 |
“Air raid precaution
implements are missing altogether. Air raid slit trench for both guards and
prisoners is also missing.” |
With respect to Raumerstrasse, it was reported on 16 October that
Stalag representatives had made an inspection and that they had found
“there are no air raid installations for the guards or the prisoners of
war. One could not help gaining the impression that the space needed for same
was not considered in the planning.” On 15 January 1943, the defendant
Lehmann reported to the housing administration that “yesterday Captain
Fiene of the local guard command called me and said that slit trenches for the
protection against splinters would have to be provided as soon as possible in
the prisoner of war camps.” Hafenstrasse camp was completely destroyed in
a raid in March 1943, and at that time still lacked even slit trenches as air
raid protection.
In 11 January 1943, the defendant Lehmann reported as
follows (NIK-12361, Pros. Ex. 919):* |
| |
“On Saturday, 9 January at
2230 the officer of the guard, Captain Dahlmann, rang me up and told me that
the guards in our prisoner of war camps in Raumerstrasse were barely able to
suppress a revolt among the Russian prisoners of war on the occasion of the air
raid on Essen. In the opinion of Captain Dahlmann the reason why the prisoners
of war became restive is that in the Raumerstrasse camp there are no slit
trenches. He urgently requests that such trenches be dug in order, among other
things, not to disturb the surrounding civilian population in case of serious
trouble.” |
A copy of this report was sent to the defendants Loeser, Krupp, Ihn,
and Kupke, among others.
It further appears from a defense document
that the prisoners lacked even enough sand to put out phosphorous bombs which
fell around the camp.
The defense evidence was to the effect that there
was available to the prisoners at Raumerstrasse “a passageway underneath
the railroad tracks” which they used as an air raid shelter. At this camp,
there were from 1,200 to 1,500 prisoners and the witness admitted that the
passageway could not accommodate that number so that during an air raid the
remainder had to stay in camp and use slit trenches which finally had been
built as the result of the report of defendant Lehmann above set forth.
Discrimination in the matter of air raid protection is also shown by
the testimony of the defense witness Marquardt who worked in one of the
numerous factories in Essen, utilizing the labor of |
__________
* Reproduced above in
section VIII G 1.
1394 |
. 
