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
Therefore, after some consideration we decided that the only possibility
was for Ruff to go to Milch or Hippke and ask to have the chamber
removed, giving the excuse that it was needed at the front. On the other
hand, I was to conclude our experiments quickly so that Himmler could be
told that the experiments were finished and that we could prove this so
that we could claim the right to remove the chamber from Dachau.
Otherwise Himmler would doubtless have ordered the experiments to be
continued until the original goal had been reached, that is, the
clarification of the question of rescue from high altitudes, and he
would doubtless have gone to Goering or even Hitler and arranged to keep
the chamber longer. He would have said that the use of this chamber at
the front was unimportant compared to its use at Dachau in the
experiments, and he would not have released the chamber.
If I myself had not gone back to Dachau, then Rascher would have carried
out the experiments on rescue from high altitudes alone; and he would
doubtless also have continued his own experiments. That was the reason
why I reluctantly went back to Dachau.
Q. Now, what was the purpose of your trip to Berlin?
A. The purpose was this report to Ruff.
Q. Was that the only purpose?
A. Yes.
Q. How did you explain this trip to Rascher?
A. I told Rascher that I was going because of my wife’s condition. My
wife had had a child in March, and that was a good reason for my going
to Berlin.
Q. How long were you in Berlin?
A. Only 1 or 2 days; then I went back to Dachau.
Q. Now, before you left did you make sure whether Ruff had done anything
in response to your report, whether he had done anything to get the
chamber out of Dachau?
A. Yes. Ruff tried to get Hippke but was not able to at that time, so
that I really did not know what was going on and what would be
accomplished.
Q. Did you notice anything special about the chamber when you came back
to Dachau?
A. Yes. When I came back, the barometer was broken, as Neff has already
said; and I had to go right back to Berlin to have the barometer
repaired.
Q. How long did you stay in Berlin this time?
A. As long as the repair required; about 2 weeks.
Q. Then during this time there were no experiments?
A. No.
Q. When did the experiments begin again?
A. The beginning of May or the middle of May I went back with the
repaired apparatus; then we concluded the experiments as quickly as
possible.
Q. Did you abbreviate the program which you had planned, or did you
change it in any way, or did you keep it the way it was?
A. No. We shortened it. We had fewer experiments at the various
altitudes in order to conclude the whole thing as quickly as possible
but in such a way that it was actually completed with adequate results.
Q. When was the second death at which you were present?
A. That was a few days after my return to Dachau.
Q. Did the death of the experimental subject occur in a manner similar
to the first case?
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