Изображения страниц

stances, were recanted by the accused with the declaration that they only wanted to shield their subordinate S.A. men by their former statements, and that they did not take any part at all in the illtreatment of Pflaumer, and that they knew nothing about the illtreatments from their own knowledge. This subsequent statement is in any case not refutable, inasmuch as it cannot be definitely inferred from the former statements of the accused that they played a direct personal part in the matter.

No further actual evidence of punishable complicity in this crime could be proved against Stark. In his case, a release from criminal proceedings should therefore be applied for.

In the case against Korn no further actual proofs have been found of personal participation in the illtreatment of Pflaumer at least. But, against that, it can be accepted for sure, by reason of the investigation that Korn had known about the illtreatment of Pflaumer in the night in question, as in the case of the other Communists who were questioned there and that he tolerated Pflaumer's illtreatment counter to his duty and thus furthered it intentionally. Korn should therefore be accused at least of complicity in the crime of bodily injury resulting in death.

The police directorate Nurnberg-Fuerth is now submitting a petition to quash the proceedings.

II. Certificate of Opinion

On mature consideration, I assent to the suggestion of the police directorate.

Firstly it should be considered whether the proceedings could not be brought to an end by the release of the accused from criminal proceedings. According to the result of the preliminary investigation alone Korn ought to be accused in any case according to what is mentioned above, while only the accused Stark could be released from criminal proceedings. But furthermore an investigation or an extension of the investigation against the persons who took part in this matter (accomplices, possible instigators and helpers) and finally also against those who favoured the culprits would, according to para. 152/II ST.P.O. be occasioned.

But if the proceedings were to be carried out in this manner, it would be unavoidable-even if the public is excluded from the actual trial-that the public would get to know about the events. But this would seriously harm and shake the reputation of the S.A., the party, the police and even the National-Socialist State.

Even greater would be the damage to the German Reich which would be caused by the fact that-as can be taken for grantedforeign countries would receive information about the happenings.

I fully agree with the statements of the police directorate in this direction.

Besides these reasons, which stand out predominantly, the following is also of special importance:

The well being of the Reich and the party absolutely demanded that the extensive and dangerous agitation of the Communists, which just at that time put in an appearance, should be exposed and destroyed. And this goal had to be—especially with a view to the security of the imminent party rally-attained in the shortest possible space of time. Therefore quick and decisive action was necessary. Because of the shortage of forces of its own, the police was forced to use auxiliary forces from the S.A. The usual method of action, as laid down by the Code of Penal Procedure, did not suffice to expose the secret plans of the Communists rapidly, because of the well known method of the Communists of denying everything or making things out to be harmless. If now the revolutionary fighting spirit of the S.A. helped to expose and destroy the criminal plans of the Communists and to render the Communists themselves innocuous, it is understandable that, in order to achieve this high objective, in overgreat zeal and under the influence of the revolution which at that time was actually not yet finished methods were after all also used which no longer agreed with the law. Only in this way can the illtreatment of Pflaumer, with its bad consequences, probably be explained; for, from the whole state of affairs it can be assumed that the illtreatment of Pflaumer only took place in order to get valuable statements about the Communist activities from his knowledge, which could not be obtained without force.

Also the personality of Pflaumer himself is to be considered when dealing with the question whether the proceedings should be continued or not.

According to the just portrayal in the petition of the police directorate, Pflaumer was a Communist traitor, dangerous to the State, and a public menace, whose sentiments and conduct do not justify that for his sake the reputation of the German people and its government should suffer as a result of a sensational and painful criminal trial.

Lastly it may also be pointed out that this deed was committed relatively shortly after the coming into force of the amnesty decree of the 2 August 1933 (G.V.B.L. page 221). If it had been committed before the 26 July 1933, i.e. only 3 weeks earlier, it would have been amnestied, like a number of other political excesses. As the deed did not originate in an ignoble motive, but rather served the achievement of an exceedingly patriotic aim


and the advance of the National-Socialist State, the quashing of the proceedings-also in view of the above-mentioned relation of the time of the deed to the abovementioned amnesty-does not seem incompatible with the orderly administration of criminal justice.

For all these reasons it is suggested, in connection with the petition of the police directorate, that the proceedings on account of the bodily injuries resulting in the death of the mechanic Oscar Pflaumer, as well as on account of the actions of criminal participation and acts of favouring, immediately connected with this, should be quashed, with the further result that also fresh criminal proceedings may therefore not be instituted on this account. [signed] HERGENROEDER.

Nr. 7183

Submitted with one further copy, one application of the police directorate Nurnberg-Fuerth of the 17 April 1934 and the files on the trial to the State Minister of Justice in Munich, further to my report of the 9 April 1934 No. 6098.

I agree with the point of view of the prosecution.

Nurnberg, the 28 April 1934.
The Public Prosecutor of the Court of Appeal,

[signed] LEUKS.

[Document No. 15.]

Munich, the 23 May 1934.


No. II 19619 a.

Free State of Bavaria

State Ministry of Justice

To the Prime Minister


Subject: The quashing of the criminal proceedings against Eugen Korn and Hans Stark of Nurnberg. With one report, one petition, one report of the Provincial Court Public Prosecutor at the Provincial Court, Nurnberg-Fuerth, and one volume of documents.

I have the honour of enclosing the petition of the police directorate Nurnberg-Fuerth of the 17 April 1934 for the quashing of the criminal proceedings pending against Eugen Korn and Hans Stark of Nurnberg.

I request this to be forwarded to the Reich Governor in Ba


[signed] HANS FRANK.

Respectfully submitted with three letters and one document to the Reich Governor in Bavaria for your kind decision.

[Document No. 16]

Munich, the 1 June 1934
The Bavarian Prime Minister

The Reich Governor in Bavaria.

[signed] Dr. SIEBERT.

Munich, the 27 June 1934.

Exercising the powers deputed to me by the President of the Reich, I hereby quash the criminal proceedings on account of the bodily injuries which resulted in the death of the mechanic Oskar Pflaumer, of Nurnberg, as well as those on account of the actions of criminal participation and acts of favouring immediately connected with it.

[signed] FRANZ v. EPP.

[Document No. 17.]

No. 46 G.J.

To the Court of Appeal Public Prosecutor of the Court of Appeal, Nurnberg.

Subject: The quashing of the criminal proceedings against Eugen Korn and Hans Stark of Nurnberg

With reference to the report of the 28 April 1934 No. 7183.

The Reich Governor in Bavaria has used his powers of quashing by his resolution of the 27 June 1934 No. Pv.7/24.5 and has quashed the criminal proceedings on account of the bodily injųries which resulted in the death of the mechanic Oskar Pflaumer of Nurnberg as well as on account of the actions of criminal participation and acts of favouring, immediately connected with it. This is to be known to the police directorate Nurnberg-Fuerth and to the accused Korn and Stark.

Munich the 2 July 1934.
[signed] HANS FRANK.



Bureau for the Investigation of War Crimes.


On January 8th 1946 there appeared before me, Johan Jacob van Geelen, Police Inspector at Amsterdam, attached to the above mentioned office, a person who stated to be named Pieter Langhorst, born on May 18th 1916 at Amsterdam, Head of the Bureau for Personal Property of enemies and traitors of Amsterdam, domiciled: Amsterdam, Earste Schinkelstraat 10 I, who stated as follows:

"I am an ex political prisoner and I have been detained in various prisons and concentration camps, finally in the Rehmsdorff camp".

At the approach of the Allied armies this camp was evacuated and the prisoners-about 2900 men-were put on transport from Rehmsdorff to Theresienstadt.

Mostly these prisoners were Czechs, Poles, Russians, and Hungarian Jews, while there were only a few Dutchmen among them.

Of these prisoners only some 500 men actually reached Theresienstadt, the others were simply killed off during the transport by the so-called "shot in the neck."

The corpses were thrown into mass graves which were filled up afterwards.

I am convinced that these graves have not yet been discovered, because they are situated in the center of woods. One must know them to find them again.

As the corpses were clothed in camp clothes bearing the registration numbers, it will most likely be possible to identify a large number of the victims. I shall be glad to cooperate in indicating these graves, so that they can be opened.

My companion in distress Jacob Bakker, domiciled: Meerhuizenstraat 7 III at Amsterdam, and L.M.P.M. Baron van Lamsweerde, domiciled: Lairessestraat 42 III at Amsterdam, who have also passed through these experiences and who can give indications regarding graves which I cannot trace, are equally fully prepared to put themselves at your disposal for this purpose.

Thereupon, on January 14th 1946, I, the reporter, heard a person who stated to be named: Jacob Bakker, born on May 6th 1917 at Sloten (Friesland), municipal official, domiciled: Meerhuizenstraat 7 III at Amsterdam, and who declared to fully endorse the statements made by Langhorst. Moreover he declared that he was prepared to cooperate in the tracing of these graves.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »