. NMT03-T1145
Volume III · Page 1145
him. Rothaug himself had to laugh because of this mean joke, and he went on to say, ‘You have to be able to hate, because according to the Bible, God is a hating God.’ " |
| The testimony of Elkar is even more
significant. He testifies that Rothaug believed in severe measures against
foreigners and particularly against Poles and Jews, whom he felt should be
treated differently from German transgressors. Rothaug felt there was a gap in
the law in this respect. He states that Rothaug asserted that in his own court
he achieved this discrimination by interpretation of existing laws but that
other courts failed to do so. Such a gap, according to Rothaug, should be
closed by singling out Poles and Jews for special treatment. Elkar testifies
that recommendations were made by the defendant Rothaug, through the witness,
to higher levels and that the subsequent decree of 1941 against Poles and Jews
conformed to Rothaug's ideas as expressed and forwarded by the witness Elkar
through SD channels to the RSHA. This animosity of the defendant to these races is further established by documents in this case which show that his discrimination against these races encompassed others who he felt lacked the necessary harshness to carry out the policy of the Nazi State and Party toward these people. In this connection the communication of Oeschey to Deputy Gauleiter Holz, concerning Doebig, is worthy of note. In this communication many charges were made against Doebig for his failure to take action against officials under him who had failed to carry out the Nazi programs against Jews and Poles. Oeschey testified that these charges were copied from a letter submitted to him by the defendant Rothaug and that the defendant assumed responsibility for these charges. Rothaug denies that he assumed responsibility or had anything to do with the charges made, except in one immaterial instance. However, in the light of the circumstances themselves, the Tribunal accepts Oeschey's testimony in this regard, particularly in view of the unimpeached affidavit of Oeschey's secretary to the effect that these charges were copied directly by her from a letter of Rothaug's. Documentary proof of Rothaug's attitude in this respect is further found in the records of cases tried by him which hereafter will be considered. Proof as to his animus is not shaken by his own testimony. It is confirmed by his testimony. He states: |
"In my view, by introduction of the question of the so-called incredibility of Poles, the whole problem is shifted onto another plane. It is a matter of course that a nation, which has been |
