Bickel declared himself prepared to arrange for a meeting with Zervas. Together with the mayor of Jannina and a deputy of the Archbishop, Bickel paid a visit to the headquarters of Zervas in October 1943. After his return he told me that Zervas was basically inclined to arrange for a truce, but only on condition of complete secrecy, as be did not wish to lose face with the British who had a liaison-commando assigned to his staff. Further, Zervas asked that a higher German General Staff Officer with adequate authority be detailed to him.
The Chief of Staff of the XXII Mountain Corps Colonel Dietl was entrusted with the negotiations. An "Edes" Captain turned up at the place of the rendezvous and reported that, to his regret, General Zervas was unable to appear personally as had been arranged; he was unable to disengage himself at his headquarters because of an offensive which the EAM had against the Edes. He himself, said the captain, bad no authority to negotiate.
If, and to which extent, negotiations with General Zervas were carried out afterwards, I am unable to say, as the division was transferred from the area of Jannina at the beginning of November 1943.
The statement is signed Dr. Karl Heinz Rothfuchs and it is duly sworn to and properly certified.
I am further reading from Lanz document book 3 a document which is document No. 88, which will be offered under Lanz exhibit 170. Lanz document book 3, document No. 88, page 53, Lanz exhibit 170. This affidavit happens to be executed by the same affiant who executed the previously read affidavit, Dr. Karl Heinz Rothfuchs. These statements refer to a special case, which came up during the evidence of General Lanz. It says: "Subject: The shooting to death of Italian officers in Sarando at the beginning of October 1943.
"These are officers of such Italian troop units, who after the Italian capitulation on 8 September 1943 worked together in the Albanian coastal area Delvine-Saranda-Kue with the Communist groups there and gave their arms to the groups, sold them or fought together with the hands against the German troops.
These officers were as far as I remember shot by troops of the 1st Mountain Division in or near Saranda according to a summary court martial on the basis of an order of the Fuehrer which was in effect at that time. This execution was then reported by the First Mountain Division to the XXII Mountain Corps."
The affidavit is signed by Dr. Karl Heinz Rothfuchs on 11 October 1947. He was at the time 1-C with the 1st Mountain division, as he states, and his affidavit is properly sworn to and it is duly certified. This affidavit is offered to the Tribunal as evidence concerning the type of Italian officers involved at the time and furthermore for the examination of the question whether this shooting had been ordered by General Lanz or by the division and finally for the examination of the further question when General Lanz learned for the first time about this shooting.
That brings me to the end of document book Lanz 3. Then I have a few documents to read from document book Lanz 4, No. Lanz document book 4. I first of all want re-read No. 145 on page 74, I repeat document 145 on page 74. This document will be offered under exhibit No. Lanz 171. This is an affidavit executed by one Hubert Hoerterer. The affiant states that from May, 1944 until September, 1944 he was platoon leader in the Light Infantry Mountain Battalion 79, The affiant deals with measures taken by General Lanz for the help and in the interest of the Greek civilian population and goes on to describe the personality and character of his General in a similar manner as has previously been done by other affiants. His statements are duly certified and properly sworn to.
The next document I want to offer to the Tribunal is the following document, namely No. 145 on page 76 and this will be offered as Lanz exhibit 172. I repeat document No. 146, page 76, exhibit No. Lanz 172. This is an affidavit executed by one Franz Rossell, who as he states was Corps Engineer leader in the XXII Mountain Corps during the years 1944 and 1945.
He describes in his affidavit in a detailed manner the attitude of General Lanz toward the civilian population. This affidavit is also offered in order to submit to the Tribunal material and documents for the examination of the question whether the plan asserted by the Prosecution for the extermination of the Greem population actually ever existed at any time.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, please. We will interrupt at this time and take our afternoon recess.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. SAUTER: Your Honor, Lanz Document 147 on page 79 of Document Book IV---this is document which received Exhibit No. 173 -an affidavit by Josef Kirchmair who, according to his statements, was first sergeant on the corps staff of the 22nd Mountain Army Corps --that is, under General Lanz, from 1943 until the end of the war.
This affiant describes a number of details with regard to General Lanz, attitude to the civilian population, especially during the withdrawal of the German troops from Joannina where, according to the description of the affiant, Lanz and his troops left with model correctness.
The next document is No 148 on page 81 and receives exhibit number 174. This is an affidavit by a former NCO, Johann Jakob, duly's sworn to and certified and concerns the same subject, the attitude of General Lanz his very humane treatment, et cetera.
The next document is Document 149 on page 82. It is Exhibit No. 175. This is an affidavit by Dr. Lanz Otto Hofmann who from Autumn 1939 until the end of 1942 was attached to the 1st Mountain Division. He states the individual positions he held, and for some period Lanz was his immediate superior. The affiant was not an active officer, he was a reserve officer. The affiant then goes on to describe in this document 149 in detail the character of General Lanz, his soldierly attitude, his political attitude, his attitude with regard to the civilian population and similar things. The affiant is also duly certified and sighed.
The next document I offer to the Tribunal is Document No. 150 in Lanz Document Book No. IV on page 85. This receives exhibit number 176, an affidavit by Dr. Walter Schmitt concerning General Lanz as a man and as a leader of troops and about his attitude towards the civilian population, towards prisoners, et cetera.
The next document which I will skip, is an affidavit by Georg Lipp who was interrogated here as a witness.
I would like Document 152 to be accepted now. This is on page 92.
It receives exhibit number 177. This is a supplement to the former affidavit by Rudolf Schwarz who was the Protestant Divisional Chaplain on the staff of the defendant Lanz. The affiant talks here about the extraordinary bravery of the defendant Lanz and describes the incident in which the defendant Lanz, contrary to the order of his commander acted without taking into account any consequences which might have arisen for him.
Document 153 is a letter from Cardinal Faulhaber, Archbishop of Munich, to the American Supreme Commander, General Eisenhower, which becomes Exhibit 178. It describes General Lanz in a similar manner as is described by other affiants and is offered to the Tribunal as proof of the question whether the defendant can be accused of crimes against humanity.
The next document is in Document Book Lanz No. V. This is Document No, 155, on page 1. It receives exhibit number 179. This comes from the Washington documents and it is by chance a contribution to the subject of General Lanz's attitude to and welfare for the civilian population, and how he kept food back for the civilian population.
The next document is on page 5. This is Document No. 158. This receives exhibit number 180. This is an affidavit by the Ib clerk of a Mountain Infantry Battalion which was under Lanz from August 1943 until January 1944. This affiant, too, confirms the support given to the population in Greece by the troops under orders from General Lanz.
And this, Your Honors, brings me to the end.........
THE PRESIDENT: Pardon me just a minute; we are trying to check here and see if there is a duplication of exhibits.
I think we have cleared up any error of pagination that we may have had here. You may continue.
DR. SAUTER: Thank you, Your Honor. This brings me to the end of my case in chief for General Hubert Lanz and I would just like to reserve to myself the right at a later period to submit a few more affidavits which we are waiting for, partly from Greece, and some others which we want to offer to the Tribunal with regard to a few points arising from the cross examination and which the defendant Lanz would like to clear up. Otherwise, I have nothing further at the moment. I am, therefore, at the end of my case in chief for General Lanz/.
THE PRESIDENT: Before you close your case entirely at present -- and concerning your desire for reservation to present further documents, that right will be given you -- through neglect and oversight on my part I failed to grant to my associates an opportunity to question the defendant; and if he will kindly return to the witness chair, I shall appreciate it.
Judge Carter, do you have any questions which you wish to ask the defendant Lanz?
EXAMINATION BY JUDGE CARTER:
Q. General, under German military procedure, was it your duty to review or pass upon the findings of a court martial that took place within your corps?
A. I don't know about such a duty, unless it was my own courts but I hadn't any court for a long time.
Q. Well, I was merely trying to find out the German procedure. Was some military officer required to review or examine the findings of a court martial or not?
A. The findings of the court martials were submitted to the judicial authorities for confirmation.
Q. But no divisional commander or corps commander was required to pass upon it? Was that your statement?
A. When a sentence was passed by q court martial, the sentence was given to the competent judicial authorities for confirmation of the execution?
Q. And the commander of the unit, whether it was a division or corps or whatever it was, had nothing to do with it? Was that the German procedure?
A. If the division court had passed sentence, then the sentence was given to the division commander, as judicial authority for confirmation, he then had to do this. If it was a death sentence, for instance, on a high German officer, then in this case the confirmation, as far as I know, had to be given by Field Marshal Keitel on behalf of Hitler. Then therefore, the files had to be passed on further.
THE PRESIDENT: Judge Burke?
BY JUDGE BURKE:
Q. A few days ago the expression was used by the interpreter with respect to your attitude towards one phase of the matter in which the word "retrospective" was the interpretation. Was your thought and your objection based upon the fact that it was "retroactive" rather than "retrospective"?
A. Might I ask what the matter concerned was? I am afraid I can't understand.
Q. It was with respect to your statement concerning your appearance before the Tribunal. You referred to Control Council Law No. 10 and you referred also to the fact that as a prisoner of war you were entitled to be tried by a commission of military people of equal rank, but the expression was used by the interpreter with respect to the type of offense which you are charged, at least with one particular, that it was in retrospect or retrospective. Do you recall?
A. Unfortunately, I can't remember this matter at all. I am very sorry.
Q. I will attempt to refresh my own recollection and yours by reference to the printed record at some later date. Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: I take it that these brief questions by the members of the Tribunal will not occasion further examination by counsel?
DR. SAUTER: No, thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: The prosecution has not indicated that they have any further questions. You may be excused then, General Lanz, subject to your recall at such time as Judge Burke is able to check the record.
Subject to your reservation previously announced, Dr. Sauter, I take it you have now closed your case for the defendant Lanz?
DR. SAUTER: Yes, thank you, Your Honors.
THE PRESIDENT: What defense counsel will present the case at this time?
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: Dr. Mueller-Torgow for General Felmy.
Your Honors, I am ready now to begin the case for the defendant Felmy. I will proceed as follows.
First of all, I would like to call my client to the witness stand, and then to examine two other witnesses who have been approved by the Tribunal. They are Professor Dr. Georg Stadtmueller and Pastor Joachim Georg Lange. With the permission of the Tribunal, I would like to call the defendant Felmy to the witness stand.
(Helmuth Felmy, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
THE PRESIDENT: The witness will raise his 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.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
THE PRESIDENT: You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. MUELLER*TORGOW (Counsel for defendant Felmy):
Q. General, would you please state your personal details?
A. My full name is Helmuth Walter Wolfgang Felmy. I was born in Berlin on the 28th of May 1885. My father worked in the Berlin town council and was in charge of the Berlin Municipal Markets.
I am married to Helen nee Boettcher. I have three sons: 21 years, 19 years, and 17 years old. The eldest is a British prisoner of war in Egypt.
Q. Please describe your career until the beginning of the First World War.
A. In 1893 my father died and then the next year I joined the Cadet Corps in Karlsruhe. In 100 I went to Lichterfelde in the Main Cadet Institute and there in autumn 1904 I matriculated and then I joined Infantry Regiment 61 as an ensign and was stationed in Thorn in West Prussia. Here I served my lieutenant's period. I trained recruits and became Battalion Adjutant. It was my personal desire to go to the colonies but this was not fulfilled; on the 1st of June 1912 I entered the Instruction and Experimental Station for Military Aviation in Doeberitz. In January 1913 I became First Lieutenant and then in Autumn I entered the Military Academy in Berlin.
Q And what did you do during the first World War?
A On mobilization, I was transferred to the east in the 16th Air Detachment, and took part in the great battles in the east -- Tennenberg, the battle of Masuren, under command of General Field Marshal von Hindenburg. In December 1914 I became captain and leader of an air force detachment. There I took part in other battles in the East-Prussia -Kowno, Wilna--and in July 1916 I became leader of an air detachment which was in action in the Sisai Desert and under the command of General von Krest took part in an action against the Suez canal. In Spring 1918, I went back to the Western Front. There I was in charge of a so-called Artillery Air Force Detachment. And then in the summer of 1918 I was ordered back to the Reich Colonial Office in order to build up our future colonial air force units. The Versailles Peace Treaty took our colonies away from us, under the pretext that the Germans were not capable of colonizing, and so this brought to an end my employment in the colonies.
Q Which decorations did you receive during the first World War?
A The Iron Cross, first and second classy the Knights Cross of the House Order of the Hohenzollern with swords; and a few foreign decorations.
Q And did you remain a soldier after the end of the first World War, and why?
A In the course of the 100,000 men selection, I was taken over into the Reichswehr. I enjoying being a soldier, and I had always been very interested in training and educating soldiers.
Q Then would you please describe your further positions in the Army?
A First of all, I was in charge of a motorized detachment in Kassel. Then in February 1921 I went to the Fifth Division in Stuttgart. I remained there until 1924, autumn. Then I was transferred to the Operations Branch of the Reichswehr Ministry. This activity came to an end after two years. Then I was transferred to the staff of the Fifth Infantry Commander in Stuttgart. On the first of February 1927 I became a major. In 1929, I went back again to the Reichswehr Ministry, into the Organizations Branch. And then in 1931 I became a Lieutenant Colonel, and then in April 1933 I became commander of the Seventeenth Infantry Regiment in Brunswick and on the first of October I was promoted colonel.
Q Did you then remain in the Army?
A I was only in charge of the regiment for a short time and on the first of December I was transferred to the Reich Air Ministry which had in the meantime, been newly formed. I became chief of staff with the command of the air school. In April 1935, I wont to Munich as Senior Air Corps Commander.
Q When did you become a General?
A On the first of January 1936, after thirty-two years of service, I became a Brigadier General. In October 1936, I took over the newly formed Seventh Air District, in Brunswick. In April 1937, I was promoted to Major General and the new Air Fleet II, which arose out of various reorganizations, was made subordinate to me after I had become General of the Air Force in February 1938.
Q What was the command area of Air Fleet II?
AAir Fleet II covered three Corps Headquarters districts. The left flank was in Bonn? the right in Luebeck. The air force had to be completely rebuilt, and not only the air training and further extended training of of the men was necessary, but the anti-aircraft detachments had to be completely reestablished and trained as well as the air signal troops, because the Ruhr Gebiet came under the command of the Air Fleet? as well as the two great ports of Hamburg and Bremen. It was the one task which I, as an officer, would have wanted -- to be active as Commander in Chief in most decisive spot and to be in charge of training the officers and men.
Q And was Air Fleet II active in tho entry into Austria and Czechoslovakia?
AAir Fleet II did not participate in the entry into Austria and Czechoslovakia and also not in the entry into the Sudotenland and Bohemia and Moravia.
Q You mean, first of all the Sudetenland and then Bohemia and Moravia?
A Yes.
Q And where were you at the outbreak of the war?
AAt the outbreak of the war, I was with my staff in the west. Alarge part of the bombing units of the Air Fleet took part in the war in Poland.
Q Did you have anything to do as regards order with these units, which were active in Poland?
A No, they were under another fleet, and were commanded by this fleet as long as they were there and not with us.
Q Did you take part in the French campaign?
A No, I did not take part in the French campaign. On the 12th of January 1940, I was dismissed.
Q Why were you dismissed?
AA liaison officer on the staff of the air fleet, a parachutist, had contrary to the well-known order, taken a top secret matter a military operational memorandum with him in the aircraft. On this occasion, the aircraft made an emergency landing in a neutral country and through this a part of this operational secret matter became known there. I was reproached with having informed the air force units concerned about this operational memorandum, even if only an excerpt from it.
Q And then, in your opinion, this affair was the real reason for your dismissal?
A No. Already since autumn 1938, there was tension between me and the Commander in Chief of the Air Force. On orders, I had worked out memorandum about the air war against England. I set down the pros and cons in this essay and came to the conclusion that an air war against England hadn't the slightest chance of success, according to technical experience and discoveries at that time.
A. This essay or this memorandum aroused the indignation of Goering or even Hitler, and it was sent back with numerous notes in the margin by Goering. And the later Chief of the General Staff of the Air Forces also stated orally something like, "This kind of work makes the Air Force impossible; this memorandum is a blow in the face for Field Marshal Goering." The memorandum, in my opinion, dissolved the tension which had been between us for so long a time, and I had given enough warnings about such kind of training and also about the speedy setting up of new units. The whole speedy set-up of the rebuilding program had cost us a great amount of losses. So, in my opinion, this incident, with the emergency landing of the officer, was a very welcome cause for my dismissal.
Q In this connection I submit from Felmy Document Book I, Document No. 31. This is on Page 49. This document contains excerpts from a book published in 1945 in Switzerland by the former Major General of the Air Force Rieckhoff. The title is "Trump or Bluff--12 Years of the German Air Force."
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Your Honor, I object to the submission of this document. Anything which is written by an author in a book is not a sworn statement, and we, of course, would have no opportunity to crossexamine him on the matter.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: Your Honor, I think the case is no different than if this man who wrote the book had given an affidavit. Major General Rieckhoff has given two affidavits for my client, which I will submit later on. The Prosecution is quite at liberty to call Major General Rieckhoff into the witness stand at any time.
Your Honor, could I give you this book so that you can have a look at it? (THE BOOK IS HANDED TO THE TRIBUNAL)
THE PRESIDENT: It is the thought of the Tribunal that this author is not here on the stand.
THE COURT INTERPRETER: Your Honor, the microphone is not turned on.
THE PRESIDENT: It is the thought of the Tribunal that this writer of this bock is not here on the stand and may not be particularly helpful to the Tribunal in the decision in this case. What we're interested in is the attitude of the witness who is now on the witness chair, the Defendant Felmy. If he has views similar to that which is expressed here (REFERRING TO THE BOOK), he can so state, but as to the excerpts which are now sought to be presented it seems to me that since there will not be an opportunity to question this witness the objection should be sustained. If you're going to call this man, that's another proposition, but at the present time I don't believe this exhibit should be admitted. That will be the ruling of the Tribunal.
BY DR. MUELLER-TORGOW:
Q Then, I offer from Felmy Document Book I, Document No. 22. This is an affidavit by a former General Hermann Hoth. I would like to read the first paragraph of his comments on the subject:
"In about 1927 I worked with former Major Felmy in the Reich Defense Ministry on questions of air war operations. At that time foreign literature was propagandizing the "war of nerves", that is the air war against enemy civilian populations. In contrast to that, Major Felmy was of the opinion that the task of the air force was to attack military targets. He gave not only military reasons, but rejected air attacks on large cities and on civilian populations for purely humanitarian reasons. At that time I was particularly impressed by this strict and just decision and his warmheartedness."
General, ...
THE PRESIDENT: Pardon me, ...
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: Then, what did you do...
THE PRESIDENT: Pardon me please.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: This affidavit receives Felmy Exhibit No. 1.
THE PRESIDENT: That was the question I wanted to ask, as to what exhibit number you were giving it.
BY DR. MUELLER-TORGOW:
Q General, what did you do after your dismissal?
A First of all I remained in Brunswick. In order not to sit doing nothing during the war I took a position, through a friend, in Brunswick.
Q Then, did you join the Party?
A Yes. In Brunswick, of course, I was very well known. In that relatively small town my dismissal had aroused considerable notice because there was no motive for it; so it was the subject of conversation in large circles of the population there and also, of course, amongst my friends. I had sons who were growing up who tried to think about the situation and also they were drawn into debates about it. In order to bring the whole matter to a head and in order to avoid differences of opinion, in the autumn of 1940 I reported my entry into the Party. Because of the incidents I had not the slightest reason to take this step. It was, in a certain way, a victory over myself. We officers were brought up to believe that personal fate has to be subordinated to higher elements, and especially so in times of crisis. This is what I wanted to show by this step.
Q And in addition did you also have economic reasons which caused you to join the Party?
A No.
Q In your professional career perhaps it helped to promote you a little quicker?
A No. As I said, they were purely personal reasons. I received my pension, and I was economically independent.
Q Did you ever hold an office in the Party?
A No.
Q Did you take part in Party meetings and other events?
A No.
Q Did your entry into the Party have any other consequences for you? Did you, perhaps, leave the church?
A No, I remained in the church with my family as always. My boys received religious instruction at school.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: Your Honor, at this moment I wanted to submit another excerpt from the Rieckhoff book. On page 51, as Exhibit number 2, I would like to submit document 80 in Document Book 3. I would like to read this. It is on page 42.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Mueller-Torgow, if in presenting and when you present your documents, if you could first refer to them by name or in volume, or book number 1, 2 or 3, and then the page, then the document number, and the Exhibit number, it would be helpful to the Tribunal. If you would kindly remember to preface your offer with that statement, it would help the Tribunal in making up its record.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: Yes, your Honor. This is Document Book Number 3 Document Number 80, page 42. This receives Exhibit number 2. This is an affidavit by Professor Dr. Alexander Graf Schenk von Stauffenberg. I would like to read this affidavit.
"Since 1st June 1944, as a Lieutenant and Special Mission Officer of the Corps Artillery Commander (Arko 168) General Schuster-Woldan, I belonged to the Staff of the General Headquarters of the 68th Army Corps. On the morning of the ill fated attempt of my brother on Hitler's life on 20 July 1944, I submitted a declaration to the Chief of Staff (similar to one already rendered to my immediate superior, the Artillery Commander) to the effect that I was the brother of the assassin, but ignorant of the latter's plans. At the same time I asked to be excused from my mess duties and from joint meals. I was thereupon told in the name of the commander General Felmy that I had committed no dishonorable deed and that there was therefore no reason to alter any existing behavior on my part; the same applied of course to the staff officers' attitude towards me. I was actually at liberty in Athens during the days following the event, after having given my word of honor that I would not try to escape, though I would have had the opportunity to disappear any time with the help of Greek friends. Not until the 24 July instructions of the Army Personnel Office were received via Army Group E to the effect that I was to be arrested immediately and was to be taken to Berlin a life, in the quickest possible manner.
Until that time, I was to be imprisoned in the military prison in Athens. This order was not carried out by the chivalrous General Felmy who ordered me to stay in my flat and had officers of his staff guard me there in an absolutely comradely manner. I gratefully remember this trip, until my arrest in Prinz-Albrecht-Strasse. It was carried out by two officers specially detailed by him, in a high-minded and comradely way. By the tactful and high minded intervention of the General for whom I shall feel grateful esteem and respect as long as I live, I was spared the already dreaded arrest in Athens by the SS or Gestapo, with all its probable consequences."
This is in connection with the defendant's membership of the Party.
BY DR. MUELLER-TORGOW:
Q. General, did you remain in Brunswick?
A. No. In October 1940 I went to Berlin. An old friend of mine who was in charge of a lot of cartels asked me to help him in his work, and I remained with him until the end of May 1941.
Q. And when did this activity came to an end?
A. On the 21st of May 1941 I was reactivated and became chief of a military commission which was to be sent to Iraq. On the journey there I comic to Aleppo in Syria, and because in the meantime the relations between England and Iraq came to an end, and that was to be expected; and at the time I also told Fieldmarshal Keitel and General Jodel about it.
Q. And were there any German troops at all in Iraq?
A. In Mossol and Bagdad there was in each place one air force squadron. They had withdrawn to Aleppo when I arrived there. According to a directive of the Foreign Office, the OKW then ordered the Squadrons to evacuate Syria. The British had used our presence there as a pretext and had threatened an attack on Syria. Well, then, when we had evacuated Syria -- it went relatively quickly -- the British attacked in Syria and pressed French troops there under General Denz slowly back until they capitulated; and so the activity of the military commission came to an end temporarily.
Q. Then you came to your appointment in Greece?
A. Yes, that is correct. About the middle of June I was appointed commander of southern Greece with headquarters in Athens. The staff of the former Military Mission which was still in the process of being set up was transferred to Junion south of Attica and was subordinated to me as a special staff F; since southern Greece was occupied by the Italians, the German troops only had the enclaves in the southern part of the Port of Pyreus and the districts around the air fields Tatei and Eleusus, and Calamati, and the Island of Crete was also subordinated to me territorially.
Q. And which Administrative Sub Area. Headquarters were subordinated to you?
A. In Athens and Epirus, there was one each with about three rifle battalions.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: Your Honor, in this connection I would like to submit a document in Felmy Document Book number 5 which is on page 1, and it is Document Number 88. This becomes Exhibit number 3.
BY DR. MUELLER-TORGOW:
Q. General, would you perhaps describe to us the most important points on this map?
A. This is a town plan of Athens and in the left bottom corner of the map, there it states the Bay of Phaleron. This can also be seen on the margins of the map, the Harbor Phaleron. It is a thick, pointed line which is shown at the bottom left-hand corner of the map, and one part of it goes through the Port of Pyreus, and the other finishes at the word "bay", (Bucht) Bay of Phaleron; and then if one goes along the Bay, another line starts which runs almost parallel with the bottom edge of the map, and the district contained therein is the airfield of Calamati.
THE PRESIDENT: Pardon me, please. We will not be able to conclude the testimony concerning this map this evening, so we will adjourn at this time until 9:30 tomorrow morning. (The Tribunal recessed until 0930 hours, 2 December 1947.)
Official Transcript of Military Tribunal V, Case VII, in the matter of the United States of America against Wilhelm List, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 2 December 1947, 0930, Judge Carter presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Courtroom will please take their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal V.
Military Tribunal V is now in session. God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the Court.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, will you ascertain if all the defendants are present in the Courtroom?
THE MARSHAL: May it please Your Honor, all the defendants are present in the Courtroom with the exception of defendant von Weichs who is in the hospital.
THE PRESIDENT: Judge Carter will preside at this day's session.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Your Honor, if I might interrupt very briefly the examination of General Felmy. The Prosecution on the 6th of November distributed to Your Honors, and filed with the Secretary General a memorandum of law concerning the unlawfulness of the German occupation of Greece and Yugoslavia, and the lawful belligerency of the Greek partisans and partisan units. The German translation of that memorandum was served to the Secretary General and distributed to defense counsel I believe on November 13, and on the 21st of November the Prosecution filed a supplementary memorandum of law concerning the law of hostages and reprisals and the plees of superior orders. The translation of that memorandum was distributed to defense counsel and filed with the Secretary General yesterday, that is December 1st. We have prepared one further memorandum of law on the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, and the inapplicability to these defendants of certain of the provisions of the Geneva Convention regarding the treatment due prisoners of war. That memorandum is being stenciled and mimeographed, and it will be ready for distribution to Your Honors and for service upon the Secretary General today, and I believe a German translation will be ready for distribution within the next two or three days.
Because the Prosecution was somewhat tardy in filing its memoranda law I hesitate to ask that the Tribunal place a date line on defense counsel for filing of replies. However, I would like to have any written argumentation of the defense filed in time for us to write replies thereto, or at least in time for us to include any replies we might wish to make toward our closing address.
THE PRESIDENT: I think it should be kept in mind in making that request, Mr. Fenstermacher, that by agreement of counsel for the prosecution and the defense, the original date for the filing of prosecution's brief was October 24.
DR. LUCK: (representing for Dr. Laternser) If it please the Tribunal, the last part of the memorandum of law the German text reached the defense as late as yesterday. Dr. Laternser had already discussed with His Honor repeatedly the reply to the memorandum of law. The defense endeavors to work as fast as possible on the memorandum of law, but just as the Prosecution, the Defense also needs a certain amount of time to work on the memorandum. As regards the memorandum of law mentioned by Mr. Fenstermacher, I would like to ask the Court to give defense counsel an opportunity to get in touch with each other.
JUDGE CARTER: The Tribunal will not fix any time for the filing of briefs on the part of defense at this time. We will wait until we have consulted with defense counsel and until they have had an opportunity to consult among themselves.
DR. MUELLER-TORGOW: If it please the Tribunal, I had fixed to the wall two maps. The right one is a map of Greece and the left one covers the area of the 68th Corps. In due course I shall refer back to these maps. Before I continue with my examination I would like to supplement the statements made by the witness yesterday. I would like to comment on his discharge from the Wehrmacht and about his party membership, and I would like to submit two affidavits in this connection, both from Rieckhoff.