Trials of war criminals before the Nuernberg military tribunals under control council law no. 10, volume IVarious
Philosophy
Trials of war criminals before the Nuernberg military tribunals under control council law no. 10, volume I
Various
Nuremberg Trial of Major German War Criminals, Nuremberg, Germany, 1945-1946; War crime trials -- Germany -- Nuremberg
important inherent reasons why the statements by Ruff and Romberg are
correct.
Actually the high-altitude experiments carried out in Dachau were
successful. They were of considerable help in clarifying the problem of
“rescue from great heights”, and this was only possible when the
experimental subjects themselves cooperated when they took part in the
experiments voluntarily and took an interest in them. This was, by the
way, also the reason why this type of high-altitude experiment could not
be made with animals as experimental subjects, a fact which, for
example, Ruff and Romberg pointed out in their summary report of 28 July
1942. (_NO-402, Pros. Ex. 66._)
I come, therefore, to the following conclusion: There can be no doubt
that the experimental subjects for the Dachau high-altitude experiments
were volunteers, at least as far as the experiments authorized by Ruff
are concerned. Whether volunteers reported for the special experiments
continued by Dr. Rascher or whether the prisoners were forced into the
experiments by Dr. Rascher does not need to be examined, because Ruff
and Romberg did not participate in those experiments in any way. But
even if any doubt as to their being volunteers were possible, it cannot
be denied that Ruff and Romberg were firmly convinced that all their
experimental subjects actually were volunteers. This was stipulated from
the very beginning, and in all the discussions of Dr. Ruff with Hippke,
Weltz, and the representative of the SS, Ruff was consequently convinced
that only volunteers were actually concerned.
Dr. Ruff’s conviction was strengthened through personal conversation
with various prisoners on that day on which he himself went to Dachau to
control the execution of the experiments and to ascertain that
everything was carried out in a completely orderly manner. And finally
in this connection it cannot be overlooked that Dr. Ruff, as he has
stated under oath and as is confirmed by numerous affidavits, had never
at any other time in his life worked with nonvoluntary experimental
subjects. Just because he considered it indispensable for the success of
the experiments that the experimental subjects were volunteers, that
they themselves cooperate, Dr. Ruff never thought that the Dachau
prisoners were not fully and completely in agreement with the
experiments.
* * * * *
It is obvious that the voluntary character of these experimental
subjects, whether an actual fact or whether Dr. Ruff deluded himself
into believing that this was the case, does not in itself relieve him of
all responsibility. On the contrary, Dr. Ruff himself is of the opinion
that, besides voluntariness, several other conditions would have to be
fulfilled before the experiments and the way in which they were
performed could be considered lawful:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account