dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
KALTENBRUNNER: Neither true or false; it is ridiculous and consequently untrue. The document can best be characterized by drawing attention to the fact that on the first page in the introduction it says: ". . . the second one for the occupation of Czechoslovakia proper (called afterwards the Protectorate of Bohemia-Moravia and the Slovakian State)." The fact that the Republic of Slovakia has never, in the course of history, been occupied by the German Reich is sufficient to reveal the ignorance of this witness, Mundhenke, who comes from North Germany and knows nothing about history or about politics. But this document contains so many details which can be clarified almost humorously that it becomes utterly worthless. I would like to call your attention to Page 3 of the German text and explain to you who were the men responsible for the individual big political actions which led to the occupation of Czechoslovakia. The first is a Franz Kourik who was a chauffeur. The second is Karl Spitt also a chauffeur. The third is an SS man whose name is Apfelbeck, son of an innkeeper and a butcher by trade, and who worked as an assistant official in the administration after he had suffered a grave skull injury in a motor accident. Stadler, a small bookkeeper, and the man Petenka are unknown to me. These men are supposed to have prepared, with me, the occupation of Slovakia by the Reich. That is utter nonsense. Excuse me for calling it so, Mr. Prosecutor, but it is and remains...
COL. AMEN: Very good, Defendant. All right. That is nonsense.
KALTENBRUNNER: One thing is true in this document and I want to come to that. I was with members of the Hlinka Guard in this house in Vienna, Park Ring 8, and I did hold a conference with them. This dealt with the union of the group of racial Germans in Slovakia and the Hlinka Guard, with a view to nominating joint candidates in the Slovakian Government. Documents prove it and files, in Pressburg at least, where my name was sufficiently known. Everybody knows it there and can confirm it, including this man Mundhenke, the leader of the racial group. But as an occupation of Slovakia never took place at all, in my opinion there is no need for me to defend myself against this accusation.
COL. AMEN: Defendant, in the course of this Trial the order of Himmler to the effect that the civilian population should not be punished for lynching Allied airmen has been introduced in evidence, and you have heard the sworn statement of Schellenberg and Gerdes to the effect that you, in your capacity as Chief of the Security Police and SD, issued such instructions to your subordinates. Do you deny these statements? "Yes" or "no," please.
KALTENBRUNNER: I do not wish to deny them, but I emphatically state that I never gave any such instructions, and I ask the Tribunal to allow my counsel to read the paper which I gave to him at the beginning of the session. This contains literally the testimony of the witness Koller, the Chief of Staff of the Luftwaffe, defining my general attitude towards this problem-that even in the presence of Hitler I declared, "I will not obey such an order." mat took place somewhat later, but it shows my own personal feelings about the matter. I made a statement to my counsel already yesterday about this question.
COL. AMEN: All right, Defendant; now take a look at Document Number 3855-PS, which will become Exhibit Number USA-806. This bears your own name at the bottom, whether it be a signature, facsimile, or anything else you choose to call it. Have you the document before you?
KALTENBRUNNER: Yes.
COL. AMEN: You will note that it comes from the Chief of the Security Police and of the SD, and according to the notes in the upper lefthand portion was prepared for your signature by Amt IV A 2 B. Number 220/44 g RS.
KALTENBRUNNER: That is, Mr. Prosecutor, the first and a very grave mistake.
COL. AMEN: All right. "a) To all commanders and inspectors of the Security Police and the SD (for oral communication to the subordinated of fires); "b) To Groups IV A and IV B. Sections IV A 1, IV A 3, IV A 4 IV A 6, IV B 1 IV B 4; "c) To Office V, Reich Criminal Police Office, for information to the Higher SS and Police Leaders, to the Chief of the Under Police; "d) To Chiefs of Offices IIII and IV of the Reich Security Main Office. "Subject: Treatment of enemy airmen who have bailed out. "Reference: none. "A series of questions dealing with the treatment of enemy airmen who have been shot down needs clarification: "I. As a general rule captured enemy airmen are to be shackled. This measure is necessary and is made with the full consent of the Chief of the High Command of the Armed Forces; a) in order to prevent frequent escapes, and b) in view of the severe shortage of personnel at the collecting stations. "II. Enemy air crews, who a) offer resistance when captured, or b) wear civilian clothes under their uniforms are to be shot at once when captured. "III. Most enemy airmen, especially of the Anglo-American air forces, carry with them escape bags filled with daggers, various kinds of maps, ration coupons, tools for escape, et cetera. "It is absolutely necessary that escape bags be secured by the Police, as they are of the greatest assistance when making a search. They must be given to the Luftwaffe.. IV. The order of the Reichsfuehrer SS of 10 August 1943" -which I believe you also testified you know nothing about_ "is not being carried out in full, as it has probably not been passed on orally, as ordered, to the subordinate police offices. "It is therefore repeated: It is not the duty of the police to interfere in conflicts between the Germans and English and American 'terror-fliers' who have bailed out. "V. Near the body of an English airman who had been shot down a brassard with the inscription 'Deutsche Wehrmacht' and an official stamp was found.
COL. AMEN: This brassard is only worn by combat troops, and it gives the bearer access to all military and strategically important points in the various operation zones. Parachuted enemy agents will probably make use of this new means of camouflage. "VI. During the past months individual cases have shown that the German population does seize enemy airmen but afterwards, while waiting for them to be handed over to the police or the Armed Forces, it does not use the proper restraint. Too strict measures on the part of the State Police against these citizens would keep them from seizing enemy airmen without restraint, since these cases must not be confused with the criminal act of helping escaped enemy airmen. "Reichsfuehrer SS has ordered the following measures to be applied to citizens who conduct themselves in a dishonorable manner towards captured enemy airmen either out of bad intentions or misunderstood pity: "1) In especially severe cases, transfer to a concentration camp; announcement in the newspapers of the district "2) In less severe cases, protective custody for not less than 14 days at the competent State Police office; employment in the clearing of damaged areas. Should there be no damaged area affording such employment within the jurisdiction of one State Police office, the short term protective custody sentence is to be served at the nearest State Police office, et cetera. "The Reichsfuehrer SS has contacted Reichsleiter Bormann in this matter and has pointed out that it is the duty of the Party officials to instruct the population to observe absolutely necessary restraint towards enemy airmen. "3) I leave it to the commanders and inspectors of the Security Police, and the SD to notify in writing the subordinated offices of Sections V and VI of the above decree. "Signed: Dr. Kaltenbrunner; Certified: Rose, of lice clerk." Do you deny having had anything to do with the issuance of that document? Do you deny that you signed it?
KALTENBRUNNER: This order was never submitted to me. I refer you to what I said yesterday concerning questions of direction and issuing of orders in the Secret Police office, Amt IV A which appears at the head of the letter indicating that it formulated it. In these matters this Amt was directly subordinated to Himmler.
THE PRESIDENT: I have not heard the answer to the question. Did you sign it?
KALTENBRUNNER: No.
COL. AMEN: You deny your signature and you deny knowing anything about this document bearing your name, is that correct?
KALTENBRUNNER: Mr. Prosecutor, I . have . . .
COL. AMEN: Will you answer that, Defendant? You deny this document just like you have denied every other document that has been shown to you today, is that correct?
KALTENBRUNNER: I already stated yesterday, and also told my defense counsel, that these documents were never submitted to me. I should know it today. To a certain degree I am to blame for not having paid more attention as to whether such orders were issued in my name. I never denied yesterday that I was partly to blame in this respect but my position to this question can be clearly seen from Koller's testimony.
THE PRESIDENT: I do not understand. Are you saying that the signature on the document is not yours, or that you may have signed it without looking at the decree? Which are you saying? KALTENBRUNNER Your Lordship, this document and this decree were never submitted to me. To sign such a document would have been completely against my inner attitude towards the entire problem. My attitude in this matter can be seen from Koller's testimony.
THE PRESIDENT: I am not asking you what your inner attitude is. I am asking you whether the name on it is written by your hand.
KALTENBRUNNER: No.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal would like to look at the document.
COL. AMEN: It is a typewritten signature, Your Lordship.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes; let us look at the document. Defendant, who is Rose?
KALTENBRUNNER: I do not know, Your Lordship.
THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Amen, can you give any idea holy long you wilt be with your crossexamination?
COL. AMEN: Perhaps half an hour, depending on the answers of the defendant.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Then the Tribunal will adjourn. We will sit tomorrow at 10 o'clock to continue this part of the case, and will adjourn at half past 12 in order to hear Dr. Thoma and the Prosecution upon his documents. [The Tribunal adjourned until 13 April 1946 at 1000 hours.]
COL. AMEN: Defendant, as I recall, you have testified that you had no knowledge of the Hitler Commando Order of 8 October '42 until some time in 1945. Is that not correct?
KALTENBRUNNER: I do not think that I said so. I believe that concerns the order...
COL. AMEN: Well, that was your testimony yesterday, according to the record, that you had no knowledge of the Hitler Commando Order of 8 October '42 until some time in the year 1945. Is that not correct? Is that not now your position?
KALTENBRUNNER: I do not believe that I made such an answer. The order is...
COL. AMEN: Well, what is the fact? When did you first have knowledge of the Hitler Commando Order of 8 October 1942? I am speaking of the order of 18 October '42, not 8. When did you first have knowledge of that?
KALTENBRUNNER: I cannot tell you that now, exactly.
COL. AMEN: All right.
KALTENBRUNNER: In any case, this order, if it were read to me, would probably be the same one which appeared in a Wehrmacht report or in the press.
COL. AMEN: All right. And you have also denied the testimony of your own witness, Mildner, concerning the existence of a decree' issued in July or August '44, under which the Security Police were to execute members of Allied commando groups after questioning them. That is correct, is it not?
KALTENBRUNNER: I was never asked about that.
COL. AMEN: Well, I beg your pardon; but never mind, anyway. I will show you Document Number 535-PS, which trill become Exhibit USA-807; and, before anything else, I want to ask you whether it is your own signature, in your own handwriting, that appears at the bottom of that document. [The document was submitted to the defendant.]
KALTENBRUNNER: Yes. That is my signature.
COL. AMEN: Oh, it is your signature, is it?
KALTENBRUNNER: Yes.
COL. AMEN: You admit that? Is that right?
KALTENBRUNNER: That is my signature, yes. ~
COL. AMEN: Now, when you were interrogated before this Trial, you denied that that was your signature, did you not?
KALTENBRUNNER: No, I do not believe so.
COL. AMEN: Well, I trill read you your testimony on that point, to see whether that helps you to remember whether you denied it or not. "Answer: 'From that it can only be seen that the Wehrmacht intended to write a letter to me; whether rightly or wrongly, and whether I was the right authority to write to is very questionable. In any case, the Wehrmacht wanted to get in touch with the Gestapo, as can be seen from this exchange of letters, and I am convinced that an officer of the Gestapo, namely, the one mentioned at the beginning of the letter, is the one who wrote this document.' "Question: 'Well, this is the letter that you know nothing about, but which, nevertheless, established just how you accomplished your desires by writing to the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces. That is very clear.' "Answer: 'But I deny that I wrote this letter.' "Question: 'Just a moment ago, you didn't know about it, but now you deny it?' "Answer: 'I not only did not know about the Hitler Order, but I also knew nothing about this letter.' "Question: 'But you acknowledged your signature?' "Answer: 'I did not say that this is my signature. I only said it resembles my signature; and I also said it is possible that it is only a facsimile. I cannot recall a letter of such contents signed by me.' "Question: 'Would it be any more convincing to you if you saw the original letter, signed in ink?' "Answer: 'It would certainly be more convincing, but it still would not prove that I signed in ink.'" Did you make those answers to those questions, Defendant?
KALTENBRUNNER: Naturally, I do not remember whether I made these answers literally. But, I would like to make the following remarks to you. Questions concerning my signature have naturally always been put to me hundreds of times during interrogations, especially to confuse met Today-I believe this is the first time I have seen this document-I immediately declared, "Yes, this is my signature." I certainly know my own signature; I can recognize it. However, you have also shown me signatures which certainly were not mine. Besides, you can see from the date of the letter, 23 January 1945, that it is correct that I learned about it in 1945, as you have already stated. I could not have the faintest notion of a Hitler order issued in the year '42. And if, in your interrogation which you just read to me, I stated that I did not write this letter, then this is confirmed by the very figures which appear on top, where you read IV A 2 a, plus numerals and letters which obviously indicates that the letter was written in a section which was in charge of these matters. That is what I mean when I say that I did not write this letter. That it may have been submitted to me for my signature among thousands of other papers which I might have had to look into possibly in the course of one day, I cannot, of course, deny. From this, however, you cannot draw the conclusion that I undoubtedly knew about the matter. You cannot imagine the extent of the official functions which I took over in complete ignorance of police background, without instructions for carrying out police functions, but rather for organizing and directing the vast intelligence service.
THE PRESIDENT: Answer questions and do not make speeches.
COL. AMEN: Defendant, is not the signature on that document before you, Document Number 535-PS, USA-807, precisely the same and identical with your signature as it appears on Document Number 3803-PS, USA-802? Just look at the two signatures, and tell the Tribunal if they are not identical.
KALTENBRUNNER: No, I never signed in that way. I always signed, "Dr. K.," as on this document, even in informal letters.
COL. AMEN: How about the handwriting? Does that look the same to you, Defendant, or does it look different?
KALTENBRUNNER: Yes, certainly there is a kind of resemblance, but I think it has happened to every person in this courtroom that in his absence any one of his assistants at times signed a particularly urgent letter using his name.
THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Amen, the Tribunal trill be able to see the signatures and judge for themselves.
COL. AMEN: Very good, Sir. Now, do you have the exhibit before you, 535-PS?
KALTENBRUNNER: Yes.
COL. AMEN: You will note that that emanates from IV A 2 a, as appears in the upper corner under Chief of the Security Police and of the SD.
KALTENBRUNNER: Yes, and at the beginning you said the letter was written by me.
COL. AMEN: That it is addressed to the High Command of the Armed Forces, right?
KALTENBRUNNER: Yes.
COL. AMEN: And that it refers to the Fuehrer Order of 18 October '42, as well as to the other Fuehrer orders referred to in the testimony of Mildner, namely, the Fuehrer orders of 18 August '44 and 30 July '44, correct?
KALTENBRUNNER: I did not know that Mildner testified on this point. Such a statement is not known to me, nor has it been submitted to me. But, I believe, it proves.. .
COL. AMEN: All right. Do you note that this document refers to the Fuehrer decrees of 18 October '42, 18 August '44, and 30 July '44. Yes or no, please.
KALTENBRUNNER: Yes. It says so here.
COL. AMEN: So that on 23 January '45 when you wrote this letter, you obviously had knowledge of those decrees, right? I mean...
KALTENBRUNNER: That is incorrect inasmuch as, in my opinion, the most important item in this letter is contained in the sixth, fifth, and fourth lines from the end: Here it says that they can make no claim upon the allowances for prisoners of war in accordance with the Geneva Convention. If, then, under the pressure of work this letter was submitted to me, it is evident that my eyes would first fall on the spot where I had to sign and also on the last lines. Here...
THE PRESIDENT: Defendant, that is not an answer to the question. The question was whether you knew the order of the 18th of October '42, of 30 July '44, and 18 August '44, when you wrote this letter. Did you know?
KALTENBRUNNER: No, I did not know of these orders, Mr. President.
COL. AMEN: All right...
KALTENBRUNNER: But please, would you let me defend myself on this point. It was clear to me that this dealt with the treatment of agents to whom the provisions of the Geneva Convention for prisoners of war are not applicable; and you cannot deny a power at war the right to let its security police take in hand those men who do not come under the regulations of the Geneva War Convention. That is the perfect right of any power at war. There there also German agents who were engaged in hostile activity in England and other countries.
THE PRESIDENT: Defendant, you are not here to argue your case now; you are here to answer questions.
COL. AMEN: Defendant, you testified, did you not, that you first acquired knowledge of the case of the British fliers who escaped from Stalag Luft III in March of 1944, some 6 weeks after the escape occurred; is that not correct?
KALTENBRUNNER: Yes, now I assume it was about 6 weeks afterwards; at any rate, it teas just when, in consequence of the speech in the House of Commons, the Foreign Office took a stand. The department chiefs turned to me, but I in turn sent them to Himmler.
COL. AMEN: But when you were interrogated about this matter before the Trial, you testified as follows, did you not? "Question: 'You remember the case of the 80 British fliers who escaped from Stalag Luft III, which took place in March '44?' "Answer: 'That case is unknown to me.' "Question: 'General Westhoff attempted to find out from the Gestapo what had happened to these men.' "Answer: 'If he had negotiations with the Gestapo, he did not negotiate with me.' "Question: 'What do you say about the general proposition that escaped prisoners were turned over to the Gestapo?' "Answer: 'Such cases are not known to me.' " Did you make those answers, yes or no?
KALTENBRUNNER: It is possible that I did; but I wish to point out to you that naturally I was completely confused by the manner in which these questions were put. I never really heard of 80 escaped airmen. Here, too, mention was made of 50 only.
COL. AMEN: For your information, 80 escaped and 50 there killed.
KALTENBRUNNER: And in addition, General Westhoff stated here that he did not discuss the Sagan case with me, but that he tried to obtain information from the State Police, that he spoke to me about the transfer of prisoner-of-war affairs to Himmler, who was the Commander of the Reserve Army, and that Sagan was referred to on this occasion.
COL. AMEN: Now, Defendant, you testified that you had no knowledge whatever of the fact that Einsatz groups of the Security Police and SD were operating in the U.S.S.R. until long after you had become Chief of the RSHA in January '43, is that not correct?
KALTENBRUNNER: Yes.
COL. AMEN: And you still say that that is correct?
KALTENBRUNNER: Yes.
COL. AMEN: You deny that you ever knew that these Einsatz groups carried out the extermination of Jews in the U.S.S.R. until long after you had become Chief of the RSHA?
KALTENBRUNNER: I only discovered this during the arguments I had with Himmler and Hitler-I believe later in 1943- probably in November.
COL. AMEN: And you admit, I take it, that you were a Higher SS and Police Leader in Austria in 1942, right?
KALTENBRUNNER: Yes.
COL. AMEN: And Schirach was a Reich Defense Commissioner in Vienna at that time, was he not?
KALTENBRUNNER: I do not know when he was appointed, but I must point out that the Higher SS and Police Leaders received those powers with which they finally were invested in three different stages. In 1941, when I became Higher SS and Police Leader, the authority of such a leader was considerably less than it was at the end of the war.
COL. AMEN: Now, if the Tribunal please, I have a document which arrived by airplane yesterday, of which there is only one original copy and which, therefore, we have not been able to get translated. So I have arranged, if it is satisfactory to the Tribunal, for the interpreter to read the excerpts from that original document, which was taken from Schirach's personal files in Vienna, and then submit the original document to the Court and have it processed just as quickly as we are able to do so. Or perhaps the Tribunal would like to see the document first. It is an original document.
THE PRESIDENT: You will read it so that it will go through into German?
COL. AMEN: Yes, Your Lordship.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
COL. AMEN: This is Document Number 3876-PS. It is a report issued by Heydrich to all the Higher SS and Police Leaders and Reich Defense Commissioners on the activities of the Einsatz groups in the U.S.S.R. during the month of January 1942, and on the distribution list appears the name of this defendant. Will you read the Exhibit USA-808?
THE INTERPRETER: The righthand side of the document bears the initials in ink, "Sch." and then several symbols, "ZRVK 4030519/41 g," and below that, "1320C." At the left on top: "The Higher SS and Police Leader attached to the Reichsstatthalter in Vienna and in Upper and Lower Danube, within Wehrkreis XVII; the Inspector of the Order Police." Below that there are several file numbers. The document bears the heading, "Secret." It is dated, "Vienna, 14 October 1941... Subject: Technical report on the battles in the East."
THE PRESIDENT: Is that right, 14 October 1941?
THE INTERPRETER: Yes, 14 October 1941.
THE PRESIDENT: The previous date that was given was January 1942. What is the explanation of that?
COL. AMEN: It covers the month-I think there are two different documents there. You are giving the date on one. There is a different date on the other. Is that not correct?
THE INTERPRETER: That is correct.
COL. AMEN: Well, give us the date on the other document so the record will be clear.
THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Amen, we shall be able to understand when we see the document.
COL. AMEN: Yes, Your Lordship. [Turning to the interpreter.] Go right ahead.
THE INTERPRETER: The date of the other document is April 23, 1942.
COL. AMEN: Go ahead.