Trials of war criminals before the Nuernberg military tribunals under control council law no. 10, volume IIVarious
Philosophy
Trials of war criminals before the Nuernberg military tribunals under control council law no. 10, volume II
Various
Nuremberg Trial of Major German War Criminals, Nuremberg, Germany, 1945-1946; War crime trials -- Germany -- Nuremberg
The decision on these killings was not reached by Dr. Hoven alone. Dr.
Hoven had no cause for that. It was not his life that was endangered by
those spies or traitors. It was, on the contrary, the committee of
political German and foreign prisoners, many of whom are today holding
high office in their countries. Those persons guaranteed to Dr. Hoven
that only such individuals would be killed who already had been active
and would continue to be active as spies and as traitors. These
statements by Dr. Hoven were expressly confirmed by a number of
witnesses who were heard on this subject. These observations may be
found in the affidavits I submitted. Above all it has been proven that
only such people of whom Dr. Hoven held that conviction were done away
with. Dr. Hoven testified to that effect and it has been reaffirmed by
the witnesses Dorn, Dr. Kogon, Seegers, and Hummel.
In his interrogation of 23 October 1946, Dr. Hoven stated expressly that
he killed or knew only of the killings of such persons of whom he was
certain that their deaths were necessary to save the lives of a
multitude of political prisoners from the various countries. At that
early date he expressly emphasized that he refused to carry out any of
the killing orders of the Camp Commander Koch; the prisoners who were
covered by these orders were put into the hospital or hidden in some
other way by Dr. Hoven.
Dr. Hoven had not negligently adopted the conviction that their killing
was essential for the salvation of huge numbers of prisoners.
This is proved first of all by the testimony of the witness Dorn, who
gave many details as to the means and methods employed by Dr. Hoven and
the illegal camp administration in becoming convinced of the necessity
for the killings. Dr. Hoven supplemented those statements. Furthermore,
they were corroborated by the testimony of the witnesses Hummell, Dr.
Kogon, Seegers, Philipp Dirk, Baron von Pallandt, and van Eerde through
their affidavits.
Actually, the prevention of the planned crimes, i.e., the mass murder of
a multitude of German and foreign political prisoners, could be
accomplished only through the killing of the spies and traitors. There
was no other means. What should Dr. Hoven have done to prevent the
crimes planned by the spies and traitors? Those spies collaborated with
the SS camp commanders to carry out Himmler’s program to destroy the
political prisoners. To whom should Dr. Hoven have turned? Perhaps to
the SS camp commanders who worked with the spies and traitors? Or
perhaps to the Gestapo or to the police who worked under Himmler’s
orders?
There was no other way but the one which Dr. Hoven chose in order to
prevent crimes. I showed that with details in my closing brief. There I
assembled the testimony of the witnesses for the prosecution and defense
who were heard on this point.
Here, I merely wish to stress the following statements by witnesses:
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