| . |
ANSWER OF THE UNITED STATES PROSECUTION
TO THE MOTION ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT
GUSTAV KRUPP VON BOHLEN
INTERNATIONAL MILITARY TRIBUNAL
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA THE FRENCH REPUBLIC. THE
UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND and THE UNION OF
SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS
against
HERMANN WILHELM GORING, et al.,
Defendants.
ANSWER FOR THE UNITED STATES TO THE MOTION
FILED
IN BEHALF OF KRUPP VON BOHLEN
The United States respectfully opposes the application
on behalf of Gustav Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach that his trial be "deferred
until he is again fit for trial."
If the Tribunal should grant this application the practical effect would
be to quash all proceedings for all time, against Krupp von Bohlen.
It appears that Krupp should not be arrested and brought to the court
room for trial. But the plea is that the Tribunal also excuse him from
being tried in absentia. This form of trial admittedly is
authorized by Article 12 of the Charter of the Tribunal. Of course trial
in absentia in circumstance of the case is an unsatisfactory proceeding
either for prosecution or for defense. But the request that Krupp von
Bohlen be neither brought to court nor tried in his absence is based on
the contention that the "interests of justice" require that he
be thus excused from any form of trial. Public interests which transcend
all private consideration require that Krupp von Bohlen shall not be
dismissed unless some other representative of the Krupp armament and
munitions interests be substituted. These public interests are as
follows:
Four generations of the Krupp family have owned
and operated the great armament and munitions plants which have been the
chief source of Germany's war supplies. For over 130 years this family
has been the focus the symbol and the beneficiary of the most sinister
forces engaged in menacing the peace of Europe. During the period
between the World Wars, the management of these enterprises was chiefly
in Defendant Krupp von Bohlen
134 |