. NMT05-T1169
Volume V · Page 1169
| [judge…] ment, the Tribunal had denied the defendants the right to answer prosecution's briefs filed against them. The Military Governor did not pass on the contentions of any of the defendants, but instead, at the request of the Tribunal, issued General Order No. 52, dated 7 June 1948, ordering it to reconvene on or about 12 July 1945, "for the purpose of permitting such reconsideration and revision of its judgment as may be appropriate." The Tribunal accordingly reconvened, and on 14 July 1948 entered an order reading in part as follows: |
"In conformity with the policy of the Tribunal to afford defense counsel every possible opportunity to present full anal complete arguments in behalf of the defense, such counsel as wish to do so will now be permitted to prepare and submit briefs in reply to the prosecution's briefs. If, after fully considering such defense briefs, it should appear to the Tribunal that the judgment heretofore entered as to any defendant is not then supported by the evidence and that his guilt has not then been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, or that the sentence imposed is injust, the Tribunal will thereupon vacate, modify, or amend the judgment now entered in accordance with the facts and the law as so determined." |
| It will be observed that this order gave
opportunity to all defendants to submit any arguments they wished, based on the
record in the case. This completely removed any possibility of prejudice
arising from the manner in which defendants claimed the original judgment had
been prepared. It gave the defendants an unrestricted opportunity to supplement
the 909 pages of defense argument already submitted with further briefs of any
scope desired. In addition, the Tribunal ordered the return of all defendants
to Nuernberg from the Landsberg prison so that their counsel could have free
opportunity to consult with them. It is the firm opinion of the Tribunal that this fulfilled every requirement of full and complete justice to the defendants, and gave them all the protection in their legal rights which could be asked. Reconsideration of the evidence after judgment and new findings of fact based thereon are not new concepts in Anglo-Saxon Law. Motions for new trial, motions for rehearing, motions to reduce the verdict of a jury to conform to the proofs, and motions for judgment non obstante veredicto are familiar procedural steps in all courts. That is exactly what is being done in this case. No new or additional proof is being offered or received. The entire evidence heretofore received is being reexamined, and reanalyzed de novo, with the aid of additional defense arguments now submitted in briefs. The fact that a judicial conclusion was |
