dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
JUETTNER: I assume that primarily it is the practical activity of the SA which is meant. These things which the SA did in the past can be judged correctly only if we bear in mind the situation that existed at the time. It cannot be judged according to the picture which has been formed now as a result of the war. The situation which prevailed in Germany at the time, if I am correctly informed, Mr. President, has been sufficiently described in this courtroom. But I should like to emphasize that the German male population of that day had been physically very much run-down because of the prevailing distress. They were hardly fit for training, much less for efficient service, even in their professions. The degree of their physical fitness and morale had reached a frightfully low level, and the only aspiration of the SA was to contribute to the development in Germany once more of a physically efficient, brave, and reliable body of men, suitable for service, who would-be ready and willing to serve the Fatherland in all emergencies. In 1933 Germany was threatened with civil war and revolts. Behind us we had the Polish insurrections. Because of her central position Germany, more than other countries, was intent on the protection of her boundaries, and necessarily so; and finally, this country, which is so poor in raw materials, was forced to prevent natural catastrophes by all possible means so that greater damage would be averted. For that purpose a well-trained, healthy body of men was necessary who were physically able and ready for military service. The SA had set itself the task of training these men.
HERR BOEHM: Did the SA, until the outbreak of war, believe in peace, and how could you prove that this belief of the SA in a peaceful development actually did exist?
JUETTNER: The SA truly did not want a war. Hundreds of thousands of former combat soldiers of the first World War were in the SA. These men were familiar with war and its unspeakable sacrifices. They did not want war. For the sake of their country's life, but also for the sake of their own existence, they wanted a peaceful development. In 1939, until the days of August, until the end of August they were ... I myself was busy here in Nuremberg as parade leader for the Reich Party Rally, to prepare the games and the big military review for the Reich Party Rally. They did not think of war, they were not enthusiastic about the war, rather did it strike them with dismay. We always believed in peace, because of many historical events in the past: the naval agreement with England, treaties with Poland, trade agreements with other states, friendly relations with the southeastern states of Europe, and above all, the events of international reconciliation at the Olympic Games in 1936. We believed in peace because of the co-operation between the veterans' organizations of the European countries, which was always strongly supported by the SA; because of the constantly increasing understanding between the youth associations of the various states; because of the regular international labor meetings at Hamburg. We knew of the friendly courtesy visits which the great statesmen of other European nations paid to Adolf Hitler, we were acquainted with the publication of prominent foreigners about the Third Reich, and finally it was the Munich Agreement, which we took up and welcomed with enthusiasm, which seemed to assure peace.
HERR BOEHM: Did the SA leadership have 'any influence on politics?
JUETTNER: After the death of R6hm none at all. The SA was completely unsuited for exerting any influence on politics, both by its organization and its leadership. Even the misuse of the SA for war-mongering purposes was quite out of the question. Militarism such as the glorification of military activities, uniforms, drilling, jingoism, or the creation of a warlike spirit, was never approved by the SA; Röhm's attitude toward neighboring countries and Lutze's attitude toward war in general, in themselves speak for that.
HERR BOEHM: Would the SA have had to follow an order for war propaganda?
JUETTNER: I have already declared in my interrogation before the Commission that the SA did not observe any blind obedience. Demands for war propaganda never reached the SA from any quarter. Consequently the SA never carried on any war propaganda, either in its courses or in the training of its units.
HERR BOEHM: A few days ago the Prosecution placed an affidavit by Prime Minister Dr. Wilhelm Högner, among other things, in my mail box, and since I have no other opportunity to define my attitude as to this affidavit except here and now, I should like to put a few questions to you dealing with these matters. This affidavit states: "As early as 1922-1 believe it was the so-called Coburg Convention-the SA dominated the streets with its armed bands and attacked the peaceful population, especially political..."
THE PRESIDENT: [Interposing.]: Is the affidavit in evidence?
HERR BOEHM: This affidavit was put in my mail box 3 days ago. I would have no reason to present this affidavit, Mr. President, but since I received it ...
THE PRESIDENT: I asked you a perfectly simple question. Cannot you give me an answer to it? I asked you if it was in evidence.
HERR BOEHM: This document has not been submitted in evidence, Mr. President, but I shall not have another possibility of commenting on this document from any aspect if I do not take advantage of this opportunity.
THE PRESIDENT: Either you want to put it in evidence or you do not. If the document is not yet in evidence there is no need to go into it.
HERR BOEHM: No, I only wanted to ask a few questions based on this document.
THE PRESIDENT: You cannot do that until you have put the document in evidence. If you want to put it in evidence, then you must put it in evidence. If you do not want to, then-just listen to me. It is not true to say that you had no opportunity of dealing with the document. You can deal with it in re-examination. If the document is put it in cross-examination you can deal with it then. Otherwise, if you want to put it in evidence now, subject to, its admissibility, you can do it and take the responsibility for it.
HERR BOEHM: Yes, that would be true if this affidavit were submitted in cross-examination, but it is not ...
THE PRESIDENT: If it is not submitted we shall not look at it, we shall not know anything about it.
HERR BOEHM: Mr. President, I gather from that that if this affidavit is not submitted in cross-examination, it cannot be submitted afterwards either. Then the procedure is quite clear and I do not need to have anyone comment on it.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. At any rate, if there was an application by the Prosecution to submit the affidavit in rebuttal you would have an opportunity of answering it after that, in these circumstances.
HERR BOEHM: Then I should like to ask the Tribunal to permit me to call the witness whom I had provided for that and who is now on the witness stand, so that I might interrogate him about the contents of this affidavit.
THE PRESIDENT: No, either you put it in evidence yourself now or else you wait for re-examination. Sir David, I do not know -what all this is about. Dr. Böhm. does not seem to know what the position is.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, it may be-I did not quite catch the name of the deponent, but it may be that this is one of the affidavits with regard to which I applied to the Tribunal a day or two ago, and I was going to put them in after the Defense's documents in general rebuttal. Yes, My Lord, it is an affidavit from the Prime Minister of Bavaria, which is one of those I mentioned to the Tribunal a few days ago.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, you can put it in on cross-examination, can you not?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, I can quite easily.
THE PRESIDENT: Would that not be the most convenient course; then Dr. Böhm can re-examine upon it.  He has had an opportunity, apparently, of looking at it.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Yes, My Lord, I will do that.
HERR BOEHM: Mr. President, the thing I wanted to avoid is the situation which would have arisen if the document had been submitted after the testimony of my last witness so that I would not have had another opportunity to refute this document. Herr Jöttner, now I should like to put my final question to you. Did the political aims of the SA have a criminal character?
JUETTNER: The things which the SA did and the aims which its leaders pursued need never fear the light of day. The SA leadership did not pursue any criminal aims and did not even know of any criminal aims of any other agencies. The SA, as an organization, never carried out any actions which could justify its defamation as a criminal organization. The SA, Mr. President, had many followers in the Reich, that is, in the former Reich, and even beyond its boundaries. The SA had opponents as well. Many of these opponents raised their voices, and out of hate or envy created prejudices against the SA. Not the truth-only prejudices of the kind which, as is well known in history, have caused the downfall of many a brave man, could lead to a situation where five or six million men who belonged to the SA in the last two and a half decades would be stamped as criminals.
HERR BOEHM: Mr. President, I have no further questions.
JUETTNER: For these men, for these five or six million men and for the many millions in their families, I can solemnly declare under oath that the SA never had a criminal character. Mr. President, my entire life has been guided by the rule that one should stand by whatever one has done, whatever the risk may be, and fear nothing, not even death itself, save only dishonor. I consider it to be dishonorable to evade responsibility by putting an end to one's life, or to become untruthful. In this respect, Mr. President, my conscience is clear. Therefore, with my declaration on the blamelessness of the SA I can stand in front of the Highest Judge.
BERR BOEHM: Mr. President, I have no further questions to put to the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Does the Prosecution desire to cross-examine?
SIR DAVID MAXVVELL-FYFE: Do you say, Witness, that the SA had nothing to do with atrocities against the people of the occupied territories?
JUETTNER: I do not quite understand the last part of your question. Atrocities?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Against the people of the territories occupied by Germany, foreign territories occupied by Germany?
JUETTNER: The SA leadership ...
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: That is a perfectly simple question. You have made your speeches. Now answer (4yes" or "no" to the question that the SA had anything to do with the atrocities against the people of the occupied territories.
JUETTNER: It is my intention to give a true answer; therefore, I cannot have anybody prescribe what I am to answer ...
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Can't you answer "yes" or "no"?
THE PRESIDENT: You can explain afterwards, you know. If you answer "yes" or "no," you can then give your explanation.
JUETTNER: The SA had nothing to do with the treatment of peoples of occupied countries.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I see. Well, now, I want you to look -at your report on the SA during the war, which the High Tribunal will find in Document Book 16-B, at Page 113. . My Lord, it is Number 4011-PS, and will become Exhibit GB-596. Now, Witness, just before you look at that, do you remember saying before the Commission: "At the beginning of the war with Poland the SA Group Sudeten carried out transports of prisoners of war into the camps. Other SA groups in the East may have been used for similar purposes later on. The SA leadership and the SA as an organization had nothing to do with this question." Do you remember saying that? Page 336 of the transcript. One of your groups carried out transports of prisoners of war into camps and other SA groups may have been used for similar purposes. Do you remember saying that to the Commissioner? If you would take your mind from the document and just address it to the point as to whether you said that before the Commission, it would help. Do you remember saying that before the Commission?
JUETTNER: I admitted before the Commission and I will not deny today, that the SA Group "Sudeten," on instructions from the Wehrmacht, transported prisoners of war to the rear in the Polish campaign. But, Mr. Prosecutor, you asked me before about the treatment of the population in the occupied countries.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I got your answer to that. We must take it by stages. You admit you said that before the Commission, that "the 'Sudeten' Group carried out transports of prisoners of war into camps. Other SA groups in the East may have been used for similar purposes." Do you remember saying that. I am only putting in the record what you said. You admit you said it?
JUETTNER: I have already said that.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Right. Now, let's look at your report. This is a report made by you on 23 June 1941, and you see that after a general paragraph-My Lord, if you would turn to Page 116, it is Page 4 of the original document; and, Witness, if you would go on to the heading "Section 4 A"-you say: "The SA men who have remained in the communications zone primarily care for the maintenance of the SA organization. All units, even the smallest ones, are active, and the men willingly sacrifice their spare time for duty in the Party. This includes assistance to the political leaders in the educational and orientation tasks, propaganda and counter-propaganda, preparations for meetings, control of the population in the frontier areas." Is that correct, what you wrote in 1941?
JUETTNER: It is exactly -true. The communications zone is of course the homeland, not occupied territories.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Turn to Page 117 of the English version, My Lord. I think it is Page 123, Witness, of your version. Have you got 123? It is Page 5 of the original. It is the next page, Page 5. You see under "C": "The duty achievements of the SA, which deal with direct support of the Armed Forces and which benefit the power of German arms, have developed in all directions. At the time this report is written or in the previous weeks the following were employed: ... SA men from 21 groups for guarding prisoners." Where were the 21 groups guarding prisoners?
JUETTNER: In the Reich area during the Polish campaign.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: This is 1941, the Polish campaign had been finished for nearly 21 months. You see, you say that that is at the time the report is written, or in the previous few weeks where were they guarding the prisoners then?
JUETTNER: This report is a summary of the activity of the SA during the war from the very beginning, and everything of a positive nature-which the SA had also done earlier is enumerated there again.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Did you not hear what I put to you, and can you not read your own report? This says: "At the time this report is written, or in the previous few weeks..." that is, ,in June 1941. It says they were guarding prisoners. I am asking you, where were they guarding prisoners?
JUETTNER: That must not be taken to mean that 21 SA groups were used to guard prisoners of war; it only says there that 21 groups have detailed SA men ...
THE PRESIDENT: The question was: Where did you say they were guarding prisoners? There is nothing about the number 21. Where was it that they were guarding prisoners?
JUETTNER: In prisoner-of-war camps in the Reich area, where individual SA men were drafted into the Wehrmacht for a short term, for the purpose of guarding prisoners of war.
THE PRESIDENT: What do you mean by the Reich area? Do -you mean Germany as it was before the war again?
JUETTNER: Yes. It is possible that there were also prisoner-of-war camps in West Prus sia and the Government General. However, that escapes my knowledge.
THE PRESIDENT: And in the Baltic provinces?
JUETTNER: I know nothing about that.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Well, we can refresh your memory in just a moment. Not to leave this document, if you will look at the next page, on page ...
THE PRESIDENT: Before you pass on to that...
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: If Your Lordship pleases.
THE PRESIDENT: The passage just before. "B," perhaps you ought to put it to him.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I am ready for it, Your Lord-ship. [Turning to the witness.] If you will look just before "B," you will see the words "Numerous SA leaders and sub-leaders were furnished to the German Labor Front for duty in the Todt Organization"; is that right?
JUETTNER: May I ask again what page that is?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: It is about ten lines before the bit I put to you about the 21 groups guarding the camps. It says: "Numerous SA leaders. and sub-leaders were furnished to the German Labor Front for duty in the Todt Organization."
JUETTNER: We did give men to the Organization Todt for labor, but they resigned from the SA when they went.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Were they looking for forced labor?
JUETTNER: No, we gave them to the Organization Todt, and they were thereby withdrawn from the authority of the SA.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Now, would you look at Page 6 of the original, and you will see a heading, "The premilitary training."  Now, you see what is said there, and this is the second year of the war.  This is the second paragraph, after the one dealing with the SA war defense groups: "This educational work is primarily to assist the fighting spirit, to retain and fortify the willingness to fight, and to harden the National Socialist community idea in German men to become an uncompromising testimonial to their comradeship in arms." Then you give an account of the training, including "signals and target practice, instruction and practice in handling rifles, as well as shooting on the range and in the field, and furthermore throwing hand-grenades," and ~o on. Now, Witness, you are very familiar with these complications. I suggest to you that that training which is set out in your third report in the second year of the war is exactly the same training as is set out in your reports in the training directives of 1934, 1938, and 1939. It is the same training as the SA had been giving to its membership for the last 7 years, almost word for word, isn't it? Isn't that exactly the same words contained in all your training directives?
JUETTNER: No, that is not correct.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: All right.
JUETTNER: Before the war...
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I will put the training directives in in due course. That is your answer, you say that it is not the same. I suggest that that is a deliberate untruth, and that this report covers the same ground, -using practically the same language as your reports in 1934, '38-your training directives in '34, '38, and '39. Now, consider that that is all; I want the Tribunal to be able to test your veracity: do you still say that that report is not the same as the SA training directives in '34, '38, and '39? Do you or do you not?
JUETTNER: The important thing is how this service was organized, and the service..-.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I am not asking you how the service was handled. I am asking you on the contents of the training directives, and I am putting to- you a perfectly clear question. Isn't' the training contained in this report, two years after the beginning of the war, exactly the same as the training laid down in the training directives of the years '34, '38, and '39? Now, do you want to maintain your answer that it isn't?
JUETTNER: Before the war we did not conduct any premilitary or postmilitary training. During the war we did everything to strengthen the armed power of the German people. I cannot answer any differently about this. Consequently, I must arrive at a "no," for what is set down here is something different from what we did in practice before the war.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: All right. That's your answer. In time I shall put the directives before the Tribunal and they shall judge them. Now, turn over to Page 15 of the original. My Lord, that is Page 127 of the book. Now, do you see the heading, "Work done by SA in regained territories"? You got that, Page 15?
JUETTNER: Yes.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: "Work done by the SA in regained territories. The two SA groups 'Vistula,' with headquarters at Danzig, and 'Warthe' with headquarters at Posen, were formed in the East. The territory of Upper Silesia was assigned to unit Silesia, the territory of Memel and Suwalki to the Baltic provinces (Ostland) unit." I ask you to notice that "Ostland unit." "Very soon the SA units formed a network of solid strong points for the National Socialist movement. The Vistula unit comprises 15 Standarten with 507 companies (Stilrme), the Warthe unit 28 Standarten counting 684 companies. In these regions, as in the period of combat"-note these words-"as in the period of combat, the SA was the assault unit for the Party. It assists in collecting German manpower, in strengthening it and bringing it into alignment according to National Socialist principles. In that respect it was often necessary to start by teaching the German language and then explaining the basic ideas of National Socialism. Many young racial Germans were trained as SA assistant leaders in SA schools. In these regions also the SA service, practically speaking, is directed towards strengthening the defensive forces. It was therefore necessary to overcome the inferiority complexes of the racial Germans, the result of Polish suppression, and to bring their external appearance and bearing into keeping with SA standards. Then only was it possible to begin the real military training. The work of the SA in the West is also similar to that in the East. There it was possible in a short time to bring into the SA an important part of the male population through the recruiting of former German soldiers of the World War. The leaders of the 'Standarten' are predominantly Reich German SA -leaders. The 'Sturmbanne' and 'Störme' are practically without exception led by Alsatians who have received special training in a special SA school in the Reich.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Reich German SA leaders and men stand at their side to advise and help." Well, now I am going to ask you quite a lot about the East, but I will just leave the West with this one question. Did you mean by that paragraph that the SA was doing its best to help in the Germanization of Alsace?
JUETTNER: The SA built up its organization there and tried to train the men to acquire the decency and outward bearing and character in keeping with the SA. The question of Germanization, et cetera, played no role in our work.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I would like you to look at the, procedure. "The Chief of Staff... that was Lutze in 1941, he was still alive then; in the next paragraph, it states, "The Chief of Staff visited these territories in the East and West, and gained a clear insight into the service, not only in the main cities, but particularly in the small and smallest garrisons of the SA." Did the Chief of Staff take his deputy with him on any one of these visits, that is, yourself?
JUETTNER: I was with him once in the East, but not in the West.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Perhaps you were fortunate that you went into the Eastern territory. Did you ever go to Vilna?
JUETTNER: No.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Let me see if you can help us from your immense knowledge of the SA, which you spoke of this morning. Did you know an SA officer called Hinkst, who was the staff commandant at Vilna?
JUETTNER: What is the name?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Hinkst.
JUETTNER: No, I do not know him.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Just think. You say you don't remember him, the town commissioner at Vilna?
JUETTNER: No.