. NMT05-T1022
Volume V · Page 1022
| doubt. Kammler's appointment of the defendant
as his deputy was in writing, and dated 8 September 1943, and states: "SS
Sturmbannfuehrer Kiefer will in principle act as my deputy until further
notice." (NO-1244, Pros. Ex. 45.) The evidence clearly discloses that Kammler was thoroughly aware of the conditions in the concentration camps, and of the atrocities, murders, and ill-treatment of the inmates. The Tribunal concludes that the defendant knew what Kammler knew, since he was his deputy and chief of Amt C II, and his duties required that he have such knowledge. The Tribunal further concludes that a person so close to Kammler and directly subordinate to him and designated by Kammler as his deputy would be advised of these facts. Such knowledge would of necessity entail familiarity with the facts as to the labor conditions on construction jobs, the type of labor employed, and the treatment accorded such labor. If these facts were known to him, the defendant would have had to know of the atrocities and inhuman tortures visited upon concentration camp inmates through Amt C II, Amtsgruppe C, and the WVHA. Another source of information for the defendant was the weekly conferences of chiefs of offices and experts. These conferences were held, and the Tribunal concludes that they were thorough and detailed. Kammler's position and duties increased to the point where he was forced to devote less and less time to Amt C II, and finally he was forced to move his offices from the WVHA building. Subsequently, the only contact between himself and the collaborators in Amtsgruppe C, was in the conferences with the Amt Chiefs (R. 3336). During these conferences Kiefer had ample opportunity to learn of the existence of the gas chambers and the crematories, the use of slave labor, the treatment of concentration camp inmates, the destruction of the Warsaw ghetto, and many other instances of the criminality of the organization of which he was an integral part. The evidence clearly discloses that the defendant did not make the slightest effort to improve these conditions, or failing in that, to sever his relationship with the organization. His activities and willing cooperation clearly shows the voluntary manner in which he worked as an Amt chief of the WVHA. The Tribunal has given careful consideration to all the contentions made by the defendant, and all the evidence and documents offered by him to rebut the case of the prosecution, but the Tribunal cannot accept his version as to his knowledge, duties, and activities as Amt chief of office C II in the WVHA. |
