dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
KALTENBRUNNER: No. I cannot admit that because I have had the feeling each time a document has been submitted to me today, that it could at first glance be immediately refuted by me in its most vital points. I ask, and I hope that the Tribunal will allow me, to refer to single points and to come into closer contact with individual witnesses, so that I may defend myself to the last. Throughout the preliminary interrogations your colleague has always adopted the attitude unjustly that I was refuting and opposing insignificant points. The conception of expeditious trial proceedings has been unknown to me in this form. Had he talked to me in broad lines about the ways to find out the real truth, I believe he would have sooner arrived at considerably larger and more important issues. I am perhaps the only defendant who, on receiving the Indictment and being asked, "Are you ready to make any further statements to the Prosecution," stated "Immediately," and I signed it-please produce the signature-"from today on after receiving the Indictment I am at the disposal of the Prosecution for any information. " Is it not so?. Please confirm it. That gentleman [pointing to an interpreter] interrogated me. I have always been ready, that is, during the last 5 months, to give information on any question, but I have not been asked any more.
THE PRESIDENT: You must try to restrain yourself. And when you see the light, speak slower. You know about the light, do you not?
COL. AMEN: Is it not a fact, Defendant, that on the occasion of your last interrogation you stated that you did not wish to be interrogated any more because the questions seemed to be designed to help the Prosecution rather than to help your case, and that you were told that in that event you would not be questioned any more; that you were also informed that there were other documents and other material with which you had not been confronted and that if you desired at any time to come back and be interrogated with respect to those matters, you should tell your lawyers so and send a note and that the interrogator would be very happy to continue interrogating you? Is that not a fact, "yes" or "no"?
KALTENBRUNNER: No, sir, that was not the case. I made that statement repeatedly when I was being interrogated on points of detail. It was in the evening and it was getting very late. I believe it was about 2000 hours; I can remember the room very welt I was led out of the room. This interpreter, whom I saw here this morning, I believe, was sitting at a long table with two or three other of finials. They said, "You have received the Indictment today," and I said, "Yes, I have." They said, "Are you aware that from now on you will have to speak with the General Secretary about your defense? Do you wish to be interrogated further?" To which I said, "Yes, certainly I am at your disposal at any time." Whereupon this officer here looked at me in a very startled manner, for he did not expect that answer from me; obviously all the others appeared to have said, "No, we are glad that these interrogations have come to an end and we can work now on our defense."
COL. AMEN: Now, Defendant, I want to read to you from your last interrogation. After a question as to whether the testimony was being helpful to you sufficiently so that you wanted to continue, you spoke as follows: "This would at least be as important for my defense as the material which is helping the Prosecutor's case and about which the Interrogator has asked me repeatedly; therefore, I have the feeling that I am still In the hands of the Prosecutor and not in the hands of a judge in charge of a preliminary hearing. As the Indictment has been served, I find myself now in a position where I can prepare my OWE defense, and I therefore do not find it proper that you continue to look for material which would incriminate me. Please do not regard this as any criticism or rebuttal, because I have never been informed about the procedure to be followed in these hearings and I do not know about it; but according to my knowledge of legal procedure this is incorrect. I have never been given the possibility of confronting other witnesses and of reminding them that this or that did not happen in this or that way, et cetera. "Question: Is your statement made in the form of an objection to further questioning? "Answer: If, as I stated it now, there is a possibility of my being confronted with witnesses and to do something about testimony in my favor, I would be very glad to continue, but even so I have the feeling that it would be better to do this during the evidence at the Trial itself. I believe I should discuss this first with my defense counsel. "Question: Well, if there is any question in your mind about whether you should go further in any interrogation by the Office of Chief of Counsel, or the U.S. representative to the International Military Tribunal, I think you should talk to your counsel, too. You have never been under any compulsion to answer either before or since this Indictment was served. I think you will agree your treatment has been fair in all circumstances." Is that not correct?
KALTENBRUNNER: Yes, Mr. Prosecutor, it confirms exactly what I have been telling you. The material that you just read states that I did not agree that interrogations and discussions should be broken off suddenly. I said that I had never had any opportunity of speaking with the witnesses with whom I was confronted. It confirms that I have asked you to bring me face to face with the witnesses, so that I might talk with them. I do not deny at all that I also said that I was glad that now I could start preparing my defense. Actually, that is so. But I did not say in the course of such a lengthy statement-it has not been read to me-and worded as no other interrogation has been worded with the exception of perhaps two or three, that I no longer place myself at the disposal of the interrogator. I stated just the opposite and you read that, too, that I am at the disposal of the interrogator.
COL. AMEN: Defendant, let us get to the Warsaw Ghetto. Do you recall from the evidence before this Tribunal that some 400,000 Jews were first put into the ghetto and then in the final action SS troops cleared out about 56,000, of which more than 14,000 were killed. Do you recall that evidence?
KALTENBRUNNER: I do not recall any details of this statement; what I know about this matter, I have already stated today.
COL. AMEN: Did you know that substantially all of these 400,000 Jews were murdered at the extermination plant at Treblinka? Did you know that?
KALTENBRUNNER: No.
COL. AMEN: What did you have to do with the final razing of the Warsaw Ghetto, nothing as usual?
KALTENBRUNNER: I had nothing to do with it, as I already stated.
COL. AMEN: I ask to have the defendant shown Document Number 3840-PS, which will become Exhibit Number USA-803. [The document was submitted to the defendant.] Were you acquainted with Karl Kaleske?
KALTENBRUNNER: No, that name is not known to me.
COL. AMEN: Does it help you to remember if I suggest to you that he was the adjutant of General Stroop?
KALTENBRUNNER: I do not know the adjutant of General Stroop; the name which you just mentioned to me, "Kaleske," I do not know either.
COL. AMEN: Let us get to his affidavit. Have you got it before you now?
KALTENBRUNNER: Yes.
COL. AMEN: "My name is Karl Kaleske. I was adjutant to Dr. Von Sammern-Frankenegg from November 1942 until April 1943, while he was SS and Polizeifuehrer of Warsaw. I then became adjutant to SS and PolizeiFuehrer Stroop until August 1943. The action against the Warsaw Ghetto was planned while Von Sammern-Frankenegg was SS and Polizeifuehrer. General Stroop' took over the command on the day of the commencement of the action. The function of the Security Police during the action against the Warsaw Ghetto was to accompany the SS troops. A certain number of SS troops were assigned to the task to clear a certain street. With every SS group there were from four to six Security Policemen, because they knew the Ghetto very well. These Security Policemen were under Dr. Hahn, Commander of the Security Police of Warsaw. Hahn received his orders not from the SS and PolizeiFuehrer of Warsaw, but directly from Kaltenbrunner in Berlin. This applies not only to the Ghetto action but to all matters. Dr. Hahn frequently came to our office and told the SS and Polizeifuehrer that he had received such and such an order from Kaltenbrunner, about the contents of which he wanted to inform the SS and PolizeiFuehrer only. He would not do this for every order but only for certain ones. "I remember the case of 300 foreign Jews who had been collected in the Polski Hotel by the Security Police. At the end of the Ghetto action Kaltenbrunner ordered the Security Police to transport these people. During my time in Warsaw the Security Police were in charge of matters concerning the underground movement. The Security Police handled these matters independently of the SS and PolizeiFuehrer, and received their orders from Kaltenbrunner in Berlin. When the leader of the underground movement in Warsaw was captured, in June or July 1943, he was flown directly to Kaltenbrunner in Berlin." Are these statements true or false, Defendant?
KALTENBRUNNER: These statements are, without exception, wrong. I will...
COL. AMEN: Just like all the other statements of all the other persons that have been read to you today? Is that correct?
KALTENBRUNNER: This statement is not correct. It is not true and can be refuted.
COL. AMEN: That is what you have said about all the other statements I read to you today, is that not so?
KALTENBRUNNER: Mr. Prosecutor, I must...
COL. AMEN: Is that so?
KALTENBRUNNER: Yes. If you bring false accusations against me I must declare them to be false. I cannot say "yes" to everything of which you accuse me just because the Prosecution is wrong in determining who is Himmler's representative here.
COL. AMEN: All right, go ahead and say whatever you want.
KALTENBRUNNER: I ask you to bear in mind what I have said about the competency and rules regarding subordination of all Higher SS and Police Leaders in the occupied territories. All of them were directly subordinated to Himmler. The SS and Police Leaders of a smaller territory were subordinated to the Higher SS and the Police Leader. The branches of the Order Police and of the Security Police were assigned to these SS and Police Leaders, who had the exclusive right to give them orders. The entire organization which thus operated in the occupied territories was excluded from the command jurisdiction of the central of lice of the Reich. There are men here who can testify to the truth of what I have said. BACH-ZELEWSKI, who was questioned here, was only in the occupied territories and knows conditions there. There is also the Defendant Frank who had to work with such a Higher SS and Police Leader who later became his State Secretary.
COL. AMEN: Your lawyer can call these people. All I am asking you is whether or not this document is true or false and then asking you to make any brief pertinent explanation that you might wish to.
KALTENBRUNNER: This document is not correct. ..
COL. AMEN: We know about potential witnesses all over Germany, and we know all these defendants in the box have knowledge about most of these affairs, but that is not what I am asking you about. I am merely asking you whether what was in that paper was true or false and you have said it is false; now, is there anything else you feel you have to say about it?
KALTENBRUNNER: It is not correct and this witness does not know . . .
COL. AMEN: Well, you said that six times.
KALTENBRUNNER: . . . does not know the conditions.
COL. AMEN: Well, how about General Stroop? Did he know anything about it? 1Z April 46
KALTENBRUNNER: If he was SS and Police Leader of Warsaw -and you have also shown me his diary and his filmreport-then, of course, yes. Stroop was subordinated to the Higher SS and Police Leader of this place. Stroop had to carry out the action on the order coming from Himmler via the Higher SS and Police Leader.
COL. AMEN: Stroop was a pretty good friend of yours, was he not?
KALTENBRUNNER: I probably have not seen Stroop more than two or three times in my life, at Reichsfuehrer Himmler's.
COL. AMEN: Well, if Stroop were here he at least would be in a position to tell the truth, would he not, about this Warsaw Ghetto affair?
KALTENBRUNNER: He would have to confirm my statement at least that he was subordinated to the Supreme SS and Police Leader in the Government General and that he was not subordinated to me. I should be very glad if he could confirm that immediately. From your words I must assume that he is in custody here.
COL. AMEN: Well, he is not in custody here, but fortunately we have an affidavit from him on exactly these matters about which I have been questioning you. I ask to have the defendant shown Document Number 3841-PS, which will become Exhibit USA-804. We will find out whether Stroop confirmed what you are trying to tell the Tribunal. You will accept what Stroop says, will you, Witness? [The document was submitted to the defendant.]
KALTENBRUNNER: I have not read the document.
COL. AMEN: No; but I say, knowing Stroop and knowing the position which he held, you do not question but what he would tell the truth about the happenings in the Warsaw Ghetto, is that not what you have just said, in effect?
KALTENBRUNNER: The truth of a witness' testimony has been questioned before and rightly so. But as I do not know the document I cannot define my position as to Stroop's statement.
COL. AMEN: All right, we will read it: "My name is Jurgen Stroop. I was SS and PolizeiFuehrer of the Warsaw District from 17 or 18 April 1943, until the end of August 1943. The action against the Warsaw Ghetto was planned by my predecessor, SS Oberfuehrer Dr. Von Sammern-Frankenegg. On the day when this action started I took over the command and Von Sammern-Frankenegg explained to me what was to be done. He had the order from Himmler before him, and in addition I received a teletype from Himmler which ordered me to evacuate the Warsaw Ghetto and raze it to the ground. To carry this out, I had 2 battalions of Waffen-SS, 100 soldiers of the Wehrmacht, units of the Order Police and 75 to 100 men of the Security Police. The Security Police had been active in the Warsaw Ghetto for some time, and during this program it was their function to accompany SS units in groups of six or eight, as guides and experts in Ghetto matters. Obersturmbannfuehrer Dr. Hahn was Commander of the Security Police of Warsaw at that time. Hahn gave the Security Police their orders concerning their tasks in this action. These orders were not given to Hahn by me, but came from Kaltenbrunner in Berlin. As SS and PolizeiFuehrer of Warsaw I gave no orders to the Security Police. All orders came to Hahn from Kaltenbrunner in Berlin. For example, in June or July of the same year, I was together with Hahn in Kaltenbrunner's office and Kaltenbrunner told me that while Hahn and I must work together, all basic orders to the Security Police must come from him in Berlin. "After the people had been taken out of the Ghetto-they numbered between 50,000 and 60,000-they were brought to the railway station. The Security Police had complete supervision of these people and were in charge of the transport of these people to Lublin. "Immediately after the Ghetto action had been completed, about 300 foreign Jews were collected at the Polski Hotel. Some of these people were already there before the action, and some were brought there during the action. Kaltenbrunner ordered Hahn to transport these people away.
COL. AMEN: Hahn himself told me that he had received this order from Kaltenbrunner. "All executions were ordered by the Reich Main Security Office, Kaltenbrunner. "I have read this statement and I have understood it completely. I have made the statement freely and without compulsion. I swear before God that this is the full truth."- Signed-"Jurgen Stroop." Do you say that that statement of Stroop is true or false?
KALTENBRUNNER: It is untrue and I request that Stroop be brought here.
COL. AMEN: You will find that instead of its bearing out your story it confirms in substantially every detail the story told by I 355 12 April 46 KALTENBRUNNER: It is not true, insofar as witness Stroop is one step closer to my story, for on Page 1 he declares he had received the orders regarding the Warsaw Ghetto from Himmler and this is something which Kaleske has never said anywhere. COL. AMEN: I will accept that, Defendant. KALTENBRUNNER: An interrogation of General Stroop will clarify this point completely, also that Hahn had, of course, received orders from the Gestapo in Berlin; whether in this matter, too, I do not know, since as a matter of course the offices of the Security Police had also to be at the disposal of Amt IV, particularly as far as support in legal proceedings was concerned. But what matters here, in an action taking place in the Government General and in Warsaw, is the question of what organizations were involved in this action and all witnesses versed in these matters will have to agree that this was within the jurisdiction of the Higher SS and Police Leader in the Government General, not to the Reich Security Main Office. It is completely incorrect that these Security Police forces in Warsaw and officials such as Hahn were not subordinate to the SS and Police Leader. It can be testified to and ascertained that all Security Police offices, especially where an action of this kind was involved, could have only one leader and that was the local leader. But if, Mr. Prosecutor, you would give me again the opportunity of defining my position to these witnesses' statements more comprehensively through my defense counsel I could come back to this matter properly. COL. AMEN: And now, Defendant, I want to refer you to Document 3819-PS, which is already in evidence as GB-306, which are notes of a conference in the Reich Chancellery on 11 July 1944, signed by Lammers and the subject of testimony before this Tribunal the other day. You recall having attended that meeting I presume.
COL. AMEN: [The document was submitted to the defendant.] KALTENBRUNNER: I do not know yet. I do not know the purpose of that meeting. COL. AMEN: You do not deny that you were there, do you? KALTENBRUNNER: I do not know. This is the first time I have seen this document. COL. AMEN: Now, look at Page 12, in the middle of the page, the. sentence there, "In Paris, the evacuation of which was considered . . ." DR. KAUFFMANN: Mr. President, may I ask for clarification of the question, whether it might have been more appropriate and correct if the Prosecution had questioned Lammers about this matter when Lammers was here on the witness stand. 356 12 April 46 THE PRESIDENT: Was this put to Lammers? COL. AMEN: Frankly, Your Lordship, I do not know. The document was introduced and identified, and I am not sure whether he was asked about it or not. Sir David says that he introduced the document with Keitel, at the foot of Page 9. THE PRESIDENT: Very well, go on. COL. AMEN: Have you found the place, Defendant? KALTENBRUNNER: Yes, I have found the place. COL. AMEN: "In Paris, the evacuation of which was considered, 100,000 to 200,000 workers could be recruited. In this connection . . ." KALTENBRUNNER: No, Mr. Prosecutor, I have not found the place. COL. AMEN: Well, it is just above the paragraph which commences, "The Chief of the Security Police, Dr. Kaltenbrunner." Can you find that spot? KALTENBRUNNER: Yes, I have it now. COL. AMEN: Well, passing to that sentence: "The Chief of the Security Police, Dr. Kaltenbrunner, declared himself willing, when asked by the Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor, to place the Security Police at his disposal for this purpose, but pointed out their numerical weakness. For the whole of France he had only 2,400 men available. It was questionable whether entire age groups could be recruited with these weak forces. In his opinion, the Foreign Office must exercise a stronger influence on the foreign governments." Is that a true reflection of what took place at that meeting, Defendant?
COL. AMEN: KALTENBRUNNER: I cannot say that concerning the wording of the document, but I might say in explanation that according to the introduction on Page 1 it was a "Cheftesprechung" (discussion of chiefs), and that does not mean me, for I was Chief of the Reich Security Main Office. "Chetbesprechung" means the ministries and the chief Reich departments. By questioning the witness Lammers it would have to be determined whether I was there on the orders of the Ministry of the Interior and Chief of the German Police, Himmler. That would have been possible. That I was there on the instruction of Himmler seems to become evident for me from the number mentioned. It mentions here that only 2,400 men were at our disposal. Neither the Security Police nor the SD, nor both together, ever had any number like that at their disposal. It must have included all the 357 12 April 46 forces, even the Order Police and other small organizations, which were subordinate to Himmler. Therefore, one thing, at least, is missing in this document; that is the explanation that Kaltenbrunner, on orders of Himmler, was giving Himmler's views; that at least is missing. But by questioning the witness Dr. Lammers, I am sure we can clarify this matter. In any case, I would like to point out that it was my opinion that I could not be helpful in this matter because, first of all, negotiations between the Foreign Office and the competent foreign-that is, the French Government, were necessary. Measures to be taken there could not be introduced without the consent of the French Government. COL. AMEN: All right, Defendant. Now, do you recall evidence given before this Tribunal about efforts made by Germany to incite the Slovaks to revolt against Czechoslovakia and that Hitler used the insurgency of the Slovakians as one of the excuses for occupying Czechoslovakia in March of 1939? KALTENBRUNNER: I do not know who testified to that. COL. AMEN: Well, in any event, during the year 1938 to 1939 it is a fact, is it not, that you were the State Secretary for Security in Austria? Is that right?
COL. AMEN: KALTENBRUNNER: No, I was not State Secretary for the Security Police. I was State Secretary for the security system of the Austrian Government at, Vienna, and there is an essential difference, because the Security Police in Austria was instituted and directed from Berlin. COL. AMEN: Well, all right. KALTENBRUNNER: And in Austria I had not the slightest influence-nor even my Minister-on the Security Police. COL. AMEN: When did you become Supreme SS and Police Leader for Upper Austria with your headquarters in Germany? KALTENBRUNNER: That is a complete misstatement. In Upper Austria there was no Supreme SS and Police Leader, only in Austria. COL. AMEN: Well, when was it? KALTENBRUNNER: That was after the liquidation of the Austrian Government and after its affairs had been settled; that can be verified exactly from the Reichsgesetzblatt. It was probably In the summer of 1941. COL. AMEN: And is it not a fact that you, yourself, directed the activity of the Slovakian rebels and assisted them with explosives and ammunition? Answer that "yes" or "no," please. KALTENBRUNNER: No. 358 12 April 46 COL. AMEN: Do you recall having participated in any conference with respect to a plan for instigating this revolt of Slovakia? KALTENBRUNNER: It is not correct; I did not participate in instigating anything like that in Slovakia. I did take part in the first Government conferences in Slovakia and in the presence of the Delegate of the German Reich. COL. AMEN: Did your friend Spacil assist you in carrying out these plans? KALTENBRUNNER: That I cannot recall today. In any case, they were not German plans. If you investigate the political situation in Slovakia at that time, you will clearly see that it did not need any instigation on the part of the German Reich. The Hlinka movement then under the leadership of Dr. Tuka and also of Dr. Tiso, I believe, had made this decision a long time ago. COL. AMEN: Were you acquainted with Obersturmbannfuehrer Fritz Mundhenke? KALTENBRUNNER: I did not quite catch the name. COL.