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
DR. PELCKMANN: I should like to object to the indictment. I should like
to say that in my opinion, as far as Schaefer is concerned, the
indictment does not conform to Ordinance No. 7. I can explain that.
PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: How much time do you desire to present your
argument?
DR. PELCKMANN: Three minutes.
PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: You may proceed. First, have you filed in the
proceeding any written notice of the objection to the indictment and
served it upon the prosecutor?
DR. PELCKMANN: I have not had the indictment long enough. I have just
had the written material for 2 days. What I have to say I could submit
in writing later. Because of the brief time, I ask to be allowed to make
a brief statement now.
PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: You may make a brief statement and submit
argument in support of your objection within 5 days.
DR. PELCKMANN: Very well. May I now say something?
PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: You may proceed for 3 minutes.
DR. PELCKMANN: Ordinance No. 7, in Article IV (_a_), prescribes the
following according to the English text: “The indictment shall state the
charges plainly, concisely and with sufficient particulars to inform
defendant of the offenses charged.” Schaefer is charged only on one
count, count two (_G_). Experiments with sea-water in Dachau are charged
against 12 defendants. In two sentences the indictment goes on to say
that the 12 persons who are then named are charged with special
responsibility for these crimes and participation in them. I am of the
opinion that this does not contain sufficient particulars.
“Responsibility” and “participation” are legal concepts. There is no
evidence of “sufficient particulars,” which implies details.
The indictment, in my opinion, must give facts to indicate how and why
each one of these 12 defendants who, ostensibly, participated in these
experiments, is responsible and participated. My client cannot tell what
the nature of his participation is supposed to have been.
The indictment says, in count one, number 2, that all defendants were
principals in, accessories to, ordered, abetted, took a consenting part
in, and were connected with plans and enterprises involving the
commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Those also are
only legal concepts.
PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: You may file a written brief in support of your
position.
DR. PELCKMANN: I should like to add, without the knowledge of the
indictment, my client is not ready to answer the question as to whether
he is guilty or not guilty.
PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: You will serve a copy of your brief upon the
prosecution and file it with the Secretary General.
DR. PELCKMANN: Very well, your Honor.
PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: In connection with this matter, General Taylor,
do you desire to make any remarks or suggestions?
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account