Homepage
Login
Profile
BookClubs
dmBox
Read Ebook: Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal Nuremburg 14 November 1945-1 October 1946 Volume 11 by Various
Font size:
Background color:
Text color:
Add to tbrJar First Page Next Page
Ebook has 6350 lines and 248372 words, and 127 pages
One Hundred and Second Day, Monday, 8 April 1946, Morning Session 1 Afternoon Session 35
One Hundred and Third Day, Tuesday, 9 April 1946, Morning Session 73 Afternoon Session 107
One Hundred and Fourth Day, Wednesday, 10 April 1946, Morning Session 152 Afternoon Session 190
One Hundred and Fifth Day, Thursday, 11 April 1946, Morning Session 224 Afternoon Session 253
One Hundred and Sixth Day, Friday, 12 April 1946, Morning Session 289 Afternoon Session 328
One Hundred and Seventh Day, Saturday, 13 April 1946, Morning Session 365
One Hundred and Eighth Day, Monday, 15 April 1946, Morning Session 396 Afternoon Session 428
One Hundred and Ninth Day, Tuesday, 16 April 1946, Morning Session 460 Afternoon Session 491
One Hundred and Tenth Day, Wednesday, 17 April 1946, Morning Session 525 Afternoon Session 568
ONE HUNDRED AND SECOND DAY Monday, 8 April 1946
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE : I want to ask you some questions about the shooting of officers who escaped from Sagan Camp. As I understand your evidence, very shortly after the escape you had this interview with Hitler at which certainly Himmler was present. That is right, isn't it?
WILHELM KEITEL : The day after the escape this conference took place with the F?hrer and with Himmler.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Yes. Now, you say that at that conference Hitler said that the prisoners were not to be returned to the Wehrmacht but to remain with the police. They were really your words. That is right, isn't it?
KEITEL: Yes.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: That is what you said. So that is what you say took place. In your own mind you were satisfied when you left that conference that these officers were going to be shot, were you not?
KEITEL: No, that I was not.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Now, will you agree with this? You were satisfied that there was a grave probability that these officers would be shot?
KEITEL: As I rode home I had a subconscious concern about it. It was not expressed at the conference.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Then you sent for General Von Graevenitz and General Westhoff, did you not?
KEITEL: Yes, that is correct.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I don't know if you can remember, because General Westhoff was a comparatively junior officer compared with yourself, but he says that it was the first occasion on which you had sent for him. Does your memory bear that out?
KEITEL: No, I did not call him. But he had been brought along to be introduced to me. I did not know him. I had summoned only General Von Graevenitz.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: You had never met him before? Do you agree that you had never met General Westhoff before, since he had come into that job?
KEITEL: I had never seen him before.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: That is what he said. Now you agree, as I understand your evidence, that you were very excited and nervous?
KEITEL: Yes, I vented my disagreement and my excitement very strongly.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: So that you agree with General Westhoff that you said something to this effect, "Gentlemen, this is a bad business" or "This is a very serious matter" or something of that kind?
KEITEL: Yes, I said, "That is an enormously serious matter."
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Now, General Westhoff said, in the next sentence, what you said was, "This morning G?ring reproached me in the presence of Himmler for having let some more prisoners of war escape. It was unheard of."
KEITEL: That must be a mistake on Westhoff's part. It was a day later. We were then at Berchtesgaden and Generals Von Graevenitz and Westhoff called on me the next morning. And it must also be a mistake that I mentioned the name of the Reich Marshal G?ring in this connection.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: So you were not very sure about that, were you, as to whether or not G?ring was present. You were not very sure, were you?
KEITEL: I only became uncertain about it when in a preliminary interrogation I was told that witnesses had stated that G?ring was present; thereupon I said it is not completely impossible but that I did not recall it.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Well, to put it quite right, when you were interrogated, an American officer put exactly the sentence that I put to you now. He put that sentence to you from General Westhoff's statement. Do you remember that he read what I have read to you now? "Gentlemen, this is a bad business; this morning G?ring reproached me in the presence of Himmler for having let some more prisoners of war escape. It was unheard of." Do you remember the interrogator put that to you? Didn't he?
KEITEL: It was something like that at the preliminary interrogation, but I said that I was not certain that G?ring was present.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I was going to put exactly what you said--and you listen carefully, and if you have any disagreement, tell the Tribunal. You said, "I request that you interrogate Jodl about the whole incident and the attitude which I displayed during the whole conference in the presence of G?ring, of whose presence during that conference I am not absolutely certain, but Himmler was there." That was your view when you were interrogated on the 10th of November, wasn't it? You said, "...during the whole conference in the presence of G?ring, of whose presence I am not absolutely certain...." That was your view on the 10th of November?
KEITEL: There must have been some misinterpretation in the minutes, which I never read. I expressed my uncertainty about the presence of G?ring and in the same connection put the request to interrogate General Jodl about it, since, in my opinion, I was not sure that G?ring was not present.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: You agree that you did ask that General Jodl should be interrogated?
KEITEL: I made that proposal, yes.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Well now, what do you complain about as to the next sentence? "...during the whole conference in the presence of G?ring, of whose presence during that conference I am not absolutely certain...." Wasn't that your view?
KEITEL: Yes, I was rather surprised at this interrogation and when I was told that witnesses had confirmed that G?ring had been present I was a little uncertain in this matter and asked that General Jodl be interrogated. In the meantime it became entirely clear to me that G?ring was not present and that I was right as I had at first said.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Had you discussed it with G?ring while you were both awaiting trial?
KEITEL: After my interrogations I had the occasion to speak with Reich Marshal G?ring and he told me, "But you must know that I was not there," and then I remembered fully.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Yes, as you say, the Reich Marshal said to you he had not been present at the interview. That is right, is it not?
KEITEL: General Jodl also confirmed to me Reich Marshal G?ring was not present.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Well now, did you tell General Von Graevenitz and General Westhoff that Himmler had interfered and that he had complained that he would have to provide another 60 to 70 thousand men for the Landwache? Did you tell them that?
KEITEL: No, that is also a misinterpretation. I did not say that. It is not correct.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: You said that Himmler had interfered.
KEITEL: I said only that Himmler had reported the fact of the escape and I intended not to report it to Hitler on that day, since a number of escapees had been returned to the camp. I did not intend to report to the F?hrer on that day.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Now, whatever you said to General Von Graevenitz, you agree that General Von Graevenitz protested and said, "Escape is not a dishonorable offense. That is specially laid down in the Convention." Did he not say that?
KEITEL: Yes, it is true he said that. But I would like to add that the statement of General Westhoff is a reminiscence which goes back over several years.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Yes, but you agree, as I understand your evidence, that General Von Graevenitz did make a protest about the action that was taken, is not that so?
Add to tbrJar First Page Next Page