 |
grouped into 13 subsections (C through O, incl.) . In many
cases these materials overlap and almost all of them are closely related under
one or more aspects of the trial. Accordingly, the division of materials has
not been an easy task. For publication purposes it was decided to utilize a
larger number of major divisions than the nine major divisions of count one of
the indictment (see p. 10 above). This practice has made it easier to
relate selections from the evidence of the opposing parties, and it has avoided
some confusion which might attend the incorporation of even a larger number of
items from the record under fewer topical classifications. Separate
introductions to the respective sections mention the principal charges of the
indictment involved and frequently make cross-references to related subsections
or to particular materials in other subsections which have a close connection.
Within the subsections, prosecution and defense materials are sometimes
interspersed where this has appeared more economical or more helpful in
clarifying the matters covered. However, evidence submitted by the prosecution
is usually followed by evidence submitted by the defense. In choosing defense
evidence considerable emphasis has been given to testimony by the defendants
themselves. Each of the defendants elected to testify on his own behalf,
excepting the defendants Schmitz, von Schnitzler, and Lautenschlaeger. The
judgment of the Tribunal, under which all of the defendants were found not
guilty under counts one and five, discusses in some detail the case as to
defendants Krauch, Schmitz, von Schnitzler, and ter Meer, noting that the other
defendants "occupied positions of lesser importance than those of the
defendants we have mentioned." (See sec. XIII, vol. VIII, this series.)
Given the page limitations upon this series of volumes and limitations of both
time and staff, it has been quite impossible to incorporate evidence on many of
the detailed specifications of the charges of counts one and five. In some
cases particular specifications are only touched upon in materials which have
been included because of their bearing on other topics in the first instance. A
constant effort has been made to maintain a close relation between the
documentary and oral evidence. However, in making a choice between testimonies
on the same general subject it has sometimes been necessary to select the
testimony least involved with documents which could not be included because of
space limitations. On the other hand important testimony with occasional
references to omitted documents has often been included where the relevant
points in the documents are summarized in the testimony or where the general
purport of the testimony appears clear notwithstanding the absence of the
|
471 |
. 
