dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, I believe that I will certainly need a day. Please consider the following: The American Prosecution used 2 days to present their evidence. The Russian Prosecution used many days for their evidence against the General Staff. Now, having faced considerable difficulties in procuring evidence within the framework assigned to me, I do not believe I am asking for too much when I say I need a day, which is a fraction of the time which the Prosecution used to present the evidence against the General Staff.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Laternser, you are leaving out of consideration altogether the fact that we have set up these Commissions and the fact that you have been before these Commissions not only for one day but for many days
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, I presented the affidavits to the Commission, but this was more a matter of form. The purpose of my presentation of evidence is to bring it into a certain order, so that the Court may see to what points of the Indictment the individual affidavits are to apply.
MR.DODD: Mr. President, I'd like to point out to the Tribunal that Dr. Laternser spent between 9 and 10 days before the Commission on the General Staff; and, of course, he called witnesses here in the courtroom as well; two, I believe, or three-I've forgotten the number.
DR.LATERNSER: Mr. President, that was not quite correct. I used several days to examine witnesses, but not to present documents; and I must be in a position to present this written evidence to the Court in a certain order. Otherwise it cannot be effective.
THE PRESIDENT: You say you are not in a position to present it in a certain order. Well, nobody wishes you to present the affidavits in the order in which they are numbered on the document; but you can group them, presumably, unless they all deal with different subjects. I rather gather that you have a very great number of affidavits; and I feel quite certain that a great many of them deal with the same topic; and, therefore, in a very short time-probably in the course of an hour-anybody could go through that list of affidavits and could see which affidavits -relate to the same subject and could, therefore, group them. It is perfectly simple; and the Tribunal will not under any circumstances be prepared to have their time taken up for longer than half a day in the presentation of documents by your organization or by any other organization.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, may I say something else on this point?
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Laternser.
DR. LATERNSER: I ask the Court to consider that the Russian Prosecution used several days to bring the most serious charges against the military leadership; and I ask that I may have approximately the same opportunity to answer these charges ...
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Laternser, Mr. Dodd has just pointed out that you have been before the Commission for 9 or 10 days; and you have already spent 2 days here. We have the very able and laborious work which has been performed by these Commissioners all before us in writing. I have before me at this moment a document. I don't know whether it -is in consecutive numbers-not quite consecutive numbers-but at any rate it goes up to the number of 3,172 affidavits which have been summarized. I say not consecutive numbers, but at any rate a bundle this thick of affidavits, which have been summarized in writing by these Commissioners. You counsel for the organizations have had the opportunity of reading the report which has been made by the principal Commissioner on these affidavits, and have, as I understand, not commented adversely upon any remark in that report. All these matters are before the Tribunal; and in my opinion the Tribunal have granted to the organizations the fullest possible and most adequate opportunity of being heard before the Tribunal; and the Tribunal think that they have heard enough on this subject; and they adhere to the decision which I have announced . All right, Dr. Pelckmann.
HERR PELCKMANN: May it please the Tribunal, I shall now give a short presentation of the last group of individual affidavits. First I present Affidavit Number 108.
MR. DODD: Mr. President, I am sorry to interrupt, but we are a little bit confused. Sir David and I both feel that there may be some misunderstanding about the position of Dr. Pelckmann. We are rather of the opinion, from listening to him, that he means that he will be ready only to submit his speech for translation on Monday, and we wondered if the Tribunal did not understand him to say that he would be ready to make his speech on Monday, and there would be a spread there of 3 days.
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly, the way I understood you, Dr. Pelckmann, was that you would be prepared to make your speech on Monday; not that it would necessarily come on Monday because, of course, Dr. Servatius' speech will come before yours. Presumably, unless you make other arrangements amongst yourselves, the speeches will be made in the order in which the documents and the witnesses have been presented. Doubtless you can make arrangements among yourselves-which the Tribunal will only be too glad to assent to-if one is ready and the other is not, but they will expect that there will be no delay.
HERR PELCKMANN: I believe, Your Lordship, that that will be all right. As stated in the letter, we will present the manuscripts for translation and mimeographing by the end of the week. If, for example, I turn it in on Friday afternoon, I believe I can speak on Monday afternoon or Tuesday morning.
THE PRESIDENT: Wait a minute. That is all very well, but the Translating Division are human, and I don't see any reason why they should work on Sundays. I may be wrong, but I think I remember that you have assistants who are helping you and who presumably have been helping you ever since the 15th of August, on which day this document was presented. As I pointed out already, that is 6 days ago. Some parts of the speech ought to be ready now and ought to be in the hands of the Translating Division. I see by the list that has just been handed to me that you have four assistants, or that Dr. Babel has four assistants and four secretaries, and that you have one associate counsel and a secretary. I don't understand why the speech, or some parts of it, should not have been handed to the Translating Division already, and the same with the other counsel appearing on behalf of the organizations.
HERR PELCKMANN: But we are still in the presentation of evidence, Mr. President. So far it has not been possible for me to prepare a complete plea before the end of the presentation of evidence, even after all my practical experience. But may I make a suggestion, Mr. President? I can turn in the manuscript of my plea for the Translating Division on Friday afternoon, and I can probably hand in a considerable part of it before that time.
THE PRESIDENT: All I am prepared to say is this, that I will not, on behalf of the Tribunal, order the Translating Division to work any more than the officer in command of that division thinks proper; and the Tribunal expects that the speeches will go on without any delay. Is that clear?
HERR PELCKMANN: I was just dealing with SS Affidavit Number 108. From this it can be seen that the SS had nothing to do with the drive for the seizure of manpower. Affidavits Numbers 102 and 103 prove that the so-called "Voluntary Self-Protection," 'abbreviated "FS"-which the Prosecution considers a Fifth Column-in Slovakia and the Sudetenland had no connection with the SS and was never armed. Affidavits Numbers 106 and 111 deal with the nature of the organizational book of the NSDAP and with that of the NS Year-Book. The Prosecution quotes from these books to prove official opinions of the Party. These affidavits, however, state that the organizational book and the NS Year-Book were not official publications and that they are therefore no proof for organizational questions. SS Affidavit Number 109 deals with the charge of the Prosecution that SS men were protected by the regime when they committed crimes. It proves that when SS members committed punishable actions, before the establishment of the SS courts in 1939, that the SS officers saw to it that no difficulties were put in the way of the regular course of justice inasmuch as these actions became known. Finally, there is a last group, Affidavits Numbers 90, 30, 91, and 92. Affidavit Number 30 is available only in the French translation. It is an answer to the assertion of the Prosecution that the -whole SS organization and its members knew, or must have known, that the SS was a criminal organization. The affidavits state, to mention an example, that there were particularly good relations between the Foreign Diplomatic Corps and the SS, so that the SS members who heard about that could not assume that this organization was criminal. Now I wish to deal briefly with the affidavits which I mentioned at the beginning, and of which no digest is available
THE PRESIDENT: What did you mean by saying that there was a group, which I took down as being 90, 31 or 30, or possibly both of them, and 92? By the document which is before me, Affidavits Numbers 90, 91, and 92 have been withdrawn. Is that a mistake?
HERR PELCKMANN: I had made application in the Commission to have them admitted, and the Prosecution did not want to have them admitted. As far as I can recall, no decision was reached by the Commission and it was postponed. However, I heard 2 days ago that Colonel Neave, who was presiding in the Commission at that time, said that they had definitely not been admitted. That is new to me. If this should be the case, then I would ask for a decision of the Tribunal whether these affidavits can be admitted. This decision need not be given at once.
THE PRESIDENT: You just cited them as a group. Have they got any relations to Number. 30? Number 30, you say, relates to the relationship between the SS and the Foreign Diplomatic Corps. Do' 90 and 92 relate to that?
HERR PELCKMANN: Yes, 30 was approved and is available in the French translation. The English translation ...
THE PRESIDENT: We can take it then, and we will consider the application. We can take it that 90 and 92 deal with the same subject, is that right?
HERR PELCKMANN: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: That's quite sufficient. I don't want any more.
HERR PELCKMANN: Now I shall deal again with Affidavits 68, 64, and 69. 1 must refute the assertion of the Prosecution that illtreatment, individual killings, and mass exterminations in the concentration' camps can be charged against the SS as a whole because, as the Prosecution asserts, they were known to most of the SS men. The very important and elucidating records of the trials of the Allied Military Courts against members of the concentration camp administrations and against guards-for example, the trials at Belsen, Mauthausen, Dachau, Neuengamme, Celle, and Rastatt-I was not able to obtain. A systematic examination of the witnesses and a part of the affidavits from the camps made it possible for me to ascertain facts sufficient to refute the assertion of the Prosecution. On 29 January, the President said that witnesses and evidence from the Defense were especially expected to be forthcoming on the point concerning concentration camps. The President said on the same day, in answer to a question by the French Prosecutor Dubost as to whether the Court was convinced that the same terrible conditions prevailed in all camps which two witnesses had testified to: "If you want to prove that, Mr. Dubost, it is necessary to call a witness from each of the hundreds of camps." I refer to the transcript. Therefore, for purposes of defense, I have a number of affidavits from guards, members of the administrations, and inmates of camps, and also from visitors to the concentration camps. I have submitted them as counter-evidence. Now, I refer only to an affidavit which seems very important to me, Number 68.
THE PRESIDENT: Now, why do you not tell us which the affidavits are, that is what we want you to do. You are telling us no and referring to some statement I made in January, that you have got affidavits made from each camp. Well, what are the affidavits? It is quite easy to tell us what the groups are, is it not?
HERR PELCKMANN: These groups, Mr. President, I mentioned yesterday. I only wanted..
THE PRESIDENT: If You mentioned it yesterday, why do you go back to them today?
HERR PELCKMANN: In order to stress the importance of the Affidavit Number 68 which I am about to explain. It is an affidavit of a commandant of a concentration camp. I can understand that in view of the prevailing attitude the general feeling of the Court will be one of distrust toward this commandant. But nevertheless, I ask that this very detailed affidavit be read. It deals with organizational questions which are significant in respect to the question: Who was responsible for crimes and ill-treatment of inmates in concentration camps, and who could have had knowledge of them. For example, this affidavit explains the position of the Economic and Administrative Main Office, Amtsgruppe D. I ask you to pay attention to the fact that this office must not be confused with the Reich Security Main Office. Confusion has already occurred in summing up the testimony of witnesses before the Court. I should like to explain how important it is to re-examine the question of organization of the concentration camp system with the aid of this Document Number 68. But the other parts of this affidavit are also very important. The other important affidavits are Numbers 64 and 69. They are also testimonies of SS judges, who just like the witness Morgen had participated in the investigations against concentration camp criminals. From the witness Morgen himself there are the Affidavits Numbers 65, 66, and 67.
THE PRESIDENT: Why does he make two affidavits on one day?
HERR PELCKMANN: I did not understand Your Lordship.
THE PRESIDENT: I said, why does he make two affidavits on one day? Why not make one affidavit?
HERR PELCKMANN: During these days work piled up with examinations before the Commission and interrogations of witnesses. The witness Morgen arrived quite at the end. I had to see to it that the affidavits were presented as quickly as possible. For that reason...
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Go on.
HERR PELCKMANN: It is purely a technical reason, Your Lordship. These concentration camp investigations were, in my opinion, of great importance and very elucidating for the Court in judging the concentration camp system in general and determining the responsibility of the rest of the SS. Therefore, I ask that the affidavits of these two judges be added and closely examined. I will deal with them in my speech. Finally, I ask the Tribunal to note the whole of Affidavit Number 70, which has been translated completely and which comprises many pages. There is neither a French nor an English translation here at hand. This affidavit gives a cross-section from a camp with 2,800 SS inmates, and these inmates include members of the various offices, members of most of the Standarten of the General SS from all parts of Germany, and members of about 30 divisions, Oberkommandos, and replacement units of the Waffen-SS. In addition, this affidavit is a good cross-section of the members at various times which, according to the Court's decision of 14 January, should be a decisive factor. The highest ranks are not represented there; it is the so-called "little man" who is represented. From a similar point of view, and because this evidence of affidavits affects the great mass of the SS, I ask the Tribunal for a proper consideration and evaluation of the 136,000 affidavits of which I have made a digest. For the evaluation of the credibility of these affidavits, the fact is important that they were taken down at a very early date without juridical or any other explanations. The SS members commented only on one or several points which interested them I most. The fact that certain points are not mentioned in these affidavits is understandable because the ordinary SS man naturally had only a limited view and was not able to judge on many subjects. As a result they could not write anything on these points. Justice Jackson stated that the numerous affidavits of SS members were only evidence of their interest in their personal fate. But this digest is to refute that.
HERR PELCKMANN: The individual's range of view is generally limited, and since he cannot testify to more than he knows, these affidavits -through the sum of the individual viewpoints assume a great value which is important for me as counsel for the mass of the SS, not for their highest leaders. They give a clear picture of the impressions made on the masses by the teachings, the statements, and the speeches of the leaders, and what actions resulted therefrom. Only this picture, only this cross-section can show to what extent one can speak of collective criminality in the SS, if it is at all possible to say so juridically. These statements are also important for the question of conspiracy. I may point out that this digest has not yet been translated This digest consists of various groups. First, may I briefly touch upon Group I. It deals with the motives of volunteering for the SS distinction being made between joining the General SS and volunteering for the Waffen-SS before 1933 and after 1933. Of 12,749 affidavits, 12,671 say that the motives were idealism and patriotism alone for joining before 1933. 78 affidavits give various other motives such as transfer from other units, for example sometimes rural riding clubs were transferred into the SS cavalry, and so forth The fact that the motive for joining after the seizure of power is commented on only by 804 men proves that people did not join out of pure idealism and on a really voluntary basis to the same extent as before 30 January 1933. As for joining the Waffen-SS there are only a few affidavits. 0 488 men, 406 say that the Waffen-SS was a select and young troop Others say that they had to fulfil their military duties in any case and that they preferred the Waffen-SS. Many indicate that the Waffen-SS considered itself a fourth branch of the Wehrmacht. Many others indicate that they were racial Germans, and as I proved yesterday with the aid of documents, racial Germans could perform their military service only in the Waffen-SS.
HERR PELCKMANN: Some enlisted in the Waffen-SS because they wanted to be in the police service after the war. I have made a digest of Group II as to the question of legal compulsion for joining the General SS and drafting into the Waffen SS. 67 affidavits say that the assimilation into the Police brought them to a service rank in the General SS. The rest of the other affidavits are made by students and university teachers, or members of the postal guard, the Reich Food Estate, civil servants, Reich War Victims Care, and teachers. Also honorary 'leaders are in this group. Concerning the drafting into the Waffen-SS, there are 4,042 statements. 1,806 racial Germans and 1,826 transferred from other parts of the Wehrmacht or from the Police, that is, compulsorily ordered to join the Waffen-SS. The question of membership in the General SS among Waffen-SS members is of interest. According to these statistics there were 246 Waffen-SS members who were drafted into the Waffen-SS by the Wehrbezirkskommando, the district command of the normal Wehrmacht. Only one-fifth of them belonged to the General SS Of further significance is the following: As early as 1939 Wehrbezirkskommandos were drafting men for the Waffen-SS. The witness Brill has also spoken on this subject. And Wehrbezirkskommandos drafted men to guard concentration camps by drafting them into the Waffen-SS. Further, members of the Reich Labor Service were taken over compulsorily into the Waffen-SS. The concentration camp guards were supplied by the Labor Office; through so-called emergency drafting the Labor Office obtained the men for concentration camp guards, and there they were taken over forcibly into the Waffen-SS. Some minor points are the compulsory transfer of postal officials for the aid of the German Reich Post service at the front and for the SS Army Post. Group III includes in its first subsection all the affidavits dealing with the knowledge which the SS members had of the intentions of their leaders.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Pelckmann, are you still dealing with Group I?
HERR PELCKMANN: No, Your Lordship, I am on Group III. Group II...
THE PRESIDENT: Where did Group II begin?
HERR PELCKMANN: Group II began with the legal compulsion to 'join the General SS ...
THE PRESIDENT: You did not say so. As far as the translation came through to me, I have taken down all the numbers you have given, and I thought they were all in Group I.
HERR PELCKMANN: I beg your pardon. I thought I said it. Perhaps it did not get through.
THE PRESIDENT: Now you have got to Group III, have you?
HERR PELCKMANN: Yes. It deals with the training which the SS members received. 55,303 SS members state that in this training they had no indication of criminal aims. It was training for character, for decency, for comradeship, and exemplary conduct of life. It is noteworthy that none of the SS men in connection with the training mentions Hitler's book Mein Kampf. Statistics will prove that the mass of SS men did not read this book at all. 289 affidavits deal with the evaluation of the racial doctrine. 233 do not consider it conducive to racial hatred, to the desire to destroy other races, or to create a master race. They see therein only a demand for a separation of the races from one another. 57 affidavits see in the doctrine the purpose of selecting the best among the people. Various affidavits say that the racial doctrine included respect for other peoples. The problem of colonization and G6rmanization is not mentioned in any affidavit as a so-called training problem Many affidavits deal with the question of whether the General SS were trained as political soldiers. 20,010 affidavits are available on this subject. 15,461 ascribe no military character to the General SS. They give, for example, the following reasons: They never had any military training in the General SS. The ranks of the General SS were not recognized in the Wehrmacht. There were no arms or so-called tactical exercises; tactical discussions were f6rbidden. Shooting was done only with small-bore rifles. There were not enough rifles. 1,053 affidavits confirm the testimony of various witnesses here that during, the war service in the General SS no longer occurred at all, or only in exceptional cases; at the end, of the war there was none whatsoever. On the question of psychological preparation for war, 3,304 affidavits say that their authors did not think of war and did not believe in war. At the Junker schools, various affidavits say, rejection of war was taught, since it created a so-called negative counterselection.