Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day011.10 Last-Modified: 2000/07/20 Q. Very well. A. So I am sorry that I forgot about it. Maybe it would have helped the case of the defence earlier. Q. It may not. A. Or it may not. Q. Professor van Pelt, would you tell the court where you first saw this document? A. This document is in the Auschwitz archive. Q. And it appears to be bound into a volume? A. They are normally in -- actually I do not know the Hauszufugun it is one of first files. They are all in boxes. What happens is that the first part of the archive, which is where I started working, which was actually boxes 1, 2 and 3, only deals with these kind of procedural matters. They do not deal with design at all. I think generally they are in folders. Q. But you agree that this particular one appears to have been part of a bound volume. Was it shown to you in this form or was it shown to you as a loose document? A. I went through these files. I do not remember at all. I know there are at a certain moment some loose pages in . P-82 these things but in general they are bound. It does not seem to be a Moscow document, if I have to look at it, but I am not sure even. It could be a copy of it in the Moscow document because obviously this was a document which was produced in many copies. Q. It has been produced in many copies? A. Because it was a general rule, so quite often you find many copies of the same document. Q. So you are not certain in your own mind whether this document actually comes from Moscow or from the Auschwitz state archives. A. This is the first thing I have heard about this document now it comes up, is right now I have seen it ten years ago. I made a copy. It is somewhere in my big files, on procedures in the architectural office. Q. Please accept my assurance. I am not trying to catch you out on this document. I am trying to do the enquiry now that I would have done over the last few months if I had had this document earlier. MR JUSTICE GRAY: As to its authenticity? MR IRVING: As to its authenticity, my Lord, yes. This is the only means I have to test its integrity. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think that is fair enough. MR IRVING: Professor, you will see that the document to me is odd in one respect, that it appears to have no printed heading. All the other documents we have seen, I think I . P-83 am right in saying, have a printed heading saying Auschwitz Zentralbauleitung and so on, Auschwitz konzentrationsanlage, whatever. This appears to be just a blank sheet of paper. A. But all hauszufugungen, all the internal communication in the camp, and that is also stuff that is coming down for the kommandantur. So, when Rudolf Hirst, for example, creates a canteen for the camp, all of that stuff also comes down to the office. None of these have a heading. They all have exactly the same heading as you see, that it says hauszufugungen number, which rule, a house rule or a house order, whatever like that, with a number but never on letter head. Q. If you had seen the whole file of course, you could have satisfied yourself that there was a No. 107 before this and another 109 after it and so on. You could have tested it, whether it was orphaned or whether it was part of a series, could you not? A. I could have, yes. I saw the whole file but I did not do that test at the time. Q. We are not informed as to that. Is the signature at the bottom of the SS Sturmbanfuhrer? Does that look like the signatures you are familiar with? A. This is Bischoff's signature, yes. Q. There are no other authenticity marks on it in any way, are there? There are no rubber stamps or initials or any . P-84 other kind of things that we have seen? A. No. You would never have a rubber stamp on any of these internal hauszufugungen. Q. Would they also lack any address list of people they are going to? A. No, they do not have that. They just appear like this in the file. Q. Yes. My Lord, I could comment on the registration number at the top, but I am not going to because I can really say nothing about the integrity of this document apart from what I have done. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I can see you are confronted with a bit of a difficulty because of its late production. MR IRVING: I am prepared to address the document as though it was genuine and just look at the content. A. My Lord, this one maybe I can add to the heading on top because the secretary. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Authenticating it? A. Yes. The secretary in the Zentralbauleitung in 1943 was a certain Eugenie Schulhof, so it seems to be that indeed the S C H U L would be -- that indeed she was a secretary at the office at the time. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. Mr Irving will probably say well, if anyone was creating this document years afterwards, they might have worked that one out. MR IRVING: My Lord, forgers have a desire often to be caught . P-85 out and they do not do the homework. That is my experience. This is what puzzled us about that cremation capacity document that they picked on initials that are only on that document and not on any other document in the entire record. But to revert to this document, I draw your attention, Professor, to the third full paragraph, beginning with the word in English "furthermore"? A. Yes. Q. Let us read out possibly the first two paragraphs: "You are reminded once more of internal instruction No. 35 of 19th June 1942 -- ", which we do not have, Professor, do we, before the court, so we do not know what that was. "As is clear from this internal instruction, Untersturmfuhrer Dejaco is personally responsible for ensuring that all incoming and outgoing plans are registered according to the rules in a book that is to be especially set aside for this purpose, and that loans of such plans (that is an interpolation by the translator) are signed for with the personal signature of the person who has asked for them". This is indicative, is it not, Professor, of the pernickety bookkeeping that the Germans went in for with their documents, that things were logged in and logged out, is that not true? A. Yes. Q. "Furthermore", it continues in the next paragraph, which . P-86 is the important one on which no doubt learned counsel relies, "it must be pointed out that we are concerned here with works that are connected with the war economy and to be kept secret". The words: "Connected with the war economy and to be kept secret" are underlined in the original. "In particular, plans for the crematoria are to be kept under the strictest surveillance. No plans are to be handed out to the individual installation groups, etc. In connection with the works to be carried out, the responsible construction leader - I suppose that be a foreman - has to give instructions to the corresponding prisoner unit on the spot. I take it as read that all the original plans are to be kept under lock and key by the leader of the Planning Department". Does Mr Rampton wish me to read out any more, or is that sufficient? MR RAMPTON: Could you just finish the paragraph? MR IRVING: "Attention is particularly drawn to DV 91", that is "Dienstvorschrifft", is it not? A. Yes. Q. In other words, Service Regulation No. 91, confidential Matters. "It is further taken as read that in cases of leave or inability to carry out duties, the leader of the Planning Department hands over the plan room in accordance with regulations to an SS colleague". We can take it from this therefore, can we not Professor, that they were anxious that the drawings of the . P-87 kind you have been showing us this morning should not be shown to unauthorized persons? A. Yes. Q. In fact, it should not be shown to anybody at all who had no need to know? A. No. In fact, even people who had need to know, it seemed to be that they were unwilling to -- that normally, of course, in a building site, plans and blueprints are readily available to the people who are actually making it, and in this case, they even had difficulty to do that. They use here that the only person who can really instruct these people, they cannot actually leave the plan there, but there must be a "Baufuhrer" and from the word "Baufuhrer", it is very clear that this is not an inmate, or must be a German, civilian or German SS men, because the designation Fuhrer was always reserved in this case for a non-inmate. They would have used for inmate always something like Alterstorser or some kind of designation like that. Q. We are in agreement that this is a security measure designed to keep these plans that you have been showing us today, that kind of thing, away from prying eyes? A. Yes. Q. Can you see no harmless reason for such a regulation? A. A harmless reason? Q. Yes. . P-88 A. I presume there is a general harmless -- if we are talking about patents, I could imagine that companies do the same thing with patents. But in this case I do not think we deal really with patent information. So I cannot see what the problem would be. It is remarkable that crematoria seem to be designated here for a particular kind of security, let us call it internal security classification. Q. They are not being designated as the only ones needing security, are they? They are just to enhance security, shall we say? A. Yes. It says: "In besonders, in der Plane," so in particular, yes. Q. Is there any kind of security classification on this document itself? A. There are never on any "Hauszufugen"; this is going to be available to everyone. Q. Yes, but there is no security classification on this document? A. No. Q. So it could have been shown to anyone, could it not, then? A. Yes. I mean anyone who got a copy of this. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Have you seen any other similar house order on any other topic in connection with Auschwitz? A. No. I remember this one. One of the reasons is that this one came up. I am trying to recall the first time I saw it. This was in the Ertl and Dejaco trial, and it came up . P-89 because one of the people who had been in the Bauleitung, who was an inmate who was drawing there, actually went into some detail about the procedure of actually getting a blueprint and saying this was a proof of the criminal intentions, and then this document was produced. I do not know what the court in the end did with this document. But I remember the testimony of the particular -- I think it was an inmate named Plas Kuhrer. MR IRVING: Did anything in particular happen in Auschwitz one or two days before this document that you are familiar with, or in the neighbourhood? I will give you a clue, air raids? A. No, there were no air raids in 1943. Q. Yes, there were. Do you agree that there was an air raid on the Buhne plant on approximately 5th or 3rd May 1943? A. 1944. Q. 1943. Well, if there is a dispute, obviously --? MR JUSTICE GRAY: The Buhne plant at Auschwitz? MR IRVING: That is right, the synthetic plant being erected. A. The first air raid, so far as I know, happened in the Spring of 1944. Q. We will check that later on perhaps. I have only two more questions on this document, my Lord, and this is this. Do you agree that the Germans had reasons to be ashamed of what was going on in this building, shall we say, whatever it was? . P-90 A. No. They certainly had reason to be ashamed of the genocidal use of the buildings, but I mean crematoria, there is no -- you see, the date is 5th May 1943. By that time, these buildings have all been committed to genocidal use. I presume and I am speculating now, and I do not know if you are interested in my speculation, my Lord.
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
Home · Site Map · What's New? · Search Nizkor