be in full.
"Chief of the Command Staff of the Armed Forces, chief WEST. Please direct drafting of order. (Warlimont). (Keitel), deputy chief of staff of the armed forces. Must go to Reichsfuehrer SS. After a report of the Reichsmarshall General Korten makes the following statement: Memorandum" -- I think the next line is not in the original -- "the Fueh rer has rendered the following decision in regard to measures to be taken against Anglo-American air crews in special instances. Downed enemy airmen are to be shot without court martial proceedings in the following instances: One, in the event of the shooting of our own downed airmen while they are parachuting to earth; second, in the event of aerial attacks upon German planes which have made emergency landings and whose crews are in the immediate vicinity; third, in the event of attacks upon railway trains engaged in public transportation ; fourth, in the event of low-level aerial attack upon individual civilians, farmers, workers, single vehicles and so forth."
Now , there es a note on that, " In the event of low-level serial attacks upon the civilian population, single civilian vehickles and so forth, " is there not ?
A : Here weapons which were on board -- something is crossed out here and there are some words which I cannot read, which are written up above. Before the expression, " single planes ", the word civilian, to point 2, it says : I would have some doubts about that, that the destruction of an emergency -- for the destrucktion of a plane which has made an emergency landing is not permissible, according to the laws of war. We are concerned with the total complex Which took part in these days or weeks and which von Brauchitsch testified to the other day.
Q. That note about that emergency landing is signed by "J," is it, which stads for Jodl ?
A : Certainly.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON : I think that es all I care to ask. in this connection, and I think it will be best perhaps if we tabulate them and get them ready over the evening and present the to morning.
THE PRESIDENT : Certainly, Mr. Justice Jackson, you can put them all in then. BY SIR DAVID MAXWLL*FYFE :
Q. I want to ask you first some questions about the matter of the Britis Air Force officers who escaped from Stalag Luft 3. Do you rembember that you said in giving your evidence that you knew this incident very completely and very minutely ? Do you remember saying that ?
A : No, that I had received accurate knowledge; not that I had accurate knowledge -- that I received accurate knowledge
Q : Let me quote your own words, as they were taken down, "I know this incident very completely, very minutely, but it came to my attention unfortunately at a later period of time."
That is what you said the other day, is that right ?
heard of it much later. in the last period of March, 1944, is that right ?
A : Yes, as far as I was on leave in March up until just afew days before Easter.
Q And you said, " As I can prove." I want you to tell the Tribunal the dates of your leave. definate memory, is part of this leave, and for that proof I would like to mention the people who were present or who accompanied me on this leave. Air Ministry or, indeed, from Breslau, if you were wanted ? wanted to communicate with me of which you have spoken. You say you heard one or two days later about this escape. Do you understand, Witness, that I am asking you not about the shooting for the moment, I want to make it quite clear. Did you mean by that, that you heard about the actual escape one or two days after it happened ?
A , Yes.
from your director of operations ?
A I heard this through my adjutant. Several other escapes had preceded this one.
Q Yes, that's right. There had been a number of escapes from this camp.
A I can't tell you exactly whether it es from this camp, but several large escapes dad taken place. I heard of them through channels to the adjutant.
Q I want you to tell the Tribunal another date: You say that on your return from leave your chief of staff made a communication to you. Who was your chief of staff ? tion to you ?
A No, I cannot tell you that exactly. About this incident I talked with my chief of staff later. I had heard about it prior to my spaeking with him.
Q Who was the first to tell you about it ? Was it your chief or staff who told you about the shootings ? Do you mean that someone else had told you about the shooting ? ting from the chief of staff or from other sources, but in any event I talked about this with the chief of staff. I talked about this fact with him. of staff ?
A I cannot tell you exactly from memery the day. It Must have been around Easter.
Q That would be just about the end of March, wouldn't it ?
A No. Might have been at the beginning of April or the firs half of April.
Q Can you fix that ?
A Of course I cannot establish this date with certainty. I s Himmler, and at my first opportunity after I had heard about this incedent talked to him about it.
Q So that you can't fix the date in relation to your coming b from leave, or the interview with your chief of staff, or any other date, or Easter ? le for me to establish the day.
I can give you the epproximate period of time ; and that I have done. on leave. Am I to take it that you haven't taken the trouble to look up what your leave dates were ? Whether the 26 th or the 28th or the 29th of March was the day or my return, that I cannot tell you. For the proof of that you would have to ask the people who accompanied me, who perhaps can fix this date a little more definitely. I don't recall the fact that I was there in March. latest of your dates, the 29th of March, to work on ? Easter was that year, because I do not recall it. It will be easier for me to specify the date, because I do recall that a few days before master I returned to Berchtesgaden in order to celebrate this holiday with my family.
Q So you had come back from leave some day before that. Before you went to Berchtesgaden you had come back from your March leave ?
A Berchtesgaden was the headquarters of the Fuehrer. I returned from my leave to Berechtesgaden, and with my retur ended my leave. I returned to duty. The return to Berechtesgaden is identical with the termination of my leave.
Q Well, I can't give you Easter offhand, but I happen to remember Whitsunday was the 28th of May, so that Easter would be early, somewhere about the 5th of April so that your leave wo finish somewhere about the end of March, maybe the 26th or the 29th; that is right, isn't it ? March to the 13th of April; do you know that?
A I do not know that exactly as that.
shooting, and I want to be quite fair with you. Only forty-nine of these officers were shot on dates, as far as we can fix, the 6th of April, and one was shot either on the 13th of April or later. But the critical period is the end of March, and we may take it you were back from leave by about the 29th of March. I just want you to tell the Tribunal this was a matter of great importance, wasn't it ? Considered a matter of great importance ? it was a matter which would require the highest authority, and I think you have said that you know it was Hitler's decision that these officers should be shot; is that so ?
Q It was Hitler's decision that these officers should be shot ?
A That is correct; and I was notified of it, that it was Hitler's decree. hed the British Foreign Secretary,Mr.Eden, at once said that Great Britain would demand justice of the perpetrators of these murders; do you remember that ?
A The speech to the Lower House given by Eden I cannot remember. I do not know the substance of this speech. I just heard that he spoke in Parliament about this incedent. involved were. I will tell you; I think it would be shorter in the end. If you disagree you can correct me. The commandant of Stalag Luft 3 was Oberst von Lindeiner of your service, was he not ? ticular. There was a court-martial against him for the escape. He was not connected with the shootings.
and confirm the proceedings of the Zentral Luftwaffen Gericht which convicted him and sentenced him to a year's imprisonment for neglect of duty. That would come to you, woldn't it ? Wouldn't that come to you forreview ?
A No, only if larger penalties were involved. One year would not come to my attention. But I know, and I would like to certify, that the court procedures were made for him because of neglect of duty.
Q In May of 1943, Inspectorate No.17 had been interposed between the Luftwaffe and the Department of the OKW, the Kriegsgefangenen Wesen; do you remember that ?
Q I want to remind you of who your own officers were. You understand, witness, that your own officers are involved in this matter.I want to remind you who they were, Was the head of Inspectorate 17, Major General Grosch of the Luftwaffe ? that you knew from information, you knew this incident very completely and very minutely. You are now telling the Tribunal you don't know whether Major Genral Grosch was head of Inspectorate No. 17 of the Luftwaffe.
A That has no connection with it. I told the high Tribunal that I know the incident of the shooting of those air force officer's and was advised of it, but that has no connection with General Grosch and his inspectorate, for he did not participate in the shooting. my question. Was Grosch's second in command Oberst Welter; do you remember that ?
A The particulars of organization of prisoners of war and the leaders; I do not know that ramification, at least not by heart. I would like to underline again, so that no confusion willtake place, that when I said I know this matter I meant that I knew how the decree came about. I knew that the people were shot, and I know that for certain. But I did not mean the complete ramification as far as inspectorates are concerned. to General Foerster, your director of operations at the Luftwaffe Ministeri um ?General Foerster was, I believe, chief of the Luftwehr or some similar capacity in the ministry.
In itself I did not concern myself with these matters, because they were not practical, strategic, or of armament natuere. It is entirely possible that be belonged to this department.
Q I put to you quite shortly, and if you don't know I willleave it for the moment; Did you know that Major General Graevenitz was head of the Defendant Keitel's department, the Kriegsgefangenen Wesen, that dealt with prsisoners of war ? touch with me. I could not know all of these many military subleaders and their divisions and branches.
Q So I take it that you didn't know Colonel, now General, Westhoff, of the deprartment under von Graevenitz ? Luftwaffe. I wanted to make it clear that I was suggesting they belonged to General Keitel's organization.
A I didn't know either; I did not know their position or rank. didn't you ?
A In this period of time, no longer. We are concerned with 1944, and at that time not at all. weren't you ? been responsible for six prisoners of war camps for the whole of the war up to that time, hadn't you ? to my ministry.
Q To the air force ?
Q You know about the general plan for treatment of prisoners of war, which we have had in evidence as the "Aktion Kugel" plan, didn't you ?
A No. I knew nothing of this action. I was not advised of it.
Q You were never advised of Action Kugel ?
document and the expression. Never did an officer of the Luftwaffe ever advise me of such, and I do not believe that any officer was ever transported off. This report was never presented to me, in any event. ed officers, other than British and American, were to behanded over to the police and taken to Mauthausen, where they were shot by the device of having a gun concealed in the maesuring equipment when they thought they were getting their prison clothes. You know what Aktion Kugel is, don't you ?
Q Are you telling the Tribunal that you didn't know that escaped prisoners of war who were picked up by the police were retained by the police and taken to Mauthausen?
A No, I did not know that. On the contrary, on occassions when escape happened through my camps the escapees were returned by the police to the camps, and this was the first case in which it did not take place completely.
Q But didn't you know that Colonel Welder, as second in command of your ministry's inspectorate, issued a written order a month before this, in February 1944, that prisoners of war picked up by the Luftwaffe should be delivered back to their camp, and prisoners of war picked up by the police should be held by them and no longer counted as being under the protection of the Luftwaffe; didn't you know that?
A No. Please ask this colonel to testify so we can determine whether he ever made a report of that nature to me.
Q Well, of course I can't tell whether your ministry was well run or not, But he certainly issued the order, because he says so himself.
Q I see. Well, he says that he issued this order, and you know as well as I do that prisoners of war is a thing that you have got to be careful about, because you have get a Protecting Power that investigates any complaint, and you never denounced the convention and you had the Protecting Power in these matters all through the war, had you not? That is right, isn't it?
A That is correct. But I just wanted to know who gave him this order, whether he received this order from me. That was my question.
Q Well, he wouldn't get it direct from you. I don't think you had ever met him, had you? He would get it grom Lieutenant General Grosch, wouldn't he? that from me. I never gave an order like that.
Q I see. So you say that you had never heard - - this was three and a half years after the beginning of the war -- and you had never heard that any escaped prisoners of war were to be handed over to the police. Is that what you ask the Tribunal to believe?
A As far as escaped prisoners of war are concerned, who had com-
mitted offenses, these, of course, were turned over to the police. I believe. But because of an attempt at escapa, and just because of an attempt at flight they were handed over to the police or to a concentration camp or that an order of that nature was given, I wish to certify that I neither knew of this or that I ever gave an order of this kind.
Q This is my last question: I want to make it quite clear, witness, that I am referring to those who had escaped, who had got away from the confines of the camp and were recaptured by the police. Didn't you know that they were handed over to the police?
A No. Only if they had committed crimes like a murder, and that, of course, took place at times.
prisoners of war handed over to the police were those guilty of crimes or misdemeanors?
A I did not express myself that way. I said if the police apprehended prisoners of war they were those who committed a crime during the escape, and as far as I knew they were retained by the police, were not returned to the camp. In other cases, how the police kept prisoners of war, without returning them to a camp, that I could gather from interroga tions and explanations here.
Q Would you look at Document D-569? Would you look first at the top, left-hand corner, which shows that it is a document published by the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht ? side, has the following: The Reichsfuehrer SS and the Inspector of Concentration Camps -got it? The second person to whom it is distributed is the Air Minister and Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force in 22 November 1941. That would be you.
A That's correct. I would like to make the following statement connection with this. and then make your statement upon it. I shan't stop you. I want *---* look at the third sentence in paragraph one. This is dealing with *---* prisoners of war, you understand. The third sentence says: If es Soviet prisoners of war are returned to the camp in accordance with this order, they have to be handed over to the nearest service station of the Secret police.
if they commit crimes owning to the fact that at present these misdemeanors on the part of Soviet prisoners of war are particularly frequent, due most likely to living conditions still being somewhat unsettled, the following temporary regulations come into force. It may be amended later. If a Soviet prisoner of war commits any other offense then the commandant of the camp must hand the guilty man over to the head of the Security Police. will be handed over to the Security Police? You understand this document says a man who escapes will be handed over to the Secret Police, a man who commits a a crime, as you mentioned, will be handed over to the Security Police.
Wasn't that the condition that obtained from 1941 up to the date we are dealing with in March, 1944. will be torn from context.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFFE: I thought your Honor might have read it. technical matter of the arrangement of exhibits? When I cross examined Field Marshal Kesselring I put in three documents, U.K. 66 which becomes Exhibit GB-274; D-39, which becomes GB-275; TC-91 which becomes GB-276, so this document willbecome GB-277.
Q Have you had an opportunity of reading it, witness? escaped were to be after their return to the camp handed over to the Secret State Police. If they committed a crime they were to be handed over to the Security Police, isn't that right?
A Not exactly correct. I would like to point to the third sentence in the first paragraph. There it says, "If a camp of prisoners of war is nearby so the man who is recaptured is to be transported there."
Q But read the next sentence, "If a Soviet prisoner of war is returned to the camp" -- that is in accordance with this order which you have just read -- "they have to be handed over to the nearest service station of the Secret State Police." Your own sentence.
A Yes, but the next paragraph shows "because."
Q The last answer, would you mind repeating it please? Frequent acts which are punishable which are occurring frequently but by itself this order was given and it was distributed to the Army, to the Sea Forces, and I would like to give the explanation to this: in this war there were not only hundreds but thousands of orders which came from subordinate officers and were transmitted, and that does not mean that each of these many orders was transmitted to the Commander-in-Chief; only the most decisive and most important were shown to be had.
The others went from department to department, and this order came and is signed not by the Chief of the High Command but by one of the subordinate officers.
Q That order would be dealt with by the prisoner-of-war department of your ministry, wouldn't it?
took, received this order, but no other resort or department received it. by your prisoner-of-war department, your ministry; isn't that so?
Q It is quicker, you see, if you say "Yes" in the beginning; do you understand?
A No; there is a difference whether I personally have read the order or not, and I will take my attitude as to responsibility.
THE PRESIDENT: You weren't asked about responsibility; you were asked whether it would be dealt with by your prisoner-of-war department. BY SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: the 24th to the 25th of March. I want you to have that date in mind. The decision to murder these young officers must have been taken very quickly, because the first murder which actually took place was on the 26th of March.
Do you agree with that? It must have been taken quickly? immediately, but it had no connection with this document.
Q No, no; we are finished with that document: we are going into the murder of these young men. The Grossfahndung -- a general hue and cry, I think, would be the British translation -- was also issued at once in order that these men should be arrested; isn't that so?
A That is correct. Whenever there was an escape where some prisoners escaped, automatically in the whole Reich a hue and cry took effect, that is, all offices had to watch to apprehend the prisoners. Grossfahndung, there must have been a meeting of Hitler itinerate with Himmler or Kaltenbrunner in order that that order would be put into effect; isn't that s
A That is correct so far as I heard afterwards; and as I said, Himmler was the first to report this escape to the Fuehrer.
Q Now, General Westhoff, who was in defendant Keitel's Kriegsgefangenenwesen, in his prisoner-of-war set-up, says this that "On a date, which I think was the 26th, Keitel said to him, 'This morning Goering reproached me in the presence of Himmler for having let some more prisoners of war escape. It was unheard of!" Do you say that General Westhoff is wrong?
A Yes. This is not in accordance with the fact. General Westhoff is referring to an expression of General Field marshal Keitel's. This utterance in itself is illogical, for I could not accuse Keitel; for he could not have said that. The guarding was his responsibility and not mine.
Q One of the defendant Keitel's officers dealing with this matter was a general inspector, General Roettich. I don't knew if you know him. to assure everyone that his senior officer had nothing to do with it, and he goes on to say this about General Roettich: "He was completely excluded from it by the fact that these matters were taken out of his hands. Apparently at that time conference with the Fuehrer in the morning, that is to say, the conference between Himmler, Field Marshal Keitel, and Goering, which took place in the Fuehrer's presence, the Fuehrer himself also took a hand in these affairs when officers escaped." You say that is wrong? You were at no such conference?
A I was not present at this conference, neither was General Westhoff; he is giving a purely subjective view, not a factual report.
Q So that we find that you don't think -- you think -- that Westhoff is wrong? You see, Westhoff, he was a colonel at this time, I think, and now he finishes as a major general, and he asks that the senior officers be questioned about it; says that, "It should be possible to find that out, that Himmler made the suggestion to the Fuehrer--to find that out from Goering who was present at the conference."
Again and again Westhoff, who after all is a comparatively junior officer, is saying that the truth about the matter can be discovered from his seniors. You say that it can't?
A I would not say that; I am just saying that General Westhoff -I would just like to say that General Westhoff was never present for even a moment, therefore he can not say I know or I saw it; that Reichsmarshal Goering was present. He is assuming or he may have heard it. to you; that Keitel went on to say to him at General von Graewenitz's, "General, these escapes must stop. We must set an example. We shall take very severe measures. I am only telling you that, for men who have escaped will be shot; probably the majority of them are dead already." You never heard anything of that? nor at the conference--Fuehrer-Himmler. As far as I know General Westhoff will be testifying here, aid in additional General Field marshal Keitel will be able to say whether I was there or not.
Q Well then, I am bound to put this to you. I come oh to your own ministry. I suppose in general you take responsibility for the actions of the officers of your ministry from the rank of field officer and above? -- colonels and major generals and lieutenant generals? if they acted against my directives and instructions, no.
Q Well now, just let us see what happened in your own ministry. You know that--do you know that Colonel Welde made a personal investigation of this matter at the camp? Did you know that? I do not know; I know only that investigations did take place. was a meeting in Berlin about this matter? Just let me tell you who were there before you apply your mind to it so you will know: Your ministry was represented by Colonel Walde, because Lieutenant General Grosch had another meeting, so he ordered his deputy to attend; the defendant Keitel's organization was represented by Colonel von Reurmont; the Gestapo was represented by Gruppenfuehrer Mueller; the Kripo was represented by Gruppenfuehrer Neve.