--- Upon resuming.
THE COURT: The jury,
please.
--- The jury enters. 2:20 p.m.
--- The witness returns to the stand.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR
CHRISTIE continued:
THE COURT: Go ahead, Mr Christie.
MR CHRISTIE:
Thank you, Your Honour. What I'd like to do is place
before the witness the ground plan of Birkenau as
presented in 1944, and ground plan as presented in the
book, "Eye Witness: Auschwitz".
THE COURT: They
are exhibits. Are they lettered or numbered?
THE REGISTRAR: I think they are numbered, Your Honour.
THE COURT: What are the numbers?
THE
REGISTRAR: Rough ground plan of Birkenau is 22, and
that of Auschwitz to Birkenau is 23.
THE COURT:
Thank you. Yes, go ahead.
MR CHRISTIE: Thank
you very much, Your Honour. What I'd like to do is
distrubute these to the jury and I think there were
some already available.
MR GRIFFITHS: I believe
Mr Christie already provided me with one.
Q. MR
CHRISTIE: I now produce and show to you the ground
plan of Auschwitz as you prepared it in 1944 which you
have in your right hand, and I am holding the ground
plan as depicted by the book "Eye Witness: Auschwitz"
on page 175 by Phillip Mueller. I am specifically
asking you in respect to what is indicated as point
nine on the Phillip Mueller ground plan, which I
suggest to you is the sauna, or bath, as depicted
there.
Would you agree?
A. Yes.
Q. Is it your evidence that that which you've
described as the bath on your 1944 drawing is actually
the number nine point on the Phillip Mueller diagram?
A. Well, this is hard to answer because of the
following situation. If you look at the diagram on the
lefthand side which, by the way, doesn't come from
Phillip Mueller but Phillip Mueller reproduced it from
some other documentation ....
Q. I realize that.
A. .... which is available from the Auschwitz
Museum, I think, but my plan was prepared as I
remembered it on the day of my escape, 7 June -- 7
April, 1944, and the date of this plan is obviously,
when this plan was prepared, is obviously later I
don't know how much later, and perhaps you will
enlighten me from which date this plan comes but
considerable changes have been made in the complex of
crematoria after my escape.
Q. Well, I put it
to you that there was only one bath in the far end of
the camp, and that is number nine on the diagram on
page 175, and that is the bath that you drew on your
diagram in 1944, and no other bath was in that area
ever at all.
A. In which area?
Q. In the
area where you drew it in 1944.
A. Well, I drew
a bath in the area of Krematoria III and IV, and I can
see that the bath is drawn in the area of Krematoria
III and IV on the other diagram too, only in the other
diagram the bath seems to be in relation to the two
crematoria, a little bit displaced.
Q. Well,
are you saying that that's not the location of the
bath you meant, that there was some other bath in the
area?
A. What I am saying is that between the
time I left and the time that this new graph was made,
there were -- they have twenty-seven new barracks in
that area.
In other words, as I remeber this
place, there was, if I would have judged, there was no
place for twenty-seven new barracks.
Q. Well,
those ---
A. And now I can see that they have
made extensive building of twenty-seven new barracks,
and it is possible that either they shifted the bath
to a new place in the absence after my escape, or the
position of my bath in my graph simply means a
graphical indication that it is in the region of
Krematorium III to IV, without claiming to be an
engineering graph.
So my graph, which was drawn
as a sort to say from memory by layman in architecture,
gives general ideas of what was there, but doesn't
claim to be an engineering piece. This, on the other
hand, is an engineering piece and I find it possible
that the bath in this new map has been rebuilt after
they built those twenty-seven new barracks there.
Q. Those twenty-seven new barracks, I put it to
you, were called Kanada and they were built on the
14th day of the 12th month, 1943, long before you
escaped.
A. What is evidence of that?
THE COURT: No, no, just ---
MR CHRISTIE: I will
put it to him in the form of the calendarium.
Q. The calendarium entry which is dated the 14th day
of the 12th month, 1943 we went over this once before,
and it says in Birkenau they finished within the
Section BII the construction of the storage buildings
which has been called by the inmates Kanada. In the
storage buildings there have been thirty-five barracks.
In thirty of them the belongings of Jews were stored
and selected. In two barracks inmates did live which
did care for the store. In the rest of the buildings
the administration was located.
A. Well, the
German text which you are showing me doesn't say
exactly what you are saying.
Q. Tell me what it
says.
A. So it is a little bit slightly
distorted translation.
Q. What does it say?
A. That on 12th 14th or December, 1943, I suppose,
they finished in Section II.
Q. Section BII.
A. BII, which is the Section BII, actually the
building of a storing room for effects in which
translated means property or ---
Q. You mean
storage room?
A. Lager, a whole camp for that
storage.
Q. More than one building, then?
A. More than one building.
Q. Which was
called by the name of Kanada.
A. Actually
twenty-seven buildings which was called by the inmates
Kanada. In other words, this is a new Kanada, because
the old Kanada was ---
Q. We are just
translating this. Right?
A. Yes. Effectenlager,
in this storage building, there were thirty-five
barracks. On this plan I see only twenty-seven.
Q. You counted them, did you?
A. Yes.
Q. Carry on with your translation. You are
translating the document.
A. I can't be certain.
I am checking the document.
Q. Fine. Just
translate the document.
THE COURT: Yes. One at
a time, please.
THE WITNESS: In Barrack 30, in
number 30 was sorted the property of those Jews who
were brought for annihilation into the camp, and
stored there; into other barracks of this camp there
lived prisoners who were employed in the Kommando
effectenlager, this means the working Kommando of this
storage camp, and in the rest of the buildings there
was administration and other things.
Q. So that
indicates that that area was built by the 14th of
December 1943.
A. Well, if I may add to it, to
my recollection ---
Q. Wait a minute. Wait a
minute. Is there any other translation there?
A. No. No.
Q. All right. Well, that does seem
to indicate that on the 12th of December, 1943, those
barracks that you described as not being there when
you escaped on the 7th of April, 1944, were built.
Right?
A. So it would appear, but I cannot
confirm it, because when I came to the ---
Q.
Can I take this away now?
A. Yes.
Q.
Thanks.
A. I cannot confirm it because I had a
relatively free access to the two crematoria, to the
place between the two crematoria, but that something
was being built behind the crematoria I took notice,
but I had no idea what it was. My information was not
good enough to say what it was, and it was behind --
it wasn't visible from where I had access to see.
Q. It wasn't visible to where you had access? In
fact, it was right across the street from what you
describe as Krematorium ---
A. No, not at all,
because I could come to the crematoria and I could see
that they are hammering something behind the
crematorium, but there was a wall put up, a wooden
wall like when you have a building.
Q. You are
saying that the crematorium that you entered here.
A. Yes.
Q. And what looks like an alleyway;
and you couldn't see whether they were built or not?
A. No, because when you build something, as you
can see even in Toronto, when you build something you
make around a what is the English word -- you surround
it with -- what is the word? Who would help me to
translate the word? You surround it with a fence.
Fence is the word. And then ---
Q. Barbed wire
fence?
A. Not barbed wire fence; normal fence
like when you are building something. And so I could
see that they are hammering something behind the
barbed wire fence that I didn't pay particular notion
to it.
Q. It was a fence that blocked your view?
A. It blocked my view, yes, and I didn't know what
was being built there.
Q. Now, the reason I
asked you this question in the first place is that in
your plan where the bathhouse is located, there is no
road to it, and on the plan that there is, you
described it as from the Museum, there is a road into
it, and I put it to you that the roads were there when
you escaped in 1944.
A. Those roads into ---
Q. --- the bathrooms.
A. Into the
crematoria.
Q. The bathhouse located in Item 9
in the schematic diagram that I gave you.
A. In
the schematic diagram I see a road that goes between
two crematoria, and then goes left to the bathhouse.
And ---
Q. And in your diagram there is no road
to the bath at all.
A. I have quite clearly
shown that here is a road, but I did not indicate the
opening and I would say that that is how a layman
would paint.
Q. Well, I suggest to you that
your diagram in 1944 doesn't indicate any access to
the bath at all because you didn't know where the bath
was, and the bath itself was inaccessible to anybody.
Now, which is it?
A. It simply means that my
objective was to indicate to potential Allied bombers
what is where, and I have forgotten to put into this
plan, plan made by amateur, the particular entrance to
this particular place; and if you will take notice and
look at this graph you will see that I haven't shown
what is an entrance to BIIA, either. Just have a look
at it and you will see that I haven't shown the
entrance to BIIB and I didn't show what is the
entrance to Camp B.
Q. I am not interested ---
A. I am just telling you what is on the graph.
Q. Well, I am not asking you to describe what is
on the graph ---
A. I haven't, on this graph,
indicated the doors, but only the position where is
where.
Q. Thank you for your comment, but my
suggestion to you that when the bath was built it was
built of brick, it was built where number nine was
indicated, it was never moved and, in fact, the roads
that are indicated on the plan, which is in detail on
No. 175, has the roads indicated very clearly on it
because those were the roads to the bath ---
A.
No. This were roads were built after my escape, much
has been built; and what new roads have been built,
this is a different question.
Q. I suggest to
you they are not new roads built after you escaped.
They had to be there when you escaped because they
were roads to the bath which you indicated was there
at the time, sir.
A. But as far as I can see,
comparing your graph with my graph, then the bath on
my graph and the bath on this graph is in a distance,
when I look at the measures, not more than twenty
yards difference.
Q. That's right. That's fine.
A. And I agree with you that painting from memory
and without having a yardstick, as I can imagine that
I made an error of twenty yards.
Q. I am not
criticizing you for an error of twenty yards or twenty
meters, whatever. I am suggesting that the roads were
there as they are depicted in the diagram No. 175, and
that this is accurate.
A. That's right. It is
accurate 1944 after my escape, whereas this diagram is
approximation of a layman at the time of my escape.
Q. Well, I suggest to you you didn't draw any
roads in there because you didn't give any thought to
the possibility that the people going by those
crematorium were going to the bath, as indicated on
the roads on the map.
A. Well, I knew exactly
who was going to the bath, because I was in that bath
on a number of occasions, and actually, that is the
reason why I was so frequently sort of skipping my
duties from going from IIA to IID and going there,
because I used that bath.
Q. Oh?
A. And
in that bath -- I used that bath. I can give you a
description what was inside perhaps not exactly, but I
can tell you what was inside.
Q. Could I
suggest to you that inside there was a fumigation
chamber for clothes? Would you agree to that?
A. A fumigation chamber for clothes was usually in
every bath in Auschwitz.
Q. Yeah. And in that
---
A. I haven't seen that fumigation chamber.
Q. Well, why do you say that there was one in
every bathhouse?
A. But I have seen one in
other baths, that is in Auschwitz I and Auschwitz IB,
and I believe you this time. That is logical.
Q. Well, you were there, and I say it was there, and
you say you don't know it was there?
A. Yes,
that is perfectly true, it was there.
Q. Is it
a fact that you knew that in the fumigation chambers
the doors were sealed, and Zyklon-B was used to
fumigate the clothes and kill the vermin?
A.
Zyklon-B was not only used for killing people, but was
also used for disinfecting clothes. In fact, history
shows that Zyklon-B was used before for gassing people.
Zyklon-B was standard equipment in all concentration
camp and army units for fumigating clothes, and in
1941 ---
Q. Please don't give us a history of
Zyklon-B unless I ask you.
A. Please don't
interrupt me, because I am trying to make a point. You
are trying to distort a point before I finish what I
have to say.
In 1941 nine hundred prisoners of
war came to the concentration camp of Auschwitz.
Q. When?
A. In 1941.
Q. You weren't
there in 1941.
A. Would you please let me
finish?
Q. Not unless it is something from
personal knowledge. I don't want to know what you
heard from other people in 1941 in Auschwitz.
THE COURT: Get on to the next question.
THE
WITNESS: Very good.
Q. MR CHRISTIE: You agree
with me that this was the front page that you say was
attributed to your report?
A. Yes.
Q.
I'd like to read it. Does it say that the figures
concerning the size of Jewish convoys and the numbers
of men and women admitted to the two camps cannot be
taken as mathematically exact and, in fact, are
declared by the author as being no more than reliable
approximations?
A. Yes, it does say so.
Q. All right.
A. It does say so, so I do not
know who wrote it.
Q. Well, the last time I
asked you about it you said the President had
something to do with it.
A. According to the
history of Reitlinger it was President Roosevelt who
issued for circulation. This is from hearsay.
Q. Do you accept that statement as being correct?
A. This statement is correct in a way that I
always said there is a reliable approximation in my
figures, and he said that it is not mathematically
exact, but reliable approximation. Mathematically
exact means that I cannot say ---
THE COURT: No.
Sorry.
Q. MR CHRISTIE: Have you ever read Mr
Christopherson's book?
A. Never heard of it.
Who is Mr Christopherson?
THE COURT: No. Next
question.
Q. MR CHRISTIE: That's the author to
whom is attributed the remarks on page 18 when you
were asked about it. You said that was more lies.
THE COURT: What is the next question, Mr Christie?
MR CHRISTIE: I was just directing the witness ---
THE COURT: No. I know what you were doing. I want
to hear your next question.
Q. MR CHRISTIE:
Well, I am just wondering, in view of the fact that
you have never read Mr Christophersen's work, would
you agree that the words that are attributed to him
there may have been said?
THE COURT: Don't
answer the question. Ask him a question. Rephrase it
so you don't quote somebody about whom the witness has
said he knows nothing.
MR CHRISTIE: Thank you.
Q. Would you agree that you cannot say that
anything attributed to him is necessarily accurately
attributed?
THE COURT: Isn't that the same
question?
MR CHRISTIE: I thought I was trying
to rephrase it.
THE COURT: You rephrased it the
same way. I thought you could rephrase it so it would
not appear that you were phrasing it the same way. If
you cannot, ask another question.
Q. MR
CHRISTIE: The remarks on page 18, the third paragraph
from the top on the lefthand side to which you were
asked to comment ....
A. Page 18?
Q.
Page 18.
A. Page 18 of what?
Q. Of
Exhibit 1.
A. Page 18, yes.
Q. Starting
with the second paragraph from the top on the lefthand
side ....
A. Yes. That's the same paragraph we
discussed in the morning. I can see.
Q. Yes.
Now, you don't know anything about Mr Christopherson.
We've established that.
A. No.
Q. Have
we established that?
A. Not to my knowledge. I
don't know anything about Mr Christophersen.
Q.
So you can't comment on the truth or falsity of that
paragraph?
A. Of course I can comment, because
I don't need Mr Christophersen to see that what was
written there was a distortion of truth.
Q. Now,
you say that was a distortion of truth, and I want to
quote from what he writes in his book. He says:
"I was in Auschwitz from January 1944 until
December 1944".
You don't say this is a
distortion of the truth, do you?
THE COURT: Is
this Mr Christopherson being in Auschwitz?
MR
CHRISTIE: Yes.
THE COURT: The witness already
indicated he does not know anything about
Christopherson.
MR CHRISTIE: Yes, but he did
say this was a distortion of truth.
THE COURT:
No, he did not. He said that what he read, what he is
looking at on page 18 is a distortion.
Is that
right or not right?
THE WITNESS: That's right.
THE COURT: All right. Now, phrase yourself
properly and I won't have to interfere, Mr Christie.
MR CHRISTIE: Thank you, Your Honour. I will try.
What I am asking you to say is whether anything in
the paragraph that is highlighted you consider to be
false.
A. Yes. I explained it to you in the
morning.
MR CHRISTIE: Now, Your Honour, for the
record, the paragraph that's highlighted is those
words attributed to Mr Christopherson. So I wanted to
ask him something about that.
THE COURT: As
long as you ask him what he is looking at.
THE
WITNESS: There is nothing mentioned about Mr
Christopherson.
Q. MR CHRISTIE: Well, then, we
are not looking at the right paragraph. I am trying to
direct your attention to the second paragraph from the
top.
A. This paragraph?
Q. You are on
the wrong page, sir. I said 18.
A. You said 17.
Q. 18. Right here.
A. So we went through
this too. Christopherson's account was -- I think this
was read to me by the Crown Attorney.
Q. Yes.
A. Yes. And this is the second paragraph printed
in heavy letters.
Q. Right.
A. And here
I see the name Christopherson.
Q. Yes. And do
you say that the statement contained therein is false?
A. They are absurd.
Q. Well, which
statement is absurd? Which one?
A. The
absurdity of the sentences come out when you finish
the sentence.
Q. "I was in Auschwitz from
January 1944 until December 1944".
Period. End
of sentence.
A. No, not period. Here is a comma.
Q. What?
A. Yes.
Q. Period or comma?
A. Yes, this is a period.
Q. Period, all
right. I hope we are dealing with the same printed
material. Now, that's a sentence. What is absurd about
it?
A. Oh, this sentence, in itself, nothing.
Q. All right. So nothing is false ---
A. If
it is true that he was there, which I don't know.
Q. All right:
"After the War I heard about
the mass murders which were supposedly perpetrated by
the S.S. against the Jewish prisoners, and I was
perfectly astonished."
Now, is that absurd?
A. Absolutely absurd.
Q. Why?
A.
Because anybody who was in Auschwitz for one year has
seen the mass murders, in one way or another, and I
suggest to you that Mr Christopherson was not there as
a prisoner, but perhaps as an S.S. man. Is it possible?
Is it possible?
Q. Why do you need to ask me
that question if you don't know Mr Christopherson? How
do you know if he is lying or mistaken?
A.
Because this is such a lie that only a Nazi can
produce it, to cover up his crimes.
Q. Somebody
you don't know, you are prepared to call a Nazi.
THE COURT: Just a moment. What's the next question?
MR CHRISTIE: Thank you.
Q. "Despite all the
evidence of witnesses, all the newspaper reports and
radio broadcasts I still do not believe today in these
horrible deeds."
Now, you would say, I suppose,
that that's absurd, too, would you?
A.
Absolutely absurd. It's untrue.
Q. It may be
that this person holds those beliefs honestly, though,
don't you think?
A. No way. If he was in
Auschwitz, he cannot hold such beliefs unless he was
in the S.S., and he is an accomplished murderer and it
is a characteristic thing of murderers that they deny
generally their crimes, and this is what I assume.
Q. So any person you say who denies such knowledge
of horrible deeds must be one of their accomplices; is
that your evidence?
A. What I say is that Mr
Christopherson, if he was, according to this paragraph,
for one year in Auschwitz and he denies the murders,
then I assume he was there in a capacity of S.S. man
and is a murderer who tries to cover up the traces of
his crime.
Q. Oh, so every S.S. man who is
there is a murderer.
A. Absolutely so, or an
accomplice to murder.
Q. And he must know about
the murder, then.
A. Absolutely so. There is no
way out. From the outlay of Auschwitz and the way how
Auschwitz was run, there is not one S.S. man who was
there who didn't know about the murder, because
otherwise they would send them to the front. They
didn't keep them there for drinking tea.
Q. All
right. So everyone who dares to suggest that there was
no murder in their knowledge you would charge with
murder as well?
A. If he was a year in
Auschwitz and wore an S.S. uniform and says there
wasn't a murder, I would claim that this is a murderer
who denies his crime.
Q. So it would be
dangerous to come forward as an S.S. man, because you
would be one of those who would accuse him of murder
immediately, wouldn't you?
A. Any S.S. man who
did service in Auschwitz-Birkenau for a time like one
year is a qualified murderer, and if such one is found
on the territory of, for instance, United States of
America without saying that he was there for one year
in an S.S. uniform will be automatically deported from
the country. I can assure you of that. I have heard it
from the Office of Special Investigations who is
looking for them.
Q. And you would make sure
that that happened, wouldn't you?
A. I would
always help the justice against the criminal. I happen
to be on the same side of the law, and not on the side
of criminal, and you shouldn't blame me for that.
Q. Well, you presumed that anyone who had seen
Auschwitz for a year and had no knowledge of such
murders must be, therefore, a criminal. Is that what
you say?
MR GRIFFITHS: That is not what he said.
He said three times, he said an S.S. man, Your Honour.
MR CHRISTIE: Oh, excuse me.
Q. Any S.S. man
who was in Auschwitz for a year would be, in your
opinion, a murderer or an accessory to murder?
THE COURT: No, you missed one point. In uniform.
MR CHRISTIE: In uniform.
THE WITNESS: That
is quite right with one or two honourable exceptions
which are well known.
Q. And he is quoted as
saying:
"I have said this many times and in
many places, but to no purpose. One is never believed."
A. That is right, but a murderer says in many
places that he didn't do it and still nobody believes
it if it is generally known that he has done it.
Q. And you, on the other hand, are saying that
whoever has done this is a murderer, and I suppose you
are also saying he is a liar the man who is attributed
with these remarks would be first an accessory to
murder, and then a liar. Is that right?
THE
COURT: Just a moment, gentlemen. Mr Christie, if you
are going to be long on this point, I am going to
excuse the jury so that an exchange can take place in
their absence.
MR CHRISTIE: Thank you very much,
Your Honour.
Q. He is further on quoted as
saying that:
"During the whole of my time at
Auschwitz, I never observed the slightest evidence of
mass gassings. Moreover, the odour of burning flesh
that is often said to have hung over the camp is a
downright falsehood."
A. Which line is that?
Q. I am moving right along the paragraph to ---
A. Yes. "During the whole of my time at Auschwitz
...."
Q. Yes.
A. ".... I never observed
...." Yes.
Q. Christopherson is quoted further
in that paragraph, and you don't deny that he may have
said those things, do you?
A. I have got no
evidence that he said it or not, because you didn't
tell me who is Christopherson, in what capacity was
Christopherson, and where does he live and I can
interview him if he was there at all. It might be a
complete invention. There may be no Christopherson at
all, but an anonymous pen pusher who invented the name
Christopherson. You give me the information who was
Christopherson and in what capacity he was there, and
I will be able to deal with this problem.
Q. I
am sure you would. You and many others would make sure
he is charged with murder if he is an S.S., if he was
in uniform and if he was there for a year. Correct?
THE COURT: Just a moment. Go to another question.
Q. MR CHRISTIE: Well, as far as anything in those
paragraphs which were read to you, I suggest to you
that although you disagree with what a person is
alleged to have said, you did not say that he did not
say those things.
A. I do not know if they said
it, because I can only read that somebody printed it,
but there is no evidence that somebody said it. It
seems to me like an anonymous statement, because you
are trying, or denying any knowledge of the existence
of a real person, Christopherson.
Q I am not
here to deny anything. I asked you if you had any
knowledge that such a person did not exist, or any
knowledge that they did not say that.
THE
COURT: Gentlemen, it's becoming argumentative rather
than the other way around.
MR CHRISTIE: Thank
you, Your Honour. I will withdraw the question.
Q. Do you know about the lawyer, Dr Manfred
Roeder, referred to in the top paragraph of that page
that you were asked to read?
MR CHRISTIE: This
is page 18?
MR CHRISTIE: Yes, sir.
THE
WITNESS: Page 18.
Q. It's a sentence that
begins on the very last part of page 17. It says:
"In May 1973, not long after the appearance of
this account, the veteran Jewish 'Nazi-hunter' Simon
Wiesenthal wrote to the Frankfurt Chamber of Lawyers,
demanding that the publisher and author of the
Forward, Dr Roeder, a member of the Chamber, should be
brought beofre its disciplinary commission."
Do
you say that is false?
A. That he was brought
-- I agree that such a character might have been
brought before the disciplinary committee in free West
Germany for good reasons. This is quite possible.
Q. So that could very well be true?
A. I
don't know about it, but it might be true.
Q.
You did say that this also was part of the general
proceedings that you said was a cynical lie. Do you
agree?
A. I said that the particular piece
which Crown Prosecutor showed to me, Crown Attorney
said to me was a cynical lie; but I didn't read this
whole thing. The particular thing was an outright lie.
Q. I am suggesting to you that you didn't even
read the part that I am reading now.
A. No. I
can convince you that I did. I assure you that I did.
Q. The next sentence:
"Sure enough,
proceedings began in July, but not without harsh
criticism even from the Press, who asked, 'Is Simon
Wiesenthal the new Gauleiter of Germany?' (Deutsche
Wochenzeitung, July 27, 1973)."
Now, is that a
false statement?
A. I didn't read Deutsche
Wochenzeitung. I don't know Dr Roeder. I never had the
honour of meeting him. I don't know what he is doing.
I understand that he was before a disciplinary
commission, and I would tell you perhaps it's true,
perhaps it's not. I don't know. I have no information
about this event ---
Q. Thank you.
A.
Which took place in 1973.
Q. Yes.
A. At
that time I was ---
THE COURT: All right,
Doctor.
Q. MR CHRISTIE: And you were in
Maidanek Camp?
A. Maidanek Camp, yes.
Q.
And you volunteered to go to Auschwitz from Maidanek?
A. In a way you can call it -- yes, I did
volunteer, because Maidanek I found a place of death
of such desolation that I couldn't imagine that there
exists anything worse. And when they said that four
hundred strong men for a labour in the fields, I
naturally volunteered because at that time I believe
the Nazi tricks, and I saw that they were going to put
me to agricultural work, so I could escape; but
instead I found myself in Auschwitz. I made an error.
Q. Well, the simple answer is that you were in
Maidanek; you volunteered to go to Auschwitz and you
were taken to Auschwitz I where you were for four
months, and then you went to Birkenau, and that you've
told us about. Right?
A. So the truth is that I
came to Auschwitz on 30 June, 1942, and stayed in
Auschwitz I until 15th January, six and a half months,
I would say, and for the rest of the time in Birkenau.
That's true.
Q. All right. So did you ever see
a gas chamber in Maidanek?
A. In Maidanek I saw
a crematorium, and I had a good look at that
crematorium because there were rumours in Maidanek
that there is a gas chamber, and my grandfather, who
was over seventy at that time, was taken to that
building. So I studied that building.
Q. Excuse
me. I just asked you if you saw a gas chamber.
A. You interrupted me again.
Q. I didn't ask
you what the rumours were. I didn't ask you if you had
a grandfather who went there. I just asked you if you
saw a gas chamber in Maidanek.
A. No. I saw
only a building which was called crematorium to which
my grandfather was taken, and that was the last time I
saw him. If there was a gas chamber, I don't know.
THE COURT: All right. All right.
Q. MR
CHRISTIE: So is it your evidence that you never saw a
gas chamber?
A. In Maidanek?
Q.
Anywhere.
A. Yes, I saw the gas chamber from
inside in Auschwitz I.
Q. What made it look
like a gas chamber?
A. The interesting thing is
that it was just a garage converted into a gas chamber.
Q. Oh.
A. There was not written on the door
that it was a gas chamber.
Q. Well, what made
it a gas chamber?
A. Simply that there were no
windows, and there were doors which could be
hermetically closed.
Q. What's hermetically
closed mean?
A. This means if you close them,
there is not much air circulation.
Q. They are
the double-door garage-type?
A. That's right.
Q. And they swung from the centre to the side.
A. Yes. And they were done with quite reasonably
good job and precision for your information.
Q.
This was the gas chamber, then?
A. Yes. In
Auschwitz I, a relatively small gas chamber.
Q.
So that's the gas chamber that you saw.
A.
That's right.
Q. You saw no other?
A.
From inside.
Q. From inside or outside.
A. From outside I had been describing here a gas
chamber that was visible from Krematorium I in front
of my eyes, a distance of a few yards, which was
coming out from the upper part of it, came out from
the ground, and you were quarreling with me if it was
four feet or six feet high.
Q. Well, wait, now.
Yesterday you told us it was six and a half to seven
feet. Is it shrinking now?
A. It is quite
possible that along the gas chamber they have made a
walk, and that the S.S. man perhaps had to reach high.
I think that your idea that it is shrinking is simply
a misplaced humour which hasn't got place here.
Q. Well, tell me, sir, how did you know it was a
gas chamber?
A. Well, in the first line I would
like to ask you, Mr Counsel ---
THE COURT: No.
Don't ask Counsel anything.
THE WITNESS: I knew
that it is a gas chamber because I saw people going
into the crematoria. I saw that they are not coming
out. I heard that they are being gassed there, and I
have seen Zyklon gas being thrown into, on top of the
gas chamber.
Q. Mm-hmmm.
A. And
therefore I concluded that it is not a kitchen or a
bakery, but a gas chamber.
Q. Yes. Were
buildings ever fumigated with Zyklon-B?
A.
Which buildings?
Q. Any buildings.
A. In
Auschwitz?
Q. Yeah.
A. Occasionally,
when there were too many lice, they were fumigated by
Zyklon-B, and that is why Zyklon-B was originally
brought in.
Q. Is this the gas chamber you went
inside of?
MR CHRISTIE: I am showing the
witness the 155th page of "K.L. Auschwitz". It's a
book.
Q. Is that what you say was the gas
chamber in Auschwitz?
A. I do not know at what
time of the year, on which year this picture was taken.
In 1942 October, when I was there, I do not remember
seeing the lamps on top of the roof; otherwise it
looks like a garage.
Q. Is that the room?
A. It can be, but from what I see to this picture,
it could be any garage.
Q. All right. So there
was nothing unique about this place that you called
the gas chamber that would help you to identify it; is
that right?
A. Well, there was not written "Gas
Chamber", but there is nothing unique in any place
where people are gassed. All we have to do is to close
windows, the ventilation, and throwing gas.
Q.
I put it to you that you have told us that there was
1,765,000 corpses to be dealt with in these various
crematoria you told us about.
A. That's right.
Q. I put it to you that if there were forty-six
stoves, as you described in the War Refugee Board
Report, and if there was one and a half hours required
for each corpse, that working twenty-four hours a day
you would require 4.38 years to cremate all those
corpses. What do you say about that?
A. Would
you please repeat me slowly all the data which you are
having here?
Q. Well, I said if you have
forty-six stoves or ovens as you described, nine times
three .... (sic)
A. Yes.
Q. And
1,765,000 corpses ....
A. Yes.
Q. ....
one and a half hours each ....
A. Yes.
Q. .... you would require, at twenty-four hours a day
operation, 4.38 years to cremate all those bodies.
A. Well, there is already a little swindle
introduced into that statement, because that statement
was introduced by Dr Staglich, and it is in the hands
of the Crown Attorney, and it is a distortion of the
statement which I made in this report in which this
Doctor statement, who was a neo-Nazi and was convicted
in West Germany, has taken the liberty to distort
mildly the contents of this report, because i this
report I never said that in one and a half hours a
body was cremated, but I said that three bodies were
cremated simultaneously in each oven, and that in
process took approximately one hour. Consequently ---
Q. One hour and a half you said.
A. Let's
go into the details. I may have said one or one and a
half hours, but it was definitely three bodies.
Furthermore, I haven't said how many openings were
there exactly. There might have been much more ovens
there than I wrote in my report. As I told you, my
report, as far as the inside of the crematoria, was
rather a provisory thing based on information which
perhaps was not that exact and detailed.
Q. May
I interrupt you with one other question?
A. Yes.
Q. What kind of fuel do you say they cremated
these bodies with?
A. To my information coal
was used in crematoria, and wood when it was outside
the crematoria.
Q. I see.
A. But I
haven't been invited to the stove, so it is hearsay.
Q. No. It is just these figures -- so I am asking
you. So it's coal or wood?
A. That's hearsay,
yes.
Q. Well, of course. So is the matter of
whether they were gassed or not, isn't it?
THE
COURT: Let's not have an answer to that. What's the
next question?
Q. MR CHRISTIE: Did you see
massive trains of coal coming into the camp, too?
A. No.
Q. Did you see loads of wood coming
into the camp?
A. I have seen loads of coal
being transported into the crematoria.
Q. Well,
did they come on the railroad?
A. No. They came
on trucks and they came on individual trucks. This
means when a transport came, that the transport would
require forty or fifty trucks which were attracts my
attention.
Q. I thought there were only ten
trucks. Do you remember when you were unloading the
people at the ramp? You said ten had to go and come
back.
A. Yes. So by going and back, so I have
seen a hundred trucks by the time they made the
journey from the crematorium to the ramp. So there was
heavy traffic. But apart from the heavy traffic which
was connected with mass annihilation of the arrivals,
there was also other type of traffic. There were
travelling trucks which were bringing coal to the
crematoriums. There were travelling trucks which were
bringing bread to the camp. There were travelling
trucks which were bringing bread nearby, and tea, and
in other words, there was many thousands of prisoners
and many thousands of S.S., and there was a certain
traffic which I could control so exactly.
Q.
Mm-hmmm. I see. Sure.
A. I didn't have every
record of every single truck which went by.
Q.
Since you did make some comments about Dr Staglich,
you called him a neo-Nazi, I'd just like to ask you if
you are prepared to make that judgment about that
particular person, were you aware that he was once a
judge and when he published his book he lost
everything in terms of his judgeship and he also lost
his right to be the holder of the University degree.
Are you aware of that?
THE COURT: Before you
answer that question, witness, please indicate in the
shortest answer possible whether you were aware of any
of these things.
THE WITNESS: I was aware of Dr
Staglich, his connections ---
THE COURT: Just a
moment. Were you aware of the things put to you by
Counsel?
THE WITNESS: No, I was only aware that
he was convicted by a West German Court for swindle
and for publishing lies in order to incite national
hatred, and this is against the West German law, and
it was the account in the German newspaper Die Welte,
which is a West German newspaper, and I have read an
account that he was convicted and his book was
forbidden as obscene, and forbidding the education of
the German population and considered dangerous to the
German population because of the demagogue which he
was using.
THE COURT: All right.
THE
WITNESS: This was an article in Die Welte.
THE
COURT: All right. What is your next question?
MR CHRISTIE: No further questions.
THE COURT:
Mr Griffiths, do you wish to re-examine now?
MR
GRIFFITHS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Go ahead.
-------------
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR
GRIFFITHS:
Q. Just a couple of things,
Doctor.
A. Yes, please.
Q. You told Mr
Christie several times in discussing your book, "I
Cannot Forgive" that you used poetic licence in
writing that book. Have you used poetic licence in
your testimony?
A. No. This is not a book. This
is under oath.
Q. And Mr Christie asked you, I
believe, put to you several places where you did not
appear to testify. He asked you if you appeared at
Nuremberg. He asked you if you testified at the
Eichmann trial
A. Mm-hmmm.
Q. Have you
ever testified about these matters at other trials?
A. I have not been in Nuremberg and I have not
been present at Eichmann's trial, but I have been
present several times at the so-called Auschwitz trial
in 1964 in Frankfurt where the criminals and murderers
from Auschwitz were arrested by the West German
authorities and put to trial.
THE COURT: Did
you testify there, Doctor?
THE WITNESS: I did.
Furthermore, I testified at the trial of a certain Dr
Krumey and Hunsche, also in Frankfurt. Krumey was
accused of having murdered the children after they
were deported ---
MR CHRISTIE: Are we going to
get into this?
Q. MR GRIFFITHS: My question was
whether you testified, and you have answered that.
A. This was after ---
Q. It's all right.
It's all right. Other than the trials of the Auschwitz
trials and in Frankfurt and the trials of the two
doctors, again in West Germany, are there any other
trials or proceedings dealing with these matters where
you have testified in public before?
A. Yes. I
testified furthermore in Vienna when they sent me to
the High Court of Justice in British Columbia. There
is a picture of a hundred people asking me to identify
if I know anyone.
THE COURT: No. Doctor, please.
Just answer the question.
Q. MR GRIFFITHS: Did
you testify in Vienna?
A. I testified against
S.S. Unterschaffuhrer and I testified in their trial
for crimes.
Q. All right. Anybody else?
A. No. To my knowledge, no.
Q. Can you tell us,
Doctor, briefly how you arrived at the number of 1.765
million?
MR CHRISTIE: Your Honour, we went
through this in-chief; I dealt with it in cross. It
did not come first in cross.
MR GRIFFITHS: The
figure did not, to my recollection, Your Honour -- it
was not mentioned in-chief. It is obvious from --
could the jury be excused, Your Honour, please?
MR CHRISTIE: I will withdraw my objection.
THE COURT: Yes.
Q. MR GRIFFITHS: Dr Vrba, could
you tell us briefly how you arrived at your figure?
You told us how you identified nationalities, and I
wonder if you can tell us how you arrived at your
account. Can you do that?
A. Yes.
Q.
Please.
A. The first time when I was on the
ramp, even before I went to the ramp, I had some idea
about the numbers who are going to come, because the
number of the people from the Kanada who were supposed
to go to work, work on the ramp, depended on the
number of arrivals which are coming.
Consequently we were woken up in the night. It was
mainly night work. Mainly the transport came in the
night not always. And an S.S. man came and said to the
Kapo who was a German criminal, a green triangle, that
we should go at once on the ramp, and told him the
number of how many prisoners are coming in the cattle
trucks in other words, how many deportees were coming.
And on that ground the Kapo decided a fifty, hundred,
two hundred people should go to work on the ramp.
So I had a rough idea, and before I came to the
ramp. Furthermore, the people -- when the wagons came,
in a system which I explained here before, on opening
of the wagons I could judge if this was a transport
where they have put a hundred in per wagon or one of
the better transport where they have put only sixty in
in the wagon.
Furthermore, I could see a number
of wagons that are counted, because I had to clean
each one of them, going through the wagons so I could
see exactly how many wagons arrive. So from this I
could know the date of arrival, the number of people
who arrived, and the number of people who were chosen
to be marched into the camp in other words, roughly
the percentage of people who were taken for slave
labour. And I could make immediately my mind the
picture how many are from that particular transport
and from what nationality murdered.
Now, this
information at the start represented only one figure,
and the next day two figures, and the next day again
two figures, or three figures, and I trained myself to
remember those figures and developed a special
mnemonical method for remembering each transport.
For instance, on the statistics, those transports
are only numbers, but in reality they were not just
numbers. The transports arrived either in the cold or
in the hot. The transports either had a lot of dead or
few dead. The transports came in a rich equipment, as
for food, or poor equipment. During unloading of the
transport it was raining or it was not raining. In
other words, I had a lot of coinciding circumstances,
so that each transport for me was not a number but an
event, a colourful event. And as the days went by I
trained myself constantly and repeated in my mind
constantly the statistics, and at the start, when I
started, it was one page and then it was two pages
that I had to remember, and then it was three pages I
had to remember, and finally it was twenty pages I had
to remember, and this was not at all very difficult
with that mnemonical help to which I have myself
trained. It is a general knowledge that people who are
arrested write a poem of ten thousand stanzas over
years, and are not allowed to write, and then they
came out and faultlessly writes them down in two days.
So this is a typical example Solzhenitsyn, without
comparing myself to him; and this is not verses to
memorize but people, transports, so it was not such a
difficult task for me to memorize it. I was asked this
question by the Chief Judge Hoffmann in Frankfurt, and
I gave him, if you will allow me, another aspect of
illustrating how human memory works.
Q. Well, I
am going to stop.
A. Yes. There is an aspect to
human memory which I can in addition to this explain,
if necessary.
Q. Excuse me just a minute now.
You have with you a report, the Vrba-Wetzler report.
A. Yes. I have here a copy which I received from
the Office of Investigations, Criminal Division,
Washington.
Q. There is something here I can
put to you if I can find it about Himmler.
A.
Yes.
Q. There is a reference to Himmler in here.
A. I will try to find it.
Q. We won't think
out loud, but we will both look for it here.
A.
Here is something on the 17th which is not about
Himmler, but about something different. I can't find
the reference to Himmler just now, but you might,
perhaps, be able to.
THE COURT: Mr Griffiths,
are there any other points you want to discuss with
the witness? I intend to adjourn in about ten minutes.
You might agree to find the Himmler reference, if you
wish to, at that time during the recess.
MR
GRIFFITHS: I thank you, Your Honour. In fact, it is
the last point that I wish to review.
THE
COURT: The Himmler matter?
MR GRIFFITHS: Yes,
sir.
THE COURT: In that case, we will adjourn
now.
--- The jury retires. 3:20 p.m.
---
Short adjournment.
--- Upon resuming.
MR GRIFFITHS: Just before the jury is brought in,
Your Honour, I will have no questions of Dr Vrba. It
was a report written by somebody else that I was
looking for. That is why I couldn't find it, and I
have another witness here. I am shifting gears. It is
not a survivor but a professor who I intended to
qualify as an expert in the field on the impact of
material of social and racial tolerance in the
community.
It is ten to four. He is here. He
will obviously be available for tomorrow. I understand
that you have a bail review at four fifteen.
THE COURT: Yes, there is another matter that I
promised counsel I would hear their bail application
at four thirty or four fifteen.
MR GRIFFITHS:
My question is whether, in the absence of the jury, I
should commence with Dr Kaufmann, the psychologist,
today and try to get him qualified, or whether we
should start fresh with that in the morning. I am in
Your Honour's hands.
THE COURT: Mr Christie, do
you have a preference?
MR CHRISTIE: No, sir, I
don't really. Whatever is convenient to Your Honour,
really.
THE COURT: Then I think that there
might be a change of court staff, and I will be in at
three-fifty or ten to four. If you have no further
questions we will call in the jury. You can say that
before the jury and we will then adjourn this case
until tomorrow morning.
--- The court addresses
members of the public in attendance in the courtroom
concerning rules of order in the court.
THE
COURT: Bring in the jury.
--- --- The jury
returns. 3:52 p.m.
THE COURT: Mr Griffiths?
MR GRIFFITHS: Thank you, Your Honour. I found the
reference, Your Honour, that I was going to ask about.
It was in a section of a report not attributed to
Messers Vrba and Wetzler. Accordingly, I will not ask
the question. I have no further questions for Dr Vrba.
THE COURT: Thank you, Doctor. You can step down.
--- The witness retires.
------------------------------
This is part 5 of the Testimony of Dr Rudolf Vrba, transcript of the 1985 Ernst Zündel trial in Toronto.
part 5
part
1
|