[Signed] Hippke
[137] When this document was introduced, Dr. Bergold made the following statement (Tr. p. 457): “Please let me have the photostatic copy of the original, so that I can make a statement.
“I merely wanted to find out on the copy, whether there was any ‘receiving’ mark. Later on, in the course of the introduction of evidence, I shall prove that all letters which are not signed with a red pencil and do not carry the initials ‘Mi’ were never seen by the defendant Milch but were forwarded directly. This letter does not show the initials ‘Mi’.
(Stepping forward and showing the Tribunal the document) “May it please the Tribunal: Milch, whenever he received the letter, added his initials ‘Mi’; at all times, when Milch received a document, he indicated the receipt with a date; he initialed with a date. These letters, which do not show the initials, were received by his office but were not shown to him. At a later date, I can prove this. I just wanted, at this time, to call the Court’s attention to it.”
[138] When this document was read, Presiding Judge Toms asked (Tr. p. 458): “Mr. McMahon, do you know whether the film referred to in this letter is available?”
Mr. McMahon: As far as we know, your Honor, it is not available. In regard to the one [letter] just referred to, I would like your Honor to understand that the copies which we have come from the secret files of Mr. Himmler, therefore, cannot show the initials of Milch, and so, in fact, would not show that Milch had seen that. This letter was received from the files of Himmler and would not have the initials of Milch, saying that he had received this particular letter.
C. Curriculum Vitae and Excerpts from the Testimony
of the Defendant Milch
TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT NOKW-269