1947-05-19, #1: Doctors' Trial (early morning)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States Of America, against Karl Brandt, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 19 May, 1947, 0930, Justice Beals presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the court room will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal 1.
Military Tribunal 1 is now in session, God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the courtroom.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, you ascertain if the defendants are all present in court.
THE MARSHALL: May it please your Honor, all the defendants are present in the court with the exception of the Defendant Gebhardt who is absent due to illness.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary-General will note for the record the presence of all the defendants in court save the Defendant Gebhardt who will be excused on account of illness, pursuant to a certificate from Dr. Martin the orison surgeon. The Secretary will file the certificate for the record.
Counsel may proceed.
VIKTOR BRACK — Resumed CROSS EXAMINATION (Continued)
BY DR. HOCHWALD:
Q: May it please the Tribunal. Herr Brack, I have a few questions for you about your affidavit, I am referring to Document No 426, Prosecution Exhibit 160, on page 10 of Document Book 14, part 1. You signed this affidavit, did you not?
A: Yes. It is not before me though.
Q: This is the affidavit you spoke about several times; I don't think it is necessary that you have it before you, I do not want to go into the details of the document itself. Did somebody compel you to sign this affidavit?
A: Compel is certainly not the right expression. I felt innerly obliged to sign the statement without being conscious at that time that many of the things contained therein were either incorrect or incomplete. This only entered my mind later when, on the basis of the documents, I was able to ascertain that many of the things were not represented corresponding to the facts.
Q: But nobody told you you would be punished or you would have some disadvantages if you would not sign it, is that correct?
A: There was no threat expressed towards me.
A: Is it not true that you were permitted to make changes in the wording and in every other respect in the affidavit?
A: I was permitted to make changes. It was pointed out repeatedly, however, that the word I had suggested was difficult to translate and I was therefor asked to admit another expression with which I basically did agree, but they convinced me.
Q: Is it further not true that you made changes in the affidavit, that changes were made on your suggestion and on the basis of your information?
A: Yes, a few changes were made.
Q: And what about the chart, you signed this chart. How did it come about? How was the chart made?
A: I have already described that. I think a female draftsman drew up this chart in my presence. I helped her as far as I could give any indications. I don't know to what extent I emphasized at that time that any such chart had not existed before, and that this was a completely new construction of that organization.
The sketch which I drew up did in no way answer the requirements.
Q: But you drew up a draft, didn't you?
A: Yes, I made an attempt to draw it up but I did not succeed.
Q: Do you remember the draft well?
A: You mean the one I signed?
Q: The draft you made yourself in the prison, not in the interrogation room.
A: No, I don't remember it. It was incomplete and insufficient.
Q: Do you remember whether there was a basic difference between the draft and the chart as to the position of Bouhler and Brandt?
A: I really can't tell you that.
Q: All right. We have the draft and I want the right to put to you this document NO 2758 which will be Prosecution exhibit 502 for identification, your Honor.
(Document handed to the witness.)
Q: Is this the draft?
A: Yes.
DR. HOCHWALD: If your Honor please, may the record show that the witness acknowledged this draft as the draft he made in the prison.
THE PRESIDENT: The record will show that the witness on examination of Prosecution Exhibit for identification 502 stated that this was a copy of the draft which he made while in the prison.
BY DR. HOCHWALD:
Q: Now I want to discuss with you the sterilization of the Jews.
You testified here, in a sense, that you were opposed to the program of exterminating the Jews and, therefore, together with your collaborators, conceived and forwarded clans for a less drastic and ruthless solution of the Jewish problem, is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: Who was the collaborator or the former collaborator of yours who first told you that the plan of exterminating the Jews was conceived?
A: That, I think was Dr. Hevelmann.
Q: And who were the collaborators with whoa you made this plan to make to Himmler the suggestion of sterilization?
A: I can't give you the names in detail now. At any rate Dr. Hevelmann participated here.
Q: Did Blankenburg participate in this plan about Madagascar, and so forth?
A: Yes, he certainly did participate, but the people most interested in this plan were experts which had nothing to do with the Chancellery of the Fuehrer, for instance the witness Legationsrat [Legate] Rademcher, for when I had asked as a witness and there were also a number of other agencies who could inform us about the circumstances involved.
Q: But Blankenburg collaborated, did he?
A: I believe, yes.
Q: Am I mistaken in assuming that you wanted to prevent extermination of the Jews, as you and your collaborators considered this to be a crime?
A: No, that is what I testified.
Q: Did you consider the extermination of the Jews a crime?
A: Yes, we considered it a crime. We did not consider it worthy of the German people. We considered it to be irresponsible towards history. That, I think, is the expression I used.
Q: You and your collaborators were of this opinion?
A: Yes, we were of this opinion.
Q: You made the first plans, for the resettlement of the Jews in a far away country, for example in Madagascar, is that correct?
A: Yes, that is true.
Q: And when these plans were not accepted you approached Himmler with the suggestion to sterilize the Jews, but in reality you did not want the Jews to be sterilized. You did that just in order to prevent more brutal measures from the part of Himmler or Hitler, did you not?
A: That does not exactly correspond to the facts, but according to its sense it does correspond to what I intended.
Q: Is it not true that in 1941 when you forwarded your report to Himmler, — I am referring to Document 203, Exhibit 161, Document Book 6, on page 35 to 37 of the Document Book 6, is it not true that it was then a matter of common knowledge that it was very well possible to sterilize people with X-rays, is it not?
A: I cannot judge that, it was my personal point of view that it was not possible.
Q: Well, did you not expect that Himmler would have checked the record with a specialist and would have easily found that the matters you suggested were not effective; if you were of the opinion you could not sterilize people with X-ray?
A: No, I didn't expect that, because I believed to know the mentality of Himmler sufficiently to realize that he would positively react to any suggestions which fitted into his plans.
Q: Did you not expect that every doctor who would have been charged by Himmler with the carrying out of sterilization in this suggested nor would have reported to Himmler at sterilization in such a way would be possible?
A: That is what I feared in the course of time, but I hoped that until the moment when these matters crystallized so much time would have passed that the war had come to an end.
Q: Did you testify here according to document 205, — this is Prosecution Exhibit 163, Document Book 6, page 39, this is the second report to Himmler in 1942, that you did not write this letter?
A: I cannot even confirm it now with any amount of certainly whether I wrote this letter myself or whether somebody else formulated it.
Q: But I presume that you read this letter rather carefully, did you not, before you signed it?
A: I really cannot say that after so much time has elapsed. I really don't know.
Q: How many personal letters did you write during the year to Himmler?
A: There is nothing I can say about that. At any rate there must have been very few.
Q: I do presume that if you sent one of these few letters to your highest SS Commander you read them rather carefully, did you not?
A: That depends entirely on the situation. It depends when such a letter is put before you for signature. I can no longer tell you that.
Q: But the topics of the letter were of a quite important nature, were they not, so I do expect you rather carefully read the thing whether it fitted into the plan you made?
A: I have already testified that I consider the possibility that this letter was sent on to me to the front for my signature. If it has arrived when I happened to be in some critical situation it is quite possible that I didn't read it too carefully, but just signed it in order to get rid of it. After so much time I can really give you no information on that.
Q: You heard here the testimony of the witnesses Levy and Berlitzky?
A: Yes.
Q: Are you still, after hearing this testimony, of the opinion that your suggestions were made for the benefit of the Jews?
A: At any rate it is my opinion that these suggestions delayed this action considerably and thereby prevented much evil being caused. During my direct-examination I already pointed out that the first report which was not in itself submitted here, but of which we had the covering letter, was only made about a year and a half later, so that the delay is quite obvious and easily recognizable. I don't know whether I remember correctly, but I believe that the witness Berlitzky stated that the sterilization experiment on him only took place in the year 1943.
Q: I hand you now this second letter of Himmler and would ask you a few questions in connection with it; will you look at the second paragraph of this letter; this is Document 205, Your Honors, Prosecution Document 163, Document Hook 6, page 39, and in the second paragraph it states:
Among 10 millions of Jews in Europe are, I figure, at least 2-3-millions of men and women, who are fit for work.
It seems to me your plan would have only worked for these 2 or 3 million; what would have happened to the other 7 or 8 million; you are speaking only in this plan of organization of the people who are able to worm. What did you expect would happen to the 7 or 8 million who were not able to work?
A: I expected the very same thing to happen to then as to the two or three million. In connection with what I have already testified during my direct examination, to the effect that in the year 1942 the war possibilities from my point of view were not bad at all and that we actually counted on a quick end to the war, since we continued to advance in Russia. If I could bring about a certain delay in this action I hoped that in conditions of peace we could, under circumstances, carry through the Madagascar plan, which had previously been rejected.
Q: But I do see the delay only —
Perhaps you can advise me, — but I do see the delay only with regard to the people you attempted to be sterilized. I do not see the delay for the 7 or 8 million who were not able to work and therefore would not be sterilized, is that correct?
A: No, it certainly is not correct. Until one can select people who are fit to work, until the entire organization is set up, months and months must necessarily elapse.
Q: You speak in the same document about the people whom you placed at the disposal of Globocnick. Was Wirth among the people you placed at the disposal of Globocnick? I mean the director of the Brandenburg euthanasia station.
A: No, he was not the director of the euthanasia station. He was the official, the registry official.
Q: I mean this Wirth; who was active in Brandenburg.
A: He certainly was not among them, because after the stop of the action in 1941 many releases were ordered by Bouhler and it became superfluous; if I may call it that way, to maintain the registry offices; and also other offices became superfluous. For instance; we no longer needed trained nurses; therefore; a great number of employees of the euthanasia organization were either dismissed or insofar as they were put at our disposal only they were sent back to their old offices.
Q: Right; but did you say that Wirth was among them or not; Wirth?
A: I assume with certainty that Wirth cannot have been among them because Wirth was a police officer and as such was sent back and put at the disposal of his superior agency in August or September 1941.
Q: What about Schumann? He was the chief doctor in a euthanasia station; was he not?
A: Yes, Schumann was the head of the euthanasia station. I saw him for the last time on the occasion when we tried to rescue the wounded in the Winter 1941-42.
Q: Was Schumann among the doctors you put at the disposal of Himmler for the examination in the concentration camps?
A: I put no physicians at the disposal of Himmler for the purpose of the extermination of Jews.
Q: No, I said examinations in the concentration camps. We mentioned this in your interrogation and you spoke of it in your direct examination and also with me on Friday. This examination which was carried out on orders from Himmler in different concentration camps. Did you not say that you went to T-4 and asked that certain doctors be put at the disposal of Himmler and that among them was Schumann along with other doctors for the examinations in concentration camps?
A: I have already said that I transmitted this request of Himmler to the T-4, I further said that I had no idea who on the part of T-4 was entrusted with the medical examinations.
Q: Alright, I would like to put to you Document No. 3010; Prosecution Exhibit 503 for identification, Your Honors. This is an affidavit of Dr. Gorgass, who was also in the Euthanasia program as you told us Friday, I am reading from paragraph two:
In the beginning of my activities in the Euthanasia program I was informed that Professor Karl Brandt was the chief and Viktor Brack the executive head of Euthanasia. I was convinced that Brandt was the leading spirit and Brack the operator of the so-called Euthanasia.
In June 1941 I was ordered to accompany Dr. Schumann on an official trip to the concentration camp Buchenwald. The purpose of this trip was to acquaint me with the assignment of concentration camp inmates for Euthanasia institutions. This was my only visit to any concentration camps. Dr. Schumann was shown approximately 100 concentration camp inmates by the camp physician in charge and questionnaires were filled out. They were not merely insane persons. According to my best knowledge and belief our one day visit in the concentration camp Buchenwald was made at Brandt's order issued by Brack.
Police Captain Wirth; whom I knew personally and who was administrative director in several Euthanasia institutions; told me late in summer 1941 that he had been transferred by the "foundation" and I put to you that was the foundation for Euthanasia care — to a Euthanasia Institute in the Lublin area.
You do not know anything about that?
A: No, I know nothing about that; nor do I know that I had sent Mr. Schumann to the Buchenwald concentration camp.
Q: Is the name Morgen familiar to you, M-o-r-g-e-n?
A: Yes.
Q: You know who he is, will you tell the Tribunal who Morgen is?
A: During the trial here the testimony of Morgen was shown to me by my defense counsel and for that reason I know that Morgen was a former SS judge and testified before the International Military Tribunal.
Q: As a defense witness for the SS; did he not?
A: I don't know that.
Q: He was a defense witness for the SS organization and I would like to read to you parts of his testimony here. This is Document No. 2614, Prosecution Exhibit 504 for identification. Your Honors.
DR. SERVATIUS (Counsel for the defendant Karl Brandt): Mr. President, in connection with the Document No. 3010, I reserve the right to call the witness Gorgass to the stand in order to examine him in cross-examination. I shall make a written application to that effect, This is again one of the documents wherein is stated by the witness that it was made clear to him that Professor Brandt played a considerable role in that program. I should like to at least have one of the witnesses here in order to have him tell us just exactly what was done here and what was made clear to him. It is my impression that a certain amount of propaganda was made in connection with the name of Dr. Karl Brandt after he had withdrawn from the Euthanasia program for a long time. That is the reason why I want this witness to testify here and I shall make a written application to that effect.
THE PRESIDENT: If the counsel for the defendant Karl Brandt will file his application it will be promptly acted upon by the Tribunal.
BY CAPTAIN HOCHWALD:
Q: I am reading from the last answer on page two, Your Honors.
When Wirth took over the extermination of the Jews, he was already a specialist in mass destruction of human beings. He had previously carried out the task of removing the incurably insane. On behalf of theSS Fuehrer himself, through the Chancellory of the Fuehrer.
— And the Chancellory of the Fuehrer was Bouhler's office; was it not?
At the beginning of the war he had set up a detail probably from agents and spies of the criminal police. Wirth described how he went about carrying out this assignment. He received no aid, no instructions, but had to do it all by himself. He was given an institution in Brandenburg. There he undertook his experiments. After much consideration and many individual experiments, he came to his later system, and then this system was used on a large scale.
A commission of doctors previously investigated the files, and those insane who were considered to be incurable were put on a separate list. Then the institution one day was told to send these patients to another institution. From this institution, the patient was transferred again, often more than once. Finally he came to Wirth's institution. There he was killed by gas and cremated.
This system which deceived the institutions and made them unknowing accomplices, this system that he worked out with very few assistants for being able to exterminate large numbers of people, this system was now employed with a few improvements in the extermination of Jews. He was also given the assignment by the Fuehrer's Chancellory to exterminate the Jews.
Question by the defense counsel: The statements which Wirth made must have surpassed human imagination. Did you believe Wirth?
Answer: At first it seemed completely fantastic to me, but in Lublin I saw one of his camps. It was a camp in which I found part of the property of his victims. From the number of them — there were a great number of watches piled up — I had to realize that atrocities were being committed here. I was shown the valuables. I never saw so much money, especially foreign money — all kinds, from all over the world. In addition, there were gold bars.
I also saw that the headquarters from which Wirth directed his operations was very small and inconspicuous. He had only three or four people working there for him.
I spoke to them too. I matched his courier arrived from Berlin, Tiergarten Strasse, the Fuehrer's Chancellory. I investigated Wirth's mail.
Of course, I did not do all of this at this first visit. I was there frequently. I persecuted Wirth up to his death.
Question: Did Wirth give you names of people who were connected with this operation?
Answer: Not many names were mentioned for the simple reason that the number of those who participated could be counted on ones fingers. I remember one name: I think the name was Blankenburg, in Berlin.
Blankenburg was your deputy, was he not?
A: Yes, Blankenburg was my successor when I left for the front.
Q: Were you not mistaken in testifying here that Bouhler would never have lent his hand to the extermination of the Jews?
A: I can only say according to my knowledge Bouhler gave no assistance for that purpose. What the witness Morgen is testifying here is the contents of a conversation he had with Wirth in the year 1943. I was a soldier in the year 1943.
DR. FROESCHMANN (Counsel for the defendant Viktor Brack):
Mr. President, perhaps the Prosecution would be kind enough to ascertain from the transcript to what time the statement of Morgen referred. As far as I can see from the original document it refers to the year 1944, it is for 1943 or 1944.
DR. HOCKWALD: I can't tell you that. The examination was made in 1944 but I am not able to say when this thing took place. Would you give me again this thing — the document.
DR. FROESCHMANN: Mr. President, I think it is very important to find out here to what time this statement of Morgen refers. In the year 1944 the defendant Brack had been with the army for two years and in the year 1943 he had been there for one year. I think it is one of the most primitive requirements for the prosecution to ascertain what year the statements refer to.
DR. HOCKWALD: I think Dr. Froeschmann is at liberty to use this whole document, so he can ascertain from the document whatever he wants. It is the right of the Prosecution to put to the witness questions from a part of the document.
THE PRESIDENT: It is, however, only fair to the witness to give the witness all of the information the document discloses.
DR. HOCKWALD: Your Honors, I certainly will.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for the Prosecution will ascertain as soon as possible to what year the witness was testifying to when he gave the testimony which is before the Tribunal in the transcript.
DR. HOCKWALD: I shall do so at the earliest possible moment.
WITNESS: To what extent this report of Wirth's to Morgen corresponds to the facts I cannot judge in anyway. One thing, however, is quite clear. What he has described as his activities and participation in the euthanasia program does not correspond to the facts, because Wirth was employed as a registry official and as such had to do office work and could in no way have the possibility of actively participating in the euthanasia. That was exclusively the task of the responsible physician and never the task of the civil servant. To that extent his information regarding Brandenburg must be altogether false as far as I can judge.
BY DR. HOCKWALD:
Q: You never cooperated in the program of examination of the Jews, is that correct?
A: No, I personally never did.
Q: Is the name Eichman, Obersturmbannfuehrer [Lieutenant Colonel] Adolf Eichmann, familiar to you?
A: Yes, the name became known to me now.
Q: You didn't know him before? That means during the war?
A: No, not to my knowledge.
A: Did you know anything about his activities during the war, from your own knowledge, not what you heard now?
A: I cannot remember ever having heard the name Eichman before.
Q: In order to keep the record straight I would like to offer document No. 2737. This is an excerpt of the judgment of the International Military Tribunal about the activities of Eichman and I would like to ask the Tribunal whether I should give an identification number to this document or whether the Tribunal will take judicial notice of the document?
THE PRESIDENT: While the Tribunal will take judicial notice of the document mentioned, it would be convenient to have an identification number for the purpose of identification only.
DR. HOCHWALD: So it will be Prosecution Exhibit 505 for identification then: Extract of the judgment of the International Military Tribunal.
INTERPRETER: Will you wait one moment, doctor?
BY DR. HOCKWALD:
In the summer of 1941, however, plans were made for the X 'final solution' of the Jewish question in all of Europe. This 'final solution' meant the extermination of the Jews, which early in 1939 Hitler had threatened would be one of the consequences of an outbreak of war, and a special section in the Gestapo under Adolf Eichmann, as head of Section B4 of the Gestapo, was formed to carry out the policy.
Adolf Eichnann, who had been put in charge of this program by Hitler, has estimated that the policy pursued resulted in the killing of 6,000,000 Jews, of which 4,000,000 were killed in the extermination institutions.
Q: Did you ever have any conferences or discussions with Eichmann concerning the extermination of the Jews and the solution of the Jewish problem?
A: I already said that I did not remember having heard the name Eichnann at all.
Q: I want to put to you document No. 997, which is Prosecution Exhibit 506, for identification, your Honors. This is a draft of a letter from the Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories to the Reich Commissioner for the East:
Solution of the Jewish Problem.
Reference: Your report of 4 October 1941, concerning the solution of the Jewish problem.
I have no objection against your suggestion for the solution of the Jewish problem. Attached please find a memorandum concerning the conversation between my referent Amtsgerichtsrat [Magistrate] Dr. Wetzel, Oberdienstleiter [Head of Service] Brack from the Chancellory of the Fuehrer and Sturmbannfuehrer [Major] Eichman, referent to the Reich Security Main Office. From this memo, please be advised about the details of the matter. Will you, please, take the necessary steps at the Reich Security Main Office and with Oberdienstleiter Brack from the Chancellory of the Fuehrer via your Higher SS and Police Leader. Please keep me informed.
(Handwritten) F.D. H.H.
(For the minister)
(2) Copy (A) Reich Security Main Office (B) Chancellory of the Fuehrer Attention:
Oberdienstleiter Brack, Copy of (1), including enclosure for information.
Did you receive a copy of this letter.
A: May I first ask you what the date of this letter is?
Q: Only 1941 is mentioned here. But this is the date of the draft that is what I told you. Did you receive a copy of this letter, Herr Brack?
A: I did not receive a copy of it nor did I even see a copy of that letter nor do I know this Amtsgerichtsrat Wetzel.
Q: Did you have conference with Eichmann on this problem, on the solution of the Jewish question?
A: I already said I cannot even remember the name Eichmann, nor can I remember the name Wetzel.
Q: Do you know something about the matters discussed at this conference as to the solution of the Jewish problem?
A: No, I know nothing.
Q: You have no idea. You never made any suggestions as to what kind of treatment or what kind of gas chambers should be used for the solution of the Jewish problem? You never did do that?
A: I can remember nothing in this connection.
Q: You were questioned by the Tribunal, questioned by the Tribunal last Friday, as to whether plans were made for the construction of the gas chambers in the euthanasia stations or whether the engineer or specialist was ordered to assist the directors of the stations in setting up such gas chambers, were you not?
A: Yes.
Q: You were not able to give any information to the Tribunal on that fact, were you?
A: No, I was saying I didn't concern myself with these matters.
Q: Is the name Kallmeyer, K-a-l-l-m-e-y-e-r, familiar to you?
A: Yes, but I really don't know just where he belongs.
Q: His wife executed an affidavit for you here, that is your Document 39, Exhibit 23, page 60 of your Document Book II. Do you remember him now?
A: Yes, yes, I remember him now.
Q: Was Kallmeyer the engineer, or he was a chemist, who made these plans for gas chambers and assisted the directors in euthanasia stations in setting up these gas chambers?
A: No. Kallmeyer was to check that the gas chambers were always operating properly, but I don't believe he made any plans for that purpose.
Q: Kallmeyer was the man who supervised these gas chambers, was he not?
A: I believe, yes, but not for long, only for a short time.
Q: All right. And does the name Kallmeyer refresh your memory as to eventual plans you made together with Eichmann about the solution of the Jewish problem, Herr Brack.
A: No.
Q: I want to put to you Document NO-365, which will be Prosecution Exhibit 507 for identification, Your Honors. This is a draft of the Reich Ministry for the Occupied Territories dated Berlin, 25 October 1941.
Referee AGR. Dr. Wetzel
Re: Solution of the Jewish Question.
1. To the Reich Commissioner for the East.
Re: Your Report of 4 October 1941 Concerning Solution of the Jewish Question.
Referring to my letter of 18 October 1941 you are informed that Oberdienstleiter Brack of the Chancellery of the Fuehrer has declared himself ready to collaborate in the manufacture of the necessary shelters as well as the gassing apparatus. At the present time the apparatus in question are not on hand in the Reich in sufficient number; they will first have to be manufactured.
Since in Brack's opinion the manufacture of the apparatus in the Reich will cause more difficulty than if manufactured on the spot, Brack deems it most expedient if he sent his people directly to Riga, especially his chemist Dr. Kallmeyer, who will cause everything further to be done there. Oberdienstleiter Brack points out that the process in question is not without danger, so special protective measures are necessary. Under these circumstances I beg you to turn to Oberdienstleiter Brack in the Chancellery of the Fuehrer through your Higher SS and Polizeifuehrer and to request the dispatch of the chemist Dr. Kallmeyer as well as of further aides. I draw attention to the fact that Sturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, the referee for Jewish questions in the RSHA, is in agreement to this process. On information from Sturmbannfuehrer Eichmann camps for Jews are to be set up in Riga and Minsk to which Jews from the old Reich territory may possibly be sent. At the present time Jews being deported from the old Reich are to be sent to Litzmannstadt, but also to other camps, to be later used as labor (Arbeitseinsatz) in the East so far as they are able to work.
As the affairs now stand, there are no objections against doing away with those Jews who are not able to work, with the Brack remedy. In this way occurrences such as those which, according to a report presently before me, took place at the shooting of Jews in Vilna and which, considering that the shootings were public, were hardly excusable, would no longer be possible. Those able to work, on the other hand, will be transported to the East for labor service. It is self-evident that among the Jews capable of work men and women are to be kept separate.
I beg you to receive advice regarding your further steps.
Q: Herr Brack, are you still going to maintain what you said here in direct examination that you tried to protect the Jews and to save the Jews from their terrible fate and that you never were a champion of the extermination program?
A: I should even like to maintain that misuse, terrible misuse, was made with my name. I see from this letter and from the date of this letter that all these negotiations were carried out at a time when I was far away from Berlin, when I was on sick leave. If I have the possibility, I hope I shall be able to bring witnesses who will testify to that effect. I must openly admit that at this period of time something was going on which was entirely in contradiction to my opinion but that this only could be done under misuse of my name and my agency. I did not declare myself ready for these things.
Q: Can you tell me, Herr Brack, where Riga and Minsk are located?
A: Riga is in the Baltics in Latvia and Minsk is in Russia.
Q: These two places were outside of Germany, were they not?
A: Yes.
Q: Prosecution has no further Questions at this time.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now be in recess for a few minutes.
(A recess was taken.)