. NMT04-T0711
Volume IV · Page 711
| IV. ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL CONCERNING TIME ALLOTTED FOR PRESENTATION OF DEFENSE EVIDENCE AND FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION BY THE PROSECUTION* |
| PRESIDING JUDGE WYATT: As a result of the
written request received by the Tribunal this morning and as a result of a
conference just completed with both defense counsel and counsel for the
prosecution, an agreement has been reached with reference to the time to be
allotted for the remainder of this trial. On behalf of the Tribunal, I will now
read the agreement into the record, which is as follows: At the request of
defense counsel and upon their agreement, the taking of evidence in the trial
of this case from this point will be limited as follows: For the remaining defendants of the Staff Main Office, Creutz, Meyer-Hetling, Schwarzenberger, and Huebner — ten trial days. For the defendants Lorenz, Brueckner, of VoMi — six trial days. For the defendants of RuSHA, Hofmann, Hildebrandt, and Schwalm — twelve and a half trial days. And for the defendants of the Lebensborn, Sollmann, Ebner, Tesch, and Viermetz — nine trial days. The above limitation as to time includes the time consumed by the cross-examination with the provision that the prosecution will be limited to ten minutes cross-examination of each witness and to thirty minutes cross-examination of each defendant. The prosecution will be allowed six hours for rebuttal testimony at the conclusion of the above periods of time. This concludes the reading of the agreement reached between counsel for defense and counsel for prosecution. Now, on behalf of the Tribunal, may I state that very largely counsel will be permitted to use this time in as just a manner as they deem to be in the best interests of their clients. The Tribunal would, however, request counsel, so far as they are able to do so, to confine themselves to material matters. However, it will be largely your judgment as to whether you do that or not. In fairness, we simply feel that we should state that only material evidence will be considered, regardless of what may be proven. In other words, again stated, the Tribunal will not consider conclusions, opinions, rank hearsay evidence, and evidence without probative value. Finally, may we say that while this |
* Tr. pp. 2060-1, 8 December 1947.
