 |
crimes against peace, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and with
participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the commission of these
crimes, as defined in Control Council Law No. 10.
Kupke's name is
mentioned only once in the indictment itself, that is when he is excluded from
the charges of spoliation and robbery under count two. Kupke’s name is not
mentioned in connection with counts one, three, and four of the indictment.
At the end of the indictment there is a supplement concerning each
individual defendant. Kupke’s former activities are mentioned; it is
stated that he joined Krupp in 1938 and a list of his positions follows.
According to the indictment, therefore, the only period of my client's
life which is of interest in these proceedings is the period of his employment
in Krupp.
As far as the actual facts are concerned, the prosecution in
its presentation of evidence only dealt with my client's activities as chief of
the office Oberlagerfuehrung (foreign workers’ camp administration).
The prosecution has not even attempted to prove that my client was
guilty under counts one and four of the indictment during the period 1938 to
April 1943, at which time he took over the office Oberlagerfuehrung.
For this reason I have requested that the proceedings with regard to
counts one and four of the indictment against the defendant Kupke be stopped. I
take the liberty of referring to the motions of 11 and 15 March 1948 submitted
by the entire defense.
The focal point of the defense is therefore the
refutation of the prosecution evidence concerning count three. With regard to
counts one and four of the indictment I reserve the right to submit evidence.
In its opening statement of 8 December 1947 the prosecution emphasized
that Kupke was one of the less important employees of the firm Krupp. This
statement was stressed by the prosecution in that in the chart of “Date of
Entry of Defendants into Krupp and High Positions” which it submitted and
which was exhibited in the courtroom, the box with Kupke’s name was the
only one of all the 12 which was not shaded but was left white. This also shows
that the rank of my client as “Gruppenvorstand” did not imply
membership in the Vorstand of the firm Krupp, that is, the administrative body
of the enterprise.
According to the indictment itself, the opening
statement of 8 December 1947, and the evidence submitted by the prosecution, my
client, in his capacity as chief of the office Oberlagerfuehrung since 1943, is
supposed to have been guilty of crimes enumerated in Control Council Law No.
10. |
222 |
. 
