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
Both by testimony and argument the defense claimed that the medical
experiments had generally been useful in furthering medical science,
that in some cases the experiments alleged as criminal had increased the
speed of the progress of medical science, and that in some cases there
was no other alternative for the development of medical science except
to conduct experiments on human beings. The prosecution, in addition to
arguing that voluntary participation by the subject of experimentation
was a prerequisite of legal experiments, argued that the experiments
turned out to be entirely useless for medical science and human
progress, and that in some cases it was doubtful if considerations of
medical science played any controlling role in the decision to conduct
the experiments.
Selections from the defense argumentation have been made from the final
pleas for the defendants Becker-Freyseng and Beiglboeck. Extracts from
these final pleas appear below on pages 62 to 64. A part of the opening
statement of the prosecution (vol. I, p. 37 ff.) was devoted to this
topic. Defense evidence on the usefulness of the experiments has been
selected from the direct examination of the defendants Mrugowsky and
Rose. Extracts from their testimony appear below on pages 66 to 70.
b. Selections from the Argumentation of the Defense
_EXTRACT FROM THE FINAL PLEA FOR
DEFENDANT BECKER-FREYSENG_[16]
* * * * *
At the moment I consider one factor above all to be material. It is the
following question: Was everything done, when the sea-water experiments
were being planned, to furnish all data required for establishing the
necessity of the experiments? And I think I can definitely answer this
question in the affirmative.
The defense has proved the high sense of responsibility applied to the
inquiry on the necessity of the sea-water experiments. Scientists of
international reputation, like Professor Dr. Eppinger and Professor
Heubner, were consulted, and they definitely answered this question in
the affirmative. More cannot be expected or demanded in the way of a
sense of responsibility. In my opinion, the mere fact that these
scientists were asked their opinion on the issue in question shows that
everything was done on the part of the Chief of the Medical Service of
the Luftwaffe and his office to reach the right decision in this
question.
With regard to the purely objective judgment of the sea-water
experiments and their necessity, I should like to refer to the
statements made in my closing brief for Dr. Becker-Freyseng.
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