. NMT04-T0537
Volume IV · Page 537
where reports bear my signature these can just as well have been written by Seibert as by me. Reports which are signed by Seibert were, as a rule, written by him during my absence from the Einsatzgruppe. Seibert was acquainted with all the duties and problems within the framework of Einsatzgruppe D. Only two people could have had complete knowledge of the number of executions which took place, namely, Seibert and myself." |
| In an affidavit dated 4 February 1947, which
has already been cited and quoted from, the defendant Seibert stated that the
radio reports on the activities of Einsatzgruppe D were known only to
Ohlendorf, Seibert, and the telegraphist. Further, that Seibert accompanied
Ohlendorf on ,journeys of inspection. On the witness stand both Ohlendorf and Schubert modified their original statements as to Seibert's activities with the Einsatzgruppe and endeavored to delimit his functions to those of chief of office III. This modification could well have stemmed from a desire to help a codefendant, rather than because of a mistaken statement in the first instance. One could err in the general summing up of another's activities, but it is difficult to comprehend how one in the normal possession of faculties of memory and reflection could ascribe the accomplishment of a very specific act to another if, in fact, it had not occurred. Thus, in his affidavit of 2 April 1947, Ohlendorf stated, "The only people whom I generally assigned to inspections were, except for Schubert, Willy Seibert and Hans Gabel." Here we have a very definite type of work. Schubert, in his affidavit of 24 February 1947, very specifically declared that Willy Seibert was Ohlendorf's deputy, and that Ohlendorf or Seibert had assigned him to supervise and inspect an execution which involved some 700 people. Schubert could scarcely have credited Seibert with this type of executive authority, unless he was aware he possessed it. One Karl Jonas declared by affidavit that Seibert was deputy to Ohlendorf. In his own affidavit Seibert declared that, although he was not Ohlendorf's deputy generally for Einsatzgruppe D, he did represent his chief "in all matters which a Chief Ill had to work out." And then he explained that "as senior officer on the staff of the Einsatzgruppe" he "took over all tasks within the group whenever Ohlendorf was absent from the group." Although the defendant attempted to testifying to confine his activities to those falling within the normal scope of office III, he did state that he made inspections of Tartar companies, that he engaged in combat actions against partisans and that he did make reports on executions. These assignments obviously do not fall within the duties of a chief of office III, as office III was described by Seibert. |
