Q. Then would you please turn to page 42, and look at the
quotation I shall now read out to you: a brief quotation,
again about matters you submitted to your superior:
“And what you presented to him was certainly about
Jews?” “Yes, about nothing else. And it was in fact a
criminal matter, and Schellenberg evidently did not
want these orders or ordinances to be applied, and I
opposed this. I did in fact already know this myself as
a matter of State regulation…”
And here your sentence finishes, as Sassen interrupted you
and cut you short. Did you say that?
A. On all these matters I can only say that there is so much
fiction in here, that it is no longer possible to
distinguish fact from fiction. But I believe I have already
Q. So finally you are saying that during your entire time in
office, there were only two days when Schellenberg deputized
A. I, in any case, did not hear of Schellenberg deputizing
frequently for Mueller; in any case, I also never had any
contact with Schellenberg apart from this one letter. But I
do know that Panzinger deputized for him and after that
Huppenkothen. Today, I cannot say anything more about this,
but what I have said corresponds to the truth. I must
correct myself in order to be more precise. Right at the
beginning – it must have been at the beginning of my stay in
Berlin, my activities in Berlin – I believe Schellenberg was
then also his substitute several times, but I did not go and
see him then. But then Schellenberg was still in Department
IV, I believe.
Q. And during these days, did you take decisions by
A. No, this is not correct – at the beginning? At the
beginning when I had just arrived in Berlin? I did not take
any decisions by myself then either.
Q. Never? Never?
A. When I came to Berlin, I did not take decisions of
principle any longer. I only took decisions in Vienna and
Prague by myself if I received the general authorization of
the Inspector or the Senior Commander of the Security Police
and the Security Service. I did not order or do anything on
my own responsibility.
Q. Very well. Let us proceed to the other chapter.
You remember that with regard to the matter of the Lidice
children, Krumey contacted you by telephone from Lodz, from
A. I do not know about telephoning; I have seen here a
teletype about this.
Q. He refers to a telephone conversation with you. Do you
A. Yes, I believe I have read that. I cannot say precisely,
but if you say so, Mr. Attorney General, it must be true, as
the document is here.
Q. The Lidice children matter was definitely something
exceptional: your director, your Chief had been killed, the
Germans carried out reprisals; the children were sent for
treatment, as we will see in a moment, but that cannot slip
your mind so quickly. This was an utterly exceptional
matter, which did not occur every day – you will admit that,
will you not?
A. I know of the attack – naturally I remember that, but I
cannot remember the business of the children. However, I
have read it and studied it carefully, on the basis of the
documents I was shown.
Q. Very well, perhaps you would be good enough to remember
a little without documents. Heydrich was killed, severe
measures were taken against the Czech village of Lidice.
That you did know of, did you not?
A. Yes, I heard that later, not at the same time, and
certainly not in advance.
Q. And now Krumey writes to you and telephones you from
Litzmannstadt about 88 children: please look at T/1093. Are
you trying to tell us that Krumey had no idea who was
responsible for dealing with this matter?
A. Obviously he had no idea who was responsible, otherwise
he would not have asked all and sundry about it.
Q. He did not ask about responsibility; he asked what was to
be done. And do you not remember that Krumey turned to you
in this matter?
A. No, I do not remember that; he could just as well have
approached some other Section. But please, if it is alleged
that he approached me nevertheless, his own letter here
proves… “Since I have not been informed either by IVB4 or
by the Commander of the Security Police and the Security
Service as to what is to be done further with the children.”
And also another teletype shows that he also wrote to
Department III, Ehlich, so he made enquiries everywhere…
Q. But it is you he approaches – with reference to and
following a telephone conversation with you. Is that true?
A. Yes, but he did not receive any information, otherwise he
would not in fact write at the end whom else he had
approached. But why Krumey approached me or my Section, that
is also quite clear – just as clear as why he approached
Department III, since Krumey had constant dealings with
Section IVB4 and Department III in connection with the
transports from the Eastern Occupied Territories to the
Q. But this does not concern the Eastern Occupied
Territories, but the Protectorate.
A. That is correct, but Krumey will have thought about what
was to be done…
Q. But why is it you whom he asks? Here is a Section in the
Head Office for Reich Security, there is a Division, a
Department which deals with this – that is Department IV –
right? There is a Department, Department IV, which deals
with this. So why is it you whom he approaches?
A. But he did not approach only me. After all, he
approached others too.
Q. But why did he approach you at all?
A. Krumey is, in fact, in custody, I would suggest asking
him. I cannot give any other information at all other than
what I can read in the teletype. This is really quite
natural, as Krumey was after all connected with Section IVB4
for a long time, as also with Department III – he addresses
Ehlich, in fact, in exactly the same way…
Q. I am asking why – if you were not responsible for this
matter – why you did not immediately say to him on the
telephone, “Krumey, don’t bother with this – I am completely
taken up with other matters, leave me alone, leave me in
peace, that has nothing to do with me”? Why did you not do
A. Today, after such a long time I do not know – but I can
imagine that I told him I would make enquiries.
Q. Why you in particular?
A. I would suggest that Krumey be asked. I do not know.
Q. And why does your deputy, Guenther, answer Krumey as to
what is to be done with the twelve children – T/1099?
A. Yes, to transfer them to the Litzmannstadt State Police,
and from there they were to be taken to the
Q. But why does your Section deal with this matter? What
does the whole business have to do with you? If you are not
responsible – what does the whole affair have to do with
A. I cannot tell you, Mr. Attorney General…I did not in
fact sign it…I do not know what Guenther agreed with
Mueller, or what instructions he received. If I had done
this, I would in fact have signed it…in fact Guenther in
Q. But Guenther is your deputy, is he not?
A. That is correct, but since this is a matter which does
not belong to the Section, this was a special matter, I
cannot after all forbid the Department Chief to charge
Guenther with any special assignments. I have no powers to
Q. This is really becoming quite ridiculous, is it not?
Krumey approaches you. You say that you will check on every
minor point with Mueller, including this one, right?
A. As can be seen, it was in fact also checked on.
Q. So that means that Mueller decided on it, right? But once
you submit this matter to Mueller and ask who is responsible
for dealing with this, are you telling us that afterwards
Mueller assigned Guenther to this behind your back? Is that
what you are saying?
A. No, I am not saying anything…I just want to say one
thing: that after twenty years, I am no longer capable of
explaining this matter in detail. But if these teletypes are
read in chronological order one after the other, the picture
anyway emerges in a natural and entirely clear fashion.
Presiding Judge: If there are any further disturbances, I
shall have the hall cleared.
Attorney General: All right, correct. That really is crystal
clear. Krumey says that he is approaching you because it is
a question of special treatment, and we already know, in
fact, what special treatment is, do we not?
A. I would like to say the following about this. The term
“special treatment” (Sonderbehandlung) has various meanings.
As Poliakov says, in Poliakov – Black or Red – I can give
the page number right away…I have it in my files
somewhere…he reproduces forms. On these forms it says,
“Re: Special Treatment” – first of all for Poles suitable
for Germanization (eindeutschungsfaehig), and the same word,
special treatment, is also for Poles not suitable for
Germanization, that is those to be sent from the Eastern
Occupied Territories to the Generalgouvernement. So that is
one meaning of special treatment (Sonderbehandlung). Special
Treatment also means – I want to say this here in this
context as well, although I know that it is known – also
means all transports of Jews, the deportation transports.
Q. And killing?
A. Yes, that as well, I must say that, too. The transports
to the camps, the transports from the camps to the work
sites, the transfers from camp to camp following the
interests of the Economic-Administrative Head Office, the
work inside the concentration camp – all of these concepts
are covered by “special treatment.” And if in the case in
question here, Krumey refers to special treatment, it must
be remembered that Krumey headed a Central Migration Office
in Litzmannstadt. Tens of thousands of Poles were processed
by this Central Migration Office, and these matters, in
which the Race and Resettlement Office also took part, were
known as special treatment, as can be immediately
ascertained from the forms in Poliakov – and I would like to
indicate the page reference.
Q. Let us for once talk without documents, let us leave the
books alone and base ourselves on what you know. If you want
to give the page reference the Court will be prepared to
listen to it, but I would like to suggest for once leaving
the books alone and addressing your memory. Do you know what
special treatment means: not Poliakov, but you, do you know
that? Is it true that you said in Bureau 06 that special
treatment, Sonderbehandlung, means killing?
A. It also means killing, yes.
Q. No, you said “killing,” not “also killing.”
A. But I must correct myself, now that I am being called
upon to make a statement this can also be checked at any
time. First of all, special treatment means the actual
transport, deportation to the concentration camp, or
wherever the order applied; special treatment also means the
use of the deportees in question by the authority which has
taken over these Jews – in this case, the Economic-
Administrative Head Office. This can also be gathered from
documents. Special treatment also means the assignment away
from a concentration camp to war production centres. And
special treatment also means killing, yes.
But all of these things were done by the Economic-
Administrative Head Office or the Inspectorate of
Concentration Camps, where these people are. IVB4 could
neither influence nor halt nor promote this. IVB4 had
nothing to do with this.
Q. So if someone came to the Auschwitz concentration camp
and on his sheet it said SB – Sonderbehandlung, special
treatment – Hoess would not know exactly what was to be done
A. I cannot say anything more about this matter, Mr.
Attorney General, than I have just explained. This
corresponds to the facts and the realities. If no value is
attached to my words, it is also in the documents. I really
cannot say anything further about this.
Q. And when you wrote Sonderbehandlung in the Zichenau
Ghetto, the Commander of the Zichenau Ghetto knew what to do
with the Jews, did he?
A. That was added specially, on orders…
Q. Special treatment – it says special treatment. Did he or
did he not know what to do?
A. That is indeed in there in as many words. But in as many
words there is not only the word Sonderbehandlung there – it
also says what is to be done. And it also says explicitly,
on the orders of the Reichsfuehrer-SS and Chief of German
Q. And you are trying to tell us that Krumey did not know
that? That everything concerning Sonderbehandlung was
unknown to Krumey, and that in his innocence he approached
A. No, but Krumey had his own concept of special treatment,
which had been appropriate in his area consistently.
Q. Did he, or did he not, know that Sonderbehandlung meant
A. At that time Krumey quite definitely did not know that.
Q. Quite definitely did not know?
A. No, I believe definitely, since after all the
Resettlement Central Offices dealt with Resettlement. And in
fact it has been proved that the forms had
“Sonderbehandlung” as a heading, a reference, even for the
Poles suitable for Germanization as well, not only for Poles
not suitable for Germanization, who were therefore
transported to the Generalgouvernement.
Q. And you want the Court to believe you? Then maintain this
A. If I may give the page number, I have it here. This is
Poliakov, Red or Black, I cannot say which for the moment;
in any case, it is page 299, and then 301 and 302.
Presiding Judge: Yes, Mr. Hausner, there are forms here
about Germanization, and here are the forms and the comment
“Sonderbehandlung – special treatment.
Attorney General: All right, perhaps you really should
explain the meaning of “special treatment” in these forms to
which you are referring?
Accused: On page 299 Sonderbehandlung means…
Q. Is this not connected with the killing of these people?
A. This is not connected with the killing of these people,
Q. Very well, read on, you will see this in a moment.
A. Because here this concerns the “special treatment of
Polish civilian labourers and prisoners of war employed in
the Reich,” and 301 “Special treatment of a Pole” and
“therefore the above-named person as an individual is
suitable for Germanization, subject to a positive moral
evaluation.” And on page 302, “re: special treatment, Pole,
first name, surname, date of birth, according to this the
above-mentioned person did not in racial terms satisfy the
requirements for the Germanization of foreign nationals, and
he is therefore judged not suitable for Germanization.”
Q. And, therefore, he has to be executed, that is really
A. No, but here there is in fact one who is suitable for
Q. He is sent to a concentration camp with the designation
SB (Sonderbehandlung), and there are the forms, and as to
what SD means, we have heard evidence about that, have we
A. Here it says something else. I am not trying somehow to
water down the term Sonderbehandlung – that is not my
intention, Mr. Attorney General. I only wanted to indicate
that the term Sonderbehandlung has various meanings. It even
has, for those suitable for Germanization, the meaning which
is perfectly clear from the form.