Dachau main process

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The courtroom with a view of the judges' table; The main Dachau trial was held in this room, December 4, 1945

The Dachau main process was the first war crimes trial of the United States Army in the American occupation zone in military court in Dachau . This process took place from November 15 to December 13, 1945 in the Dachau internment camp , where the Dachau concentration camp was located until the end of April 1945 . In this trial, 40 people were charged with war crimes in connection with the Dachau concentration camp and its subcampswere charged. The trial ended with 40 convictions, including 36 death sentences, of which 28 were carried out. Officially, the case was named United States of America vs. Martin Gottfried Weiss et al. - Case 000-50-2 called. The Dachau main trial was followed by 121 secondary trials with around 500 defendants, who were based on the main trial as a parent case. The Dachau main process was the first and therefore groundbreaking concentration camp process within the framework of the Dachau processes . Up until 1948, there were other main and secondary lawsuits against the camp staff of other concentration camps.

prehistory

Detainee corpses in the evacuation train from Buchenwald , between April 29 and May 1, 1945

When the United States Army advanced on the territory of the German Reich in the final phase of the Second World War , it was unprepared, sometimes in the middle of the fighting, confronted with the traces of the concentration camp crimes. The care of the mostly emaciated and seriously ill " Muselmen ", as well as the burial of the prisoners who died on the death marches by exhaustion or shooting , presented the United States Army with a difficult task.

Shortly before the liberation of the Dachau concentration camp , which took place on April 29, 1945, US soldiers had reached the subcamps, including the Kaufering camp complex . Like other subcamps, the Kaufering IV subcamp was evacuated shortly before the invasion of the US Army on April 28, 1945. In the course of the liquidation of the camp, SS men set fire to the prisoners' barracks . American soldiers found about 360 bodies of prisoners in Kaufering IV; It is not certain whether those who were unable to march were burned alive or had previously been murdered. In the main camp they first met the evacuation train from Buchenwald , where up to 2,000 prisoners were dead in more than 38 wagons. Members of the US Army also discovered many unburied corpses inside the camp. These and other final phase crimes that were committed in the Dachau concentration camp and the sub-camps caused an extraordinarily high number of victims in the last weeks of the war. Even after the liberation, more than 2,200 former prisoners died as a result of the concentration camp imprisonment and the still rampant typhus epidemic .

Against this background, American investigators as part of the War Crimes Program began investigations to determine who was responsible for these crimes as early as April 30, 1945, and concluded them on August 7, 1945. Witness statements were recorded, evidence secured and photographs of the crimes taken. Many perpetrators were soon caught and interned, including Martin Weiß , predecessor of the last camp commandant Eduard Weiter . The investigation report was completed on August 31, 1945 and created the basis for the indictment and thus the main Dachau trial.

Legal basis and indictment

The basis of the indictment was JCS 1023/10, which was issued on July 15, 1945 by the Joint Chiefs of Staff . This directive, which was later superseded by Control Council Act No. 10 of December 20, 1945, authorized the American Commander-in-Chief Dwight D. Eisenhower to conduct military trials against war criminals in occupied territories. Other ordinances regulated jurisdiction, negotiable offenses, jurisdiction and the rights of the defendants in military trials.

The defendants in the main Dachau trial, November 15, 1945

The indictment, drawn up on November 2, 1945 and subsequently served on the defendants, comprised two main charges which were brought together under the title "Violation of the customs and laws of war". The complaint contained war crimes committed against Allied civilians and (Allied) prisoners of war between the beginning of January 1942 and the end of April 1945 in the Dachau concentration camp and the satellite camps. Initially, only crimes against citizens of the Allies or their allied states were prosecuted; Crimes committed by German perpetrators against German victims went unpunished for a long time and were usually only tried in German courts later. The defendants were charged with unlawfully and deliberately participating in the ill-treatment and killing of Allied civilians and prisoners of war as part of a concerted effort. In addition to the general involvement in the crimes in the Dachau concentration camp, the indictment also listed excesses that were assigned to the individual defendants.

The accused were charged with a common approach ( common design ) , which implied an approving participation in a system of killings, mistreatment and inhuman neglect and therefore implied a presumption of guilt . Therefore, the prosecution had to prove that “each of the defendants was aware of this system, that he knew what was happening to the inmates, and they had to prove to everyone that he was in his place of administration, the organization of the Camp supported the functioning of this system through its behavior, its activity, and its functioning ” . If this evidence was provided, the individual sentencing varied according to the type and extent of this participation. This legal construct was not familiar in European legal tradition, since the Allied war crimes trials did not require individual evidence to be provided in order to commit a criminal offense .

Originally, 42 members of the former camp administration were to be indicted in the main Dachau trial. However, since Hans Aumeier and a suspect named Hans Beier were not present and the indictment could not be served on them, they were struck off the list of defendants at the beginning of the trial. Aumeier was sentenced to death in the Kraków Auschwitz Trial and executed in Kraków in January 1948 . The group of the 40 remaining defendants consisted of 32 members of the camp crew, five doctors and three prison functionaries . Among the 32 members of the camp crew were the former camp commandant Martin Weiß , his adjutant Rudolf Suttrop , the head of the political department Johann Kick and protective custody camp and report leaders . The group of accused doctors included the tropical medicine specialist Claus Schilling , three camp doctors and a troop doctor. The three prison functionaries held leading positions as Kapos in the Dachau concentration camp. With the exception of the Austrians Fridolin Puhr and Johann Schöpp , ethnic Germans from Romania, all of the accused were German citizens.

Execution of litigation and pronouncement of judgment

Captain John Barnett testifies before the main prosecutor William D. Denson the authenticity of the photographs taken during the liberation of the Dachau concentration camp on November 17, 1945
The camp doctor Hans Eisele followed the allegations made against him on November 17, 1945

On October 30, 1945 the establishment of a military tribunal for the conduct of the Dachau main trial was ordered by the headquarters of the United States Army and set up on November 2, 1945. The military tribunal was presided over by Major General John M. Lentz, who, like his seven associate judges, wore a uniform during the trial. The prosecution, headed by Attorney General William D. Denson, consisted of four American officers . The defense of the accused was taken over by five American officers and the German lawyer Hans von Posern. Since the language of the court was English, interpreters had to translate into English and German between the court and the defendants. Trial observers from allied states should take part in the process.

“With the permission of the court, we will show that a system of extermination took place in Dachau during the period mentioned. We will prove that the victims of this planned extermination included civilians and prisoners of war, individuals who were unwilling to submit to the yoke of Nazism. We will also prove that these people were used as guinea pigs for experiments, starved, and at the same time had to work harder than their physical condition would allow; that the living conditions there inevitably led to illness and death. Furthermore, we want to show that while Germany overran Europe, these people became subjects of absolutely inhumane treatment and each of these accused was a member of this extermination machine. "

- Attorney General William D. Denson : From the opening speech on November 15, 1945.

After the proceedings began on November 15, 1945 at 10 a.m. in the former Dachau concentration camp, the prosecution first outlined the allegations against the accused. The military judges thereupon established the lawful establishment of the court and the power of justice with regard to the accused. However, the termination of the initial phase of the process was interrupted by three motions to dismiss on the part of the defense. Firstly, the defense contested the jurisdiction of the court and, secondly, the cited period of the offense was criticized as being too imprecise. The third motion to dismiss related to the small number of defense attorneys in relation to the 40 defendants, which would significantly impede an effective defense strategy in the event of potentially incriminating statements by defendants in relation to co-defendants. The military court rejected all three motions to dismiss. The jurisdiction of the court was based on the status of the defendants as war criminals, who were not to be treated according to the rules applicable to prisoners of war, since the crimes were committed prior to their detention. The second application was rejected on the grounds that the accused were not primarily charged with individual crimes, but with the ongoing crime committed jointly. The division of the proceedings into individual proceedings was also not allowed due to the ongoing crime committed together.

The presiding judge then read out the indictment and explained the rights of the accused in the trial. When asked how the defendants plead, they all responded with "not guilty". The prosecution then clarified the facts from their point of view and backed them up with evidence. The 139 admitted pieces of evidence included 60 photos, the camp's death books from 1941 and 1942, other incriminating documents and the testimony of the defendants. Among the 69 witnesses were former prisoners and officers of the United States Army who were involved in the liberation of the Dachau concentration camp and documentation of the concentration camp crimes there. First, officers of the US Army testified, who reported about the bodies in the evacuation train from Buchenwald and the catastrophic conditions in the main camp at the time of liberation. Former prisoners explained the inhumane living conditions in the Dachau concentration camp, in terms of clothing , food, accommodation, forced labor , epidemics , medical experiments, selections, executions , mistreatment and killings. In addition to the conditions in the main camp, the catastrophic living conditions in the subcamps were also described.

The defense then substantiated its view of the facts with 93 witnesses, including the defendants, and 27 admitted pieces of evidence. Like the prosecution, the defense cross-examined witnesses .

The members of the camp team among the defendants were accused of ill-treatment and, in some cases, of killing prisoners; Another set of offenses included participation in executions and crimes in connection with the evacuation of the camp. The camp doctors and medical staff were charged with participating in executions by establishing the deaths of those executed and, in some cases, also with the selection, mistreatment and killing of prisoners. The commandant's staff were accused of having been primarily responsible for the catastrophic conditions in the camp and thereby making the system of killings, mistreatment and inhuman neglect possible in the first place. Two of the three prison functionaries were charged with mistreating and killing prisoners. One prison functionary was accused of participating in executions. The defendants played down the crimes, pleaded imperative to order or denied having been at the scene at the time of the crime.

Claus Schilling during his testimony in court on December 7, 1945

Claus Schilling , who at 74 years of age was the oldest defendant in the Dachau main proceedings, received special attention . Schilling, neither a member of the Nazi Party nor the SS , had a doctorate and habilitated in tropical medicine. As a respected doctor, Schilling had studied under Robert Koch and from 1898 specialized in malaria research . Even after his retirement in 1936, Schilling continued his research and was able to convince Heinrich Himmler of the war-necessary development of a malaria vaccine serum. Soon afterwards, Schilling was given an experimental station in the Dachau concentration camp to carry out his malaria studies. From February 1942 to the beginning of April 1945, 1,000 to 1,200 concentration camp prisoners were deliberately infected with malaria and then treated with medication on a trial basis. Over 100, but possibly up to 400 prisoners died as a result of these series of experiments.

Schilling did not deny that the series of experiments had been carried out in court. He subordinated the suffering of the victims of his experiments to a higher interest in science. He therefore asked the court to be allowed to complete his series of experiments and write them down. In addition, he had nothing to do with the events in the camp itself. The military tribunal did not follow Schilling's arguments.

In his closing argument, Chief Prosecutor Denson highlighted the ongoing crime that had taken place in Dachau concentration camp. It was through their participation and cooperation in the Dachau system that all the defendants made the concentration camp crimes possible there and are therefore all to be found guilty. The three accused prisoner functionaries, as Kapos appointed by the SS, were also responsible for the functioning of the Dachau system in the broader sense and were therefore to be found guilty. Denson did not accept the defendants' appeal to an imperative of order, as that imperative of orders did not absolve the accused from responsibility for war crimes committed. Denson saw no mitigating circumstances with the defendants and therefore pleaded for harsh sentences for all defendants.

The defense attorneys then attacked the allegation of common design because it was not in line with European legal tradition and, in their opinion, had been applied to the defendants in a very arbitrary manner. Only in this way would it have been possible to conduct the trial against the 40 defendants, as in several cases the individual evidence of the crime had not been provided. In the case of the former camp commandant Weiß, even witnesses had pointed out that conditions in the Dachau concentration camp had noticeably improved under his camp management. In addition, false testimony was sometimes used in court and the fact of the involuntary use of individual defendants for camp service was not taken into account. Overall, according to the defense's résumé, the main culprits in the Nuremberg trial against the main war criminals were to be found and the main Dachau trial was guided by thoughts of retaliation.

The military tribunal, through its chairman, pronounced the verdicts on December 13, 1945. In addition to 36 death sentences , one life sentence and three prison sentences with compulsory forced labor were imposed. In the reasoning for the verdict, the court again pointed out the criminal nature of the jointly committed act, which made it necessary to convict all of the accused.

  • The former prisoner Eugen Seybold identified Fritz Hintermayer on November 22, 1945

  • The Polish priest Theodore Korcz (left) reads from the malaria logs on November 22, 1945 in the presence of Chief Prosecutor Denson

  • Wilhelm Wagner during his testimony in the main Dachau trial on November 30, 1945

  • Former inmate Helmuth Breiding identified Friedrich Wetzel on November 22, 1945

  • Friedrich Wetzel (on the right) during his testimony on November 29, 1945

  • Friedrich Wetzel (back view with number 40) delivering the verdict on December 13, 1945

The 40 judgments in detail

Defendant rank     function Acts of excess judgment
Martin White SS-Obersturmbannführer Camp commandant of the Dachau concentration camp Death sentence, executed May 29, 1946
Rudolf Suttrop SS-Obersturmführer Adjutant to the camp commandant in the Dachau concentration camp Death sentence, executed May 28, 1946
Michael Redwitz SS-Hauptsturmführer Protective custody camp leader in Dachau concentration camp Abuse of detainees Death sentence, executed May 29, 1946
Friedrich Ruppert SS-Obersturmbannführer Protective custody camp leader in Dachau concentration camp Ill-treatment of prisoners, participation in executions Death sentence, executed May 28, 1946
Wilhelm Welter SS-Hauptscharführer Labor service leader in the Dachau concentration camp Abuse of prisoners, participation in selections Death sentence, executed May 29, 1946
Josef Jarolin SS-Obersturmführer Protective custody camp leader in Dachau concentration camp Mistreatment and killing of inmates Death sentence, executed May 28, 1946
Franz Trenkle SS-Hauptscharführer Report leader and deputy protective custody camp leader in the Dachau concentration camp Ill-treatment of prisoners, participation in executions Death sentence, executed May 28, 1946
Wilhelm Temple SS squad leader Labor service leader in the Dachau concentration camp Abuse of prisoners, sometimes resulting in death Death sentence, executed May 29, 1946
Engelbert Niedermeyer SS-Unterscharführer Block leader and deployed to the Dachau concentration camp crematorium command Abuse of detainees Death sentence, executed May 28, 1946
Josef Seuss SS-Hauptscharführer Report leader in the Dachau concentration camp Abuse of detainees Death sentence, executed May 28, 1946
Leonhard Eichberger SS-Hauptscharführer Report leader in the Dachau concentration camp Participation in executions Death sentence, executed May 29, 1946
Alfred Kramer SS Oberscharführer Warehouse manager of the Dachau subcamp Kaufering No. 1 Abuse of prisoners, sometimes resulting in death Death sentence, executed May 29, 1946
Wilhelm Wagner SS-Hauptscharführer Head of the prisoner laundry in Dachau concentration camp Abuse of prisoners, sometimes resulting in death Death sentence, executed May 29, 1946
Johann Kick SS-Obersturmführer Head of the Political Department in Dachau Concentration Camp Abuse of detainees Death sentence, executed May 29, 1946
Vincent Schöttl SS-Obersturmführer Deputy Commander of the Dachau sub-camp complex in Kaufering Abuse of prisoners, killing of a prisoner Death sentence, executed May 28, 1946
Fritz Hintermayer SS-Obersturmbannführer 1. Camp doctor in the Dachau concentration camp Killing of two pregnant women prisoners by injection, preparation for the killing of seven mentally ill prisoners, participation in executions to determine the death of those executed Death sentence, executed May 29, 1946
Johann Kirsch SS-Hauptscharführer Warehouse manager of the Dachau subcamp Kaufering No. 1 Abuse of prisoners, sometimes resulting in death Death sentence, executed May 28, 1946
Johann Eichelsdörfer Captain of the Wehrmacht Warehouse manager of the Dachau subcamp Kaufering No. 4, 7 and 8 Abuse of detainees Death sentence, executed May 29, 1946
Otto Foerschner SS-Sturmbannführer Commander of the Dachau subcamp complex in Kaufering Abuse of prisoners, killing of a prisoner Death sentence, executed May 28, 1946
Walter Langleist SS-Oberführer Commander of the guards in the Dachau concentration camp, camp commander of the Mühldorf external command Abuse of prisoners, sometimes resulting in death Death sentence, executed May 28, 1946
Claus Schilling Tropical medicine Head of the malaria experiments in Dachau concentration camp Conducting malaria experiments on prisoners, some of which resulted in death Death sentence, executed May 28, 1946
Arno Lippmann SS-Obersturmführer Camp leader of the Dachau subsidiary camp Kaufering No. 2 and 7, protective custody camp leader under Michael Redwitz Abuse of detainees Death sentence, executed May 29, 1946
Franz Boettger SS Oberscharführer Labor and report leader in the Dachau concentration camp Mistreatment of prisoners, killing of a prisoner, participation in executions Death sentence, executed May 29, 1946
Otto Moll SS-Hauptscharführer Division of work in the Kauferinger sub-camps Abuse of prisoners, shooting of prisoners during the evacuation march Death sentence, executed May 28, 1946
Anton Endres SS Oberscharführer SS medical rank in Dachau concentration camp Abuse of inmates, killing of one inmate by injection, participation in two executions Death sentence, executed May 28, 1946
Simon Kiern SS-Hauptscharführer Block leader in the Dachau concentration camp Ill-treatment of prisoners, killing of one prisoner, participation in three executions Death sentence, executed May 28, 1946
Fritz Becher Function prisoner Block elder in the pastor's block Abuse of prisoners, sometimes resulting in death Death sentence, executed May 29, 1946
Christof Knoll Function prisoner Block elder and Kapo in the Dachau concentration camp Mistreatment and killing of inmates Death sentence, executed May 29, 1946
Hans Eisele SS-Hauptsturmführer 2. Camp doctor in the Dachau concentration camp Participation in executions to determine the death of those executed Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment
Wilhelm Witteler SS-Sturmbannführer 1. Camp doctor in the Dachau concentration camp Participation in executions to determine the death of those executed Death sentence reduced to 20 years in prison
Fridolin Puhr SS-Hauptsturmführer Chief medical officer in the Dachau concentration camp Participation in executions to determine the death of those executed Death sentence reduced to 20 years in prison
Otto Schulz SS-Untersturmführer Operations manager of the German equipment works in Dachau Abuse of detainees Death sentence reduced to 20 years in prison
Fritz Degelow SS-Sturmbannführer Commandant of the guards in Dachau concentration camp Head of an evacuation transport Death sentence reduced to ten years in prison
Emil Mahl Function prisoner Kapo in the crematorium of the Dachau concentration camp Participation in executions Death sentence reduced to ten years in prison
Sylvester Filleböck SS-Untersturmführer Supply officer in the Dachau concentration camp Death sentence reduced to ten years in prison
Friedrich Wetzel SS-Hauptsturmführer Administrative leader in the Dachau concentration camp Death sentence reduced to ten years in prison
Peter Betz SS-Hauptscharführer Report leaders, command officers and in the office of the camp commandant's office Abuse of detainees Life sentence reduced to 15 years in prison
Hugo Lausterer SS squad leader Command leader in the Feldafing subcamp of the Dachau concentration camp ten years imprisonment
Albin Gretsch SS-Unterscharführer Member of the guards in the Dachau concentration camp and sub-camps of the Dachau concentration camp ten years imprisonment
Johann Schöpp SS man Member of the guards in the Dachau concentration camp and the Feldafing subcamp of the Dachau concentration camp ten years imprisonment reduced to five years imprisonment

Review process

Arthur Haulot , President of the International Committee of the Dachau inmates, gave the name of the committee a request for clemency and for the three death-row inmate functionaries, as these perpetrators and victims were at the same time and hence require different treatment than the other defendants.

For numerous other defendants, requests for clemency were received from families, friends, colleagues and neighbors. This also applies to the accused tropical medicine specialist Schilling, for whom, among other things, requests for clemency were received from colleagues at the Robert Koch Institute , the Bernhard Nocht Institute and the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute . In the appeals for clemency for Schilling, his scientific reputation, his services to science, his apolitical attitude and his impeccable behavior were expressly pointed out. Schilling is, so is stated in some requests for clemency, a passionate researcher who did not deliberately plan the death of test subjects in a series of experiments, but on the contrary wanted to save the lives of people.

"Quite apolitical, he only loved his science, his violin and his wife."

- From a pardon for Claus Schilling

The defense demanded an acquittal for the defendants Mahl, Becher, Knoll, Schöpp, Gretsch, Lausterer, Betz, Suttrop, Puhr, Witteler and Eisele. In their opinion, no significantly incriminating statements or evidence were given against the aforementioned defendants. In addition, the judgments against the other defendants were disproportionately harsh.

During the revision , which went through two reviewing bodies, the individual involvement of the accused in the course of the joint proceedings played an essential role. After examining the trial documents and weighing up the arguments put forward by the prosecution and defense, the judgments made were largely confirmed. The death sentence against the camp doctor Eisele, who was later also a defendant in the Buchenwald main trial, was to be commuted to a life sentence. Likewise, Puhr and Mahl's death sentences were to be commuted to imprisonment and Schöpp's prison sentence was to be reduced to five years. In the case of Mahl, his comprehensive willingness to give evidence and the fact that he was involved in the crime, which was less weighted than that of the other two prison functionaries, were also taken into account. With Eisele, for whom no individual abuse could be proven, the improvement of the medical care in the camp was taken into account, and with troop doctor Puhr his only substitute presence in the prisoner camp was taken into account. The recommendation to reduce Schoepp's prison sentence by half was based on his compulsory conscription to the Waffen-SS , his role in the camp, which was insignificant compared to the other defendants, and the fact that he had not mistreated any prisoners. After the conclusion of the second review instance, the death sentences of Witteler, Schulz, Degelow, Wetzel and Filleböck were commuted to prison terms. Witteler, Schulz, Wetzel and Filleböck had an important function in the camp, but they tried to improve the conditions in the camp in different ways. Although Degelow led an evacuation march, he tried to ensure that the march was carried out in a humane manner and was also only a few days in person in the camp. The Commander-in-Chief of the American Armed Forces followed the recommendations of the two review bodies and also confirmed the remaining judgments.

Execution of judgments

After the verdict was announced, the convicts were transferred to various prisons, mainly the Landsberg War Crimes Prison . Of the 36 death sentences pronounced, 28 were finally carried out on May 28 and 29, 1946 by hanging in the Landsberg War Crimes Prison. The executions took place in camera.

The sentences were successively reduced in review proceedings or as a result of appeals for clemency. Until the mid-1950s, all prisoners convicted in the Dachau main trial were released, at least on probation, on the grounds of good conduct, amnesties or health reasons.

Valuations and effects

Reeducation: residents of the city of Burgsteinfurt on their way to the cinema, where recordings are shown on May 30, 1945 after the liberation of the Bergen-Belsen and Buchenwald concentration camps . The British military police and German police officers are located at the entrance to the cinema.

In the main Dachau trial, the hardest judgments were made in relation to the following concentration camp trials that took place as part of the Dachau trials. The main reasons for this were undoubtedly the timely implementation of the proceedings after the end of the war and the fact that the judges of the military tribunal were able to get a comprehensive picture of the catastrophic conditions after the liberation of the Dachau concentration camp on the spot. In the later Dachau concentration camp proceedings, the responsible judges could no longer fall back on this experience, which played an important role in the decision-making process in the main Dachau trial. In addition, in the course of the Cold War - the Western Allies wanted West Germany as an alliance partner - the successive softening of the sentences and thus the early release of the prisoners from Landsberg began after review procedures.

In the main Dachau trial, as in the other war crimes trials of the Allies, the constitutional punishment and atonement of Nazi crimes were initially in the foreground. In addition, the population should be informed about the Nazi crimes and the criminal character of the acts of violence should be made clear. Furthermore, these processes should set in motion a collective reflection process in the German population in order to establish a constitutional and democratic culture in post-war Germany and thus in society. The symbolic process location Dachau, the collective shock of the news and pictures of the violent crimes in the concentration camps earned in the early postwar period in Germany within the meaning of Reeducation initially quite an effect, which can be seen from the numerous contemporary media publications. The initial shock at the atrocities in the concentration camps was followed by solidarity from large sections of the German population with the prisoners in Landsberg in the course of the collective displacement. Hermann Göring and Heinrich Himmler were soon identified as those primarily responsible for the atrocities of the concentration camps ; this shifting of guilt harbored the risk of a subordinate judiciary against the lower classes. This assumption was also promoted by the legal construct of common design , which is barely comprehensible in Germany , the approving participation in a criminal system which from the outset assumed a criminal offense even without individual evidence of a crime. The American military courts therefore tried to prove that the accused had committed crimes individually in the Dachau concentration camp trials, which they succeeded in doing in the majority of the cases.

The Dachau secondary processes

Alexander Piorkowski in the British internment camp in Westertimke near Bremen on May 16, 1945
Sebastian Schmid's adhesive sheet, which contains two photos and fingerprints; Schmid was a defendant in a subsidiary trial of the Dachau main trial. Schmid, who as SS-Unterscharführer was a driver and mechanic in the Dachau concentration camp, was sentenced to life imprisonment on September 18, 1947 for mistreating prisoners in the Dachau concentration camp. The verdict was reduced to ten years imprisonment in the review process. Sticky sheets were created for all of the defendants in the Dachau trials.

The main Dachau trial was followed by 121 subsidiary trials with around 500 other defendants, which took place between October 11, 1946 and December 11, 1947. Due to the large number of ancillary proceedings, several processes were carried out in parallel at times. In addition to a few camp doctors and prison inmates, mainly members of the camp crews were charged. The secondary proceedings were based on the Dachau main process and therefore took place in a shortened form. In contrast to the main proceedings, the secondary proceedings, in which mainly one to nine accused lower-ranking SS members were tried, rarely lasted longer than a few days. The main negotiations were the mistreatment and killing of Allied prisoners who were committed in the Dachau concentration camp and the sub-camps. The Mühldorf trial against the camp personnel of the Dachau external command Mühldorf , on the other hand, was conducted as an independent main trial. Three of the 121 ancillary proceedings require special attention, as they concerned a former camp commandant and adjutant, an SS doctor and a report leader, whose death sentence received nationwide attention:

  • The proceedings (Case No. 000-50-2-23 US vs. Alex Piorkowski et al) against Alex Piorkowski and Heinz Detmers , which took place from January 6 to 17, 1947, were directed against a former camp commandant of the Dachau concentration camp and his own Adjutants. Piorkowski was camp commandant of the Dachau concentration camps from February 1940 to the end of August 1942 and his adjutant from 1940 to February 1942. Like the defendants, both defendants were accused of war crimes against Allied civilians and prisoners of war and, after reading the indictment, also pleaded “not guilty”. Piorkowski was particularly accused of executing Soviet prisoners of war, pseudo-medical experiments on prisoners and arbitrary abuse beyond the camp rules . Detmers also took part in these crimes as part of the joint action. The two defendants, who remained silent during the trial on the advice of their lawyers, were found guilty despite the committed efforts of their American defense lawyers. After the review process and appeals for clemency, the death sentence against Piorkowski was confirmed, but Detmers' fifteen-year prison sentence was reduced to five years. Detmers was later indicted again in the Nordhausen main trial, and Piorkowski was hanged on October 22, 1948 in Landsberg.
  • From November 24 to December 11, 1947, the doctor Rudolf Brachtel and the prisoner functionary Karl Zimmermann were tried ( Case No. 000-50-2-103 US vs. Rudolf Brachtel et al. ). Brachtel was accused of deliberately infecting prisoners with malaria as a temporary assistant to Claus Schilling and of having performed liver punctures that were not medically necessary. Zimmermann, as the chief kapo of the infirmary, was accused of mistreating prisoners and killing them with phenol injections. However, the allegations against Zimmermann, who had taken over his post from Josef Heiden , could not be upheld. Both were eventually acquitted.
  • The defendant Georg Schallermair was tried from September 18 to 23, 1947 (Case No. 000-50-2-121 US vs. Georg Schallermair) . As a former report leader in the Mühldorf external command, Schallermair was accused of having been jointly responsible for the catastrophic conditions in the Mühldorf external command due to his position. In addition, it is known that Schallermair beat prisoners to death. Schallermair was found guilty and sentenced to death by hanging on September 23, 1947. This judgment was also upheld in the review process. In the Federal Republic of Germany, a campaign to abolish the death penalty began in 1950 , in which high-ranking representatives from society and politics also took part. Justice Minister Thomas Dehler asked Federal President Theodor Heuss to submit appeals for clemency for Schallermair and Hans-Theodor Schmidt , who was sentenced to death in the Buchenwald main trial, to General Thomas T. Handy . Handy, who had commuted eleven death sentences to prison terms, declined this request. In the case of Schallermairs with the following reason:

“Georg Schallermair, as the leader of a rolling command, was directly responsible for the prisoners in Mühldorf, a subcamp of Dachau. He himself beat many prisoners in such a way that they died as a result. Of 300 people brought to the camp in autumn 1944, only 72 were alive after four months. Every day he visited the morgue with a dentist imprisoned to break out the dead gold teeth. There are no facts or arguments that could in any way justify grace in this case. "

Schallermair and Schmidt were hung with Oswald Pohl and four other not pardoned delinquents on June 7, 1951 in Landsberg. These were the last death sentences carried out in Landsberg.

literature

  • Case No. 000-50-2 (US vs. Martin Gottfried Weiss et al.) Tried 13 Dec. 1945; jewishvirtuallibrary.org (PDF; 39 MB; English)
  • Holger Lessing: The first Dachau trial (1945/46). Nomos, Baden-Baden 1993, ISBN 3-7890-2933-5 .
  • Ludwig Eiber , Robert Sigl (ed.): Dachau trials - Nazi crimes before American military courts in Dachau 1945–1948. Wallstein, Göttingen 2007, ISBN 978-3-8353-0167-2 .
  • Ute Stiepani: The Dachau Trials and their Significance in the Allied Prosecution of Nazi Crimes. In: Gerd R. Ueberschär : The allied trials against war criminals and soldiers 1943–1952. Fischer, Frankfurt am Main 1999, ISBN 3-596-13589-3 .
  • Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Campus, Frankfurt am Main 1992, ISBN 3-593-34641-9 .
  • Joshua M. Greene: Justice at Dachau - The Trials of an American Prosecutor. Broadway, 2003, ISBN 978-0-7679-0879-5 .
  • Martin Gruner: Sentenced in Dachau. The trial of the concentration camp commandant Alex Piorkowski in a US military tribunal. Wißner, Augsburg 2008, ISBN 978-3-89639-650-1 .
  • Ernst Klee : The dictionary of persons on the Third Reich: Who was what before and after 1945. Fischer, Frankfurt am Main 2007, ISBN 978-3-596-16048-8 .

Web links

Commons : Dachau main process  - collection of images, videos and audio files

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Michael S. Bryant: Nazi Crimes and Their Punishment, 1943-1950. A Short History with Documents . Hackett, Cambridge 2020, ISBN 978-1-62466-861-6 , p. 154.
  2. ↑ Ute Stiepani: The Dachau Trials and their Significance in the Allied Prosecution of Nazi Crimes. In: Gerd R. Ueberschär: The allied trials against war criminals and soldiers 1943–1952. Frankfurt am Main 1999, p. 229ff.
  3. ^ Katrin Greiser: The Dachau beech forest processes - claim and reality - claim and effect. In: Ludwig Eiber, Robert Sigl (ed.): Dachau Trials - Nazi crimes before American military courts in Dachau 1945–1948. Göttingen 2007, pp. 160f.
  4. ↑ Wolfgang Benz , Barbara Distel (ed.): The place of terror . History of the National Socialist Concentration Camps. Volume 2: Early camps, Dachau, Emsland camps. CH Beck, Munich 2005, ISBN 3-406-52962-3 , p. 367f.
  5. ^ Stanislav Zámečník: That was Dachau. Fischer, Frankfurt am Main 2007, pp. 360f, 387f, 398f.
  6. ↑ Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 16 ff., P. 48.
  7. ↑ Michael Bryant: The US military trials against SS personnel, doctors, and Kapos of the Dachau concentration camp 1945-1948. In: Ludwig Eiber, Robert Sigl (ed.): Dachau Trials - Nazi crimes before American military courts in Dachau 1945–1948. Göttingen 2007, pp. 109–111.
    Holger Lessing: The first Dachau trial (1945/46). Baden-Baden 1993, p. 58ff.
    Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, pp. 35f.
  8. ↑ Dachau main trial: Case No. 000-50-2 (US vs. Martin Gottfried Weiss et al) Tried 13 Dec. 45, p. 3ff.
    Holger Lessing: The first Dachau trial (1945/46). Baden-Baden 1993, p. 83f.
  9. ↑ Dachau main trial: Case No. 000-50-2 (US vs. Martin Gottfried Weiss et al) Tried 13 Dec. 45, p. 3ff.
  10. ↑ Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 44.
  11. ↑ Florian Freund : The Dachau Mauthausen Trial. In: Documentation archive of the Austrian resistance. Yearbook 2001, Vienna 2001, pp. 35–66.
  12. ↑ Holger Lessing: The first Dachau trial (1945/46). Baden-Baden 1993, p. 91f.
  13. ↑ Holger Lessing: The first Dachau trial (1945/46). Baden-Baden 1993, p. 82f., P. 91f.
    Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, pp. 40f.
  14. ↑ quoted and translated from: Joshua M. Greene: Justice at Dachau - The Trials of an American Prosecutor . Broadway, 2003, p. 44. Original text: “ May it please the court, we expect the evidence to show that during the time alleged, a scheme of extermination was in process here at Dachau. We expect the evidence to show that the victims of this planned extermination were civilians and prisoners of war, individuals unwilling to submit themselves to the yoke of Nazism. We expect to show that these people were subjected to experiments like guinea pigs, starved to death, and at the same time worked as hard as their physical bodies permitted; that the conditions under which these people were housed were such that disease and death were inevitable. Further, we expect to show that during the time that Germany overran Europe, these people were subjected to utterly inhuman treatment, and that each of these accused constituted a cog in this machine of extermination. ”
  15. ↑ Holger Lessing: The first Dachau trial (1945/46). Baden-Baden 1993, pp. 91-117.
    Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 44 f.
  16. ↑ Holger Lessing: The first Dachau trial (1945/46). Baden-Baden 1993, pp. 117f., Pp. 144 ff.
    Robert Sigel: In the interest of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 47 f.
  17. ↑ Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 52 f.
  18. ↑ Dachau main trial: Case No. 000-50-2 (US vs. Martin Gottfried Weiss et al) Tried 13 Dec. 45, p. 3ff.
    Michael Bryant: The US military trials against SS personnel, doctors, and Kapos of the Dachau concentration camp 1945-1948. In: Ludwig Eiber, Robert Sigl (ed.): Dachau Trials - Nazi crimes before American military courts in Dachau 1945–1948. Göttingen 2007, p. 112.
  19. ↑ a b c Michael Bryant: The US military trials against SS personnel, doctors, and Kapos of the Dachau concentration camp 1945-1948. In: Ludwig Eiber, Robert Sigel (eds.): Dachau trials - Nazi crimes before American military courts in Dachau 1945–1948. Göttingen 2007, p. 115f.
    Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, pp. 71f.
  20. ↑ Holger Lessing: The first Dachau trial (1945/46). Baden-Baden 1993, p. 238f.
    Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 56ff.
  21. ↑ Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, pp. 59f.
  22. ↑ Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, pp. 60f.
  23. ↑ Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 63.
  24. ↑ quoted from: Robert Sigel: In the interest of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 74.
  25. ↑ Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 63 f.
  26. ↑ Holger Lessing: The first Dachau trial (1945/46). Baden-Baden 1993, pp. 260f.
    Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 65 f.
  27. ↑ Holger Lessing: The first Dachau trial (1945/46). Baden-Baden 1993, pp. 251, 270.
  28. ↑ a b Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 75.
  29. ↑ Michael Bryant: The US military trials against SS personnel, doctors, and Kapos of the Dachau concentration camp 1945-1948. In: Ludwig Eiber, Robert Sigl (ed.): Dachau Trials - Nazi crimes before American military courts in Dachau 1945–1948. Göttingen 2007, p. 120 f.
  30. ↑ Norbert Frei: Politics of the Past. The beginnings of the Federal Republic and the Nazi past. Munich 2003, ISBN 3-423-30720-X , pp. 133-306.
  31. ^ Katrin Greiser: The Dachau beech forest processes - claim and reality - claim and effect. In: Ludwig Eiber, Robert Sigl (ed.): Dachau Trials - Nazi crimes before American military courts in Dachau 1945–1948. Göttingen 2007, p. 167 ff.
  32. ↑ Ute Stiepani: The Dachau Trials and their Significance in the Allied Prosecution of Nazi Crimes. In: Gerd R. Ueberschär : The allied trials against war criminals and soldiers 1943–1952. Frankfurt am Main 1999, p. 232 f.
  33. ↑ Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, pp. 76f., 109f.
    Michael Bryant: The US military trials against SS personnel, doctors, and Kapos of the Dachau concentration camp 1945-1948. In: Ludwig Eiber, Robert Sigl (ed.): Dachau Trials - Nazi crimes before American military courts in Dachau 1945–1948. Göttingen 2007, p. 112f.
  34. ↑ Martin Gruner: Condemned in Dachau. The trial of the concentration camp commandant Alex Piorkowski in a US military tribunal. Wißner, Augsburg 2008
  35. ↑ Michael Bryant: The US military trials against SS personnel, doctors, and Kapos of the Dachau concentration camp 1945-1948. In: Ludwig Eiber, Robert Sigl (ed.): Dachau Trials - Nazi crimes before American military courts in Dachau 1945–1948. Göttingen 2007, pp. 118f.
    Robert Sigel: In the interests of justice. The Dachau war crimes trials 1945–1948. Frankfurt am Main 1992, pp. 79ff.
    Review and Recommendations of the Deputy Judge Advocate's Office of the War Crimes Group on February 26, 1948 (PDF; 630 kB). Review of the acquittal of December 11, 1947 against Brachtel.
  36. ↑ Review and Recommendations of the Deputy Judge Advocate's Office of the War Crimes Group of January 7, 1948 (PDF; 1.4 MB). Review and approval of the first judgment of 1947 against Schallermair.
  37. ↑ Jens Bisky : Two classes of people . In: Berliner Zeitung , March 8, 2001
  38. ^ Quoted from Annette Wilmes : pardon of Nuremberg war criminals .
  39. ↑ Wolfgang Benz , Barbara Distel (ed.): The place of terror. History of the National Socialist Concentration Camps. Volume 2: Early camps, Dachau, Emsland camps. CH Beck, Munich 2005, p. 393.
    Landsberg War Crimes Prison
This version was added to the list of articles worth reading on January 12, 2009 .