 |
IV. OPENING STATEMENTS OF THE
PROSECUTION
AND THE DEFENSE |
| |
| A. Opening Statement for the Prosecution* |
| |
BRIGADIER GENERAL TELFORD TAYLOR: Of all the names which have become
associated with the Nuernberg trials, I suppose that none has been a
“household word” for so many decades — indeed for nearly a
century — as that of Krupp. Today the name “Krupp” is freighted
with associations and preconceptions. For some people it is the name which
heads the list of arms-makers — Schneider-Creusot, Vickers, Skoda, and
others — who, it is said, stir up wars and, with a zeal which transcends
mere patriotism, arm all the legions of Mars with terrible impartiality. For
others, the name of Krupp weighs level in the balance with the sum total of von
Kluck’s, and Kluge’s, and Kuechler’s, and Kleist’s, and all
the gallery of tight-lipped German war lords; so regarded, Krupp and the German
militarists are the indestructible common denominator of Germany’s
murderous and obstinately repeated lunges at the world’s throat.
Just because “Krupp” is so meaningful and historic a name,
the true basis and purpose of this case are not unlikely to be misunderstood.
We do not seek, in this case, to level any attack against the business of
making arms as such. We are not trying to prove that all wars derive from the
sinister machinations of armament manufacturers and their sales agents. The
armorer’s trade is no more inherently unlawful than that of the soldier or
diplomat; all of these professions revolve around war and statecraft, but that
does not make them criminal per se.
Furthermore, the individual
defendants in this case are not being prosecuted for the sins of others, or
because the name “Krupp” has acquired over the years a sinister
sheen. The men in the box are not symbols, nor are they charged as
representatives of other men. It is true, of course, that the charges in this
case arise out of acts committed by or in the name of the Krupp firm. And it is
true that most of the crimes with which the defendants are charged were
committed by them in their capacity as Krupp officials. But no man in the dock
was named in the indictment merely because of his association with the Krupp
firm; each defendant was named because the prosecution believes, and is
confident that it can prove, his personal criminal responsibility.
We
are not dealing in this case with men who rose to power by riding the crest of
the Nazi wave. That most of the defendants |
__________
* Opening statement is
recorded in mimeographed transcript, 8 December 1947. pp. 18-113.
60 |
. 
