Also you had no idea what such an assignment would be, and you asked him not to put you into such a position by pointing out that you had served in the First and in the Second World War, and that you just had returned from the Western Campaign. Then you said Heydrich agreed to this, and said that actually he had intended me to be a police director or a police president but owing to my knowledge of the church and church politics, he considered it suitable to employ me in his office. The question of your counsel then was, what did he suggest in this connection, and, you said, he suggested to me I should take over the State Police Office. Doesn't that indicate, Herr Biberstein, that you actually had the choice between taking the position in an Einsatzkommando, of which according to your own testimony you didn't know anything, or, the office of the State Police in Oppeln, of which you didn't know anything, either. Would you tell the Tribunal whether you were forced by Heydrich to take this position in Oppeln?
AThis question, Mr. Prosecutor, which you just asked me I had already answered in my direct examination as far as I know. I said I think that I could have refused that but what would have happened then I must have had in "inkling of" because I was under military law and by military order I could be employed in other tasks of war, and had been put at the disposal of the SD and the Chief of Security Police.
QHerr Biberstein, I do not want to argue with you. What I just read to you was that what you said about it.
Will you tell the Tribunal whether it is not true from your own testimony that you actually had the choice to take this position?
AThe choice between what offices?
QTo take the command of the Einsatzkommando, or the Police Office in the Gestapo Office in Oppeln.
AI already said yesterday that there was no choice between these two agencies. The first question of Heydrich's as to giving the assignment had nothing to do with the second matter.
AYou refused to take the first job offered to you, is that correct?
AYes, that is correct.
QAll right. Why where you then not in a position to refuse the second one?
AThe second assignment? He said in the second assignment, that he wanted to make me a police director, and apart from that I told him on the first occasion - you forget this - that I was not the man for this job, therefore, we compromised, and I accepted this compromise suggestion, and I had no other choice, and that is not voluntarily. I didn't go to him voluntarily at all.
QYou just said that you agreed to his second suggestion, so if you had to agree your voluntarity is, in my opinion, quite obvious, but possibly you are not - -
ANo, no, it was not voluntarily.
QHerr Biberstein, when you described your duties in Oppeln, you testified that you were also Political Referent to the Regierungspraesident, is that correct?
AYes.
QWill you explain to the Tribunal your tasks as Political Referent in more detail?
AFirst of all I had the job to deal with the welfare for families who had children. I had a number of files which dealt with this question only.
QWhich question is that?
AChild welfare - some law was passed according to which even non-employees or people who were not officials could receive money for children through this welfare. That was the assignment of the Landrat, District counsel. These files would come in as complaints to the Regierungspraesident, and I handled a great number of these files together with the Vice-president in the government office in Oppeln. I was not fully employed there.
THE PRESIDENT:Why not place the microphone on the left side, since naturally he will look towards the crossexaminer. BY MR. HOCHWALD:
QIt was your only task as Political Referent?
AI just was thinking what else it could have been. In any case there were not many tasks. I, of course, consulted with the Vice-president, on occasions when we want through the files and discussed them, but I can not remember at the moment any details. In any case, there were no "exciting"matters to deal with.
QWould you consider the task which you have just described a political one?
AYes, insofar as in this procedure the Kreisleiter objected to the granting of this child welfare support.
QThat was the only task of the political referent to the Regierungspraesident, is that correct?
AWell, I don't know, I only saw the files, and in the discussions which I had with the vice-president these files were handled, and that is all.
I can not remember anything else.
QCan you tell the Tribunal whether it is correct that the Regierungspraesident was in charge of the entire police force in the District of Oppeln?
AMr. Prosecutor, if you are going to ask me details about the channels of command, you will find no unable to give an exact answer. I can only speak about my impressions and not about the legal and actual matters.
QWhen you were interrogated, examined by the Tribunal what you did as Chief of the Gestapo, you said, I didn't do a thing but I was Political Referent to the Regierungspraesident, I was active in this field, and I asked you, what did you do in this field, and the answer to my question was again negative; so may I then assume that all the time you were in Oppeln you just didn't do a thing, is that correct? That you didn't know what happened in the Gestapo; you didn't know what happened at the Regierungspraesident; you do not know the chain of command; you just do not know a thing which happened in Oppeln, is that correct?
AMr. Prosecutor - -
DR. FIRCHT:Dr. Ficht for the defendant Biberstein. Your Honor, I would like to object to this question, insofar as the statements of the Prosecutor are not correct. The witness didn't say that he didn't do anything when he was in this Gestapo Office or the State Police Office. On the contrary he told in detail his activity. It is not that he denied it that definitely, but in my opinion the facts as of his own statement which are now being discussed are misunderstood, or at least a little distorted.
THE PRESIDENT:That is right. The cross-examiner always attempts to take the worst possible interpretation from what his victim has said, and it is up to the man who is on the fire to extract himself as best he can. That is what cross-examination is. It is a very cruel process.
THE WITNESS:May I say something about the last statement which was mentioned by the Prosecutor. If it has not yet been brought out from my direct examination, I want to emphasize again that during this whole period I hold a very miserable position, and I would like to consider whether it is not understandable how a human being with my training feels in such a position. It was the most unfortunate and unhappy time of my life. There was only one hope and that was that Heydrich gave me only a year in this activity after which I could leave this job. It is not so unnatural that I should have felt unhappy there and remained inactive. I should like to consider this.
QYou have said that it was the most unhappy time of your life, is that correct?
AYes.
QSo may I then assume that your position with the Einsatzkommando 6 was more agreeable than in Oppeln?
AI tried to combine these two things -- these two periods. It is one concept for me, that is, my activity with the SD and the security police. I always combined these activities and regarded them as one.
QHow long were you in Oppeln?
AOne year.
QAll right, you have said, if I am not mistaken, just two minutes ago that this was the most unhappy year of your life. You have been another year in the Einsatzgruppen. May I assume then that your first remark was just referring to your activities in Oppeln?
AYou misunderstood me, Mr. Prosecutor. It is absolutely clear for me and I emphasize this, that far be it from me to distinguish between the state police and the assignment in the cast. I have said quite clearly, and I have explained my attitude to the Einsatz; in my direct examination I gave details of it. It had its consequences, too, but I must emphasize again that I did not want to leave the Einsatz alone; I did not only want to be dismissed from the Einsatz alone but also from the assignment of the state police, and I always combined these two.
QCan you tell the Tribunal whether the Gestapo office in Oppeln in your time had a special department for Jewish affairs?
AYes.
QWas this department under your supervision?
AYes. It was part of the Gestapo state police in Oppeln.
QWhen you were assigned to an Einsatzkommando, you reported to the commander of Einsatzgruppe C, Thomas, in Kiev, is that correct?
AI did not quite understand.
QYou have testified here that when you arrived in Kiev in your new assignment, you reported to the commander of Einsatzgruppe C, Thomas, is that correct?
AYes, that is correct.
QWhen was that, Herr Biberstein?
AThat must have been beginning of September.
QThe first days of September, what days in September?
AOn the 18th I was with my commando for about 10 days. I stayed in Kiev. I presume I must have left Oppeln on the 3rd or 4th of the month, so on the 6th I would have arrived in Kiev.
QAnd you have said that on the 18th you took over the commend?
AYes.
QYou took over the commando 6?
AYes.
QCan you tell the Tribunal how strong the EinsatzKommando 6 was?
AAbout 150 men.
QHow many subkommandos?
AAs I already pointed out, four - Rostov, Taganrog, Novocherkassk, and Schachty.
QHow many officers were in the commando?
AEight.
QWill you tell us that in more detail, where were these eight officers, how many of them were at the subcommandos how many of them were at your headquarters, just how was the thing distributed?
AI already said in my direct examination that the commando consisted of the staff and the four subcammandos. In the staff there was the Einsatzkommando leader, his deputy, and the leader of 1 and 2, an officer, also the leader of 3 and 4, an officer. They were also leaders, officers. Then there was also one officer at the outpost Schachty, and one in Novo-Tscherkask. And then there was another officer in Solchose.
QThat made, together with you, nine officers, is that correct?
ANine, yes. Yes, and that would make nine officers. I had miscounted.
QTo recapitulate, you had four officers, one officer in each subcommando?
AExcept Taganrog.
QThen only three?
ANo. At my time there was no officer stationed at Taganrog. He was only a Sturmscharfuehrer, who was a noncommissioned officer at that time.
QYou had five officers in headquarters, and three officers at the subcommandos, is that correct -- six officers at headquarters and three officers at subcommandos, is that what you said -- I only want to keep the record straight. If you are mistaken, you can make a correction. Is that correct?
AI must count again. I left somebody out, and I want to point out that my heart attack which I had on Friday has not been fully cured yet. This is not supposed to be an excuse though. I am trying hard to follow and I am trying to answer all the questions.
As I said, deputy officer, 1, 2, 3, 4. That is five officers in the staff. Then one in Solchose, one in Schachty, and one in NovoTscherkask. There are only eight.
QAll right then, you had five officers in headquarters and three officers in subcommandos, and there was a fourth subcommando which was under the command of a noncommissioned officer?
ANo. He was wearing an officers' cap.
QWarrant officer?
AHe had the insignia of an officer and an officer's cap, but he had not quite the officers' rank.
THE PRESIDENT:You may not have In the German army an officer who is known as a "warrant officer" in the American Army. A warrant officer is one who holds a commission from the War Department and not from the ruler or the chief executive officer of the country, which would be the President in the United States. He is higher than a noncommissioned officer, and not quite a commissioned officer. We call it a warrant officer. BY MR. HOCHWALD:
QHow many officers were in Office 4, Herr Biberstein?
AOnly the chief of Department 4 who at the same time was the chief of the subcommando Rostov. As I have already said in my direct examination, he was the only one.
QHow many of these persons which you just enumerated were carrying out investigations and passed sentences and ordered executions?
AOnly from the subcommando up. It depended on the position that the person concerned held. An administrative officer was not entitled to do so.
QMy question is, how many of these could do it. You have enumerated to the Tribunal that you had eight officers, together with you, that you were eight. In office 4 there was only one. In every subcommando, with the exception of one, was only one. In one there was no commissioned officer at all. My question is now, who of these persons was entitled to carry out investigations, entitled to pass sentences, and to order executions?
AFour leaders, four officers.
QAll in all?
AYes. The others were not entitled to do it.
QWell, if I understood you correctly, the three subcommando leaders and the leader 4?
ANo. The leader 4, as I said, in Taganrog there was no officer. In Schachty and Novo Tscherkask, and Rostov. There were five. Aid then Nehring and, of course, I also was authorized.
QFive?
AYes.
QHow many people carried out executions?
AWhat do you mean, by executions, executions carried out -- you mean shootings? That I don't know. That are the subcommandos, Schachty, Novo Tscherkask, and Rostov.
QHow strong were the three commandos? You do not know?
AThat I cannot say. The men were detailed for these assignments.
QWhen you came to Kiev, you have received no instructions about your task as commander of Einsatzkommando 6, is that correct?
AYes, that is correct. I only got the directives to go to Rostov, take over the commando, and to inspect it and then report about it.
QWho then actually informed you about your tasks when you came on the 18th of September to Rostov?
ANo one informed me about my tasks. The commando was shown to me, I inspected it, and the leader 4 arranged this.
QThat was all you did. You did not question anybody, "What am I supposed to do as commander of Einsatzkommando 6"?
AI told him, "What do you do, and how do you do it" and "Please show me".
QWho was this leader 4 who just gave you this scanty information?
AThat was an SS Hauptsturmfuehrer.
QCan you tell the Tribunal his name?
AYes. This is already in the files. His name is Heidelberger.
QDo you know whether Heidelberger was instructed by Thomas to give you information on your task?
AWhether he had received orders from Thomas, that I do not know.
QHe never told you that he was -
AHe never told me that he had any such order. In any case, I do not remember.
QThomas knew that you were a former minister and had no experience in security matters, is that right?
AYes, that is correct.
QIs it not strange what Thomas who knew that, sent you in time of war to an important unit as its leader and neither information you about the security tasks or aid he instruct anybody to give you at least the basic information which was necessary for the carrying out of your tasks?
AI have dealt with this in detail in try direct examination. From my training, my professional training and my attitude to these matters, he drew the conclusions. He did not order me to this particular position, but I was sent there from the Berlin office. Berlin detailed me to this position, and I discussed the question in detail as to whether Thomas could not have, given me another assignment. He just couldn't do so. He found a solution which satisfied both parties.
QBut for the reason if at he could not change your assignment, it would be logical to me what he would have tried to make yourself acquainted with this job, just for the simile reason that he knew that you had to stay there as commander. He should have done something to make you able to fill out this position.
AActually, of course, I can't understand it. I told Thomas that I wanted to leave, I wanted to apply for a release. This he accepted. He said, "Well, go there. Of course, you have been detailed there by Berlin; one cannot do anything about it, but please go to that place and inspect it, and we shall see about it". That I did according to my duty, and he came to the decision, as I have already said, that the leadership task within the commando should be divided between Nehring and myself.
QThat was and of October, wasn't it?
AYes.
QSo what actually from the 18th of September to the end of October you were in command of the entire Einsatzkammando 6, is that right?
ANo, not quite. I think we misunderstood each other. Nehring arrived the end of October end the meeting was at the beginning of October, which I already said in my interrogations--on the 13th of October I returned to Rostov.
QSo you were at least from the 18th of September to the beginning of October--when you went to Kiev--in command of the entire Einsatzkommando 6?
AI always was, in the final analysis. I never denied that, and it always was that way.
QIs it correct than if I assume that Nehring was always your subordinate?
AIn the final analysis, yes, because only one man can be the officer and chief of a commando, and I think I confirmed this expressly in my direct examination.
QAm I light in assuming that these four persons which you have just enumerated, the three subcommanders and the leader of office 4 who were entitled to pass sentences and ordered executions, were all the time, when they did so, your subordinates, is that correct?
AYes, I said that in detail and quite explicitly.
QYou told the Tribunal that you never heard before this trial about the Fuehrer order, is that correct?
AYes, Yes.
QThat you first found out what this order really was, clearly before your mind, when the defendant Ohlendorf testified here, is that also correct?
AYes.
QWas it known to you that there was a definite general policy in the time when you were in the East and earlier to kill all Jews there?
ANo.
QWhen did you learn about this fact for the first time?
AAlso after 1945.
QWhen?
AWell, the word, "final solution," I heard for the first time here.
QWhen did you hear it here, in the trial or in pre-trial interrogation?
AIn the interrogation. I don't know whether I was asked for it then. I can't say anything about that. I can't say whether I heard it here or somewhere else, but here one is so mixed up that one doesn't really know where it is.
QYou did not hear about the so-called "final solution" before you came to Nuernberg?
AAs far as I remember, I did not.
QThen you don't remember whether you were interrogated by Mr. Wartenberg about the extermination of the Jews?
AI don't think so, but I can't say with certainty. I can't remember it.
QWell, it is an important matter. I do think you should have a recollection when you heard about that. You do not know?
AI said yesterday, if one is interrogated, one can't keep all the impressions that one gets, especially if there are strange matters which one isn't used to.
QYou just don't know any more?
ANo.
QAm I correct in assuming that these two executions which you described to the Tribunal and which you witnessed, one by gas van and one by shooting, were carried out between the 18th of September and the beginning of October 1942?
AYes.
QWho was chief of the detachment who carried out this execution?
AIn Rostov executions were carried out by the officer of the particular service. I don't know who it was at that time, but I went there with Heidelberger, at least, I drove there with him.
QDid you have a special execution section in your Einsatzkommando?
ANo, No. I already said the whole subcommando took part in it.
The men were detailed for these tasks, with the exception of the administration and the kitchen, of course.
QEverybody else?
AYes. Well, according to the requirements of the officer, who orders how many people are to be employed in it, and I did not have to deal with it.
QWell, we will assume that all members of an Einsatzkommando with the exception of the personnel of the cookhouse and of the administration took part in -
AOf course, administration and SD have to be excepted.
QTook part in executions, all others-
AWell, I don't know. I couldn't say anything else.
QYou watched an execution by asphyxiation?
AYes.
QDid you inform yourself whether such an execution is admissible according to German criminal law?
AI already testified as to this in my direct examination, and I said that I did not order this particular way of execution, but I found it when I arrived, and I had to assume that a lawyer had regulated it, and that all decrees had been examined, and I could not pass judgment myself.
QYou never tried to satisfy your own conscience in questions of that kind?
AI did not have to satisfy any conscience.
QYou have told the Tribunal just now that you were a commander of the outfit, and that all the people who carried out these orders were under your command, and I do think that it would have been necessary if you had satisfied your own conscience if that which was going on around you, and under your supervision, was legal or not.
AI did not understand the meaning of this question.
QDid you consider it necessary to satisfy yourself whether that which was carried out under your command was legal and justified?
AI have already said that my predecessor, Moor, in Kiev told me that he had regulated everything in the proper manner and that everything was all right, and then whom I supposed to ask--whom am I supposed to ask. I knew that everything was all right, or at least I thought I knew, and I myself had no power of judgment concerning these matters.
QSo you never made inquiries in this respect?
AWhat do you mean--what happened? I saw that the execution by gas van was carried out according to order, and I saw that it was not a wild, extreme measure which somebody was doing, but that was an orderly matter which had been instituted by the authorities.
QYou testified that when you came to Rostov there were no Jews in this place?
AYes. I said in my direct examination that I never noticed any Jews.
QDid you mean to say that there were never Jews in Rostov or that there were no Jews any more when you came there?
AI can't testify anything about this because I don't know anything about it.
QWill you tell the Tribunal how many inhabitants Rostov has?
AI can only say how many there were supposed to be at that time. If I am correct--or at least according to my memory, vaguely, there must have been 200,000.
Q 250,000 now, correct?
A 250,000? Yes, about.
QDo you know how many of these inhabitants were Armenians?
ANo, I couldn't say that because I don't know whether in these 200,000 the suburb Nahichova is included.
QPossibly you can tell the Tribunal how many Armenians were living in this suburb?
ANo, I don't know how many Armenians lived there. I did not inquire about ethnic groups.
QYou have said then, explaining your statement, that is quite possible that there were some Jews, not very many in Rostov, how many would that be?
AI don't know. I said I don't know that there were any Jews. That does not mean that there is no Jew actually living there because this question was never brought up. I onlu know in general that there were no Jews, but that doesn't mean that Jews didn't come there. There was a constant wandering between the towns and villages. The town, Rostov, did not have a fixed population. Those who saw this constant migration must have been most amazed about these tremendous wanderings by all these Russians over these distances. The population fluctuated largely, some had escaped and, of course, returned on occasions to the places they came from.
QWould you say that there were more or less than 10 per cent of the population in Rostov Jewish?
AI can't testify anything concerning this because this question was never mentioned at the time.
QYou said that you assumed that it was the reason for Thomas not to inform you about the Hitler order, as this order was not valid for Rostov as there were no Jews, is that correct?
AThe answer to this question can only be my opinion. Yes.
QHow was it then with Taganrog? In Taganrog there were Jews, were there not?
AI but knew about this fact -- it was the end of May or beginning of June in 1943, and quite accidentally without any particular excitement about this fact.
QBut you knew that these Jews were registered, were they not?
AYes, I heard about that at the time.
QSo there were Jews in Taganrog, were there not?
AYes, Jews must have been there.
QWill you tell the Tribunal approximately how many?
AThat I did not know. I didn't interest myself in it as there was no cause for doing so.
QCan you tell me why it was that the Fuehrer order did not apply for these Jews in Taganrog?
AThat question I asked myself. I ask myself this question today. There were Jews.
QDid you consider at that time the registration of the Jews as the first step to their extermination?
ANo.
QYou remember that you have been interrogated here about the subject by Mr. Wartenberg?
AThe Jewish question was mentioned in Eselheide. Whether, however, it was mentioned here I can't say, because in the affidavit nothing is mentioned which surprised me at that time.
QI think there is mention, I am not quite sure. But I want to ask you another question. Is it not ---
ATaganrog, yes, that I think---
QIs it not true that Mr. Wartenberg asked you whether Jews were exterminated by you or by your unit and your answer was, approximately, "That I cannot say. I only know the Jews were registered in Taganrog. Could that be?
ANo, I said the same as I said here. The other statement is a combination.
QYou were, according to your own testimony, in charge of --before the arrival of Nehring -- in charge of the Einsatzkommando from 18 September to -- what was the date when you went to Kino -- beginning of October, is that right?
AWhat?
QWho was your deputy with the Einsatzkommando 6 at the time when you were in Kiev?
AExactly as in the time before my arrival, the Chief of 4.
QCan you tell the Tribunal how many executions approximately were carried out between the 18th of September and the day you left for Kiev?
ANo, unfortunately, I am not able to say.
QCan you tell the Tribunal who made the reports from your Einsatzkommando to the Einsatzgruppe at the time before Nehring arrived?
AI already said that information was dealt with by Department 4.
QDid you forward these reports to Einsatzkommando 6?
AI said in my direct examination that I saw one or the other of the reports. That does not mean that I remember a figure or a special event.
QWere these reports forwarded to you from Office 4 before they went to the Einsatzgruppe?
A whether I always saw them, I don't know. At that time, exactly as it was later, I had the deputy Heidelberger work on as he had done before my time, and this situation Thomas regulated to the effect that as the responsible man between myself and Heidelberger he put Nehring.
QWhat do you mean, earlier than? At the end of October, is that correct?
ANehring arrived at the end of October, yes.
QYou have told the Tribunal that every single person who was executed by Einsatzkommando 6 at the time when you were in command was thoroughly investigated and proved guilty of having committed a crime and sentenced duly to death by, as you have stated in your testimony, orderly procedure. Will you please explain to the Tribunal what you understand by the expression "orderly procedure?"
AI can only say what I found when I arrived, and I tried to explain this in my direct examination the best I could. As far as I knew, the case arrived, -- it was the Russian police who found out about the facts by investigations and sent the criminal with the documents concerning this case to the local Kommandatura. Then the Commando started working, that is, the sub-commando Rostov, investigated this case again. New interrogations were carried out and a final report was made. Then, according to my knowledge, a meeting took place with the chief of Department 4, who was the subcommando leader, and in this meeting the sentence was established.
QHow long would such a procedure take, usually?
AThat varied. I again cannot make any statements concerning this, because I did not deal with anyone of those procedures, but there was a prison where these men were imprisoned and we had enough time to deal with each individual case according to order as it had been regulated by my predecessor.
QAn approximate time, one hour, one day, one week?
AI can't say, because I did not take part in such matters. I have tried to explain and I can only repeat it again, that I wasn't to deal with such tasks as I did not know anything about them, even less than the officials. They were all criminal officials who dealt with these matters.