dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: How much longer was he at large? Goering: The letter is of 3 November 1943, as we have just found. I heard about the arrest of Schacht only after the attempt on the life of the Fuehrer and after my return a few days later, after an illness of some time, that is to say, in September 1944. There is not the least connection between this letter and his arrest, because, when I asked about his arrest, I was told definitely it was in connection with the 20th of July.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Did you make an agreement, as Supreme Commander of the Air Force, with the ReichsFuehrer SS, the Youth Fuehrer of the German Reich, and the Reich Minister for Occupied Eastern Territories, about the recruiting of youthful Russians, Ukrainians, White Russians, Lithuanians, and Tartars between the ages of 15 and 20? Did you come to some agreement with Himmler and Rosenberg about that? Goering: That I personally concluded such an agreement, I do not think so. It is possible and even probable that my office did so, however.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And you have testified yesterday or the day before -- I think Friday -- as follows; let me refresh your recollection about the questions of confiscations. And I think you also said that you never took anything, not even so much as a screw or a bolt, when you were in occupation of foreign territory. Do you recall that testimony? Goering: Very exactly.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Do you still stand on it? Goering: Of course.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I ask to have you shown a Document EC-317. Goering: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, that is a secret command matter, is it not, dated the 7th of September 1943? Is that right? Goering: I have a letter here before me of 21 February 1944.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Then you have the wrong exhibit -- EC-317, Page 3. Goering: Yes; Page 3.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: This letter of transmittal we will not bother about. Your secret command matter is dated 7 September 1943, is it not? Goering: That is correct.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And it reads as follows: Right? Goering: Absolutely correct; but I want to make the following statement in connection with it. We are dealing here with purely military measures in a retreat, and may I comment on these four points: I emphasized the other day that a great number of agricultural machines had been brought to Russia by us. As the Russians, in their retreat, destroyed everything, we had all the less military reason to allow the machinery of industries which we had set up and brought there to fall into their hands undestroyed. This concerns an urgently necessary military order which had been issued during a retreat, and which was executed in the same way as before in the reverse sense. It does not deal with any sort of private property.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And it was signed by you? Goering: Yes, this order bears my signature.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I am about to go into a different subject, may it please Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, we will adjourn now. [A recess was taken.]
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I will ask that the witness be shown a document, 3786-PS, of which there are no extra copies available because it came to us so late. I will ask you to examine that and tell me whether you recall the meeting to which these minutes refer? Goering: We are apparently concerned here with a report dealing with a meeting which took place daily with the Fuehrer. As meetings occurred once or twice daily, I naturally cannot, with any accuracy, without first having read the report, recall the report of 27 January 1945, for I was present at a great number of these meetings during the course of the war.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I shall call your attention to specific incidents in it. The minutes indicate that the Fuehrer, yourself, Keitel , and Jodl were present, were they not? Goering: That is according to the notes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And I will call your attention to Page 31 and ask you to follow with me the notes and see if it refreshes your recollection. Now this relates to 10,000 imprisoned air force officers. I quote what is attributed to you. Do you recall that incident? Goering: I remember this incident but vaguely. Now that I have given the answer I would like to give a short explanation of the value of this document. I understood that this document has just now arrived, but I have already been interrogated with respect to this document long before the beginning of the proceedings. Already at that time I pointed out that at the stenographic recording of a meeting two stenographers took notes at the same time, since the meetings often lasted 4 or 5 hours, and therefore these stenographic notes always had to be gone over afterwards, especially as frequently, because of the presence of many men, inaccuracies occurred in the recordings so that statements made by one person were credited to another in the minutes. For that reason I said at that time already that not only did I not remember this statement, but that in my opinion I have never made this statement. We were concerned solely with the preparation of motor vehicles for transport.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, I must say that you were interrogated with reference to the incident, but not with reference to these notes which were not transcribed. Goering: In respect to this transcript and this incident, it was especially emphasized that we were concerned with the stenotype record of the report of the meeting, and I already uttered a similar opinion at that time. It was not submitted to me at that time.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Not stenotype, but stenographic. You are also reported on Page 35. 1 call your attention to this and ask you, is it attributed to you mistakenly? Did that occur? Goering: That I do not know. I have already testified before that the B.d.E. had to take charge of the transportation, because we had nothing to do with it. What ideas and opinions the other gentlemen expressed in the discussions I cannot completely testify to, or state here. It was a question of whether these 10,000 were to be surrendered or shipped away.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I will ask you a question or two about the Warsaw bombing. Was it known to you that on the 3rd of September, the house of the Ambassador of the United States, situated some 17 kilometers out of Warsaw, was bombed by the German Air Force? Goering: No; that is unknown to me.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Your Air Force took a good many pictures of the Polish villages and of Warsaw and used them for distributing among the German people, didn't they? Goering: That is possible, I was not concerned with that. In any event, the Luftwaffe did not distribute pictures to the German people. It is possible that pictures taken by the Luftwaffe might have got into the German press by way of the Propaganda Ministry. But distribution, in the sense of the Luftwaffe's distributing photographs like leaflets, never occurred.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: The Luftwaffe did take the pictures for the purpose of determining the efficiency of its hits, did it not? Goering: The Luftwaffe took pictures before the target was bombed, and again after the target had been bombed, to determine whether the target had actually been hit.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I ask to have you shown five photographs and ask you if those are not photographs taken by the Luftwaffe, following the attack on Poland. [Photographs were shown to the witness.] Goering: To answer the first question, whether the pictures had actually been taken by the German Air Force, I regret I cannot give a positive answer for there is no indication that these were made by the German Air Force. Four out of the five pictures were, if you observe them closely, taken from an oblique angle, as though they had been taken from a church steeple rather than from an airplane, from which generally only vertical pictures are taken because of the built-in camera. The picture showing the destruction of parts of Warsaw can be regarded technically as such an aerial photo. The date is lacking here. But none of these pictures give any proof that they were taken by the Luftwaffe. However, let us assume that they were taken by the Luftwaffe, so that further questions will be facilitated.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You say you will assume they were by the Luftwaffe? Goering: Yes, although I doubt it.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I do not want you to give away anything here. If you think they were not taken by the Luftwaffe, I do not want you to admit it. Goering: I said there is no proof. I did not take the pictures, I do not recognize them, they were not submitted to me as Luftwaffe pictures and from a purely technical point of view they could only have been taken from a plane with a private camera from a very oblique angle. They are not true aerial pictures, that is vertical pictures as taken by the Air Force.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, we will pass them then and go to something else. Let us take up Document 638-PS, Exhibit Number USA-788, about which you have been interrogated and which, as I recall, you authenticated. [Document 638-PS was submitted to the witness.] This is the document which was signed by Dr. Joel and I ask you to follow me. Do you wish to make an explanation of that document to the Tribunal? Goering: Yes, with the same that I made once before. The first two paragraphs clearly show that I wanted only those people who had committed no offenses involving laws of honor, such as poachers, distinguishing between those having a passion for hunting and those who only want to steal. I made a distinction also with regard to smugglers, between those who take personal risks showing a certain passion for their activity, and those who do it in a dishonorable way. Both these main paragraphs plainly show that I did not wish to use criminals of any type, and that is why I explicitly denied having said what is stated in the last paragraphs. It is not a question of the minutes but of the notes taken by an official with whom I discussed these things. He should be able to testify where and if he heard these words uttered by me. But they contradict my ideas so much, and I particularly emphasize this, and in particular, as I have clearly said, as regards rape, which I always punished with death even if committed against citizens of enemy states, that I rejected that statement; and I again pointed out that the main paragraphs are in utmost contradiction to the last remark, because if it had been a matter of indifference to me, I could have selected criminals. Thirdly, I expressly stated above, that their main task behind the lines was to create confusion, to disrupt communications, to destroy railways, and the like. Fourthly and lastly, the whole thing never took place.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You objected to the word "ravish" which had been translated the first time "rape", and that is the only objection you made to this document when it was presented to you. Is that not correct? Goering: No, it is not correct that way. I say this because it is a most significant concept which has always particularly contradicted my sense of justice, for shortly after the seizure of power I instigated a sharpening of this phase of German penal laws. And I wanted to show by this word and this concept, that this entire latter part could not have been uttered by me, and I deny having said it. I will absolutely and gladly take responsibility for even the most serious things which I have done, but I deny this statement, as being in complete contradiction to my opinions.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Who is the signer of this document? Goering: Dr. Joel.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Yes -- you knew him? Goering: I knew him slightly. I saw him at this conference.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: He was present at the conference? Goering: I instructed him to come to tell him that I wished that type of people.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, you dealt in economic matters with the various occupied countries through Reichskommissars? Goering: I testified the other day that all sorts of authorities, including the Reichskommissars had to follow my economic directives and orders.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And were to report to you on economic matters? Goering: Not about all of them, only insofar as they concerned my directives.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And who was your Reichskommissar in Poland? Goering: There was no Reichskommissar, in Poland. There was a Governor General in Poland, that was Dr. Frank.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And who was the Reichskommissar in the Netherlands? Goering: Dr. Seyss-Inquart was Reichskommissar for Holland.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Who was the Reichskommissar for Norway? Goering: In Norway the Gauleiter Terboven was Reichskommissar.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Terboven -- he was also a Gauleiter you say? Goering: He was Gauleiter at Essen.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You appointed him to Norway or attained his appointment? Goering: I neither appointed him for Norway -- because that was beyond my jurisdiction -- nor did I have him appointed. I did not oppose his appointment in any way as I considered he would make a very competent Reichskommissar.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And he was there from 1940 until 1945? Goering: I believe that is correct.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, I will ask to have you shown Document R-134, a communication from Terboven to you. [Document R-134 was submitted to the witness.] That is a communication of the 1st of May 1942, is it not? Goering: I note the date; yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And that reports to you as follows, does it not -- it is addressed to you as Reich Marshal, "My esteemed Reich Marshal", is that right? Goering: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Omitting the first paragraph, unless you are to give it. Is that correct? Goering: It says so in the letter, a copy of which is before me.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Terboven remained after that report until 1945, didn't he? Goering: That's correct.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, later in the same year, 1942, you adopted very similar means to those reported by Terboven to you, did you not? Goering: I did not understand the question.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well you adopted later in the same year the same means as Terboven, didn't you? Goering: I? Where?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, I will ask that you be shown Document 1742-PS. [Document 1742-PS was submitted to the witness.] Now, this is a decree of 26 October 1942, by Goering. I ask you to follow me: Is that right? Goering: Absolutely. It concerns areas overrun by guerrillas, and no one could expect me to leave cattle and foodstuffs at their disposal. Furthermore, people who were repeatedly being incited to guerrilla activities and revolts against us had to be brought back to safe areas and put to work. I would like to emphasize that this was absolutely vital for the security of the troops. But I may emphasize again that you said I gave the same orders which you read from Terboven's letter. I did not order villages to be burned, and did not order the shooting of hostages. This was something basically different.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You simply seized all the men, women and children and moved them out. That is what I referred to. By May of 1944 your problem in the loss of fighter aircraft and fighter personnel was becoming serious? Goering: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: On the 19th of May, 1944, you had a conference in your office, on the subject of fighter aircraft and the losses of fighter personnel, did you not? Goering: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And you have been shown the minutes of that meeting and authenticated them in your interrogations? Goering: It is not the minutes of that conference. It is a short and brief summary by an officer of a meeting which, as far as I know, lasted 2 days.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I will ask to have you shown Document L-166. It is entitled, "Most Secret Document," isn't it? Goering: That is correct.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And it is also entitled, "Minutes of conference on fighter aircraft with the Reich Marshal on 15 and 16 May 1944." That is correct, too, is it not? Goering: No, it says, "Notices of a conference on fighter aircraft at the Reich Marshal's on 15 and 16 May 1944."
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: "Notices," you translate it "notices"? Goering: It says "memorandum" here and that is the original.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: "Notes of Conference on Fighter Aircraft." Goering: Lasting 2 days.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Yes. And at first General Galland described in detail the situation regarding fighter personnel. That took place, didnt it, and he reviewed the losses? Goering: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And reviewed the losses? Goering: That is right.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And then he reviewed at some length under Item 2, "Remedial Measures," is that right? Goering: According to the memorandum, yes, but whether that actually took place I cannot say.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: This conference took place, didn't it? Goering: Absolutely, 2 days.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And under Item 3 General Galland made certain proposals, did he not? Goering: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And then after considerable discussion General Schmidt made certain proposals, Items 12 and 13, is that right? Goering: It must have been so. At any rate it says so according to the memorandum.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You recommended a conference between the chief of the General Staff and the chief of artillery, as soon as possible, did you not? Item 13? Goering: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And General Schmidt's recommendations and requests appear in Items 14 and 15 and 16 and 17 and 18? Goering: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Then you decided: That occurred, did it not? Goering: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Then: Number 19. That occurred, did it not? Goering: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Item 20 reads: Have I correctly read that? Goering: It says so here. And I objected at once at that time that this was not correct. This passage has no connection at all with the context of these notes, 19-21. Besides the expression "soldiers hanging to parachutes" is entirely misleading and not commonly used. I thought for a long time about how this could have got into the notes, which I never saw and which were drawn up over a period of 2 days, and can only find the explanation that I pointed out -- as can be gathered from the other evidence -- that around that time the Fuehrer gave a directive in that connection, and that in any event there must be a mistake; that is, it should not be that the Reich Marshal wants to propose, et cetera , to the Fuehrer, but that I might have suggested that the Fuehrer had some such intention. But about this the author of these notes would have to be consulted. No other item in all these notes refers to this. Even the next item is entirely different. Whereas everything else stands in relationship, this one point is extraneous.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: In all the notes of the 2 days, this is the one thing that you say is mistaken. Now I ask to have you shown Document 731-PS. [Document 731-PS was submitted to the witness.] Now, the conference, the notes of which I have just read you, was followed within a week by the order, 731-PS, was it not, the memorandum, 731-PS, which reads:
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Justice Jackson, shouldn't you refer to a passage four lines above that, after "Report of the Reich Marshal"?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I did not, but perhaps for the record it ought to be in full. Now, there is a note: "In the event of low-level aerial attacks on individual civilians, single civilian vehicles, and so forth," is there not? Goering: On mycopy, "In the event of low-level aerial attacks on single" -- "single" is crossed out here and there are two words written above which I cannot read. Before the expression, "single vehicles," is the word "civilian" and referring to Point 2, it says: We are concerned with the entire series of questions discussed in these days and weeks and to which Von Brauchitsch also testified recently.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: That note about that emergency landing is signed by "J," isn't it, which, stands for "Jodl"? Goering: Certainly.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I think that is all I care to ask. There are a number of documents which should be introduced in this connection, and I think it will be best perhaps if we tabulate them and get them ready over the evening and present them in the morning.
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly, Mr. Justice Jackson, you can put them all in then.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I want to ask you first some questions about the matter of the British Air Force officers who escaped from Stalag Luft III. Do you remember that you said in giving your evidence that you knew this incident very completely and very minutely? Do you remember saying that? Goering: No -- that I had received accurate knowledge; not that I had accurate knowledge -- but that I received it.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: 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? Goering: Yes, that is what I meant; that I know about the incident exactly, but only heard of it 2 days later.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: You told the Tribunal that you were on leave at this time, in the last period of March 1944, is that right? Goering: Yes, as far as I remember I was on leave in March until a few days before Easter.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: And you said, "As I can prove." I want you to tell the Tribunal the dates of your leave. Goering: I say again, that this refers to the whole of March -- I remember it well -- and for proof I would like to mention the people who were with me on this leave. 2O MarCh 46
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: What I want to know is, where you were on leave. Goering: Here, in the vicinity of Nuremberg.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: So you were within easy reach of the telephone from the Air Ministry or, indeed, from Breslau, if you were wanted? Goering: I would have been easily accessible by phone if someone wanted to communicate with me.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I want you to help me with regard to one or two other dates of which you have spoken. You say: "I heard 1 or 2 days later about this escape." Do you, understand, Witness, that it is about the escape I am asking you, not about the shooting, for the moment; I want to make it quite clear. Goering: It is clear to me.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-YYFE: Did you mean by that, that you heard about the actual escape 1 or 2 days after it happened? Goering: Yes.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Did you hear about it from the office of your adjutant or from your director of operations? Goering: I always heard these things through my adjutant. Several other escapes had preceded this one.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Yes, that's right. There had been a number of escapes from this camp. Goering: I cannot tell you exactly whether they were from this camp. Shortly before several big escapes had taken place, which I always heard of through the office of my adjutant.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: 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? Goering: General Korten was chief of staff at that time.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Can you tell us the date at which he made this communication to you? Goering: No, I cannot tell you that exactly. I believe I discussed this incident with my chief of staff later, telling him what I had already heard about it from other sources.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Who was the first to tell you about it? Was it your chief of staff who told you about the shootings? Do you mean that some one else had told you about the shooting? Goering: I cannot say exactly now whether I heard about the shooting from the chief of staff, or from other sources. But in any event I discussed this with the chief of staff.