with the other Nazi conspirators. He advised them and made available to them in his foreign embassies and legations abroad, information which was required and at times participated, as I had shown, in the planning of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Appendix A of the indictment are completely proved against this defendant, I only wonder if the Tribunal will allow me to add one fact on behalf of the British delegation. In the preparation of these briefs we have received great assistance from certain of our American colleagues, and I should like to thank once, but nonetheless heartily, on behalf of all of us, Dr. Kempner's staff: Captain John W. Auchincloss, Lieutenants Richard Heller and Frederick Felton, Captain J. Robert Claggett and Captain Norman Stoll, and Mr. Karl Lachmann for the great help they have been to us.
THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn now for ten minutes.
DR. SEIDL: May it please the Tribunal, I have to make a motion.
THE PRESIDENTS: On behalf of whom is your motion?
DR. SEIDL: Dr. Seidl, defense Counsel for the defendant Prank. Frank. The Charter of the Tribunal contains, in Paragraph 4, regulations for the procedure, and in Paragraph 16 it has been ruled that the rights of the defendants shall be protected in such manner. The defense must have oil particulars of the facts of the Prosecution which can be had. A copy of the Prosecutions facts, with all documents pertaining to it, must be submitted to the defendant, in the language which is known to him, at a certain time before the proceedings start. the Prosecution. This is a copy which was read at the first day. This is if I may say so, a general indictment. All actions are listed which, according to the opinion of the signatories of the London Conference, are looked at as crimes against peace--crimes of war. The Indictment does not contain in particular the criminal actions of each defendant. I am now thinking about positive actions, or concrete actions, or missions.
This morning I received a document. It has the title "The defendant Hans Frank, for Crimes against the Peace, or Crimes against Humanity"-in other words, in German the personal responsibilities of the defendant Frank for crimes against the peace and criminal actions or war and crimes against humanity. This document is without any table of contents. It is thirty pages long, typewritten pages. In addition to this document, or Indictment, as I like to call it, another document book has been given to me, which book contains documents concerning Frank, The first document, as well as the second document, are not in German but in English, This first document is, in reality, what I would call the indictment against Frank, because here in this document, which is thirty pages long, for the first time the individual activities of Frank are listed which are looked upon as criminal actions. At least, one ought to say that this document is an essential part of the Indictment.
THE PRESIDENT: Interrupting you, the Tribunal has already expressed its desire that a motion such as this should be made in writing. The Tribunal considers that a motion of the sort which you are making made orally is a waste of the Tribunal's time. It therefore desires you to put your motion in writing. It will then be considered.
DR. SEIDL: May I say something to this, your Honor? I regretted myself that I must make this motion at this point, but I was not able to make this motion in writing beforehand because I only received this document two and a half hours ago. My motion is confined to asking the Prosecution that these two documents be given to the defendant Frank in the German, language.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal hasn't got the documents to which you are referring, but it is quite impossible for us to understand the motion you are making unless you make it in writing and attach the documents or in some other way describe or explain to us what the documents are. We haven't got the documents that you are referring to.
DR. SEIDL: I will, then, make my motion in writing.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Roberts, can you explain to me what counsel who just spoke is complaining about?
MR. ROBERTS: I gather he was complaining that the trial brief and the document took which had been served on his client, Frank, were in English and not in German.
THE PRESIDENT: Who is dealing with the case against Franks
MR. ROBERTS: It is being dealt with by the United States.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps I had better ask Colonel Storey, then,
COLONEL STOREY: If the Tribunal please, I think what counsel is referring to is the practice we have made of delivering in advance a copy of the document book and a copy of the trial brief. In this particular instance I happen to know that what counsel refers to is the trial address, which he intends to read over the microphone, and as a courtesy to counsel they have been delivered in advance of the presentation, just like the
THE PRESIDENT: The documents which will be presented against the defendant Frank will be all translated?
COLONEL STOREY: I am sure they are, yes, sir. I don't know about if your Honor please.
We handed that to him in advance -- what the THE PRESIDENT:
Colonel Storey, I thought the Tribunal ordered, after consulting the prosecutors as to the feasibility of the scheme, that sufficient translators should be supplied to the defendant's counsel so that such documents, if in the English language, as trial briefs might be translated to defendant's counsel.
You will remember it was suggested that at least four translators, I think, should be supplied to the defendant's counsel.
COLONEL STOREY: If the Tribunal will recall, I think this is what finally was decided: that document books and briefs could be submitted in English and the photostatic copies submitted to defendant's counsel, and that if they wanted additional copies of the German, then they so request them and they would be furnished. I think that is what the final order was.
THE PRESIDENT: There was, at any rate, a suggestion that translators should be ordered to translate such documents as trial briefs.
COLONEL STOREY: That is correct, yes, sir, and whenever counsel wanted more copies they would request them and they would be available for them. The translator's translation of the photostats would be available if they requested them.
Were there anyother questions, your Honor?
THE PRESIDENT: To you mean that translators have not been supplied to defendant's counsel?
COL. STOREY: If your Honor pleases, as I understand, the defendants' information center is now under the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, and my information is -- I would like to check it -- that when they want extra copies all they have to do is ask for them and they may obtain them, and sufficient translators are available to provide the extra copies if they want them. That ismy information. I haven't checked it in the last few days, but sufficient copies in English are furnished for all counsel, and these briefs and document books are furnished to them in advance. In this case I am told that the document book and the briefs were furnished.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
DR. FRITZ SAUTER (Counsel for Defendant Ribbentrop, Funk and von Schirach): the time of the Tribunal for such discussions.
We, of the defense counsel would rather avoid these issues ourselves. But the question which has been touched upon by my colleague is really very disagreeable to us and makes our work very difficult for us. regulations are ruled upon and the practice is entirely different.
THE PRESIDENT: You are going too fast.
DR. SAUTER: -- all documents being in English. Now, at night in prison we are supposed to talk with our defendants. This is made much more difficult now. We will have to talk about documents which are all in English and at great length and this is practically impossible, We receive these documents, of course, always in English before the trial, and it is completely impossible, even if we could speak English very well, to prepare ourselves adequately. I do not know whether the Indictments, as we have them for each defendant, are the same.
THE PRESIDENT: Nearly every document which has been referred to in this branch of the case, which has been presented by Mr. Albrecht and by Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe, are documents which have been referred to previously in the trial and which must have been before the defense counsel for many days, for weeks, and therefore, there can be no lack of familiarity with those documents. The number of documents which have been referred to which are fresh documents, are very few indeed and the passages in them, which are now being put in evidence, are all read over the microphone and therefore are heard by defense counsel in German and can be studied by German counsel tomorrow morning in the transcript of the shorthand notes. I do not see, therefore, what hardship is being imposed upon German counsel by the method which is being adopted.
for the defendants, have been giving them their trial briefs in English beforehand. But there is no strict obligation to do that and in so far as the actual evidence is concerned, all of which is contained in documents, as I have already pointed out to you, the vast majority of those documents have already been put in many days ago and have been in the hands of German counsel ever since, in the German language and also the documents which are now put in.
DR. SAUTER: No, this is not true, your Honor. Mr. President, thatis not true, This is the complaint which we, of the defense counsel, have been talking about amongst ourselves. We have always repeated that we do not receive German documents. You may be assured, Mr. President, if that were so, as you seem to be of the opinion, none of us would approach the microphone. We would all be very grateful but it really is not so.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, surely when you have a reference to a German document that German document is available to you in the Information Center. And as these documents have been put in evidence, some of them as long ago as the 20th of November or shortly thereafter, surely there must have been adequate time for defense counsel to study them.
DR. SAUTER: Well, for instance this morning I received a volume on Funk. I have no idea when Funk's turn will be up; it might be tomorrow. It is completely impossible for me to study this volume of English documents when I come to the prison at night to study it. It is physically impossible for me to do this and I would be able to work through it if it were in German. But it is impossible for me to do this at night, at 9 o'clock or half past nine, at such a time to start working on such a volume. It is absolutely impossible for us.
THE PRESIDENT: You see, Dr. Sauter, it is not as though you have to cross-examine witnesses immediately after the evidence is given. The documents are put in and it is not necessary for you then to get up and argue upon the interpretation of those documents. You will have, I regret to say, a considerable time before you will have to get up and call your own evidence and ultimately to argue upon the documents, which are now being put in.
Therefore, it is not a question of hours, it is a question of days and weeks before you will have to deal with these documents, which are now being put in. And I really do not see that there is any hardship upon defendant's counsel in the system which is being adopted. Prosecution, is that every document which is put in evidence and every part of the document which is put in evidence, has got to be reviewed in open Court, in order that it should be translated ever the earphones and then shall get into the shorthand notes. next morning but are only available some days afterwards. But it is ultimately available in German. And therefore, every defendant's counsel must have a complete copy of the shorthand notes, at any rate up to the recess and that contains all the evidence that has been given against the defendants and it contain it in German.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, that which is most dear to us is what we have already asked for many weeks ago; that the document or at least that part of the document read, would be given to us in German translation. It is very difficult for us, even if we have the text in English, to work on the documents during the time they are at our disposal. It is impossible for any of us to do this. That is the reason we regret that our wish to get the documents in German is not being taken into consideration. we are very sorry that we do have to keep insisting
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, I am most anxious and the other members be afforded to the defendants and their counsel.
But, as I have pointed in.
By the time that you have to get up and argue upon the documents
DR. SAUTER: Thank you, sir.
DR. BABEL: (Counsel for the SS): I have repeatedly asked to receive copies of everything that will be presented in English.
Today, after the day or the day after; that it is at our disposal to be read at that time.
THE PRESIDENT: We are not dealing with the SA or the organizations at the present time.
If you have any motion to make, you will kindly make it
DR. BABEL: Mr. President, will you permit me one more remark? The
THE PRESIDENT: Do you mean the transcript?
DR. BABEL: The German transcript from the 18th and 19th of December 1945, I have received today.
You see, it is not a fact that we receive the transcript the day after or only a few days after the meeting.
I only
THE PRESIDENT: We will inquire into that.
One moment. Will the last counsel who was speaking stand up?
(DR. BABEL arose)
THE PRESIDENT: I am told that is a special case; that the reason for to be recopied.
I understand that the delay ordinarily isn't anything like
DR. BABLE: But I hardly believe that this postponement, this delay, is also concerned with the translation of the Document Book.
But even if good time.
This is, apparently, not the case.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps you will kindly make your complaint in writing and give the particulars of it.
Do you understand that?
DR. BABLE: Yes, I do.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
MR. GEOFFREY ROBERTS, K.C.: May it please the Tribunal:
The story with regard to Keitel and Jodl runs on parallel lines. For the years in question they marched down the same road together.
Most of the THE PRESIDENT:
Yes.
MR. ROBERTS, K.C.: Then I shall proceed, if I may, on that activities of both these defendants have been referred to in detail many times and quite recently by Colonel Taylor and my earnest desire is to avoid repetition as far as I possibly can.
And may I say, I welcome any suggestions, as I travel the road, which the Tribunal have to make, to may my presentation still shorter. which is a joint Document Book, dealing with both the defendants. Practically all the documents in that book have already been referred to. They nearly all, of course, have a German origin. I only propose to read passaged from nine new documents and those nine documents, I think, are shown in your Lordship's bundles and in the bundles of your colleagues. part of the Indictment which deals with the two defendants. That will be found on page 33 of the English translation. I begin with "Keitel" in the middle of the page, and it says:
"The defendant Keitel between 1933 and 1945 was --" the holder of various offices. I only want to point out there, that although the commencing date is 1938, the Prosecution relies on certain activities of the Defendant Keitel before 1938 and we submit that we are entitled so to do because of the general words appearing on page 28 of the Indictment, at the head of the Appendix:
"The statement hereinafter set forth following the name of each individual defendant constitute matters upon which the prosecution will rely inter alia as establishing the individual responsibility of the defendants: --"
And then the Tribunal will see: "Keitel used the foregoing positions, his personal influence and his intimate connection with the Fuehrer in such a manner that: he promoted the military preparations for war set forth in Count One of the Indictment --" if I may read it shortly -- he participated in the planning and preparation for wars of aggression and in violation of treaties; he executed the plans for wars of aggression and wars in violation of treaties and he authorized and participated in war crimes and crimes against humanity.
various positions. He "used the foregoing positions, his personal influence, and his close connection with the Fuehrer in such a manner--" and this is not to be found in the text relating to Keitel -- "he promoted the accession to power of the Nazi conspirators and the consolidation of their control over Germany --." moment to support that allegation that he promoted the Nazi rise to power before 1933. There is plenty of evidence that he was a devoted, almost a fanatical admiere of the Fuehrer, but that, I apprehend, would not be enough. tions for war; he participated in the planning and preparation of the war and that he authorized and participated in war crimes and crimes against humanity. it is well-known that in February of 1936 he became Chief of the OKW, Supreme Commander of all the Armed Forces and that Jodl became Chief of the Operations Staff and that is copiously proved in the shorthand notes and on the documents, Perhaps I ought to refer to his position in 1935, at the time when the reoccupation of the Rhineland was first envisaged. Keitel was head of the Wehrmacht in the Reich War Ministry and that is proved by a document, 3019-PS, which is to be found in "Das Archiv", and I ask the Court to take judicial notice of that. It is not in the bundle.
Jodl's positions have been proved by his own statement, which is 2865-PS, which is also U.S. 16 and in 1935 he held the rank of Lieutenant Colonel, Chief of the Operations Department of the Landesverteidigung. period -- to two documents, one of which is now. The first document I desire to mention, without reading it, is EC 177. It is U.S. 390. My Lords, these are the minutes, shortly after the Nazi rise to power, of the Working Committee of the delegates for Reich Defense. The date is the 22nd of May, 1933.
Keitel presided at that meeting. The minutes have been read.
There is a long discussion as to the preliminary steps for putting Germany on to a war footing. Keitel regarded the task as most urgent; that so little had been done in previous years and perhaps the Tribunal will remember the most striking passage where Keitel impressed the need for secrecy, documents must not be lost, oral statements can be denied at Geneva.
is interesting to see in those very early days, 1933, that the heads of the armed forces of Germany concentrated using lying as a weapon. EC-405. I desire to refer to this shortly because in my submission it fixes Jodl with knowledge and complicity of return to reoccupy Rhineland country, contrary to the Versailles Treaty, The Tribunal will see that these are the minutes of the Working Committee of the Reich Defense Council, dated the 26th of June, 1935. Lt. Colonel Jodl gives a dissertation on mobilization preparation, and it is only the fourth and fifth paragraphs on that same page that I desire to read, the last paragraph but one from the bottom:
"The demilitarized zone requires special treatment. In his speech of the 21st May and other utterances, the Fuehrer has stated that the stipulations of the Versailles Treaty and the Locarno Pact regarding the demilitarized zone are being observed. To the Aide memoire of the French Charge d'affaires on recruiting offices in the demilitarized zone, the Reich Government has replied that neither civilian recruiting authority as nor other offices in the demilitarized zone have been entrusted with mobilization tasks such as the raising, equipping, and arming of any kind of formations for the event of war or in preparation therefor.
"Since political entanglements abroad must be avoided at present" -I stress the "at present" -- "only these preparatory measures that are urgently necessary may be carried out. The existence of such preparations or the intention of them must be kept in strictest secrecy in the zone itself as well as in the rest of the Reich."
My Lord, I needn't read more. I submit that fixes Jodl clearly with knowledge of the forthcoming breach of Versailles. March, 1936, the Defendant Keitel issued the directive which has been read before, C-194, U.S. 55, ordering an air reconaissance and certain U-Boat movements in case any other nation attempted to interfere with that reoccupation.
My Lords, shortly after its formation there was issued a handbook which is a new exhibit, from which I want to read short passages.
The number of the exhibit is 211, It is GB-161.
THE PRESIDENT:L-211?
MR. ROBERTS, K.C: L-211, My Lord, and you should find it nearly at the end of the book. Now, this is dated 19 April 1938, "Top Secret for Commanders only. Direction of War as a Problem of Organization." I only read from the appendix which is entitled, "What is the War of the Future?" and if the Court will kindly turn over to the second page, I am going to read 12 lines from the bottom of the page, the line beginning "Surprise". "Surprise which must be the premise for quick initial success will often require hostilities to begin before mobilization has been completed or the armies are fully in position.
"A declaration of war is no longer necessarily the first step at the start of a war.
"The normal rules of war towards neutral nations may be considered to apply only on the basis of whether the operation of these rules will create greater advantages or disadvantages for the warring nations." they might apply to any other nation who might be minded to make war on Germany. The Court can use its judicial notice of the conditions of things in Europe in 1938 and ask itself whether Germany had any potential aggressor against her. envisages exactly the way in which Germany did make war in 1939 and in the subsequent years. times, and which will be trodden so many times again, the road from 1938 and 1941 to the final act of aggression. But I believe that I can treat this, so far as Keitel and Jodl are concerned, in a very few sentences because I submit that the documents which are already in, which have been read and reread into the record, demonstrate quite clearly that Keitel, as would only be expected, he being Chief of the Supreme Command of all the Armed Forces, and Jodl, as only would be expected also, he being Chief of the Operations Staff, were vitally and intimately concerned with every single act of aggression which took place successively against the various victims of Nazi aggression.
My Lord, you should have in front of you the document book and the trial brief in which those documents are set out under the heading. If I might take first the aggression against Austria, your Lordship will remember in Jodl's diary on the 12th of February, 1938 how Keitel, who was something more than a mere soldier, put heavy pressure upon Schuschnigg -- that is 1780-PS, Jodl's diary -- how on the following day, Keitel writes to Hitler, 1775-PS, USA 75, suggesting the shamming of military action and the spreading of false but quite credible news, as it has been translated.
Then, the actual operation orders for Operation Otto, U.S. 74, 75, and 77, all of the 11th of March, 1938, are OKW orders for which Keitel is responsible.
THE PRESIDENT: What are the numbers of them?
MR. ROBERTS, K.C: My Lord, C-102, C-103, and C-182. One of them is actually signed or initialled by Keitel, and two are initialled by Jodl. Those are the operation orders for the advance into Austria, the injunction, if the Tribunal remembers, to treat Czech soldiers as hostile and to treat the Italians as friends. Austria. My Lord, the second is, is it not -
THE PRESIDENT (Interposing): Well, perhaps if you are going off to another, we had better adjourn now until 2:00 o'clock.
(Whereupon at 1245 hours the hearing of the Tribunal adjourned to reconvene at 1400 hours.)
Military Tribunal, in the matter of: The
MR. ROBERTS, K.C.: May it please the Tribunal: I had got to the commencement of the aggression against Czechoslovakia, and the Tribunal will remember that the leading Exhibit on that matter is the file 388PS, US 26, the "Fall Gruen" file. My Lords, that file, in my submission, contains copious evidence against both Keitel and Jodl, showing that they were taking the natural part of the chief of the supreme command of the armed forces and the head of the operations staff.
May I remind the Tribunal of Item 2. I don't want to read any of these. I might just refer to them. That is notes of a meeting on the 21st of April 1938. The important thing to notice is that Keitel and the Fuehrer met alone, showing the intimate connection between Keitel and the Fuehrer. And it was at that meeting that preliminary plans were discussed, including the possibility of an incident, namely, the murder of the German ambassador at Prague. for the political and the military campaign against Czechoslovakia, issued by Keitel. Keitel for the invasion of Czechoslovakia, with the date given as the 1st of October, 1938.
There are many items which are initiated by Jodl; Item 14 and Item 17, to mention only two. Items 24, 36, and 37. signed by Keitel, enclosing orders for secret mobilization.
Jodl's diary, 1780-PS, contains many references to the forthcoming aggression, particularly the 13th of May and the 8th of September, and and there is a very revealing entry on the 11th of September in Jodl's diary, 1780-PS, in which he says:
"In the afternoon, conference with the Secretary of State".
THE PRESIDENT: Will you give us the date?
MR. ROBERTS, K.C.: I beg your Lordship's pardon; 11th of September, 1938, that is.
"In the afternoon, conference with Secretary of State Jahnke, from the Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda, on the imminent common tasks. The joint preparations for refutation of our own violations of international law and the exploitation of its violations by the enemy were considered particularly important."
I emphasize those words, "our own violations of international law." was referred to by my learned leader, Sir David, was prepared, which the Tribunal will remember has in parallel columns the possible breach of international law and the excuse which is then going to be given for it. It was referred to so recently that I needn't refer to it again. there is an overwhelming case that Keitel and Jodl played an important, indeed, a vital part, in the aggression against Czechoslovakia, which led up to the Pact of Munich. out many times, the Nazi conspirators at once set about preparations for annexing the remainder of Czechoslovakia. because he goes to do some regimental soldiering as artillery general in Austria -- artillery general of the 44th Division -- and so it cannot be said that there is any evidence against him from the Munich Pact until the 23rd of August, 1939, when he is recalled on the eve of the Polish invasion to take up his duties once more as chief of the operation staff of OKW. than a month after the Munich Pact, he countersigned Hitler's order to liquidate the rest of Czechoslovakia and to occupy Memel - Document C-136, US 104.
memorandum about the surprise occupation of Danzig. to the lower formations, "prepare for the liquidation of Czechoslovakia." Those preparations were made. than a mere soldier, was present at the midnight conference between the Fuehrer and Hacha, President of Czechoslovakia, when, under a threat of bombing Prague, Hacha surrendered the rest of his country to the Germans, I refrain from referring to the contents of the minutes, which have been road many times already.
My Lords, so that milestone is past. And again I submit, in all that aggression, it's clear that Keitel was playing a vital part as Hitler's right-hand man, commanding all the armed forces under him.
I now passto the Polish aggression. Keitel was present at the meeting at the Chancellory on the 23rd of May, 1939, L-79, US 27, when it was said, quoting just a few words, so familiars Danzig was not the subject of the dispute; Poland was to be attacked at the first suitable opportunity; Dutch and Belgian air bases must be occupied; declarations of neutrality were to be ignored.
The directive for "Fall Weiss", the invasion of Poland, is C-120A, GB 41. The date is the 3rd of April, 1939. The Tribunal will remember the plans were to be submitted to OKW by the 1st of May, and the forces were to be ready for invasion by the 1st of September. And that directive is signed by Keitel.
C-126, GB 45, is a follow, up of that previous directive. It's dated the 22nd of June, 1939. The need for camouflage is emphasized, and it is stated, "don't disquiet the population." That is signed by Keitel.