The pertinent portions of the Law with which we are concerned provide as follows:
Article II "1. Each of the following acts is recognized as a crime:
"(b) War Crimes: Atrocities or offenses against persons or property constituting violations of the laws or customs of war, including but not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave labour or for any other purpose, of civilian population from occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.
"(c) Crimes Against Humanity: Atrocities and offenses, including but not limited to murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, imprisonment, torture, rape, or other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, or persecution on political, racial or religious grounds whether or not in violation of the domestic laws of the country where perpetrated.
"(d) Membership in categories of a criminal group or organization declared criminal by the International Military Tribunal.
"2. Any person without regard to nationality or capacity in which he acted, is deemed to have committed a crime as defined in ......this article, if he was (a) a principal or (b) was an accessory to the commission of any such crime or ordered or abetted the same or (c) took a consenting part therein or (d) was connected with plans or enterprises involving its commission or (e) was a member of any organization or group connected with the commission of any such crime.
"4. (a) The official position of any person, whether as Head of State or as a responsible official in a Government Department, does not free him from responsibility for a crime or entitle him to mitigation of punishment.
(b) The fact that any person acted pursuant to the order of his Government or of a superior does not free him from responsibility for a crime, but may be considered in mitigation."
The indictment in the case at bar is filed pursuant to these provisions.
Judge Crawfor will continue reading:
TIE CHARGE The indictment is framed in four counts.
Count One - The Common Design or Conspiracy: The first Count of the indictment charges that the defendants, acting pursuant to a common design, unlawfully, willfully and knowingly did conspire and agree together to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity as defined in Control Council Law No. 10.
During the course of the trial the defendants challenged the first count of the indictment, alleging as grounds for their motion the fact that under the basic law the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to try the crime of conspiracy considered as a separate substantive offense. The motion was set down for argument and duly argued by counsel for the prosecution and the defense. Thereafter, in one of its trial sessions the Tribunal granted the motion. That this judgment may be complete, the ruling made at that time is incorporated in this judgment. The order which was entered on the motion is as follows:
"It is the ruling of this Tribunal that neither the Charter of the International Military Tribunal nor Control Council Law No. 10 has defined conspiracy to commit a war crime or crime against humanity as a separate substantive crime; therefore, this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to try any defendant upon a charge of conspiracy considered as a separate substantive offense.
"Count I of the indictment, in addition to the separate charge of conspiracy, also alleges unlawful participation in the formulation and execution of plans to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity which actually involved the commission of such crimes. We, therefore, cannot properly strike the whole of Count I from the indictment, but, insofar as count I charges the commission of the alleged crime of conspiracy as a separate substantive offense, distinct from any war crime or crime against humanity, the Tribunal will disregard that charge.
"This ruling must not be construed as limiting the force or effect of Article 2, paragraph 2 of Control Council Law No. 10, or as denying to either prosecution or defense the right to offer in evidence any facts or circumstances occurring either before or after September, 1939, if such facts or circumstances tend to prove or to disprove the commission by any defendant of war crimes or crimes against humanity as defined in Control Council Law No. 10."
Counts Two and Three - War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity:
The second and third counts of the indictment charge the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The counts are identical in content, except for the fact that in count two the acts which are made the basis for the charges are alleged to have been committed on "civilians and members of the armed forces then at war with the German Reich in the exercise of belligerent control", whereas in count three the criminal acts are alleged to have been committed against "German civilians and nationals of other countries." With this distinction observed, both counts will be treated as one and discussed together.
Counts two and three allege, in substance, that between September 1939 and April 1945 all of the defendants "were principals in, accessories to, ordered, abetted, took a consenting part in, and were connected with plans and enterprises involving medical experiments without the subjects' consent .... in the course of which experiments the defendants committed murders, brutalities, cruelties, tortures, atrocities, and other inhumane acts." It is averred that "such experiments included, but were not limited to" the following:
"(A) High Altitude Experiments. From about March 1942 to about August 1942 experiments were conducted at the Dachau Concentration Camp for the benefit of the German Air Force to investigate the limits of human endurance and existence at extremely high altitudes. The experiments were carried out in a low-pressure chamber in which the atmospheric conditions and pressures prevailing at high altitude (up to 68,000 feet) could be duplicated. The experimental subjects were placed in the low-pressure chamber and thereafter the simulated altitude therein was raised, Many victims died as a result of these experiments and others suffered grave injury, torture, and illtreatment. The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser, Schroeder, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugewsky, Poppendick, Sievers, Ruff, Romberg, BeckerFreyseng, and Weltz are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(B) Freezing Experiments. From about August 1942 to about May 1943 experiments were conducted at Dachau Concentration Camp primarily for the benefit of the German Air Force to investigate the most effective means of treating persons who had been severely chilled or frozen. In one series of experiments the subjects were forced to remain in a tank of ice water for periods up to three hours. Extreme rigor developed in a short time. Numerous victims died in the course of these experiments. After the survivors were severely chilled, rewarming was attempted by various means. In another series of experiments, the subjects were kept naked outdoors for many hours at temperatures below freezing.... The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser Schroeder, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Sievers, Becker-Freyseng, and Weltz are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(C) Malaria Experiments. From about February 1942 to about April 1945 experiments were conducted at the Dachau Concentration Camp in order to investigate immunization for and treatment of malaria. Helathy concentration camp inmates were infected by mosquitoes or by injections of extracts of the mucous glands of mosquitoes.
After having contracted malaria the subjects were treated with various drugs to test their relative efficacy. Over 1,000 involuntary subjects were used in these experiments. Many of the victims died and others suffered severe pain and permanent disability. The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser, Rostock, Gebhardt, Blome, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, and Sievers are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(D) Lost (Mustard) Gas Experiments. At various times between September 1939 and April 1945 experiments were conducted at Sachsenhausen, Natzweiler, and other concentration camps for the benefit of the German Armed Forces to investigate the most effective treatment of wounds caused by Lost gas. Lost is a poison gas which is commonly known as Mustard gas. Wounds deliberately infected on the subjects were infected with Lost. Some of the subjects died as a result of these experiments and others suffered intense pain and injury. The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser, Blome, Rostock, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, and Sievers are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(E) Sulfanilamide Experiments- From about July 1942 to about September 1943 experiments to investigate the effectiveness of sulfanilamide were conducted at the Ravensbrueck Concentration Camp for the benefit of the German Armed Forces. Wounds deliberately inflicted on the experimental subjects were infected with bacteria such as streptococcus, gas gangrene, and tetanus. Circulation of blood was interrupted by tying off blood vessels at both ends of the wound to create a condition similar to that of a battlefield wound. Infection was aggravated by forcing wood shavings and ground glass into the wounds. The infection was treated with sulfanilamide and other drugs to determine their effectiveness. Some subjects died as a result of these experiments and others suffered serious injury and intense agony. The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser, Rostock, Schroeder Genzken, Gebhardt, Blome, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, BeckerFreyseng, Oberheuser, and Fischer are changed with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(F) Bone, Muscle, and Nerve Regeneration and Bone Transplantation Experiments. From about September 1942 to about December 1943 experiments were conducted at the Ravensbruck Concentration Camp for the benefit of the German Armed Forces to study bone, muscle, and nerve regeneration, and bone transplantation from one person to another. Sections of bones, muscles, and nerves were removed from the subjects. As a result of these operations, many victims suffered intense agony, mutilation, and permanent disability. The defendants Karl Brand, Handloser, Rostock, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, Oberheuser, and Fischer are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(G) Seawater Experiments. From about July 1944 to about September 1944 experiments were conducted at the Dachau Concentration Camp for the benefit of the German Air Force and Navy to study various methods of making seawater drinkable. The subjects were deprived of all food and given only chemically processed seawater. Such experiments caused great pain and suffering and resulted in serious bodily injury to the victims. The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser, Rostock, Schroeder, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Sievers, Becker-Freyseng, Schaefer, and Beiglboeck are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(H) Epidemic Jaundice Experiments. From about June 1943 to about January 1945 experiments were conducted at the Sachsenhausen and Natzweiler Concentration Camps for the benefit of the German Armed Forces to investigate the cause of, and inoculations against epidemic jaundice. Experimental subjects were deliberately infected with epidemic jaundice, some of whom died as a result, and others were caused great pain and suffering. The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser, Rostock, Schroeder, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Sievers, Rose, and Becker-Freyseng are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
"(I) Sterilization Experiments. From about March 41 to about January 1945 sterilization experiments were conducted at the *uschwitz and Ravensbruck Concentration Camps, and other places, The purpose of these experiments was to develop a method of sterilization which would be suitable for sterilizing millions of people with a minimum of time and effort. These experiments were conducted by means of X-Ray, surgery, and various drugs. Thousands of victims were sterilized and thereby suffered great mental and physical anguish. The defendants Karl Brandt, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Brack, Pokorny, and Oberheuser are charged with special responsibility for and participation on these crimes.
"(J) Spotted Fever Experiments From about December 1941 to about February 1945 experiments were conducted at the Buchenwald and Natzweiler Concentration Camps for the benefit of the German Armed Forces to investigate the effectiveness of spotted Fever and other vaccines. At Buchenwald numerous healthy inmates were deliberately infected with spotted fever virus in order to keep the virus alive; over 90% of the victims died as a result. Other healthy inmates were used to determine the effectiveness of different spotted fiver vaccines and of various chemical substances. In the course of these experiments 75% of the selected number of inmates were vaccinated with one of the vaccines or nourished with one of the chemical substances and, after a period of three to four weeks, were infected with spotted fever germs. The remaining 25% were infected without any previous protection in order to compare the effectiveness of the vaccines and the chemical substances. As a result, hundreds of the persons experimented upon died. Experiments with yellow fever, smallpox, typhus paratyphys A and B, cholera, and diphteria were also conducted. Similar experiments with like results we conducted at Natzweiler Concentration Camp.
The defendants Karl Brandt, Handloser, Rostock, Schroeder, Genzken, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugewsky, Poppendick, Sievers, Rose, Becker-Freyseng, and Hoven are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes.
" (K) Experiments with Poison. In or about December 1943 and in or about October 1944 experiments were conducted at the Buchenwald Concentration Camp to investigate the effect of various poisons upon human beings. The poisons were secretly administered to experimental subjects in their food. The victims died as a result of the poison or were killed immediately in order to permit autopsies. In or about September 1944 experimental subjects were shot with poison bullets and suffered torture and death. The defendants Genzken, Gebhardt, Mrugowsky, and Poppendick are charged with special responsibility for and participation in these crimes."
In addition to the medical experiments, the nature and purpose of which have been outlined as alleged, certain of the defendants are charged with criminal activities involving murder, torture, and ill-treatment of non-German nationals as follows:
"7. Between June 1943 and September 1944 the defendants Rudolf Brandt and Sievers... were principals in, accessories to, ordered, abetted, took a consenting part in, and were connected with plans and enterprises involving the murder of civilians and members of the armed forces of nations then at war with the German Reich in exercise of belligerent control. One hundred twelve Jews were selected for the purpose of completing a skeleton collection for the Reich University of Strasbourg. Their photograpsh and anthropological measurements were taken. Then they were killed. Thereafter, comparison tests, anatomical research, studies regarding race, pathological features of the body, form and size of the brain, and other tests, were made. The bodies were sent to Strasbourg and defleshed.
"8. Between May 1942 and January 1943 the defendants Blome and Rudolf Brandt...were principals in accessories to, ordered, abetted, took a consenting part in, and were connected with plans and enterprises involving the murder and mistreatment of tens of thousands of Polish nationals who were civilians and members of the armed forces of a nation then at war with the German Reich and who were in the custody of the German Reich in exercise of belligerent control. These people were alleged to be infected with incurable tuberculosis. On the ground of insuring the health and welfare of Germans in Poland, many tubercular Poles were ruthlessly exterminated while others were isolated in death camps with inadequate medical facilities.
"9. Between September 1939 and April 1945 the defendants Karl Brandt, Blome, Brack, and Hoven... were principals in, accessories to, ordered, abetted, took a consenting part in, and were connected with plans and enterprises involving the execution of the so-called "euthanasia" program of the German. Reich in the course of which the defendants herein murdered hundreds of thousands of human beings, including nationals of German--occupied countries. This program involved the systematic and secret execution of the aged, insane incurably ill, of deformed children, and other persons, by gas lethal injections, and divers other means in nursing homes, hospitals, and asylums. Such persons were regarded as "useless eaters" and a burden to the German war machine. The relatives of these victims were informed that they died from natural causes, such as heart failure. German doctors involved in the "euthanasia" program were also sent to the Eastern occupied countries to assist in the mass extermination of Jews."
Counts two and three of the indictment conclude with the averment that the crimes and atrocities which have been delineated "constitute violations of international conventions.
.., the laws and customs of war, the general principles of criminal law as derived from the criminal laws of all civilized nations, the internal penal laws of the countries in which such crimes were committed, and of Article II of Control Council Law No. 10."
Count Four - Membership in Criminal Organization:
The fourth count of the indictment alleges that the defendants Karl Brandt, Genzken, Gebhardt, Rudolf Brandt, Mrugowsky, Poppendick, Sievers, Brack, Hoven and Fischer are guilty of membership in an organization declared to be criminal by the International- Military Tribunal, in that each of these named defendants was a member of DIE SCHUTZSTAFFELN DER NATIONAL SOZIALISTISCHEN DEUTSCHEN ARBEITERPARTEI (commonly known as the SS) after 1 September 1939, in violation of Paragraph 1 (d) Article II of Control Council Law No. 10.
Before turning our attention to the evidence in the case we shall state the law announced by the International Military Tribunal with reference to membership in an organization declared criminal by the Tribunal:
"In dealing with the SS the Tribunal includes all persons who had been officially accepted as members of the SS including the members of the Allgemeine SS, members of the Waffen-SS, members of the SSTotenkopf Verbaende, and the members of any of the different police forces who were members of the SS. The Tribunal, does not include the so-called riding units....
"The Tribunal declares to be criminal within the meaning of the Charter the group composed of those persons who had been officially accepted as members of the SS as enumerated in the preceding paragraph who became or remained members of the organization with knowledge that it was being used for the commission of acts declared criminal by Article 6 of the Charter, or who were personally implicated as members of the organization in the commission of such crimes, excluding, however; those who were drafted into membership by the State in such a way as to give them no choice in the matter, and who had committed no such crimes.
The basis of this finding is the participation of the organization in War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity connected with the war; this group declared criminal cannot include, therefore, persons who had ceased to belong to the organizations enumerated in the preceding paragraph prior to 1 September 1939."
THE PRESIDENT: Judge Sebring will continue with the reading of the judgment.
JUDGE SEBRING: THE PROOF AS TOWARD CRIMES AND CRIMES
AGAINST HUMANITY Judged by any standard of proof the record clearly shows the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity substantially as alleged in counts two and three of the indictment.
Beginning with the outbreak of World War II criminal medical experiments on non--German nationals, both prisoners of war and civilians, including Jews and "asocial" persons, were carried out on a large scale in Germany and the occupied countries. These experiments were not the isolated and casual acts of individual doctors and researchists working solely on their own responsibility, but were the product of coordinated policymaking and planning at high governmental, military, and Nazi Party levels, conducted as an integral part of the total war effort. They were ordered, sanctioned, permitted or approved by persons in positions of authority who under all principles of law were under the duty to know about these things and to take steps to terminate or prevent then.
PERMISSIBLE MEDICAL EXPERIMENTS The great weight of the evidence before us is to the effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally.
The protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study.
All agree, however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts:
1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.
This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.
The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a. personal duty and responsibility which nay not be delegated to another with impunity.
2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an appropriate reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.
8. The experiment should be conducted. only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.
Of the ton principles which have been enumerated, our judicial concern, of course, is with those requirements which are purely legal in nature -- or which at least are so closely and clearly related to matters legal that they assist us in determining criminal culpability and punishment. To go beyond that point would lead us into a field that would be beyond our sphere of competence. However, the point need not be labored.
We find from the evidence that in the medical experiments which have been proven, these ten principles were much more frequently honored in their breach than in their observance. Many of the concentration camp inmates who were the victims of these atrocities were citizens of countries other than the German Reich. They were non-German nationals, including Jews and "asocial persons", both prisoners of war and civilians, who had been imprisoned and forced to submit to these tortures and barbarities without so much as a semblance of trial. In every single instance appearing in the record, subjects were used who did not consent to the experiments; indeed, as to some of the experiments, it is not even contended by the defendants that the subjects occupied the status of volunteers. In no case was the experimental subject at liberty of his own free choice to withdraw from any experiment. In many cases experiments were performed by unqualified persons; were conducted at random for no adequate scientific reason, and under revolting physical conditions. All of the experiments were conducted with unnecessary suffering and injury and but very little, if any, precautions were taken to protect or safeguard the human subjects from the possibilities of injury, disability, or death. In every one of the experiments the subjects experienced extreme pain or torture, and in most of them they suffered permanent injury, mutilation, or death, either as a direct result of the experiments or because of lack of adequate follow up care.
Obviously all of these experiments involving brutalities, tortures, disabling injury and death were performed in complete disregard of international conventions, the laws and customs of war, the general principles of criminal law as derived from the criminal laws of all civilized nations, and Control Council Law No. 10. Manifestly human experiments under such conditions are contrary to "the principles of the laws of nations as they result from the usages established among civilized peoples, from the laws of humanity, and from the dictates of public conscience.
Whether any of the defendants in the dock are guilty of these atrocities is, of course, another question.
Under the Anglo-Saxon system of jurisprudence every defendant in a criminal case is presumed to be innocent of an offense changed until the prosecution, by competent, credible proof, has shown his guilt to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. And this presumption abides with a defendant through each stage of his trial until such degree of proof has been adduced. A "reasonable doubt" as the name implies, is one conformable to reason -- a doubt which a reasonable man would entertain. Stated differently, it is that state of a case which, after a full and complete comparison and consideration of all the evidence, would leave an unbiased, unprejudiced, reflective person, charged with the responsibility for decision, in the state of mind that he could not say that he felt an abiding conviction amounting to a moral certainty of the truth of the charge.
If any of the defendants are to be found guilty under counts two or three of the indictment it must be because the evidence has shown beyond a reasonable doubt that such defendant, without regard to nationality or the capacity in which he acted, participated as a principal in, accessory to, ordered, abettel, took a consenting part in, or was connected with plans or enterprises involving the commission of at least some of the medical experiments and other atrocities which are the subject matter of these counts. Under no other circumstances may he be convicted.
Before examining the evidence to which we must look in order to determine individual culpability a brief statement concerning some of the official agencies of the German government and Nazi Party which will be referred to in this judgment seems desirable.
THE PRESIDENT: THE MEDICAL SERVICE IN GERMANY Adolf Hitler was the head of the Nazi Party, the German Government, and the German Armed Forces.
His title as Chief of the government was "Reich Chancellor". As Supreme Leader of the National Socialist German Worker's Party, commonly called the NSDAP or Nazi Party, his title was "Fuehrer". As head of Germany's armed military might he was "Supreme Commander in Chief of the German Armed forces, or Wehrmacht".
The staff through which Hitler controlled the German Armed Forces was known as the "Supreme Command of the Wehrmacht" (OKW). The chief of this staff was Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitell.
Under the Supreme Command of the Wehrmacht were the Supreme Commands of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. The Supreme Command of the Navy (OKM) was headed by Grand Admiral Karl Doenitz. The Supreme Command of the Army (OKH) was headed by Field Marshal Walter von Brauchitsch until December 1941, and thereafter by Hitler himself. The Supreme Command of the Air Force (OKL) was headed by Reichmarshal Hermann Goering.
Each of the three branches of the Wehrmacht maintained its own medical service.
Army Medical Service: The defendant Handloser was the head of the Army Medical Service from 1 January 1941 to 1 September 1944. While in this position he served in two capacities, namely; as Army Medical Inspector and as Army Physician. These positions required the maintenance of two departments, each separate from the other. At one time or another there were subordinated to Handloser in these official capacities the following officers, among others: Generalarzt Prof. Schreiber and Prof. Rostock; Oberstabsarzt Drs. Scholz, Eyer, Bernhard Schmidt and Cremer; Oberstabsarzts Prof. Gutzeit and Prof. Wirth; Stabsarzt Prof. Kliewe and Prof. Kilian, and Stabsarzt Dr. Dohmen. Under his supervision in either or both of his official capacities were the Military Medical Academy, the Typhus and Virus Institutes of the OKH at Cracow and Lemberg, and the Medical School for Mountain Troops at St. Johann.
Luftwaffe Medical Service: From the beginning of the war until 1 January 1944 Hippke was Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe. On that date the defendant Schroeder succeeded Hippke and remained in that position until the end of the war.
Subordinated to Schroeder as Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe were the following defendants: Rose, who was consulting medical officer on hygiene and tropical medicine; Weltz, who was chief of the Institute for Aviation Medicine in Munich; BeckerFreyseng, a consultant for aviation medicine in Schroeder's office; Puff, the chief of the Institute for Aviation Medicine in the German Experimental Institute for Aviation in Berlin; Romberg, Ruff's chief assistant, who toward the end of the war attained the position of a Department head at the Institute; Schaefer, who, in the summer of 1942, was assigned to the Staff of the Research Institute for Aviation Medicine in Berlin to do research work on the problem of sea emergency; and Beiglboeck, a Luftwaffe officer who performed medical experiments on concentration camp inmates at Dachau in July 1944 for the purpose of determining the potability of processed seawater.
Under Schroeder's jurisdiction as Chief of the Luftwaffe Medical Service was the Medical Academy of the Luftwaffe at Berlin.
SS Medical Service: One of the most important branches of the Nazi Party was the Schutzstaffeln of the NSDAP, commonly known as the SS. Heinrich Himmler was chief of the SS with the title of Reichsfuehrer SS, and on his personal staff, serving in various and sundry official capacities was the defendant Rudolf Brandt.
The SS maintained its own medical service headed by a certain Dr. Grawitz, who held the position of Reich Physician SS and Police.
Medical Service of the Waffen-SS: The SS branch of the Nazi Party, in turn, was divided into several components, of which one of the most important was the Waffen, or Armed, SS. The Waffen SS was formed into military units and fought at the front with units of the Wehrmacht.
Such medical units of the Waffen-SS as were assigned to the field, became subordinated to the medical service of the Army, which was supervised by Handloser.
The Chief of the Waffen-SS Medical Service was the defendant Genzken. His immediate superior was Reich Physician SS and Police Grawitz.
Six other defendants in the dock were members of the Medical Service of the SS, under Grawitz, namely; Gebhardt, who in 1940 became surgical advisor to the Waffen-SS and who in August 1943 created and took over the position of Chief Clinical Officer of the Reich Physician SS and Police; Mrugowsky, who became Chief of the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen-SS under Genzken in November 1940, and when the Institute was taken from Genzken's supervision on 1 September 1943 and placed under direct subordination to Grawitz, remained as Chief; Poppendick, who in 1941 was appointed Chief Physician of the Main Race and Settlement Office in Berlin and who in 1943 also became Chief of the Personal Staff of the Reich Physician SS and Police; Hoven, who from the beginning of 1941 until July 1942, served as the assistant, and from then to September 1943, as Chief Physician, at the Buchenwald Concentration Camp; Fischer, an assistant physician to the defendant Gebhardt; and finally the defendant Oberhauser, who in December 1940 became a physician at the Ravensbruck Concentration Camp, and thereafter, from June 1943 until the end of the war, served as an assistant physician under the defendant Gebhardt at Hohenlychen.
Civilian Medical Service: Throughout the war the Civilian Medical Services of the Reich were headed by a certain Dr. Leonard Conti. Conti had two principal capacities: (l) He was the Secretary of State for Health in the Ministry of the Interior of the Government; in this capacity he was a German civil servant subordinated to the Minister of the Interior -- first Wilhelm Frick and later, Heinrich Himmler. (2) he was the Reich Health Leader of the Nazi Party; in this capacity he was subordinated to the Nazi Party Chancellery, the chief of which was Martin Bormann.
In his capacity as Reich Health Leader, Conti had as his deputy the defendant Blome.
Reorganization of Wehrmacht Medical Service: In 1942 a reorganization of the various Medical Services of the Wehrmacht was effected. By a Fuehrer decree of 28 July 1942, Handloser became Chief of the Medical Services of the Wehrmacht, while at the same time retaining his position as Chief Physician of the Army and Army Medical Inspector. Under the decree referred to, Handloser was given power and authority to supervise and coordinate "all tasks common to the Medical Services of the Wehrmacht, the Waffen-SS and the organizations and units subordinate or attached to the Wehrmacht." He was also commanded "to represent the Wehrmacht before the civilian authorities in all common medical problems arising in the various branches of the Wehrmacht, the Waffen-SS and organizations and units subordinate or attached to the Wehrmacht" and "to protect the interests of the Wehrmacht in all medical measures taken by the civilian authorities."
Handloser thus became supreme medical leader in the military field, as was Conti in the civilian health and medical service.
By a subsequent Fuehrer decree of 7 August 1944 Handloser was relieved of his duties as Chief Physician of the Army and Army Medical Inspector, but retained his position as Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service.
By the decree of 28 July 1942 pursuant to which Handloser became Chief of the Medical Services of the Wehrmacht, the defendant Karl Brandt became empowered, subordinate only to, and receiving instructions directly from, Hitler "to carry out special tasks and negotiations to readjust the requirements for doctors, hospitals, medical supplies, etc., between the military and the civilian sectors of the Health and Medical Services." The decree also directed that Brandt "is to be kept informed about the fundamental events in the medical service of the Wehrmacht and in the Civilian Health Service" and "is authorized to intervene in a responsible manner."