Q Wasn't it your relative, Kiefer? You are related to the Kiefers, aren't you?
A No, I had no relatives there.
Q But you know the Kiefers?
A Yes, I know there was a Kiefer who was with me in the experiment. He was a young fellow.
Q You said there were only 7 or 8 Germans?
A Yes.
Q Don't you think it really was more than that, if I read you all these German names, from Bavaria alone?
AAll I can tell you is what I remember.
Q Couldn't it possibly be more?
A Yes, it is possible.
Q Weren't there 2 Mettbachs there?
A Two Mettbachs? There was a Schweizer - yes, his name was Mettbach.
Q Well, Furth, let me tell you, is in Bavaria. Schmidt?
A Yes, I remember Schmidt.
Q Franz?
A I can't remember him.
Q Adler?
A Yes, I remember him.
Q Was he a German or a Hungarian?
A I don't know.
Q Hoellenrainer?
A Yes.
Q Bernhard?
A Yes.
Q Herzberg?
A Yes.
Q Bamberger?
A Yes.
Q Hermann?
A I don't know him.
Q Taubmann?
A Yes, I remember him.
Q Now, there, look at this. How about Reinhardt?
A Yes.
Q Weren't there even a couple of Reinhardts in there?
A I only know one.
Q Now, there, look at that. We already have more than 7 Germans. Don't you grant the possibility that there were more?
A Yes, of course I do.
Q Were there Slovaks in the experiment?
A Slovenians, yes, but who they were and how,many, I do not know.
Q Were there Burgenlaender?
A No.
Q Remember a little fellow named Papai?
A Yes.
Q He was from Burgenland, wasn't he?
A Yes.
Q Can you tell me the name of the fellow who was force-fed?
A No.
Q But you say he was only 2 beds away from you?
A Nevertheless I do not know his name. I have thought about this frequently.
Q You were in Bed 7?
A Yes.
Q Could his name have been Patschowsky?
A I don't know.
Q Then the next man was Mettbach.
A No, it was not Mettbach.
Q Then you don't know what his name was?
A No.
Q Did the Professor pass out very many cigarettes during the experiment?
A Sometimes we got 2, sometimes 3; there wore some among us who were very good, and they got an extra ration of cigarettes.
Q How long did the experiment last altogether, do you know that?
A I can only tell you approximately - 4 to 5 weeks, I should say.
Q Can it be true that on the 12th of September it was finished?
A I can't tell you the exact date.
Q Did the gypsies help the professor to clear out the experimental station?
A No.
Q. Did you cone to Block 22?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you moot Mettbach there?
A. Yes.
Q. He said here, as a witness, that he had given you a loaf of broad?
A. I don't know about that.
Q. Did you meet other comrades there?
A. Well, we were in Block 22, but we were in different rooms, one, two, and three, so we met now and again, that is so.
Q. If anyone had died, then you would have found out about it, since you gypsies stick together?
A. No, it was not possible, because about two days after that I was put to work.
Q. There were you sent to?
A. I stayed in Dachau.
Q. You stayed in the camp?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Ah, that is very important. You just went out to work during the day?
A. I was employed there in the equipment office, and while I was working there I did not have a chance to talk to anyone. After I was finished work, I was glad to have a chance to rest.
Q. Don't you think that if anyone had died you would immediately have been told about it, that was usual in the camp; was it not?
A Well, my comrades were really too dumb to do that.
Q. Well, you would not say that Mettbach was dumb, would you?
A. They were too afraid they would be sent to the hospital or something would happen to them if they told what actually happened to them or things of that sort.
Q. But you do not exclude the possibility that you could have heard of such a death if one occurred?
A. That is possible, but I heard nothing about it.
Q. At any rate, you heard nothing about a death?
A. No, I only know that two were carried to the hospital on stretchers and I saw nothing after that.
Q. When was it that they were taken out?
A. That was during the experiment.
Q. Now, before you answer, please think is it not possible that one of these men was taken away at the very beginning of the experiment?
A. No, that is not possible.
Q. THen, I must tell you that Mettbach said that he was taken away on the first day.
A. That cannot be so, Mettbach wont through the whole experiment.
Q. Now perhaps you arc mixting up the two Mettbachs. I am referring to the younger Mettbach.
A. I don t know any young Mettbach at all, all I know is the older Mettbach, he was a Schweizer and was with me in the experiment.
THE PRESIDENT: The secretary will file the certificate of Dr. Roy A. Martin, Captain, Medical Corps, stating that the defendant Oberhauser will not be able to be in court today on account of illness.
Just a moment, counsel.
During the recess which the Tribunal is about to take, the witness will be kept in the custody of the Marshal and will not be allowed to talk to anyone.
THE INTERPRETER: Your Honor, may I make a correction?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, go ahead.
THE INTERPRETER: When this witness has been using the word "Schweizer", he is not referring to the nationality Swiss, but to the German word "Schweizer", meaning a dairyman.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, the record will show the correction. The Tribunal will now be in recess.
(A recess was taken).
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel may proceed.
BY DR. STEINBAUER:
Q Witness, will you please be kind enough to give me your home address and your exact present residence?
A It is Heilbronn on the Neckar, Jaegerhausstrasse, formerly the RAD camp.
Q And this is where you are living now?
A Yes.
Q In order not to misunderstand one another, during the experiment you drank no sea water, only water which had the salt removed?
A No, this water also contained salt. It was the second type.
Q But you don't know that it was called Schaefer water?
A No, I don't know that.
Q But at any rate, it wa.s not sea water?
A Yes, it was sea water, but not as much salt content as the other.
Q Don't you know the names of the two persons who allegedly went to the hospital?
A No, I don't know their names.
Q You went through the hell of Auschwitz?
A Yes.
Q After the experiment, you went into the quartermaster's office, didn't you?
A. Yes.
Q Now, if you compare these two concentration camp experiences, don't you think that the quartermaster's office was a comparatively good detail?
A No, on the contrary. I had to do hard work there. I had to transport rifles and machine parts, and we had to do whatever work there was there.
Q Didn't you have to deal with the so-called property room there?
A No.
Q Is it correct that you actually experienced a liver puncture performed on you?
A Yes.
Q Well, where is the scar?
A The scar is no longer visible.
Q Don't you have a little white circle on your dark skin. I am sure that you could see if there was a liver puncture there.
A No, I can't see anything.
Q Would you agree to be given a medical examination to see whether you have such a scar?
A Certainly.
DR. STEINBAUER: In that case, I have no further questions to put to the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Any further questions on the part of counsel for the defendant Schroeder or Becker-Freyseng? Does the prosecution have any redirect examination?
MR. HARDY: The prosecution has no further questions to put to this witness, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness is excused from the witness stand.
(Witness excused.)
MR. HARDY: At this time the prosecution would like to call Karl Hoellenrainer to the witness stand.
THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal will bring the witness Karl Hoellenrainer to the stand.
KARL HOELLENRAINER, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
JUDGE SECRING: Hold up your right hand and be sworn. I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(Witness repeated the oath.)
You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. HARDY:
Q Witness, your name is Karl Hoellenrainer?
A Yes.
Q Would you spell your last name, please? Did you hear me, witness? Spell your last name.
A Yes.
Q Would you spell your last name, please?
A Yes. H-o-e-l-l-e-n-r-a-i-n-e-r.
Q When and where were you born, witness?
A I was born in Fuerth, in Bavaria.
Q What year, what is the date of your birth?
A I was born on the 9th of March, 1914.
Q Prior to the time that you were arrested by the Gestapo, were you ever sentenced or arrested by the police?
A No, I was arrested on the 29th of May, 1944, by the Gestapo. I was sent to Auschwitz from Nuernberg.
Q Witness, just a moment, please. Have you ever appeared as a witness before any Tribunal before this time?
A No.
Q Now, in the course of this examination, witness, I want you to attempt to be brief, yet tell the Tribunal the story of what happened to you, and also try to answer my questions specifically; and due to the fact that I am asking you questions in English and you are answering in German, it is necessary for you to pause a moment after you have heard my question so that it will be properly translated to you before you answer. Now, witness, for what reasons were you arrested by the Gestapo on the 29th of May, 1944?
A Because I am a gypsy of mixed blood.
Q And after your arrest you were sent to the Auschwitz concentration camp?
A Yes.
Q How long did you remain in Auschwitz?
AAbout four weeks.
Q And then whore were you placed?
A I was sent to Buchenwald.
Q How long did you stay in Buchenwald?
A I only stayed there for a few days.
Q And then what happened to you?
A I was in a tent camp in Buchenwald, and suddenly our numbers were called up, 40 men were called, including me, and we were told that we would have to leave for Dachau in order to work there. As soon as we arrived at Dachau we were put in a quarantine block, and one day an SS man came and wrote down our numbers, and they sent us to the surgical department of a certain doctor of the Luftwaffe. I am afraid I no longer remember that physician's name. I know that he came from the Luftwaffe and that ho was an Austrian. He examined all of us, and then we were divided into groups for a seawater experiments
Q Just a moment, witness. I now want to ask you some brief questions concerning what you have just told us. You state that you went to Dachau to work. Did you consider going to Dachau to be good fortune?
A Yes; a friend of mine, a gypsy, had already been to Dachau, and he told me that the situation was much better and that we would get better food. But that was not the case.
Q Well, did you understand what you were to do when you went to Dachau, what type of work was it, bomb disposal or removal?
A Yes, we went there to work.
Q Did you understand that you were going to Dachau to volunteer for seawater experiments?
A No, never.
Q Now, upon arrival in Dachau you then went to the quarantine block, is that correct?
A Yes.
Q You stayed there for a day or two and were given physical examinations?
A Yes.
Q Did you also get an X-ray examination?
A Yes.
Q And then you were transferred to the experimental block?
A Yes.
Q And there you met a professor, or a doctor?
A Yes.
Q Do you think you would be able to recognize that doctor if you saw him today?
A Immediately, yes. Yes, I would immediately recognize him.
Q Would you kindly stand up from your witness chair, take your earphones off, and proceed over to tho defendants' dock, and see if you can recognize the professor that you met at Dachau?
(Witness leaves the stand.)
Q Walk right over, please.
(Witness attempts assault on the defendant Beiglboeck.)
MR. HARDY: The prosecution apologizes for the conduct of the witness, Your Honors. Due to tho manner of this examination, the prosecution will have no further questions, Your Honors.
THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal will keep the witness guarded before the Tribunal.
DR. STEINBAUER (Counsel for the defendant Beiglboeck): I have no questions to put to the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Will the Marshal bring tho witness before the bar of this Court? Will an interpreter come up here who can translate to the witness?
Witness, you were summoned before this Tribunal as a witness to give evidence.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: This is a court of justice.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: And by your conduct in attempting to assault the defendant Beiglboeck in the dock, you have committed a contempt of this Court.
THE WITNESS: Your Honors, please excuse my conduct. I am very excited.
THE PRESIDENT: Ask the witness if he has anything else to say in extenuation of his conduct.
THE WITNESS: I am very excited and that man is a murderer. He ruined me for my entire life.
THE PRESIDENT: Your statements afford no extenuation of your conduct. You have committed a contempt in the presence of the Court, and it is the judgment of this Tribunal that you be confined in the Nuernberg prison for the period of 90 days as punishment for the contempt which you have exhibited before this Tribunal.
THE WITNESS: Would the Tribunal please forgive me. I am married and I have a little son. And this man is a murderer. He gave me salt water and he performed a liver puncture on me. Please do not confine me to prison.
THE PRESIDENT: That is no extenuation. The contempt before this Court must be punished. People must understand that a Court is not to be treated in that manner. Will the Marshal call a guard and remove the prisoner to serve the sentence which this Court has inflicted for contempt? It is understood that the defendant is not to be confined at labor. He is simply to be confined in the prison, having committed a contempt in open court by attempting to assault one of the defendants in the dock.
MR. HARDY: At this time, Your Honor, the Prosecution will request a brief recess, if Your Honors please.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, the Tribunal will be in recess for a moment.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHALL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: I desire to inquire whether or not stenographers have made a record of the recent occurrence, in the course of which the Tribunal found it necessary to sentence the witness Karl Hoellenrainer for contempt?
MR. HARDY: The court reporter for that time has left the courtroom. We will check if the President desires it to be in the record.
THE PRESIDENT: In order to make the record clear, I will state for the record that the witness Karl Hoellenrainer, having been called to the stand and duly sworn, and a few preliminary questions propounded to him, was requested by counsel for the prosecution to identify the defendant Beigleboeck. In order to do so the witness advanced toward the dock and at approximately 1125 hours on this morning of Friday, 27 June 1947, as he approached the dock, suddenly sprang over the rail of the dock and attempted to assault the defendant Beiglboeck. The witness was promptly placed under restraint, and the Tribunal directed that he be brought before the Tribunal to be punished for a contempt of court committed in open court by his attempted assault upon the defendant Beiglboeck. The witness was asked if he had anything to say in extenuation and simply pleaded his excitement and the strain he was under and that he yielded to the impulse of the moment upon identifying the defendant Beiglboeck in the dock. The Tribunal thereupon sentenced the witness to confinement to the Nurnberg Prison for a period of ninety days for a contempt committed in open court, the defendant to be confined but not put to labor.
MR. HARDY: The prosecution has no further testimony to offer at this time, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Is Counsel for the defendant Handloser ready to proceed?
DR. NELTE: (for the defendant Handloser): Mr. President, gentlemen of the Tribunal, the submission of evidence in the case of the defendant Dr. Handloser was broken off on the 20th of February 1947 by the submission of the document HA 30, Exhibit 51.
The Tribunal has temporarily admitted into evidence a number of documents for the defense. It has accepted them subject to the submission of the proper oath in the prescribed form. In that correction I have to mention document HA 42, which has the temporary Exhibit No. 19, and also document HA 3 which has the temporary Exhibit No. 21.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, there has been handed to the Tribunal one file of these documents. Are there no other files available for the members of the Tribunal?
DR. NELTE: I asked the Secretary General to submit these documents to the Tribunal by handing him that file yesterday. I asked him to see to it that the Tribunal would have today available the translated and mimeographed document. I had believed that would be possible by this morning. All the documents have been translated and mimeographed. They have been made available in sufficient numbers for the benefit of the Tribunal.
MR. HARDY: Anticipating further difficulties in the presentation of the defense counsel's supplementary documents, I would suggest that if possible the defense counsel could start out and make an index that the Tribunal can use and that the prosecution can use, such index containing Exhibit No. 1 through to the final exhibit which they wish to introduce. I have before me now about eight or nine document books or supplemental sheets for the defendant Handloser; I feel certain that Dr. Nelte has no intention of introducing each and every document in those eight or nine supplementary editions that I have. However, in order to follow him and in order to follow the future presentation of documents, if we were provided with these indexes, then we could follow the presentation more readily and discard the documents which they do not intend to introduce, and then we could properly assemble the exhibits in one folder or two folders as the case may be, completely disregarding the superfluous documents. I think that would be the only way I could work it out.
I have several documents, and each time Dr. Nelte reads off a number it will take me a considerable number of minutes to find the document involved. We shall go on now and see if we can follow. But in the future if the defense would follow that it would be most helpful.
THE PRESIDENT: The suggestion of the prosecution appears to the Tribunal to be excellent. If that plan can be followed by defense counsel it will make matters easier for the Tribunal and opposing counsel. My question in the first place was directed to the fact that the Tribunal has on the bench only one file of these affidavits. There must be more available. I would ask Mr. Hardy -- the secretary is absent for the moment -- if during the noon recess he could see if these documents are not available in the office of the Secretary-General so that each member of the Tribunal could be provided with a file.
MR. HARDY: I must say that Dr. Nelte has been most helpful in that he has given me a folder containing the documents which he wishes to introduce as supplements, but I am unable to ascertain what he left off and if he is going to use some of the others, and if these indexes can be provided at a later date, we can proceed with this group of documents which he will offer as supplements and introduce formally now. I presume the Tribunal has one set put in one folder as I have.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has one set.
DR. NELTE: Mr. President, this file is the one which I personally submitted yesterday, when distributing the documents; however, a number of copies are provided for the Tribunal as well as for the prosecution, and I assumed that these documents would already be in front of the Tribunal at the time I started my submission.
THE PRESIDENT: Evidently the Secretary-General has just arrived.
MR. HARDY: Dr. Nelte does have before him Your Honor, a rather detailed index starting with Exhibit No. 1 and going through Exhibit No. 77 as I see it here, which is just what I was referring to. If he could have that mimeographed, even in the German language as it is now, without translating it, it would be decidedly helpful, and then we could take our document books and supplements and weed them out and have what he has presented to the court.
THE PRESIDENT: During the noon recess you can endeavor, Counsel to assist Dr. Nelte in seeing that the mimeographing process moves along as rapidly as possible.
DR. NELTE: I have just explained that I submitted a number of affidavits during the case of Handloser which received only temporary exhibit number. Before starting the further submission of evidence, I should like to submit these three affidavits again in the proper form, as desired by the Tribunal. This is the affidavit by Shaefer, document HA 42, Exhibit No. 19. Shaefer has now submitted the affidavit in the form as prescribed by the Tribunal, and the same holds true of the affidavit of Professor Rodenwald, which is Document HA 3, Exhibit No. 21, and finally the affidavit of Professor Frey, which is Document HA 52, Exhibit No. 31. I submit these three formal affidavits to the Secretary-General, and I now ask the High Tribunal to convert the provisional admission of these documents into a final admission.
THE PRESIDENT: Has counsel for the prosecution examined these documents? Is counsel satisfied that the proper jurat is attached? The secretary will hand him the original documents.
MR. HARDY: This merely a formality. At the time that the documents wore introduced, we objected to them because of lack of jurat. The three supplementary pages contain jurats duly notarized or signatures sworn to, so the prosecution withdraws any objection.
THE PRESIDENT: It appearing to the Tribunal that Handloser Documents HA 42, HA 3, and HA 52, Exhibits respectively 19, 21, and 31, are now in order, those three exhibits are received in evidence on behalf of the defendant Handloser.
MR. HARDY: I might add, Your Honor, that you will find the affidavits in Handloser English Document Book No. 2; wherein you will find Handloser Document No. 3, which is Exhibit 21, Handloser Document 42, which is Exhibit 19; and in Handloser Document Book No. 3 you will find Handloser Document 52 which is Exhibit 31.
THE PRESIDENT: I will return these three pages to the Secretary, who will see that they are properly attached to the exhibits.
DR. NELTE: I should now like to ask the High Tribunal to give me a decision regarding the admission of a letter written by the prelate, Kreuz. This is Document HA 39, which has been provisionally admitted as Exhibit 41. This can be found on page 3262 of the German record. After the Prosecution had raised an objection to this document, the President rules as follows: "It appears from the evidence offered that it is an answer to a letter by Dr. Nelte, dated the 4th of January. If Dr. Nelte would submit a copy cf the letter written to Dr. Kreuz, the Tribunal would save something before it in order to make a decision. Document HA 39, as it is before the Tribunal, now is clearly not admissible, as it is merely a letter. If Dr. Nelte can submit a copy of the letter to which this is the answer, the Tribunal, will then be able to make a decision regarding the admissibility of Document HA 39 later." I have reied to have Prelate Dr. Kreuz add to his letter the jurat as prescribed by the Tribunal. On 19 March, 1947, I informed Military Tribunal No. 1 that the Prelate Dr. Kreuz because of basic principles has refused to give an affidavit in lieu of an oath, and I asked the Tribunal to admit the letter without the jurat, since it is of particular value to me with reference to Dr. Handloser's character, and I referred to article III, Ordinance VII.
In my letter of 3 March 1947 I also applied to the High Tribunal, in case the Tribunal should not want to admit this letter in spite of its importance, to approve the Prelate Dr. Kreuz as a witness, and ask him to come to Nurnberg. I have no decision of the High Tribunal in answer to this application, and I am asking you now to tell me whether I may assume that this letter of the prelate Dr. Kreuz, Document HA 39, is finally admitted as Exhibit 41 or whether the Tribunal desires to make any other decision in that connection.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal understands that the matter rests before the Tribunal in exactly the same situation as it was when first presented; is that correct, Dr. Nelte?
DR. NELTE: I have ccnformed with the wish of the Tribunal and submitted my letter to the Prelate Dr. Kreuz, on 19 March 1947.
The Tribunal desired to see my letter to him in order to be able to decide whether the answer of the Prelate Kreuz can be admitted in evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: Has counsel for the Prosecution any comment?
MR. HARDY: I have no comment to make, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Upon the record before the Tribunal, the letter from Dr. Kreuz, if I understand his name correctly, is not admissible, and the Tribunal is not disposed to summon Kreuz as a witness.
MR. HARDY: Inasmuch as the letter is a character reference of Dr. Handloser, the Prosecution withdraws its objection without prejudice, even though it doesn't meet with the requirements of the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: In view of the statement of the Prosecution, the letter by Dr. Kreuz to Dr. Handloser will be admitted in evidence, attached to a copy of Dr. Handloser's letter to Dr. Kreuz, which Dr. Nelte would certify to be a copy of the letter which he wrote to Dr. Kreuz. That may be admitted in evidence under these circumstances as Handloser Exhibit 41.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, I have a problem to take up here. Dr. Nelte has, as Handloser Document 52, in Document Book 3, as Handloser Exhibit 31, just submitted a jurat. This Document 52 has a jurat already, but Document Handloser 10 from the same affiant does not have a jurat, and I assume that this jurat from the same affiant should be attached to Handloser Document No. 10 and not Handloser Document 52. I offhand do not know the exhibit number of Handloser Document 10. That is to straighten that one out.
I also might call to Dr. Nelte's attention that he has given us a jurat for Handloser Document 42, which is Exhibit 19, and that document already has a jurat on it. Perhaps this jurat also should be attached to another document. Maybe he could clear that up at recess, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: We will pass that now until the noon recess, which will occur in a few moments, and then it can be cleared up and the matter clearly stated to the Tribunal when we reconvene.