EIGHTH COUNT OF THE INDICTMENT
I. Argument for the Prosecution
War crimes during the period of World War II in Germany and
other Axis countries and in areas occupied by them. He
persecuted, deported and murdered the Jewish inhabitants of
Germany and other areas occupied by Axis countries. The
Accused committed these acts in his capacity as defined in
Count I.
II. Argument for the Defence
As to pleading on the facts, cf. Counts I-III. As to legal
arguments, cf. the oral pleading.
NINTH COUNT OF THE INDICTMENT
Deportation of Poles
I. Argument for the Prosecution
Crimes against Humanity
1. Deportation of Polish civilians.
Means of Proof:
1. T/167 – Document 1396
2. T/164 – Document 983
3. T/205 – Document 1087
4. T/170 – Document 1398
5. T/171 – Document 1399
6. T/172 – Document 1400
7. T/359 – Document 1402
8. T/166 – Document 468
9. T/211 – Document 1401
10. T/169 – Document 1397
11. T/363 – Document 1403
12. T/365 – Document 1405
13. T/364 – Document 1404
14. T/366 – Document 1406
15. T/367 – Document 1407
16. T/368 – Document 1408
17. T/384 – Document 1395
18. T/373 – Document 1411
19. T/362 – Document 1251
20. T/370 – Document 284
21. T/371 – Document 285
22. T/378 – Document 292
23. T/377 – Document 293
24. Testimony of the Accused before the Police pp.
151, 977-989, 1656-1677, and 3150-3175.
2. Directing the deportees to forced labour in SS labour
camps and to re-Germanization.
Means Of Proof:
25. T/374 – Document 1412
26. T/372 – Document 289
3. Actions by the Accused on the basis of a special
authorization of December 1939.
Means of Proof:
27. T/170 – Document 1398 (see above)
II. Argument for the Defence
As to 1, 2 and 3:
(a) The Accused’s Section was required to take part in the
deportation of Poles as regards the technical aspect of
transportation, but the planning of these matters originated
with other authorities.
Means of Proof:
1. T/167 – Document 1396
2. T/169 – Document 1397
3. T/206 – Document 779
4. N/7 – Document 1458
5. T/171 – Document 1399
6. T/364 – Document 1404
(b) The technical aspect of the deportation lay also mainly
in the hands of the local offices. The resettlement was
under way when the Accused, on Heydrich’s order, was charged
with the co-ordination of the transports.
Means of Proof:
7. N/7 – Document 1458
8. N/8 – Document 1459
9. T/170 – Document 1398
10. T/171 – Document 1399
11. T/359 – Document 1402
The following documents also prove that the Accused took
part in the resettlement operations only insofar as his
Section dealt with matters of transport.
Means of Transport:
12. T/166 – Document 468
13. T/211 – Document 14
14. T/1406 – Document 1485
15. T/363 – Document 1403
16. T/365 – Document 1405
17. T/366 – Document 1406
18. T/367 – Document 1407
19. T/368 – Document 1408
20. T/384 – Document 1395
21. T/373 – Document 1411
(c) The classification of the deportees did not originate
with the Accused, nor was it the duty of his Section during
the implementation of the resettlement.
Means of Proof:
22. T/374 – Document 1412
23. T/379 – Document 287
24. T/375 – Document 286
25. N/26 – Document 1413
26. T/372 – Document 289
27. T/370 – Document 284
28. T/371 – Document 285
(d) The responsible direction of the resettlement operation
did not belong to the Accused’s Section.
29. T/172 – Document 1400
30. T/1405 – Document 1461
31. N/11 – Document 1488
(e) Legal questions as to property within the context of the
resettlement were not amongst the duties of the Accused’s
Section.
Means of Proof:
32. T/205 – Document 1087
(f) In his Statement to the Police (T/37, pp. 977 ff., pp.
1656 ff., pp. 3150 ff.), the Accused admits that he had been
dealing with the technical accomplishment of the transports,
but he pointed out that the basic directions emanated from
other offices and that the Polish Section in the Head Office
for Reich Security and the Head Office for Race and
Resettlement participated in deciding on the group of
persons to be resettled.
III. Submission for the Defence
As to 1. Carrying out acts of resettlement by the Accused
within the context of the resettlement operations in Poland
cannot be equated with the general concept of deportation
and is not in itself a crime against humanity.
The actual participation of the Accused:
Providing the means of transport and co-ordinating the
timetables does not lead to the conclusion that there was an
intention to act inhumanely. That is confirmed by the fact
that the Accused’s Section was made to take part in the
co_ordination of the transports, in order to eliminate
abuses. These abuses were in fact eliminated. (T/171, note
by Abromeit of 8 January 1940.)
As to 2. Forced labour.
The division of the deportees into classified groups by the
Head Office for Race and Resettlement was not the duty of
the Accused’s Section. He was not responsible for this
classification, nor did he carry it out.
As to 3. Authorizations.
Exhibit T/170, which mentions that the Accused was entrusted
with the co-ordination of resettlement transports, does not
prove any particular power of independent decision, but it
shows that the Accused became active at the express superior
order of Heydrich. The designation “Special Section” was
due to the fact that at that time the work assignment
schedule of the Head Office for Reich Security had not been
finalized. From the time of the finalization the Accused
was no longer head of a Special Section, but head of Section
IVB4.
TENTH COUNT OF THE INDICTMENT
I. Argument for the Prosecution
Crimes against Humanity
1. (I a and b)
Carrying out of deportations by the Accused from
Yugoslavia to Serbia
Means of Proof:
1. T/899 – Document 1080
2. T/901 – Document 1093
3. T/900 – Document 1079
2. (I c)
Planning of the deportations by the Accused
Means of Proof:
4. T/898 – Document 423
3. Overall direction of the deportations by the Accused
Means of Proof:
5. Same as for 1. (I a and b)
4. Acting by the Accused on the basis of a special
authorization
Means of Proof:
6. T/170 – Document 1398
II. Argument for the Defence
As to 1 (I a and b)
The Accused’s Section only provided the necessary means of
transport for the resettlement and organized the transports.
Means of Proof:
1. T/37 – pp. 2045-2059.
As to 2 (I c)
The Accused took part in the conference at Marburg only
because technical questions of transport were discussed
there.
Means of Proof:
2. T/898 – Document 423
As to 3. The carrying out and direction of the deportations
and of the resettlement staff were the duty of Department
III of the Head Office for Reich Security (Race and Folkdom)
and of the Head Office for Race and Resettlement. The
resettlement staff was subordinate to Department III.
Means of Proof:
3. T/899 – Document 1080
The Accused’s Section did not deal with the direction of the
resettlement but only with organizing transports.
Means of Proof:
4. T/900 – Document 1079
III.
As to 1. (I a and b)
The carrying out of the transports by the Accused’s Section
was not equivalent to carrying out the resettlement. No
proof was adduced showing that the transports were carried
out in an inhumane manner or by terrorist means.
As to 2. (I c)
The planning of the resettlement was not done by the
Accused. The resettlement was ordered by Heydrich on the
basis of an order from the Fuehrer, within the framework of
Himmler’s powers as Commissioner for the Strengthening of
German Folkdom.
As to 3. (I c)
The direction of the resettlement, and in particular the
selection of the persons to be resettled, their
concentration and treatment, were not the task of the
Accused’s Section, but that of Department III.
As to 4. (I c)
The Accused did not act by virtue of a special
authorization, but on specific orders. He had no choice as
to whether to carry out the transports or not to carry them
out, but was ordered to carry out the transports.
ELEVENTH COUNT OF THE INDICTMENT
Deportation of Gypsies
I. Argument for the Prosecution
1. Deportation by the Accused
Means of Proof:
1. T/37, pp. 1664-1665 and 976-977
2. T/XII – Testimony of Novak
2. Seizure of the Gypsies in collection camps by the
Accused
Means of Proof:
3. Same as for 1.
3. Transport to the extermination camps
Means of Proof:
4. Same as for 1.
II. Argument for the Defence
As to 1. The Accused dealt with the deportations only
insofar as the transport was carried out by his Section.
Means of Proof:
1. T/37, pp. 1664-1665 and 976-977
2. T/166 – Document 468
As to 2. The Accused was not competent for the
concentration in collection camps.
Means of Proof:
3. T/293 – Document 1505
As to 3. The Accused attempted to evade the transport to a
camp in the East and sent five thousand Gypsies with a
transport of Jews to the Litzmannstadt Ghetto.
Means of Proof:
4. T/220 – Document 1248
III. Submission for the Defence
The Accused was not responsible for the resettlement nor for
the seizure. He only carried out the transports of the
Gypsies from the territory of the Reich on Heydrich’s order.
There is no accusation relating to the killing of the
Gypsies.
WELFTH COUNT OF THE INDICTMENT
Deportation and causing the death of the Lidice children
I. Argument for the Prosecution: Crimes against Humanity
1. The Accused is alleged to have caused the deportation of
about 81 children from Lidice.
Means of Proof:
1. T/1091 – Document 865
2. T/1092 – Document 866
3. T/1093 – Document 867
4. T/1094 – Document 868
5. T/1095 – Document 869
6. T/1096 – Document 936
7. T/1097 – Document 937
8. T/1098 – Document 938
9. T/1099 – Document 939
10. T/1100 – Testimony of Maria Hanfova in Nuremberg
11. T/1434 – Excerpt from book: Here Stood Lidice
II. Argument for the Defence
As to 1. The Accused bears no reponsibility for the
deportation of the children from Lidice
Means of Proof:
1. T/1091 – Document 865
2. T/1097 – Document 937
As to 2. The children were not to be put to death, neither
were they put to death.
3. T/IX – Testimony of Krumey before the Frankfurt
Court on 6 June 1961, who mentions the despatch from
the BdS Prague to the Central Resettlement Office on 12
June 1942. The children are to be added to transports
of Poles to the Generalgouvernement.
4. N/19 – Declaration of Mrs. Elise Freiberg –
T/1100 and T/1434
III. Submission for the Defence
The Prosecution has produced no proof of the acts with which
the Accused is charged in Count 12 of the Indictment. The
death of the children has not been proved. The deportation
from Lidice to Lodz was carried out on directions from the
Higher SS and Police Leader.
In the secret despatch mentioned under II 2., the transport
of the children into the Generalgouvernment had already been
ordered. There is no criminal responsibility of the Accused
for the deportation of the children or for causing their
death.
THIRTEENTH, FOURTEENTH AND FIFTEENTH COUNT OF THE INDICTMENT
I. Argument for the Prosecution: Membership in Hostile
Organizations
1. As to Count XIII
Membership of the Accused in the SS
Means of Proof:
1. T/37-1 – Document 17
2. As to Count XIV
Membership of the Accused in the SD
Means of Proof:
. Same as for 1.
3. As to Count XV
Membership of the Accused in the Gestapo
1. T/647 – Document 1588
2. T/99 – Document 36
3. T/104 – Document 51
4. T/170 – Document 1398
II. Argument for the Defence
As to 1, 2 and 3
The Accused was a member of the SS, SD and the Gestapo.
When he joined the SS, its aims were still legal.
When the Accused joined the SD, its tasks were not yet known
to him, and the work he did at first was neutral office
work.
The Accused was transferred to the Gestapo by force of
circumstances, as a result of the unification of the central
authorities of the Security Police and the State Police
within the Head Office for Reich Security.
III. Submission for the Defence
The documents mentioned under 1. represent membership,
official rank and official position of the Accused. As to
the position of the Accused within the hierarchy of these
organizations, see the plans which have been submitted:
N/2 – Time plan AE 1
N/3 – Time plan AE 2
N/20 – Routing of orders in departments and authorities
N/21 – Germany Plan II
N/22 – Germany Plan III
N/23 – Germany Plan IV
N/25 – Time Plan AE, The central authorities of the
Reich
As to the legal arguments, cf. the oral pleadings.
WRITTEN SUMMARIES BY THE PROSECUTION
Marginal Note (to Session 113, p. 1)
These written summaries by the Prosecution contain mainly
references to the evidence (oral testimonies and documents)
arranged under headings of subject matter as follows:
I. Up to the outbreak of the War
1. The Deportations from Germany, Austria and the
Protectorate
2. SS, Gestapo, SD
3. The Accused
4. Measures against the Jews by the Sipo and the SD
5. Terezin
6. Bergen-Belsen
7. Marking the Jews
8. Poland
9. USSR
10. France
11. Holland
12. Belgium
13. Denmark
14. Norway
15. Italy
16. Yugoslavia
17. Bulgaria
18. Greece
19. Romania
20. Slovakia
21. Hungary
22. Spoliation of Property
23. Camouflage
24. Skeletons
25. Sterilization
26. Camps
27. The Lidice Children
28. Mass Deportations
29. Prevention of Emigration to Palestine
The above references to the evidence have been incorporated,
under each respective heading, into the consolidated index
which appears in the final volume of this publication.
Last-Modified: 1999/06/15
