. NMT05-T1183
Volume V · Page 1183
| [Auf…] sichtsrat of the
Cooperative House and Home Building Company, a firm which was incorporated into
WVHA "in organization, personnel and business matters." The Aufsichtsrat is defined by Tribunal VI in Case No. 6 as follows: |
"This body was in the nature of a supervisory board, some what comparable functionally, to those members of a board of directors of an American corporation who are not on the executive committee and who do not actively participate in the management of the business. Under German Law the Aufsichtsrat elected and removed members of the Vorstand, called special meetings of the stockholders, and had the right to examine and audit the books and accounts of the firm." |
| Whether or not one chooses to define
Loerner's participation in this enterprise as merely formal or on a low level,
the fact remains clear that he was in the front office and part and parcel of
the executive group. Counsel discusses Document NO-2133, Pros. Ex. 387, book 14, which is a letter from Maurer to several office chiefs, with copies to Loerner and Gluecks, as counsel states "for their information." That is exactly the point. As early as 24 January 1912, shortly before the organization of WVHA, Loerner was informed that land was to be purchased and a concentration camp housing 25,000 inmates was to be constructed at Stutthof. The acquisition of the land fell within Loerner's province as head of the legal division of Main Department I/2. Thus he had early knowledge of the existence, and at least partially, of the scope of the system of concentration camps. This early knowledge is only one factor in his guilt. Standing alone it is not enough, but it is a piece in the mosaic which in toto spells slavery. After a careful review of the entire record in the case and a thorough consideration of the final arguments of defense counsel and briefs filed supplemental thereto, the Tribunal is of the opinion that the judgment of guilty under counts two, three and four of the indictment as determined on 3 November 1947 should be affirmed. A certain disparity, however, which might be claimed to be unjust is found in a comparison of the sentences imposed upon defendants Georg Loerner and August Frank. The similarity in length of service with WVHA, and as deputy to Pohl, a consideration of their respective ranks, and of the counts on which they were found guilty convinces the Tribunal that the sentence imposed upon Georg Loerner as announced in the original judgment on 3 November 1947 should, in the interest of justice, be modified. Although Georg Loerner was designated as deputy to Pohl, the record discloses no occasion on which he actually |
