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
Accordingly it had to be clarified, whether Berkatit could not, after
all, be introduced for distribution to persons facing the risk of
shipwreck, and the inquiry into this question was all the more necessary
as, according to the opinion of Professor Eppinger and Professor
Heubner, Berkatit apparently contained vitamins which eliminated the
risks incurred by human beings when drinking sea water. Whether the
opinion of the experts, Heubner and Eppinger, was right or not, could,
at that time as today, only be established by experiment.
Hence if the defendant Dr. Becker-Freyseng, who examined all these
factors and applied all precautions possible, became convinced in 1944
that the experiments could not be avoided, and if, from this viewpoint,
in his official capacity as a consultant (Referent) he reported to his
highest authority at that time, Professor Dr. Schroeder, that he
considered the experiments necessary, then, in my opinion, he can in no
way be charged under criminal law on that account.
Therefore, in my opinion, it has been proved that Dr. Becker-Freyseng
considered these experiments necessary and that he was entitled to
consider them necessary. And this question alone can be made the basis
for an inquiry into his guilt under criminal law.
With regard to this point, I would like in conclusion to refer to the
testimony of Professor Dr. Vollhardt. This world-famous physician, this
research scientist, recognized as such in international circles, upon
whom, only a few weeks ago, on the occasion of his 75th birthday, the
highest German decoration of science was bestowed, namely the Goethe
Medal for Art and Science, a ceremony in which nearly all European
countries, also America, joined, stated before this high Tribunal, and I
quote:
“I regarded it as sign of a sense of responsibility that in view
of the increasing number of flying accidents, the sea-emergency
question was taken up and these experiments were launched.”
Insofar, I consider it proved that the planning of these experiments was
in no way objectionable.
* * * * *
_EXTRACT FROM THE FINAL PLEA FOR
DEFENDANT BEIGLBOECK_[17]
* * * * *
Even medical science on both sides had to assist warfare. I have before
me the index of the best known scientific English periodicals from the
war period, “The Lancet” and “Nature”. Now, after the war, General T. J.
Betts of the United States War Department and Professor W. T. Sinsteat
of the British Supply Office declared that the captured German
scientific results accomplished during the war were of the greatest use
for the economic progress of British and American industry. Even the
terrible freezing experiments of Dr. Rascher proved to be of greatest
use for America in the war against Japan. (_Becker-Freyseng 31,
Becker-Freyseng Ex. 18._)
c. Evidence
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