. NMT04-T0573
Volume IV · Page 573
not sufficiently safeguarded? Is that what you want to say, that that was your opinion; was that your opinion?" |
| And he replied, "That was my theoretical
opinion, Mr. Prosecutor." The defendant is presumed to be innocent until proved guilty, and the Tribunal is not prepared to say that the evidence in this case rises to that degree of certainty which could conclusively establish that the defendant was guilty of planning the killing of people or ordering their death. It does, however, show that the defendant took a consenting part in the criminal activities in the sense intended in Control Council Law No. 10, although there are some mitigating circumstances. From the evidence in the case the Tribunal finds the defendant guilty under counts one and two of the indictment. The Tribunal finds the defendant was a member of the criminal organizations SS and SD under the conditions defined by the judgment of the International Military Tribunal and is, therefore, guilty under count three of the indictment. |
| WALDEMAR VON RADETZKY |
| Von Radetzky was born in Moscow, attended
school at Riga and ,joined the Latvian army in 1932. After discharge in 1933 he
worked with an import firm until November 1939 and then moved to
German-occupied Posen, being employed from November 1939 until January 1940 at
the advisory office for immigrants and from January 1940 until May 1941 at the
office of repatriation of ethnic Germans. In May 1941 he was assigned for
emergency service with the RSHA and then transferred to Pretzsch as an
interpreter to the newly formed Sonderkommando 4a. He traveled with the
Sonderkommando to Hrubieszow and from there to Lutsk where he was assigned to a
Teilkommando of the same organization. In December 1941 he took leave and
reported back to Sonderkommando 4a in Kharkov in March 1942. He remained with
this unit until December 1942 and, at the same time, acted as liaison officer
between the Einsatzkommando and German and Hungarian army units. In January
1943, the area under the jurisdiction of the 2d Army was subordinated to the
area of the Einsatzgruppe and the defendant's reports and activities were
controlled by Einsatzgruppe B. In the winter of 1943, he returned to Berlin.
The defendant stated in his pretrial affidavit that, during the time he served with Sonderkommando 4a, he was officially informed that the Kommando participated in a number of executions in the areas assigned. |
