. ©MAZAL LIBRARY

NMT04-T0547


. NUERNBERG MILITARY TRIBUNAL
Volume IV · Page 547
Previous Page Home PageArchive
 
clear here that under the order which has been issued there was no scope to hold trials of Jews."
Document NOKW-584, describing the executions mentioned in that document carried this significant item — 
 
"SS Sturmbannfuehrer Dr. Braune gave orders on the place of execution for the carrying out of the shooting."
Although Braune denies that he actually gave the order to fire he does admit that he marched with the condemned men to the place of execution.

Speaking of the Yevpatoriya action the defendant explained that he was convinced that "the whole lot of them had engaged in illegal activities", but he admitted that there was the possibility, theoretically, as he described, that among these 1,184 executees —  
 
"There were some people who had not participated in murdering the German soldiers or who had not participated in sniping activities."
The Tribunal finds from all the evidence in the case that the defendant is guilty under counts one and two of the indictment.

The Tribunal also finds that the defendant was a member of the criminal organizations SS, SD and Gestapo under the conditions defined by the judgment of the International Military Tribunal and is, therefore, guilty under count three of the indictment. 
  
   
WALTER HAENSCH 
 
SS Lieutenant Colonel Walter Haensch studied law at the Leipzig University, trained as Referendar in various cities and passed his final State law examination in December 1934. He took a position with the town administration of Doebeln in February 1935 and in the fall of that year entered the SD. In the early part of 1942 Haensch was assigned to Sonderkommando 4b as its leader. It is the contention of the prosecution that his authority over this unit began on 16 January 1942. The defendant asserts on the contrary that although it is true he was ordered to this post in January, he did not arrive at the site of the Kommando until 15 March 1942.

In support of this asserted delayed inauguration of his Einsatz service, the defendant presented evidence to show that he was in Berlin on 7 February 1942 for some dental work, that on 20 February 1942 he opened up a bank account, on 21 February 1942 he posed for some pictures, and on another date attended a birthday party, all in Berlin.

A great deal of time was devoted at the trial to the presentation of evidence both for and against the alibi contended for by the defendant. The question of alibi, however, remains moot, in view

 
 
 
547
Next Page NMT Home Page