| |
[princi
] ple [grundsaetzliche Haerte], but that on the
contrary, especially if the absence of the Minister offered an opportunity, he
was inclined to be lenient. Impressive examples for this fact will be given to
the Court from the document book of the prosecution 3-L, Document NG-414,
Prosecution Exhibit 252.
In this connection the opportunity will arise
to prove in general that it is only a mere assertion of the prosecution that
the Ministry of Justice illegally ordered that a death sentence be carried out.
Klemm did not participate in the issuance of directives concerning the clearing
of jails when the enemy approached. These were affairs which were ordered by
the executive department of the ministry (Dept. V). Evidence will be submitted
which will prove that my client had practically nothing to do with Department
V. They will prove that all decisions in these questions were always made by
Thierack, without consulting his Under Secretary. Concerning the individual
case about the illegal murder in the penitentiary Sonnenburg, the evidence
obtained up to now through the cross-examinations of witnesses will be
supported by additional evidence. It will clearly be shown that the Ministry of
Justice was not responsible for these measures. It will be seen that Klemm did
not know anything about the common plan of the Reich defense commissioner and
the general public prosecutor and that therefore, he did not have the
possibility to prevent that their intentions were carried out.
By
reference to individual cases I will prove that, in accordance with the plea
made by the entire defense the judiciary did not do anything which made the
lynching of Allied fliers who were shot down possible. The contrary will be
proved. It was Klemm who ordered that criminal proceedings should be started
against Germans who had killed Allied fliers illegally. The dispute with the
Party offices with regard to these orders will be shown. Furthermore, it will
be proved that Klemm saw to it that Germans, who treated bailed-out enemy
fliers decently were protected from subordinated authorities of justice who
showed over-great zeal.
(g) When discussing the individual
counts of the indictment I will try to find the basis of the evidence for
subsequent legal considerations. This includes especially the question, whether
it can be at all important for the judging of the facts of a crime. to examine
the actions of a superior Minister in which the subordinate Under Secretary had
also no part. Here the problem will not be the importance of an order with
regard to criminal law, but it will be discussed that the necessary causal
connection is missing. Going further we will have the opportunity to produce
evidence before this Tribunal with regard to the subjective side.
140 |