30 Nov. 45
was quoted quite inaccurately. In the summary submitted by
defense counsel, it is pointed out that the mental condition of the
Defendant Hess does not permit him to defend himself, to reply to the
witnesses or to understand all the details of the evidence. This is
contrary to the decision submitted by the experts in their statement.
The final conclusion of the experts definitely states that his loss
of memory would not entirely prevent him from understanding the
trial; it would, however, make it impossible for him to defend
himself and to remember particulars of the past. I consider that
these particulars, which Hess is unable to remember' would not unduly
interest the Tribunal. The most important point is that emphasized by
the experts in their decision, a point which they themselves never
doubted and which, incidentally, was never doubted by Hess' defense
counsel, namely-that Hess is sane; and in that case Hess comes under
the jurisdiction of the International Tribunal. On the basis of these
facts I consider that the application of the Defense should be denied
as being unsubstantiated.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: May it please the Tribunal, it has been
suggested that I might say just a word, and as shortly as the
Tribunal desires, as to the legal conceptions which govern the
position with which the Tribunal and this defendant are placed at the
present time. The question before the Tribunal is whether this
defendant is able to plead to the Indictment and should be tried at
the present time.
If I might very briefly refer the Tribunal to the short passages
in the report, which I submit are relevant, it might be useful at the
present time. According to the attachments to the order, which I
have, the first report is that signed by the British doctors on the
19th November 1945. And in that report I beg the Tribunal to refer to
Paragraph 3, in which the signatories say that at the moment he is
not insane in the strict sense. His loss of memory will not entirely
interfere with his comprehension of the proceedings, but it will
interfere with his ability to make his defense and to understand
details of the past, which arise in evidence.
The next report is that signed by the American and French
doctors, and in Paragraph 1, the Tribunal will see:
"We find, as a result of our
examinations and investigations, that Rudolf Hess is suffering from
hysteria characterized in part by loss of memory. The nature of this
loss of memory is such that it will not interfere with his
comprehension of the proceedings, but it will interfere with his
response to questions relating to his past and will interfere with
his undertaking his defense."