dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
THE PRESIDENT: FRITZSCHE Fritzsche is indicted on Counts One, Three, and Four. He was best known as a radio commentator, discussing once a week the events of the day on his own program, "Hans Fritzsche Speaks." He began broadcasting in September 1932; in the same year he was made the head of the Wireless News Service, a Reich Government agency. When on 1 May 1933, this agency was incorporated by the National Socialists into their Reich Ministry of Popular Enlightenment and Propaganda, Fritzsche became a member of the Nazi Party and went to that Ministry. In December 1938 he became head of the Home Press Division of the Ministry; in October 1942 he was promoted to. the rank of Ministerial Director. After serving briefly on the Eastern Front in a propaganda company, he was, in November 1942, made head of the Radio Division of the Propaganda Ministry and Plenipotentiary for the Political Organization of the Greater German Radio. Crimes against Peace As head of the Home Press Division, Fritzsche supervised the German press of 2,300 daily newspapers. In pursuance of this function he held daily press conferences to deliver the directives of the Propaganda Ministry to these papers. He was, however, subordinate to Dietrich, the Reich Press Chief, who was in turn a subordinate of Goebbels. It was Dietrich who received the directives to the press of Goebbels and other Reich Ministers, and prepared them as instructions which he then handed to Fritzsche for the press. From time to time, the "Daily Paroles of the Reich Press Chief," as these instructions were labelled, directed the press to present to the people certain themes, such as the leadership principle, the Jewish problem, the problem of living space, or other standard Nazi ideas. A vigorous propaganda campaign was carried out before each major act of aggression. While Fritzsche headed the Home Press Division, he instructed the press how the actions or wars against Bohemia and Moravia, Poland, Yugoslavia, and the Soviet Union should be dealt with. Fritzsche had no control of the formulation of these propaganda policies.
THE PRESIDENT: He was merely a conduit to the press of the instructions handed him by Dietrich. In February 1939 and before the absorption of Bohemia and Moravia, for instance, he received Dietrich's order to bring to the attention of the press Slovakia's efforts for independence, and the anti-Germanic policies and politics of the existing Prague Government. This order to Dietrich originated in the Foreign Office. The Radio Division, of which Fritzsche became the head in November 1942, was one of the 12 divisions of the Propaganda Ministry. In the beginning Dietrich and other heads of divisions exerted influence over the policies to be followed by radio. Towards the end of the war, however, Fritzsche became the sole authority within the Ministry for radio activities. In this capacity he formulated and issued daily radio "paroles" to all Reich propaganda offices, according to the general political policies of the Nazi regime, subject to the directives of the Radio-Political Division of the Foreign Office, and the personal supervision of Goebbels. Fritzsche, with other officials of the Propaganda Ministry, was present at Goebbels' daily staff conferences. Here they were instructed in the news and propaganda policies of the day. After 1943 Fritzsche himself occasionally held these conferences, but only when Goebbels, and his state secretaries were absent. And even then his only function was to transmit Goebbels' directives relayed to him by telephone. This is the summary of Fritzsche's positions and influence in the Third Reich. Never did he achieve sufficient stature to attend the planning conferences which led to aggressive war; indeed according to his own uncontradicted testimony he never even had a conversation with Hitler. Nor is there any showing that he was informed of the decisions taken at these conferences. His activities cannot be said to be those which fall within the definition of the common plan to wage aggressive war as already set forth in this Judgment.
THE PRESIDENT: War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity The Prosecution has asserted that Fritzsche incited and encouraged the commission of war crimes, by deliberately falsifying news to arouse in the German people those passions which led them to the commission of atrocities under Counts Three and Four. His position and official duties were not sufficiently important, however, to infer that he took part in originating or formulating propaganda campaigns. Excerpts in evidence from his speeches show definite anti-Semitism, on his part. He broadcast, for example, that the war had been caused by Jews and said their fate had turned out "as unpleasant as the Fuehrer predicted." But these speeches did not urge persecution or extermination of Jews. There is no evidence that he was aware of their extermination in the East. The evidence moreover shows that he twice attempted to have publication of the anti-Semitic Der Stuermer suppressed, though unsuccessfully. In these broadcasts Fritzsche sometimes spread false news, but it was not proved he knew it to be false. For example, he reported that no German U-Boat was in the vicinity of the Athenia when it was sunk. This information was untrue; but Fritzsche, having received it from the German Navy, had no reason to believe it was untrue. It appears that Fritzsche sometimes made strong statements of a propagandistic nature in his broadcasts. But the Tribunal is not prepared to hold that they were intended to incite the German people to commit atrocities on conquered peoples, and he cannot be held to have been a participant in the crimes charged. His aim was rather to arouse popular sentiment in support of Hitler and the German war effort. Conclusion The Tribunal finds that Fritzsche is not guilty under this Indictment, and directs that he shall be discharged by the Marshal when the Tribunal presently adjourns.
GEN. NIKITCHENKO: BORMANN Bormann is indicted on Counts One, Three, and Four. He joined the National Socialist Party in 1925, was a member of the Staff of the Supreme Command of the SA from 1928 to 1930, was in charge of the Aid Fund of the Party, and was Reichsleiter from 1933 to 1945. From 1933 to 1941 he was Chief of Staff in the office of the Fuehrer's Deputy and, after the flight of Hess to England, became Head of the Party Chancellery on 12 May 1941. On 12 April 1943 he became Secretary to the Fuehrer. He was political and organizational head of the Volkssturm and a general in the SS. Crimes against Peace Bormann, in the beginning a minor Nazi, steadily rose to a position of power and, particularly in the closing days, of great influence over Hitler. He was active in the Party's rise to power and even more so; in the consolidation of that power. He devoted much of his time to the persecution of the Churches and of the Jews within Germany. The evidence does not show that Bormann knew of Hitler's plans to prepare, initiate, or wage aggressive wars. He attended none of the important conferences when Hitler revealed piece by piece these plans for aggression. Nor can knowledge be conclusively inferred from the positions he held. It was only when he became head of the Party Chancellery in 1941, and later in 1943 Secretary to the Fuehrer, when he attended many of Hitler's conferences, that his positions gave him the necessary access. Under the view stated elsewhere which the Tribunal has taken of the conspiracy to wage aggressive war, there is not sufficient evidence to bring Bormann within the scope of Count One. War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity By decree of 29 May 1941 Bormann took over the offices and powers held by Hess; by decree of 24 January 1942 these powers were extended to give him control over all laws and directives issued by Hitler. He was thus responsible for laws and orders issued thereafter. On 1 December 1942, all Gaue became Reich defense districts, and the Party Gauleiter responsible to Bormann were appointed Reich Defense Commissioners.
GEN. NIKITCHENKO: In effect, this made them the administrators of the entire civilian war effort. This was so not only in Germany, but also in those territories which were incorporated into the Reich from the absorbed and conquered territories. Through this mechanism Bormann controlled the ruthless exploitation of the subjected populace. His order of 12 August 1942 placed all Party agencies at the disposal of Himmler's program for forced resettlement and denationalization of persons in the occupied countries. Three weeks after the invasion of Russia, he attended the conference of 16 July 1941 at Hitler's field quarters with Goering, Rosenberg, and Keitel; Bormann's report shows that there were discussed and developed detailed plans of enslavement and annihilation of the population of these territories. And on 8 May 1942 he conferred with Hitler and Rosenberg on the forced resettlement of Dutch personnel in Latvia, the extermination program in Russia, and the economic exploitation of the Eastern territories. He was interested in the confiscation of art and other properties in the East. His letter of 11 January 1944 called for the creation of a large-scale organization to withdraw commodities from the occupied territories for the bombed-out German populace. Bormann was extremely active in the persecution of the Jews not Only in Germany but also in the absorbed or conquered countries. He took part in the discussions which led to the removal of 60,000 Jews from Vienna to Poland in co-operation with the SS and the Gestapo. He signed the decree of 31 May 1941 extending the Nuremberg Laws to the annexed Eastern territories. In an order of 9 October 1942 he declared that the permanent elimination of Jews in Greater German territory could no longer be solved by emigration, but only by applying "ruthless force" in the special camps in the East. On 1 July 1943 he signed an ordinance withdrawing Jews from the protection of the law courts and placing them under the exclusive jurisdiction of Himmler's Gestapo. Bormann was prominent in the slave labor program.
GEN. NIKITCHENKO: The Party leaders supervised slave labor matters in the respective Gaue, including employment, conditions of work, feeding, and housing. By his circular of 5 May 1943 to the Leadership Corps, distributed down to the level of Ortsgruppenleiter, he issued directions regulating the treatment of foreign workers, pointing out they were subject to SS control on security problems, and ordered the previous mistreatment to cease. A report of 4 September 1942 relating to the transfer of 500,000 female domestic workers from the East to Germany showed that control was to be exercised by Sauckel, Himmler, and Bormann. Sauckel by decree of 8 September directed the Kreisleiter to supervise the distribution and assignment of these female laborers. Bormann also issued a series of orders to the Party leaders dealing with the treatment of prisoners of war. On 5 November 1941 he prohibited decent burials for Russian prisoners of war. On 25 November 1943 he directed Gauleiter to report cases of lenient treatment of prisoners of war. And on 13 September 1944 he ordered liaison between the Kreisleiter with the camp commandants in determining the use to be made of prisoners of war for forced labor. On 29 January 1943 he transmitted to his leaders OKW instructions allowing the use of fire arms and corporal punishment on recalcitrant prisoners of war contrary to the rules of land warfare. On 30 September 1944 he signed a decree taking from the OKW jurisdiction over prisoners of war and handing them over to Himmler and the SS. Bormann is responsible for the lynching of Allied airmen. On 30 May 1944 he prohibited any police action or criminal proceedings against persons who had taken part in the lynching of Allied fliers. This was accompanied by a Goebbels propaganda campaign inciting the German people to take action of this nature, and the conference of 6 June 1944 where regulations for the application of lynching were discussed. His counsel, who has labored under difficulties, was unable to refute this evidence.
GEN. NIKITCHENKO: In the face of these documents which bear Bormann's signature it is difficult to see how he could do so even were the defendant present. Counsel has argued that Bormann is dead and that the Tribunal should not avail itself of Article 12 of the Charter which gives it the right to take proceedings in absentia. But the evidence of death is not conclusive, and the Tribunal, as previously stated, determined to try him in absentia. If Bormann is not dead and is later apprehended, the Control Council for Germany may, under Article 29 of the Charter, consider any facts in mitigation, and alter or reduce his sentence, if deemed proper. Conclusion The Tribunal finds that Bormann is not guilty on Count One, but is guilty on Counts Three and Four.
THE PRESIDENT: Before pronouncing sentence on any of the defendants, and while all the defendants are present, the Tribunal takes the occasion to advise them that any application to the clemency of the Control Council must be lodged with the General Secretary of this Tribunal within 4 days from today. The Tribunal will now adjourn and will sit again at 10 minutes to three. [A recess was taken until 1450 hours.] Afternoon Session
THE PRESIDENT: In accordance with Article 27 of the Charter, the International Military Tribunal will now pronounce the sentences on the defendants convicted on this Indictment: "Defendant Hermann Wilhelm Goering, on the Counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the International Military Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging. "Defendant Rudolf Hess, on the Counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to imprisonment for life. "Defendant Joachim von Ribbentrop, on the Counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging. "Defendant Wilhelm Keitel, on the Counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging. "Defendant Ernst Kaltenbrunner, on the Counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging. "Defendant Alfred Rosenberg, on the Counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging. "Defendant Hans Frank, on the Counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging. "Defendant Wilhelm Frick, on the Counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging. "Defendant Julius Streicher, on the Count of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging. "Defendant Walter Funk, on the Counts of the Indictment an which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to imprisonment for life. "Defendant Karl Doenitz, on the Counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to ten years' imprisonment. "Defendant Erich Raeder, on the Counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to imprisonment for life. "Defendant Baldur von Schirach, on the Count of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to twenty years' imprisonment.
THE PRESIDENT: "Defendant Fritz Sauckel, on the Counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging. "Defendant Alfred Jodl, on the Counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging. "Defendant Arthur Seyss-Inquart, on the Counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to death by hanging. "Defendant Albert Speer, on the Counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to twenty years' imprisonment. "Defendant Konstantin von Neurath, on the Counts of the Indictment on which you have been convicted, the Tribunal sentences you to fifteen years' imprisonment." The Tribunal sentences the Defendant Martin Bormann, on the Counts of the Indictment on which he has been convicted, to death by hanging. I have an announcement to make. The Soviet member of the International Military Tribunal desires to record his dissent from the decisions in the cases of the Defendants Schacht, Von Papen, and Fritzsche. He is of the opinion that they should have been convicted and not acquitted. He also dissents from the decisions in respect to the Reich Cabinet and the General Staff and High Command, being of the opinion that they should have been declared to be criminal organizations. He also dissents from the decision in the case of the sentence on the Defendant Hess and is of the opinion that the sentence should have been, death, and not life imprisonment. This dissenting opinion will be put into writing and annexed to the Judgment, and will be published as soon as possible. [The Tribunal adjourned.] Appendix containing corrections to translations of documents quoted in the Judgment. 1)  "Treaty" should read "Church," according to the original document, Number USA-348. 2)  The letter "A" should read "R," according to the original document, Number USA-43.
THE PRESIDENT: 3)  The German word "Angriff" would here better be rendered by "aggression." 4)  According to the original document, 502-PS, the first sentence of the quotation should read: "The mission of the detachments is the political investigation of all camp inmates, the segregation and further processing..." 5)  "Commanders" should read "detachments." 6)  "Intelligence" should read "intelligentsia." 7)  "Fleckfieber" should be rendered as "typhus" rather than as "spotted fever." 8)  "Bummelanten" should be translated "slackers" rather than "tramps." 9)  Should read: "How the Russians or Czechs fare is absolutely immaterial to me." 10) Accurate translation should read: "It has been confirmed that apart from the works of art known to us in Germany ... such as for example, the Veit Stoss altar and the plates of Hans von Kulmbach in the Church of Maria in Krakow... and several other works from the National Museum in Warsaw, not very much exists which would constitute a material contribution to German art treasures." 11) "16 October" should read "18 October," according to Document EC-408, USA-519. 12) The original German version "auf alle Faelle" is better rendered as "at any rate." 13) "February" should read "6 February."
THE PRESIDENT (Lord Justice Lawrence): Is Counsel for Gustav Krupp von Bohlen in Court?
DR. THEODOR KLEFISCH (Counsel for Defendant Krupp von Bohlen): Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you wish to make your motion now?
DR. KLEFISCH: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you make your motion?
DR. KLEFISCH: Mr. President, gentlemen: As defense counsel for Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach, I repeat the request which has already been made in writing , to suspend the proceedings against this defendant, at any rate, not to carry out the Trial against this defendant. I leave it to this High Court to decide whether it should suspend proceedings against Krupp for the time being or altogether. According to the opinion of the specialists, who were appointed by this Court for the investigation of the illness of Krupp, Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach is not able, on account of his serious illness, to appear at this Trial without danger to his life. Their opinion is that he is suffering from an organic disturbance of the brain and that mental decline makes the defendant incapable of reacting normally to his surroundings. From that it follows that Krupp is not capable of informing his defense. Furthermore, the report states that the deterioration of his physical and mental powers has already been going on for several years and that since Krupp was involved in an auto accident on 4 December 1944, he can only speak a few disconnected words now and again, and during the last two months has not even been able to recognize his relatives and friends. On the basis of these facts one can only establish that Krupp has no knowledge of the serving of the Indictment of 19 October. Thus he does not know that he is accused and why. The question now arises whether, in spite of this permanent inability to appear for trial, in spite of this inability to inform his defense. and in spite of his not knowing of the Indictment and its contents, Krupp can be tried in absentia . Article 12 of the Charter gives the right to the Tribunal to take proceedings against people who are absent, under two conditions: First, if the accused cannot be found; second, if the Tribunal, for other reasons, thinks it is necessary in the interests of justice, to try him in absentia .
DR. KLEFISCH: Since the first condition, impossibility of finding the defendant, is immediately eliminated, it must be examined whether the second condition can be applied, that is, whether it is necessary, in the interests of justice, to try Krupp. The Defense is of the opinion that justice does not demand a trial against Krupp in absentia , that this would even be contrary to justice. I want to quote the following reasons: The decision on this question must come from the concept of justice in the sense of Article 12 of the Charter . We must take into account here that the 12th Article is purely a regulation concerning procedure. The question arises, however, whether the Trial against Krupp in his absence would be a just procedure. In my opinion, a just procedure is only then given if it is, as a whole or in its particular regulations, fashioned in such a way that an equitable judgment is guaranteed. That is a judgment whereby the convicted defendant will be punished accordingly and the innocent exonerated from guilt and punishment. Is it possible that a just judgment can be guaranteed if a defendant is tried in absentia , who through no fault of his own, cannot appear and defend himself, who cannot inform his defense counsel, and who does not even know that he is accused and for what reason? To ask this question is to deny it. Even the regulations of the Charter concerning the rights of the defendant in the preliminary procedure and in the main Trial, oblige us to answer this question with "no". The following regulations are applicable here: According to Article 16 (a) , the accused shall receive a copy of the Indictment before the Trial. According to Article 16 (b) , the defendant in the preliminary procedure and in the main Trial, has the right to declare his own position in the face of each accusation. According to Article 16 (c) , a preliminary interrogation of the defendant should take place. According to Article is 16 (d) , the defendant shall decide whether he wishes to defend h himself or to have somebody else defend him.