. NMT02-T0881
Volume II · Page 881
that the cruel methods were not necessary and that, therefore, they were an error. But if they were not necessary then the conclusion drawn from them without any explicit proof was not permissible.
8. It is not consistent with recorded evidence that 100,000 Polish prisoners of war were deported to concentration camps. The opposite has been proved, viz., that Polish prisoners of war, in accordance with the agreement between Russia and Germany were released from captivity and employed as civilians.
9. It is not consistent with recorded evidence that Romanian nationals were subjected to deportation. Not one single piece of evidence for that has been submitted. Romania was mentioned by the defense only in connection with the armistice agreement between Russia and Romania.
10. It is not consistent with recorded evidence that Milch used Hungarian Jews. It is proved by the evidence that this did not happen before the summer of 1944 when Milch had resigned from his positions.
11. It is not consistent with recorded evidence that the Schmundt minutes must be correct, for the reason that if any allusion to a war had been omitted, Hitler would not have spoken at all. It has been proven that Hitler spoke merely theoretically about the world situation in case there should be a war at some time. He did not mention that he wanted to foment aggressive wars.
The judgment states that the defendant recommended more drastic and more cruel measures in regard to the recruiting and utilization of workers. (Page 18 of the judgment.)
This is in discrepancy with the recorded evidence.
Here the defense does not argue about the separate reasons given by Judge Michael A. Musmanno, since these reasons do not constitute the official judgment. These reasons also contain factual errors and even use material which has not been discussed during the trial.
These separate reasons, however, make it possible to draw a conclusion in regard to the sentence of the judgment which states that the defendant recommended more drastic and more cruel measures.
It has been proved through the evidence that utterances to that effect were made by the defendant only in smaller circles and while he was in a state of excitement. It has been proved that no action was ever taken in conformity with these utterances. It has been proved that the defendant never asked for action pursuant to such utterances. It has been proved that he did not have any
