Archive/File: people/e/eichmann.adolf/transcripts/Sessions/Session-054-05 Last-Modified: 1999/06/04 Q. Did you see anyone else, in addition to him, the chauffeur and this Slawik? A. I saw the gardener's wife, who lived in one of the rooms, I don't know which one. Q. And was that all? A. On one occasion I saw a German sentry inside the building. Q. How old was this boy Salomon? A. His age was exactly the same as mine - 16 or 17. Q. When Slawik and Eichmann entered this shed, did Slawik have anything in his hands - some instrument? A. I didn't notice anything. Q. And in Eichmann's hands? A. Here, too, I didn't see anything. But there were work tools inside the shed - pick-axes and spades. Q. What kind of noises did you hear from there? Or, more correctly, I would ask: Did you hear any noises apart from the boy's shouts? A. I heard shouting. However I could not distinguish words. There was confused shouting. I also heard shouts in German. Q. Apart from that - any noises? A. Also the voice of the boy. He cried, he pleaded. It sounded as if they were kicking him. I heard the sound of something heavy. Q. Regarding that statement you made at Eilat, in what language were you speaking? A. I spoke Hebrew. Q. And the policeman wrote it down in Hebrew? A. Yes. Q. And afterwards he read out to you what he had recorded? A. Yes. Q. What did you actually tell him about your conversation with your brother? A. I said to him that I had told him on the same day. It simply could not have been otherwise. Q. And he wrote down "a year later"? A. Yes. Q. And he read it to you? A. He read it to me, but I was simply tired from the conversation and didn't pay attention exactly to what he was reading back to me. Q. Were you together with your brother a year after the incident? A. We were together all the time. Q. But approximately a year after the event? A. Even after less than a year I was together with him. We met after the War - after the liberation of Budapest - and met for a second time in March 1945. Q. What is your present occupation? A. I am in charge of the watchmen's department of the Timna Copper Works. Q. You have concluded your evidence - unless Dr. Servatius wants to ask you something in connection with the questions put to you by the Judges. Dr. Servatius: Witness, you said earlier that in the shed there were work tools with which it was possible to mishandle Salomon. But previous to that you said you heard the lashes of a whip? Witness Gordon: I didn't mention lashes of a whip. Presiding Judge: Perhaps the reference is to that statement, when you said: "After they had entered, they closed the door, and for half an hour I heard blows of a whip or a belt?" Witness Gordon: I was referring to a trouser belt. I imagined to myself, and it could only have been an assumption on my part, that they had taken off their belts and struck the boy. Q. With a whip or a belt? A. According to the sounds it could have been either a whip or a belt. Q. At any rate, when the two of them went inside, neither of them was carrying a whip? A. Certainly not a whip. Q. As far as you were aware, was there a whip inside the shed? A. No. Q. Did you enter this shed from time to time? A. We entered this shed every morning. Dr. Servatius: It says here "...or blows with a belt." When one removes a belt, do not the trousers fall down, so that it is no longer possible to do anything? Witness Gordon: I believe it is possible to wear trousers without a belt as well. But I don't know exactly that it was, in fact, a belt - I merely assumed this. Q. I have no further questions. Presiding Judge: Again with regard to this belt. Are you able to say whether either of the two was wearing a belt when they went inside? Witness Gordon: I didn't notice that but I supposed that Slawik who was rather stout, also wore a belt. Q. Did you, in this regard, notice any change in their apparel when they came out as compared with what it was when they went in? A. Definitely. Q. I mean that one of them who had a belt when entering, came out of there without a belt or was carrying a belt in his hand - something of that nature. A. We were simply too terrified then to be able to notice these small details. Presiding Judge: Mr. Bach, as the result of these questions do you have anything more to ask of the witness? State Attorney Bach: No, thank you very much. Presiding Judge: [To Witness] Thank you. State Attorney Bach: With the Court's permission I shall now submit to the Court a number of documents. The Honourable Court will recall that Mr. Freudiger testified about a certain meeting on 20 March, in which Krumey and Wisliceny participated on behalf of the Germans. I wish to submit the minutes of this meeting. This is a document bearing our No. 813. It was also handed to the Accused and was given the number T/37(241). Authentication of that document, together with authentication of a substantial number of other Hungarian documents, was received by us through the Hungarian Government. And here I have a batch of documents which came to us bound together. I shall afterwards submit to the Court a number of documents from that collection. Not all of them are relevant to our case, but the authentication is common to them. Inter alia, amongst this batch of documents authentication as documents which correspond to the originals which were found in Hungary, we also have these minutes. Presiding Judge: Which were found in Hungary? State Attorney Bach: Which are in Hungary. We have here a number of reports of the Hungarian gendarmerie, which I shall also submit presently. Amongst others there are minutes here in German. The printed copy of these minutes was handed to the Accused and was given at the time No. T/37(24). Presiding Judge: Who drew up these minutes? State Attorney Bach: There is a signature at the end, here, of SS Obersturmbannfuehrer and Oberregierungsrat Trenker. He was one of the men from the Accused's Section - we have several items of evidence to that effect. That is the name which appears at the end. Whether he was the man who also wrote the minutes or to whom all kinds of applications had to be addressed - that does not emerge clearly from the minutes. But here it seems that these are minutes which were sent to a number of addresses and it was drawn up on 20 March 1944. It states there who were present and what was discussed. Presiding Judge: Do you wish to submit the entire batch? State Attorney Bach: At least for purposes of authentication I wanted to submit the whole batch to the Court. After the other exhibits will have been submitted, I can perhaps afterwards mark within the batch which exhibit corresponds to which document. Presiding Judge: In addition to the Hungarian authentication is there no authentication by our Consulate? State Attorney Bach: No, we received it in this form. Presiding Judge: [To interpreter] Please read what is stated here in Hungarian. Interpreter: The reference number is 43,017. I hereby confirm that this photocopy, consisting of 54 pages, is identical in every respect with the original unstamped document which has been presented to me. Given at Budapest this 17th day of December, 1960. Dr. Paul Ronau, State Notary. Seal: State Notary No. 5, Budapest. With the State Seal. Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/1154. Dr. Servatius: Your Honour, the Presiding Judge, may I be permitted to point out that Obersturmbannfuehrer Trenker, who is mentioned here, was the commanding officer of the Security Police and the SD in Budapest, that is to say he was not under the command of the Accused? State Attorney Bach: That may well be... Presiding Judge: We will not argue about the document until we have seen it. Are you submitting it? State Attorney Bach: Yes. Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/1155 State Attorney Bach: Trenker's name appears here, I believe that he worked for part of the time with Geschke, who was the commander of the Security Police and the SD in Hungary, and that it was very likely that he was in charge of Budapest. I shall check whether he was not also, for part of the time, in the Accused's office. At any rate, it says here, above his name, that in the event of possible complaints, they should be referred to SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Krumey and SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Wisliceny. This document has already been mentioned. Presiding Judge: How do you know that these minutes were prepared by this Trenker? That was the question. State Attorney Bach: I simply assumed this from the printed copy. But I also said that I am not altogether sure that it was written by him. His name appears at the end. Presiding Judge: His name is mentioned. "Ueber die Pester Israelitische Kultusgemeinde verfuegt einzig und allein der (sic) Kommando der Sicherheitspolizei"(The Unit of the Security Police is in sole charge of the Jewish Religious Community of Pest). State Attorney Bach: "IVB4" I thought that SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Oberregierungsrat Trenker was what appeared at the end, but it is possible that this also is connected with the address, in other words, this is the address to refer to. That is why I said that I was not altogether certain that it was he who wrote the minutes. Presiding Judge: [To interpreter] Here there is something else in Hungarian. Please translate for it us - there is some heading to this document, at the top, which apparently was not translated. Interpreter: Page 41, 20.3.1944. "List of participants which was distributed at the gathering called by the Gestapo, with the issue of the first orders of the Gestapo." Presiding Judge: At the end there are still some more words in Hungarian on the second page. Interpreter: "Jewish National Collection for History and Religion." State Attorney Bach: Most of the details appearing in this document have already been referred to by the witness Freudiger, and I shall not repeat them. I shall only draw attention to the opening where it is stated that all matters affecting the Jews must be referred to the German Security Police IVB4 only. It is announced that leaving Budapest without permission is forbidden to all Jews. Also, changing apartments without the consent of IVB4 is forbidden. It contains an order calling a meeting of all the chairmen of Jewish Institutions in general, and thereafter a number of instructions, all of which point to the absolute control of Section IVB4 over all affairs connected with the Jews. And the final sentence: The Unit of the Security Police IVB4 is in sole charge of the Jewish Community of Pest. It is difficult to know how to link Trenker to what was said previously, since if it was in IVB4, it was not the Security Police and the SD, then it would mean that this is under the control of the Experts (Referenten) on Jewish affairs. At all events I shall look into this question of Trenker exactly and shall inform the Court where he worked in Budapest at the various stages of that period. Presiding Judge: There is a mistake here in the German text. It gives the impression that the document was not drawn up by Germans. State Attorney Bach: Possibly this was some kind of reprint which was distributed to a number of persons who participated, to a number of addresses. Presiding Judge: This will be exhibit T/1155. State Attorney Bach: On 31 March 1944 a meeting took place at which the Accused presided. He summoned the entire Judenrat to the Schwabenberg. Presiding Judge: Is that also stated here? State Attorney Bach: No, Your Honour. This does not appear in this collection. Minutes of this were drawn up by Dr. Boda, who has already been mentioned here, and who was one of the members of the Jewish Council. He is now living in Budapest, and is 80 years old. He sent us a sworn affidavit in which he confirms the authenticity of the minutes of that meeting which were drawn up by him. These minutes were printed in a certain book in the Hungarian language. This document bears our No. 785. A translation of those minutes into the German language was handed to the Accused and was given the number T/37(242). I would ask the Court to admit Dr. Boda's affidavit together with the document constituting the minutes of the meeting. Presiding Judge: Dr. Servatius, do you have any comment to make? Dr. Servatius: No, I have no formal objections. Presiding Judge: The name is Dr. Ernoe Boda. Decision No. 55 We allow the submission of the affidavit of Dr. Boda, together with the minutes which he attests, by virtue of our authority under Section 15 of the Nazi and Collaborators (Punishment) Law, 5710-1950. This will be exhibit T/1156. State Attorney Bach: There are several rather important points in the minutes. Presiding Judge: Where is the original affidavit? We only have a copy of it. Why?
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
Home · Site Map · What's New? · Search Nizkor