The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-11/tgmwc-11-106.12

Archive/File: imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-11/tgmwc-11-106.12
Last-Modified: 2000/01/13

Q. Were you acquainted with Obersturmbannfuehrer Fritz

A. I did not quite catch the name.

Q. Well, you'll see it on this exhibit which I ask you to be
shown now, Document 3842-PS, which will become Exhibit USA
805. Defendant, this is a fairly long exhibit, which I don't
want to go through in detail; but I first call your
attention to the opening lines:

  "With respect to the occupation of Czechoslovakia, two
  different actions were taken: The first one: Occupation
  of the Sudetenland and the Border Districts inhabited by
  German Nationals. The second one: Occupation of
  Czechoslovakia proper."

And the following lines:

  "Some time before the second action, officers of the
  'Hlinka, Garde' (the illegal or underground organisation
  in the Slovakian part of the former Czechoslovakian
  Republic) came to the office of S.S. Oberabschnitt Donau
  (S.S. Corps Area Danube), which at the time may still
  have had its original name of S.S. Oberabschnitt

Then follow the details of the plans for inciting this
revolt. Then, coming to the end of the first paragraph, you
will find the following:

  "There were secret meetings in which I did not take part.
  I felt that I was not fully trusted. I saw the gentlemen
  in Kaltenbrunner's anteroom only and, as far as I can
  remember, in the dining-room. I was told nothing about
  the object of the discussions, which referred without
  doubt to the action planned."

Then he gives his reasons. And, passing to the second page,
in the centre, you will find the following:

  "Kaltenbrunner alone was responsible for this action. In
  charge of the action was S.S.-Standartenfuehrer Spacil
  (nicknamed Spatz). He was chief of the administration of
  S.S.-Oberabschnitt Donau and was called later on by
  Kaltenbrunner to Berlin and made Administration Chief at
  the Reich Main Security Office. Spacil was one of
  Kaltenbrunner's most intimate friends."

                                                  [Page 323]

Then, at the close, paragraphs 1 and 2, and sub-divisions:

  "I have made this statement:
  (1) not from a feeling of revenge or because I want to be
  an informer, but in the knowledge that in so doing I can
  help in exposing crimes which I, as a German, am ashamed
  (2) with the full consciousness that because of my
  statements I will be slandered by the other side. I know
  the men who for years have been trying to make trouble
  for me. But this shall not deter me from helping the
  spirit of justice to a victorious end."

I ask you whether the substance of that document, as I have
given it to you, is true or false?

A. Neither true nor false. It is ridiculous and consequently
untrue. The document can best be characterised by drawing
attention to the fact that on the first page in the
introduction it says:

  "The second one: 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 are really ridiculous 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 S.S. 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. Then Stadler, a small book-keeper. The man
Petenka is 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.

Q. Very good, defendant. All right. That is nonsense.

A. One thing is true in this document and I want to come to
that - that I was with members of the Hlinka Garde in this
house in Vienna, Park Ring 8, and I did hold a conference
with them. This dealt with the Union of Volksdeutsche,
racial Germans, in Slovakia, and the Hlinka-Garde with a
view to nominating the same candidates in the Slovakian
Government. Documents prove this and also events, 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 has never taken place in my opinion
there is no need for me to defend myself against the

Q. 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 S.D.
issued such instructions to your subordinates. Do you deny
these statements? Yes or no, please.

A. 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 the testimony of
the witness Koller, the chief of staff of the Luftwaffe,
defining my attitude towards this problem - that even in the
presence of Hitler I declared "I will not obey such an
order." That took place somewhat later, but it shows my own

                                                  [Page 324]

personal feelings about the matter. I made a statement to my
counsel yesterday about this question.

Q. All right, defendant. Now take a look at Document 3855-
PS, which will become Exhibit 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?

A. Yes.

Q. You will note that it comes from the Chief of the
Security Police and of the S.D., and according to the notes
in the upper left-hand portion was prepared for your
signature by Amt IV Az B No. 220/44 g RS.

A. That is, sir, the first and very great mistake.

Q. All right.

  (a) To all Commanders and Inspectors of the Security
  Police and the S.D. (for oral communication to the
  subordinate offices)
  (b) To the
  Groups IV A and IV B
  The Sections IV Ai
  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 Senior S.S. and Police Leaders
  To the Chief of the Uniformed Police
  (d) To Chiefs of office I - III and IV of the Reich
  Security Main Office.
  Subject: Treatment of enemy airmen who have baled out.
  Reference: None.
  A series of questions dealing with the treatment of enemy
  airmen who have been shot down needs clarification:
  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.
  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.
  Enemy airmen - especially the Anglo-American Air Forces -
  mostly carry escape bags with them, filled with daggers,
  various kinds of maps, ration coupons, tools for escape,
  It is absolutely essential that escape bags be secured by
  the police, as they are of the greatest assistance when
  making a search. They must be forwarded to the Air Force.

                                                  [Page 325]
  The order of the Reichsfuehrer S.S. of 10.8.1943" - 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 German people and English and
  American 'terror flyers' who have baled out.
  Near the body of a shot-down English airman a brassard
  with the inscription 'Deutsche Wehrmacht' and an up-to-
  date badge was found. 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.
  During the past months individual cases have shown that
  the German population does seize airmen but afterwards,
  while waiting for them to be handed over to the Police or
  the Armed Forces, it does not use the proper reticence.
  Too strict measures on the part of the State Police
  against these citizens would keep them from seizing enemy
  airmen without restraint; these cases must not be
  confused with the criminal act of helping escaped enemy
  Reichsfuehrer S.S. has ordered the following measures to
  be applied to citizens who conduct themselves in a
  dishonourable 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
  (2) In less severe cases, protective custody 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 the State Police Office, the short-term
  protective custody sentence is to be served at the
  nearest State Police station, etc. The Reichsfuehrer S.S.
  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 reserve the absolutely
  necessary reticence towards enemy airmen.
  I leave it to the Commanders and Inspectors of the
  Security Police and the S.D. to notify in writing the
  subordinate offices of Sections V and VI of the above
  Signed: Dr. Kaltenbrunner Certified: Rose
  Office Clerk."

Do you deny having had anything to do with the issuance of
that document? Do you deny that you signed it?

A. This order was never submitted to me. I refer you to what
I said yesterday, concerning questions of direction and
issuing of orders in Amt IVA which appears at the head of
the letter as having drawn it up. In these matters this Amt
was under the direct jurisdiction of Himmler.

THE PRESIDENT: I haven't heard the answer to the question.
Did you sign it?

A. No


Q. You deny your signature and you deny knowing anything
about this document bearing your name, is that correct?

                                                  [Page 326]

A. Sir, I have -

Q. 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?

A. I have already stated yesterday and also told my defence
counsel that this document was never submitted to me. Had it
been I should recognise 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, but my position as to this
question can be clearly seen from Koller's testimony.

THE PRESIDENT: I don't 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

A. Your Lordship, this document and this decree was never
submitted to me. To sign such a document would have been
completely against my inner attitude, for 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.

A. No.

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal would like to look at the

COLONEL AMEN: It is a typewritten signature, your Lordship.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, let us look at the document.

THE PRESIDENT: Defendant, who is Rose?

A. I don't know, your Lordship.

THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Amen, can you give any idea how long
you will be with your cross-examination?

COLONEL 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 twelve in order to hear
Dr. Thoma and the prosecution upon his documents.

(The Tribunal adjourned until 13th April, 1946, at 10.00 hours.)

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.