 |
| I don't want to delay the Tribunal by multiplying my examples. They
are integral parts of this indictment, and they are a part of this
specification which we request, because only then will sufficient clarity be
achieved. |
| |
GENERAL TAYLOR: May it please the Court, I am convinced that
everything Dr. Siemers has said is quite as irrelevant as was everything Dr.
Boettcher said.
I clearly understood the Court to ask, at the
conclusion of Dr. Boettcher's argument, whether any motion had been filed
requesting a dismissal of the Bill of Particulars, and there is a clear answer;
no such motion has been filed. In order to prevent a repetition of Dr. Siemers'
intransigent remarks, the prosecution now formally requests that the pleas of
the defendants be taken, and, if there are any objections to the form and
substance of the indictment, the defendants file a motion in accordance with
the rules of the Court, with which all of them are fully familiar.
PRESIDING JUDGE SHAKE: As the Tribunal understands the arguments of
counsel for the defense, three propositions have been urged; one that the
indictment does not charge an offense within the language or the meaning of the
laws of the Charter and the ordinances under which this Tribunal operates. That
matter would go to the jurisdiction of this Tribunal as applied to these
defendants, and any objection may be as well raised on the offering of the
evidence or in the final argument, as now, and it cannot be seen how the
arraignment of the defendants would injure their rights in that regard.
The second proposition urged appears to be that the indictment does not
charge the offenses with sufficient certainty. Manifestly this Tribunal would
be in no position to pass decision upon such a matter without a definite and
specific motion before it, setting out exactly the parts of the indictment
which ought to be made more definite and certain, in order to permit the
defendants to make their proper showing.
The third proposition appears
to be a motion for a continuance of the case, and it is the view of the
Tribunal that on the present state of the record that matter was passed upon by
the presiding judges. This Tribunal is not disposed at this time to disturb the
ruling of the presiding judges in that regard, and, unless and until some
further facts are presented to the Tribunal, we shall be obliged to consider
that matter as closed. |
| |
| (Recess) |
| |
|
PRESIDING JUDGE SHAKE: The Secretary-General will proceed with
the calling of the defendants for arraignment |
96 |
. 
