1947-06-11, #3: Doctors' Trial (late morning)

THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.

DR. BEIGLBOECK — Resumed
CROSS EXAMINATION — (Continued)

BY MR. HARDY:

Q: Now, with the charts indicating the second experimental subject, we note on chart A-2 the name of the subject has been erased; can you tell us whether or not that erasure was made by yourself, Doctor?

A: No, I did not erase anything here at all.

Q: Who made that erasure?

A: I cannot tell you that now, perhaps at the time it was written down by mistake.

Q: The Tribunal will note the name on chart A—2 has been erased and you can see the impression of the letters: K — L-A and I believe it is N and then the next letter, the impression cannot be seen and the next is E again; who made that erasure, Doctor?

I do not know that any more, I cannot tell you. Perhaps it is possible that there was a wrong name written down. In any case, I did not erase it or perhaps I did so at the time but I did not do it later. If I had erased it here, I would probably have done it in such a way that you could not read it now.

Q: Have you been advised that was erased here in Nurnberg?

A: No.

Q: Can you look at the name on chart A-2 and determine from the impression thereon what letters may have been there before the erasure; using this glass?

(A magnifying glass is handed to the witness.)

A: Klau — Klau; well as far as I can see there is a K-L-A and then it must have been a D like in Dora and then the next I cannot read, then an E again. Klaude or something like that, such a name was among the patients or something like that.

Q: Was that originally your hand-writing before the erasure?

A: Could be, maybe yes.

Q: Is it possible that was erased here in Nurnberg by your defense counsel?

A: Well, you will have to ask my defense counsel himself. In any case, I did not erase it.

Q: Does it seem strange to you that the name on chart A-2, written in your hand-writing, should be erased when later negligently the Chart on D-2 has the same name as the impression conveys on Chart A-2 has not been erased?

A: Well, any way, it seems to me to speak with absolute certainty that the erasure was done for reasons of camouflage, you do not have to think my defense counsel is so stupid he would erase one and not the other. If he had done that, he would have done it more thoroughly.

Q: Now, on chart D from there would you kindly spell the name you have written, the name you have written in your own handwriting?

A: Klande or Klaude and it could be Klafde too. No, I believe it must be Klan or Klaude.

Q: How do you spell that, Doctor?

A: K-L-A and either a U or an N, I cannot say that, then a D — E.

Q: Does Chart D-2 bear any recording thereon, or was it just an extra sheet that was not used?

A: That was not used.

Q: That was not used; then it is possible in studying the case of the second subject that the fourth sheet, namely D-2 or mark D-2, could have been overlooked by the person who erased the name on A-2?

A: Yes, I already saw that. In case 1, it seems to have been as follows: namely, that these curves had been prepared then and someone forgot they had been prepared already and new ones were started. I contend that possibility or probability.

Q: At any time has your defense counsel consulted with you concerning possible alterations on those charts?

A: I do not understand your question.

Q: At any time has your defense counsel consulted with you concerning alterations on these charts?

A: We were in agreement at all times that the charts and the curves shall be submitted in the same way as we received them here.

Q: But, this chart has been erased. Doctor, was that in the same condition as those found in your trunks in Vienna?

A: Yes, apparently in many cases I didn't erase it. I can't tell you anything more than that. I did not erase anything here, and, in any case, they were lying next to each other. It is possible, too, that it was erased at that time, I can't tell you any more now what happened. In any case, I myself did not erase it and certainly not with the intention to hide the name.

Q: Did the defense counsel erase it, to your knowledge?

A: I certainly don't believe that he did.

Q: Do you exclude the possibility that he could have erased it?

A: Well, the simplest thing would be — I meant to say that my defense counsel could best answer this question Himself.

Q: Let's go to the next section of this case No. 2. Under the date 21 August on Chart A2, the eighth day of the experiment, we see in the third block an arrow running horizontally with a vertical line bisecting that arrow. Immediately thereunder appear the German words "Hunger D". What does the arrow and the words "Hunger D" indicate in that block?

A: That means the same as in the other curve, and here I also see that my original opinion was correct after all. I stated at the time, you start with hunger and thirst, Therefore the arrow is there, because if the arrow had started before, I probably would not have drawn that arrow. I can't tell you anything else but that the experiment began in any case for the first group on August. That is visible from all the values. From the weights it is unequivocally noticeable that it must have been that way. Of course, I had the weight determined on that day in which the experiment began.

Q: But now you have an inconsistency with your explanation of the arrow and the blue circle, thereon in case No. 1, in that here on Chart B2 you have just stated that you said the experiment was to start on the 22nd, but you have an arrow under the date of the 23rd with a blue circle thereunder indicating the experiment began on the 23rd.

Now, did you erroneously place that arrow in the date of the 23rd?

A: Yes, presumably at that time I made the marking and it is possible that I was somewhat superficial. I didn't do that, after all, because I believed that at any time it would, be submitted; but you can see that the weights show Quite clearly that the experiment began on the 22nd. On Case 1 the arrow was on the 21st and the fever curves I believe it must have been on the 22nd, I can't explain to you any more.

Mr. President, please look at the weights. From the weights alone —

MR. HARDY: If defense counsel has an objection, Your Honor, he may raise it. I will proceed with my cross examination.

Q: If that arrow with the blue circle at the end thereof under the 23rd of August was made to indicate the beginning of the experiment, can you explain what the arrow with the blue circle thereunder under the date of the 22nd of August indicated?

A: I made those arrows at the time when I copied the weights when I evaluated this experiment.

Q: You slipped up making this entry of the arrow under the 23rd and put in the wrong date, didn't you?

A: Well, in any case, that was done erroneously. Yes, it can't be any other way.

Q: And did you put that red arrow with the blue mark on the end thereof, blue circle of the end thereof, on this chart at the time of the experiment in August 1944 at Dachau?

A: I told you already that at a later date I evaluated these charts and determined the different values and curves, and for my own use at that time I entered this curve, this arrow, because in the copying of the weights and looking at the weights at that time in different charts it starts once here and once there. I noted down the loss of weight at the time in order to evaluate them, and I made that sign at that time. At that time I wasn't thinking that at one time this sign would ever be of any significance. I don't stand here and say that the experiment began at that time because of that. I say only that on the 22nd of March the experiments of Group 1 began.

Q: If you entered this mark or this arrow on the 23rd at a later date — that is, a year or two years after the conclusion of the experiments — as an evaluation mark, why did you attempt to imitate the red and blue pencil of the original? Why didn't you just use a scratch pencil which would show the later entry and not be an attempt at forgery? If you entered this mark one year later, you had to go and get a red and blue pencil to make your evaluation mark, didn't you?

A: Well, in order to make the difference apparent to the eye, between the beginning and the end, probably that is what it was. I wasn't thinking for a long time at that time about what I was doing. Perhaps, I just liked it that way. I can't tell you that any more.

Q: Is it possible you made the entry in red and blue pencil in order to deceive your expert witness Volhard, so that he would think the experiments were of a shorter period of time than they actually were?

A: I showed Professor Volhard the weight chart. I pointed out to him particularly in the evaluation of this experiment that the most important thing seemed to be how the weights behaved in this experiment, and I hope that I shall have an opportunity later on to prove this. Only from this can one determine one decisive point — namely, the amount of loss of water. I did not think that the Professor was so stupid that he wouldn't notice that between the 22nd and the 23rd there was a loss of weight of more than 2 kilograms while from the 20th to the 22nd an increase of weight of 0.8. This constant loss of weight I would be crazy if —

Q: Now, whether or not Professor Volhard would be stupid enough not to assume that the experiment began on the 8th experimental day or the 9th or the 10th is not an issue here. You, in fact, were either careless enough or stupid enough to yourself to mark the chart that the experiment began on the 23rd and marked it one year later when you had ample opportunity to evaluate the charts. Isn't that correct? Now, if you, the experimenter, carelessly — or, as you put it, stupidly — state here with; your marking that the experiment began on the 23rd, how would an innocent expert looking at these records and making an attempt to evaluate them and then coming here before this tribunal and testify under oath — how could he determine that any better than you did?

A: An expert, of course, should be able to see that at first sight, that the experiment started here.

Q: But, you could, not see it, could you, when you made the entry?

A: Well, that is evidence of the fact that this was an error on my part.

Q: Now, under the date of the 22nd — you contend that is the date the experiment began, is that correct?

THE PRESIDENT: I would like to ask the witness a question.

BY THE PRESIDENT:

Q: Witness, on all of these four charts, the first line indicates the date, does it not?

A: Yes, your Honor.

Q: On A-2 we find the date in pencil on the first block 14; is that correct?

A: On the third block, the date 16.

Q: On the fifth, the date 18, and on the seventh, the date 20. The next block is vacant.

A: Yes.

Q: That would be the 21st of the month, would it not?

A: Yes.

Q: Over on B-2, the next succeeding date block, was originally written with the date 22, was it not?

A: Yes.

Q: It was then altered to the 21st, is that correct?

A: No.

Q: It was altered from the 22nd to the 21st?

A: Apparently from the 21st to the 22nd.

Q: Then, as the charts now stand, there are two dates for the 21st, are there not, the last block on A-2 and the first block on B-2?

A: I can remember now, or I believe that I remember, how it happened.

These curves were written in advance; that is, at the desk he wrote down the dates before the charts were fixed to the wall. Probably he made a mistake in the date here. Later on it probably will become apparent how this happened. Originally the 21st had been written down, then he changed that to the 22nd, etc. He probably wrote the whole thing in advance and made an error of one day. This is now the 21st, 22nd, 23rd, etc.

Q: On the lower blocks on the chart where the red and blue graphs indicate, both dates are made out. Both dates which should be the 21st are indicated, are they not?

A: No. This curve was drawn continuously, I said that the dates were already written down in advance, that is, the date of illness, that was written in advance for the entire curve, and then the curve was placed on the wall near the bed, and then every day it was marked several times — the pulse, the temperature and the like, and here he must have noticed that in writing the date down in advance he made a mistake. Therefore, only the date was changed and not the observational date that corresponds to the pulse and temperature of 21st, and here to the 22nd, and there to the 23rd, and so on.

Q: Then, one day more has a curve than actually existed in the days of the week, did it not? There is one extra day in the curve, is there not?

A: No, the curve was made from day to day by the medical students, and the entries were made continuously; and then apparently he noticed that in writing the dates in advance he made an error and he corrected that. This was carried out on the same way, day by day, one day after the other.

THE PRESIDENT: Very well.

BY MR. HARDY:

Q: Under the date of 28 August on chart B-2, we find in the fifth block under the graph section of the chart the word which I will spell "Z-u", and the next word "S-c-h-w-a-c-h". Now, does that mean that the patient's pulse was too weak to get a recording?

A: The blood pressure of the patients was measured every day when they were lying down and standing up, or after a slight effort. There are two different values for the blood pressure; 104 over 68, 112 over 80? 106 over 71? 110 over 78.

Q: (Interposing) What does that entry mean? doctor? the word? "Zu Schwach"?

A: Well? that is because he originally did not want to undergo this effort. Please show me the black notebook again.

Q: Will you kindly tell me what those words mean? What is the meaning of the words?

A: Well? it is concerned with the blood pressure. I want to clarify that by means of the black note book.

Q: What do the words "Zu Schwach" mean?

A: Because originally they were not supposed to subject him to an effort because if the blood pressure is taken after a person has been subjected to an effort —

Q: (Interposing) What do the words "Zu Schwach" mean? That is simple? is it not?

A: That the person who is thirsting and hungry in bed, of course, has a certain weakness in his muscles and therefore, first of all, they did not want to put any pressure on him — his blood pressure was taken after he first got up, and so forth.

Q: This same patient on the 28th and on the 27th of August, in this case, he has a temperature rate above normal, does he?

A: Yes, 37.3 and 37.2 in temperature? but that is not a rise in temperature in the sense of a sick person.

Q: Now, on this same day, on the 28th, did you not find it necessary to give this patient either Sterofundin or Strychnine? The entry under the 28th on chart B-2 in pencil has been made illegible. The word Strychnine can be made out if you pursue it closely, and the word Sterofundin can be made out. Now, what did you give that subject whose blood pressure was too weak to take?

A: The blood pressure was 112 over 80. It was not too weak. Probably he also got Sterofundin probably because he — that was administered to him on the next day — that means the interrupting of the experiment. If a thirsting person is given 350 cc's Sterofundin intravenously the experiment has, of course, been interrupted.

Q: Well, you had some trouble with this patient, didn't you? Weren't his pulse and temperature rather erratic?

A: If you consider a temperature of 37.2 a strong disturbance of temperature, then I do not know what you would say to a person who has a fever of 4l degrees Centigrade. In any condition of thirst 37.2 occurs. Experiments have been described in which the temperature went over 38 up to 39 degrees Centigrade without causing any damage.

Q: Well, on the 30th of August, the 31st of August, and on the 1st of September, as indicated on chart C-2, we see that the subject became rather cold on you, didn't he?

A: The experimental subject became cold? With 36.4, 36.5 — if first of all you consider 37.2 a high temperature, then 36.5 could not be considered cold temperature. A body temperature of 36, 35.8, is enough for normal temperature.

Q: His temperature dropped, down to 35.3, didn't it?

A: Where?

Q: Here.

A: That means times two; that is 3 times 2 are 6; 35.6 was the lowest temperature.

Q: Doesn't that indicate that the subject got rather cold?

A: That means that the person was still within the scope of normal temperature; that does not mean anything else.

Q: Well, now, the final weight entry, which is included under the 3rd of September, states here that on the 11th of September his weight was 62 kilograms, then that 62 kilograms is written over in ink with 64 ½ kilograms. How do you explain that correction?

A: That can only be explained by saying that apparently he made a mistake here, confused it with another one. Apparently he registered the weight of experimental person No. 1, erroneously marked it on chart No. 2, and then he corrected it because he noticed that he made an error. It is the same handwriting — the handwriting of the medical student Seine from Marseilles, whom I mentioned yesterday, and whom I have not seen since September 1944. And I should like to ask you that this medical student should identify his own handwriting here.

Q: This medical student obviously did not put this weight in on the 11th of September did he, because he said "um den", meaning about the 11th of September his weight was that is that correct?

A: He was a Frenchman who spoke only a few words of German, and probably he wanted to write on the "an dem", because frequently he used German terms which were absolutely not correct.

Q: In case No. 1 he used only the word "den", didn't he?

A: At the moment I cannot tell you any more why the medical student, this French medical student, at that time wrote "um den". That is the way it was determined at that time. What reason should we have had at that time to write about.

Q: Where did this patient go after the 3rd of September? To the hospital?

A: I did not send any one of my experimental subjects to the hospital except case No. 9 which came up during the preliminary period. Otherwise all the experimental subjects remained with me from the beginning to the end. I had the fever curves in the experimental room until the 11th or 12th, and then I took them away, except for group 2. They may have stayed there a few days longer. I looked over the results and wrote them down. The fever curves were carried on until the 3rd regularly, and from the 3rd to the 12th the temperature was no longer recorded. And on the 11th, probably the 12th, the final weight was determined. That is the weight which he then carried as the weight at the time of discharge.

If I had kept the curve longer and weighed them until the 13th, my weight balance might have come out a lot better.

Q: Will you find the weight for us in this black book? For this No. 2 subject?

A: In this black book, as far as I remember, there are no weights recorded at all.

Q: I am sorry, your Honor, the black book does not have the weights which are indicated on the charts.

A: It does not show any weights at all. The weights were not recorded anywhere else but on these curves.

Q: Well then, on these charts we see in the last few days of the experiments, as opposed to the chart of case No. 1, that the urinary output is recorded under the date of the 30th and 31st of August, is that correct?

A: Yes, that is correct. The medical man put it down once and another time he didn't — I did not consider the record of the amount of urine on this chart so important, because the amount of urine had been marked on the fever curve.

Q: One question, your Honor, will you kindly tell us whether or not the urinary output indicated on charts B2 and C2 are recorded in the black book?

A: On the 30th it says here, 520, that is, 500 is recorded here. On the 2nd, that is not exact; on the 2nd, 600, on the 31st, 600, is marked here, and there is nothing more recorded here either.

THE PRESIDENT: These records having been impounded by the Tribunal must remain in the custody of the representative of the Secretary General. If either party wishes to examine them during the noon recess, he may do so in the presence of the Secretary General.

The Court will now be in recess until 1:30 o'clock.

(Thereupon the Court recessed until 1330 hours, 11 June 1947.)