[97] Defendants in case of United States vs. Ernst von Weizsaecker, et al. See Vols. XII, XIII, XIV.
[98] Same as note above.
[99] Defendant in case of United States vs. Otto Ohlendorf, et al. See Vol. IV.
[100] Defendant in case of United States vs. Wilhelm von Leeb, et al. See Vols. X, XI.
[101] Defendant in case of United States vs. Carl Krauch, et al. See Vols. VII, VIII.
[102] Complete testimony is recorded in mimeographed transcript, 17 Feb. and 4 Mar. 47, pp. 1136-1186, 1445-1457.
[103] Prosecution introduced other portions of this report as Prosecution Exhibit 48-A. See pp. 457-59.
[104] Prosecution also introduced this document.
[105] Defense counsel, Dr. Bergold, explained (Tr. p. 523):
“This document shows that the defendant liked to use strong language. It refers merely to the allocation. He speaks of ‘beating’, yet he does not mean this literally but figuratively. The high Tribunal will remember at one time he spoke of whips being used to force certain people to use suggested methods. That is not what he meant.”