. NMT03-T0554
Volume III · Page 554
| Q. One final question in that
context. In the two so-called guidance letters, especially in the one to
Stuttgart, mention is made of the fact that an extraordinary objection was
supposed to be raised. Do you know anything about whether that was done?
A. The sentences were not sent to the Oberreichsanwalt with a request to raise the extraordinary objection, but with the instruction to examine whether it would be worthwhile to raise an extraordinary objection. In neither of those cases, neither in the guidance letter to Hamburg or to Stuttgart, the problem was the changing of prison sentences to death sentences, but the questions were merely prison terms and whether they should be increased but still remain prison sentences. Thus, the Oberreichsanwalt was not instructed to raise an extraordinary objection. As far as I know, at the time, the Oberreichsanwalt in the cases which were sent to him for examination refused to register an extraordinary objection; and, as far as I know, the minister was satisfied with those results of the examination. Q. With that we have concluded the question of the Guidance Letters. |
|
| * * * * * * * * * * | |
| c. Lawyers' Letter Written by Thierack | |
| PARTIAL
TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT NG-260* PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 87 |
|
| EXTRACTS FROM
LAWYERS' LETTER NO. 1 SIGNED BY REICH MINISTER OF JUSTICE THIERACK, 1 OCTOBER 1944 |
|
| Lawyers' Letters | |
| Information of the Reich Minister of Justice | |
| Confidential
Number 1, dated 1 October 1944 |
|
| LAWYERS OF GERMANY | |
| The German people, on the threshold of the sixth year of war, face tremendous war tasks. | |
* Mr. LaFollette, Deputy Chief Counsel, stated the following concerning the prosecution's purpose in offering this document in evidence: "I briefly stated this morning with reference to the other brief [Judges' letters] and to this brief [Lawyers' Letter] that the prosecution offers them as evidence for the purpose of showing that there was a direct controlled judiciary and bar. We are not offering these documents as evidence of any particular act contained therein, but since we offer them, we are to some extent bound by them and our purpose of offering them is to prove there was a connection" (Tr. p. 412). Mr. LaFollette also stated that this was the only Lawyers' Letter known to the prosecution.
