The Trial of Adolf Eichmann

State Attorney Bach: We shall immediately submit it. I thought that it had been submitted. It states here: “Eichmann summoned the Jewish Council to come to him at the Schwabenberg, to the Majestic Hotel and he laid before them the pro memoria plan.

Those present were Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann and Krumey, Hauptsturmbannfuehrer Wisliceny and another German officer. Representing the Jews: The President Samu Stern, the Vice-President Dr. Ernoe Boda, Dr. Ernoe Petoe and the counsel, Dr. Janos Gabor.

At the outset President Stern presented certain requests. Following this, Eichmann began his address, and spoke first of all about the Jewish star. He said that the Jewish Council would have to provide the star. There was some discussion on this matter and thereafter he said that as from 5 o’clock all Jews would have to wear the yellow star which would be exchanged afterwards by the one which the Jewish Council had to supply.

He said that the Jewish Council would have to provide about three million stars. He also demanded that the stars should be uniform throughout the country.

Afterwards he passed on to questions regarding housing. He said that in the case of a change of address, they had to notify him about it and receive permission from him. He said he would also deal with matters concerning Kistarcsa – he could not say when this would be.

This was in reply to a request that he release those who were detained in Kistarcsa when the Germans first arrived. He said they could apply to him in this connection, but he warned them not to deceive him. He expressed his opinion that the most important objective was to increase industrial productivity that was so essential to the war effort.

To this end he had created a labour force, and this was comprised of Jewish workers specifically. If the Jews behaved properly, nothing would happen to them, and they would be treated as all other workers, and this applied to work productivity. After that he added that these people would enjoy fair treatment and would receive the same wages as other workers. We said that, for this purpose, we would have to obtain a mandate. To this he retorted that we should have to abandon such liberal attitudes, and that we should not ask but command.

“At a later stage in the minutes Eichmann mentioned that he was taking a very great interest in Jewish artistic works and in Jewish libraries. Since 1934 he had been dealing with Jewish affairs and that he knew Hebrew better than we did. We told him that we had a Jewish museum in which antiquities and libraries were kept. He said he would visit it. Thereafter he issued various instructions regarding the supply of goods to the Germans and concerning the submission of lists of Jewish organizations.

Later on he stressed that these orders would be valid only for the duration of the War (that is to say the orders by the Germans) and that, afterwards, the Jews would be free and would be able to do as they pleased. Everything that was happening in regard to Jewish affairs was only for the duration of the War. When the War was over, the Germans would again be pleasant towards people, as they had been in the past (or, as he expressed it in German: ‘Die Deutschen werden wieder gemuetlich sein‘).

“He would prefer this to be carried out without violence. Only in case of resistance would there be need of force. If the Jews went over to partisan operations – he would kill them off without mercy. The Jews had to understand that nothing was being demanded of them except discipline and order.

If there would be discipline and order then not only would Jewry have nothing to fear, but he would defend Jewry and it would live under the same good conditions as regards payment and treatment, like all the other workers. He would especially appreciate it if they would make his views public amongst all sections of Jewry. He also stated that he would prevent all plunder of Jewish possessions and that he would punish those seeking to enrich themselves from Jewish property.

“After that there came a moment of excitement. Dr.Janos Gabor rose and said that he was very unhappy  because of the wearing of the Jewish star. His father had served in the World War as a mililtary judge, with the rank of major. His grandfather had been a ‘Honved‘* {*Popular name for a member of the Hungarian armed forces.} in the 1848 revolution. The wearing of the star would incite the riff-raff to shame the Jews in the street and to attack them. To this Eichmann replied that he would not permit anyone to suffer because of the star and if such incidents were to occur – he should be notified and he would attend to them.”

The Court will take note that Dr. Boda, in fact, confirms that his minutes are contained in a certain book, and they were printed there in Hungarian. What we have submitted to the Court is a translation of those minutes into German. We shall submit to you, later on, confirmation that this German translation is a correct translation from the Hungarian book which we are also prepared to place at the Court’s disposal.

Presiding Judge: Does not Dr. Boda himself confirm it?

State Attorney Bach: He does not confirm the translation and hence it is still necessary for us to compare the translation with the book.

There is another affidavit by Dr. Ernoe Petoe who also took part in that meeting. He is now living in Brazil. He is also about 79 1/2 or 80 and in a delicate state of health. He actually confirms two matters. Firstly he participated in that meeting and he, for his part, confirms the same details which I have already brought before you, and therein, naturally, there is additional corroboration, and I should like to bring this to your notice.

Apart from that he was the man who at the time established contact with the Regent Horthy and achieved the return of a train for the first time, that train which set out from Kistarcsa. This we have learned from other witnesses who heard it from him. He confirms that he found a way of approach to Horthy’s son and managed to secure the return of the train, and hence there is the additional weight of his evidence also on this point. He made a sworn affidavit about these matters before our consul in Brazil and I request the Court’s permission to submit his affidavit. The number of our document is 1300.

Presiding Judge: Dr. Servatius, what do you have to say?

Dr. Servatius: I have received the contents of this affidavit, for my information. It exists only in the Hungarian language. I have no objection to its submission, but I would ask to be given a German translation.

Presiding Judge: [To State Attorney Bach] Will you see to that?

State Attorney Bach: Yes, of course. I have asked someone to read this document to Defence Counsel in German, but we shall also supply to Dr. Servatius a full translation of the document into German.

Presiding Judge:

Decision No. 56

We permit the submission of the affidavit of Dr. Ernoe Petoe.

State Attorney Bach: To my regret, here too I shall only be able to produce the original affidavit during the recess. We have been given only photocopies of that affidavit.

Presiding Judge: The document will be marked T/1157.

State Attorney Bach: Incidentally, he also mentions an interesting fact that the son of the witness, the son of Dr. Petoe, was in the company of Raoul Wallenberg in a student hostel in Switzerland in the summer of 1920. This later helped in the joint activity of the witness and Raoul Wallenberg about whom we shall still hear, who extended outstanding aid to the Jewish community, mainly in Budapest.

After that he describes this meeting. Here he only adds one point, that with regard to those goods and articles that Eichmann demanded to hand over to the Germans, Eichmann had at the time promised to make payment to the Jews, and that it never reached the stage of payment. This is on page three of the Hebrew reprint, on page two of the original.

After that there is an account of the meeting. I do not want to go over that again. Then comes the chapter on Kistarcsa. Here he again relates the whole story, including what happened at the Schwabenberg. He too, together with the Witness Freudiger: was at the Schwabenberg and he gives a first hand account of what happened there and what they learned later, in the evening, from Dr. Brody when the latter returned from Kistarcsa. He also mentions that the operation at Kistarcsa was carried out by Novak.

At the end he describes a certain change of attitude on the part of the Hungarian gendarmerie and about his contact with Ferenczy who told him that at first he did not believe that they were really exterminating the Jews in the east, but in view of the behaviour of the Accused, who would not allow them to go there personally to ascertain the facts, he began to believe that this was truly the fate of the Jews. It is on page 6 of the translation.

“In Ferenczy’s presence Captain Lullay delivered a ‘Philippic’ address to us, lasting hours, against the Gestapo and, in particular against Eichmann and his men, in which he said that they were now conducting a campaign of life and death against those who had now become a cause of danger to them as well. They wanted us to clarify to them what the truth was about Auschwitz, for they had asked Eichmann in vain to permit them to go there and personally to ascertain the facts. From this they came to the conclusion that the rumours about the incinerators for the destruction of Jews who were not capable of working, were correct. I pointed out to them the nature of the military situation according to which the defeat of the Germans was a fact.”

“The outcome of this discussion was that Ferenczy offered his assistance in thwarting Eichmann’s plans to carry out deportations.”

And here these are several particulars about the negotiations with Ferenczy.

“On 17 August I was taken to Eichmann’s headquarters
and from there I was put into a German prison. I was
released on 21 August on the intervention of the
Regent. On 23 August, Ferenczy appeared before Eichmann and informed him that, on the orders of the Regent, they would prevent the deportation, even by force of  arms. Meanwhile Ferenczy showed me the deportation schedule prepared by Eichmann, and which was to be carried out between 26 August and 18 September, from the brick industry zone in Csillaghegyi. The first transport was to include the members and officials of the Jewish Council, together with their families.”

“In view of this opposition, Eichmann was prevented from carrying out his plans, and he said that he would fly to Berlin and seek aid from Himmler. I later received a message for Dr. Wilhelm Karolyi from Mor, a Counsellor in the Hungarian Foreign Office, to the effect that Himmler had agreed to defer the deportations. In this way Eichmann’s plan to deport the Jews of Budapest failed. As a consequence of the change in the military situation, Eichmann was no longer capable of carrying out the deportation without the help of the gendarmerie. Thus Budapest Jewry was saved from deportation.”

Attorney General: With the Court’s permission, may I be permitted briefly to interrupt the submission of evidence on the question of Hungary, and to request the directives and the guidance of the Court in a matter which is to take place next week?

It is our intention to exhibit in Court a number of documentary films in order to illustrate certain events about which evidence had already been led, and other events on which evidence will be produced next week. Naturally we will ensure suitable authentication of the incidents contained in these films. We shall produce witnesses who will be asked to testify under oath that this is how matters looked in fact.

It seems to me that we have the right to present these films, but in view of the fact that it is not a daily or normal occurrence for films to be shown in a court-room, I thought it would be proper to ask the Court’s guidance in this matter.

Presiding Judge: Is there a precedence for that?

Attorney General: Yes, Your Honour. Films were also exhibited at Nuremberg on several occasions. This was also the case in the Bergen-Belsen trial. These are two instances which I can recall at the moment, concerning this type of evidence. We sometimes make use of a film for another purpose, in order to identify a place, and so on. But this is not our purpose. Here the intention is to illustrate the events.

Presiding Judge: Were decisions given there – or was the matter simply taken for granted?

Attorney General: I believe that there was some objection, and it was decided that it had probative value and, on several occasions, the showing of films was allowed.

Presiding Judge: Perhaps you could show us where this appears in the reports.

Attorney General: Certainly. I think that it appears already in the early volumes.

Judge Halevi: What do the films contain?

Attorney General: One film is about Auschwitz after the liberation – showing the appearance of the survivors. One film which we will also show if we can manage to convert it from 35 mm to 16 mm, concerns the Warsaw Ghetto.

I say “if we can manage” for there is a technical problem in bringing a 35 mm projector to the Court. If we cannot manage, we shall be obliged to forego the film because of this difficulty. There is one film dealing with the transport of Jews to Ravensbrueck. There is another one showing scenes of the Mauthausen camp.

Judge Halevi: Was the film of Mauthausen taken after the liberation or before?

Attorney General: There are scenes which were photographed at the time of the event. There is one scene, really apocalyptic, of thousands of people standing at a roll-call, naked, which was certainly shot at the precise moment when it took place. And there will be a witness who will testify that this is indeed what it looked like.

Judge Halevi: Where do these films come from?

Attorney General: From various sources. There are documentary films which were made by various institutions,  immediately after the War. The film on Auschwitz has a Czech commentary. We will remove the sound – we do not need the Czech commentaries, but apparently this film is of Czech origin. There are films which were filmed jointly by Eastern and Western bodies, French and Polish, but these were private organizations, not official bodies. These films were taken immediately after the War.

Judge Halevi: The transport of Jews to Ravensbrueck, for example, that was filmed at the time of the event?

Attorney General: We are not aware of the origin. I cannot tell the Court with certainty who photographed it. We have our assumptions, but I do not want to deal with assumptions. At any rate we shall not exhibit anything which cannot be substantiated by witnesses.

Presiding Judge: Are there amongst these films such as have already been shown in those trials?

Attorney General: This, too, is not clear to us. According to the record of proceedings at Nuremberg, there was some authentication on behalf of the Allied military authorities at the beginning of the film. This authentication does not appear in the films in our possession, and hence we shall require a different method of authentication. There is also a film which the German television prepared towards this trial. It was shown in Germany and called “In the steps of the Hangman.” It was featured on West German television on the occasion of the opening of this trial.

It is a film which we do not propose showing to the Court in its entirety, because it adopts a moralizing tone in order to arrive at certain conclusions and clearly it would not be proper for us to ask the Court to view all of it. But it contains sections on the operations of the Einsatzgruppen, which were apparently filmed at the time they were taking place, and these, too, will be verified by witnesses. We shall extract this portion only and show it to the Court.

Dr. Servatius: Your Honour, the Presiding Judge, before I can take a stand on this, I should have been shown the films, in order to enable me to evaluate them. And a further observation relating to the inclusion of the films in the Court record. I would ask the Court to determine the procedure in this matter, for obviously the films are not going to be annexed to the records of the trial. Therefore, the Prosecution, in my opinion, should have submitted a precis of the contents of the films.

Attorney General: QWe are ready to comply with both requests of Defence Counsel. We shall show him the films before we apply to exhibit them. We shall also prepare a precis for the Court’s use.

Presiding Judge: So when will we be able to obtain Defence Counsel’s reaction – after he has seen the films? In other words, when will you be able to show him the films?

Attorney General: Not before the end of next week, but we wanted a decision in principle before we start expending the sums of money involved in converting the 35mm film to 16mm. It is not a simple matter.

Presiding Judge: This is a sort of vicious circle.

Attorney General: Yes, to a certain extent, but, if I understand in general from the Court that subject to appropriate authentication, there will be no objection to this form of submitting evidence, we shall nevertheless undertake this expense.

Judge Raveh: But is the rest of the material ready?

Attorney General: Yes.

Judge Raveh: If that is so, it is possible to show it to Defence Counsel immediately.

Previous | Index | Next

10 Sivan, 5721 (25 May 1961)

Presiding Judge: I declare the fifty-third Session of the trial open. Dr. Brody, you are still giving evidence under oath.

Witness Brody: Certainly.

State Attorney Bach: Dr. Brody, you said, this morning, that on that particular day Lemeke gave an order to arrest you as well, and you wanted to tell the Court something about the order which the camp commandant, Vasdenyei, gave concerning yourself. Would you please tell the Court what happened in the course of that day?

Witness Brody: When Vasdenyei gave the order to his clerk Istvan Vass he nodded his head as a sign that I should be taken out into the courtyard, but he accompanied me, not to the courtyard, but to Vasdenyei’s official apartment. Consequently Lemeke imagined that I, too, was put into one of the trucks and taken away. I can attribute the fact of my presence here to Vasdenyei.

Q. So you came out of the camp safely?

A. Without harm. What is more, I ran to the tram in order to inform the Jewish Council that people had again been seized.

Q. Can you tell the Court approximately at what time this happened?

A. When I reached Pest, it was in the early hours of the afternoon. I was astonished at the fact that at No 12 Sip Street, instead of finding the Jewish Council in session, I did not find any of the members of the Council.

Q. Were you told where they were?

A. Yes. Officials, who were there, told me that Eichmann, some time before, in the early hours of the morning, had ordered all the members of the Jewish Council to come to his office in the Schwabenberg.

Q. When did you eventually manage to establish contact with the members of the Jewish Council?

A. Only at night was I able, if my memory serves me correctly, to contact Samu Stern and Ernoe Petoe, and they told me that they had spent the entire day in the office – they were watched and were not even given an opportunity to use the telephone. They were allowed to go leave in the evening, almost certainly after the receipt of a telephone call to the effect that the train had left.

Q. Dr. Brody, do you know the man in this photograph?

A. This is SS Major Novak.

Q. Is that the same Novak you have been speaking about?

A. Yes.

State Attorney Bach: I apply to submit the photograph.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/1147.

State Attorney Bach: Dr. Brody, in previous deportations from Kistarcsa, each time a transport was to leave – who determined the list of people who were to be deported from Hungary?

Witness Brody: The SS did not determine the list of names of the deportees – except in the case of this last transport. They only fixed the number of deportees, that such-and-such a number had to be taken, but not one of the hostages was taken.

Q. Perhaps you would explain to the Court who were these hostages who were not taken?

A. Those 280 persons whom the SS arrested on that first day when they went from address to address in accordance with a list that had been drawn up in advance in Germany; these people were placed in a special building which was given the name “Pavillion B.”

Q. Can you tell us how many transports you, yourself, saw leaving Kistarcsa?

A. I cannot give you an exact figure, but at least 15 to 20 – I cannot give a precise number.

Q. How many were deported each time?

A. I would add that, after each deportation, I drew up a list of the deportees and I submitted it to the Jewish Council. These lists remained there.

Q. From whom did you obtain these lists?

A. In part Vasdenyei allowed me to draw them up, at my request. There was also a detective-inspector by the name of Vasarhey. Not only did they give me the list of deportees, but they also gave me the lists of those people who were brought there each day. These were the lists I submitted to the Jewish Council and this enabled them to notify the relatives of those who had been detained.

Q. You said, earlier that the SS determined the number of deportees. How did you know that?

A. From the fact that in each case they stated how many freight-cars were needed. The cars had to be ordered in advance. From time to time they notified Vasdenyei that he had to order twenty cars to be brought to the Kistarcsa station.

Apart from the hostages the SS men regarded the prisoners as if they were chattels, and when the “stores” filled up they were emptied out and new ones brought in.

Q. Dr. Brody, you told us this morning that you were glad that those 280 Jews who had arrived at Sarvar were saved. Can you tell the Court what eventually happened to those Jews?

A. We got to know that our joy was premature, since two or three days later they, too, were deported together with the other prisoners who were there – by the order of Hunsche. That was the last transport under the regime of the Regent Horthy.

Q. Dr. Brody, after 15 October 1944, were you arrested again – or were you arrested at all?

A. After 15 October 1944, men of the “Arrow Cross” seized me and on 18 October – they established units in an area which was used for horse races – and they brought me to Nagyteteny to dig anti-tank traps and trenches.

Q. What happened to most of the people who were engaged in this work?

A. The vast majority, most of them, perished there; the remainder were taken to Hegyeshalom. On the journey there, elderly people in particular, those who could not endure the march, were shot in the course of the march by the men of the “Arrow Cross.”

Q. You said that there were thousands of people who walked to Hegyeshalom. What happened to them there?

A. They were led onwards, and the majority of them died in the village in the neighbourhood of Sopron. I escaped from my unit.

Q. How did you succeed in escaping? With whose help?

A. They led us to the island of Csepel – from Nagyteteny to Budafok and later to Csepel and there they loaded us on to a truck in order to take us to Pest. I concealed myself in this truck, I jumped off the truck and I walked to my apartment.

Q. Were you previously a member of the Hungarian Parliament?

A. I was elected in 1947, on the platform of the Social Democratic Party.

Q. You mentioned earlier that your brother was also deported on one of the transports. Can you tell us what happened to your brother and to other members of your family?

A. I rescued my brother. I went to Obuda, to a brick factory, and there I came across an officer of the “Todt” organization, who released him together with his children, for a sum of 3,000 pengoe. I subsequently accompanied them to a building which was under Portuguese protection, a building of which I was in charge, and I concealed them there. Twenty-eight members of my family were lost.

May I be permitted to point out that I secured this Portuguese protection through a Mr. Sebestyen,* {*Pal Sebestyen – legal expert in the Hungarian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.} Minister and Plenipotentiary, who served in the Foreign Ministry, who, notwithstanding the fact that he did not know me, gave me a letter of recommendation to the effect that, as a token of appreciation for my activities in rescue work, I should be given a Portuguese protective passport, and this was done.

State Attorney Bach: I have no further questions.

Regent Miklos Horthy

Dr. Servatius: I have one question to the witness. If I understood correctly, both the commandant Vasdenyei and the Regent Horthy were helpful to the Jews.

Witness Brody: Yes Sir, you understood me correctly. Vasdenyei helped us right from the first moment, from the time I was released. Thanks to him, children up to the age of 14 were entrusted to me. Thanks to him, the establishment of a hospital, in Bethlen Square, was made possible for the sick people who were entrusted to my care. The important role of the Regent Horthy lay in the fact that, as from the month of July, he forbade all further deportations.

Q. Were the Hungarian gendarmerie and the Hungarian Gestapo also helpful to the Jews?

A. I am not in a position to reply that question, since there were in Kistarcsa neither personnel of the gendarmerie nor members of the Hungarian secret police. The policemen on duty there behaved very well.

Presiding Judge: Did you not have any experience beyond the Kistarcsa camp?

Witness Brody: Only through hearsay, and I want to testify only as to facts.

Presiding Judge: Quite right.

Dr. Servatius: Was it for that reason that you did not say anything unfavourable to the Hungarians in your testimony which you first gave in writing on 23 January 1961, and that there you only spoke well of them?

Witness Brody: I wrote only the truth in my testimony, and only what I had personally witnessed, and now, too, I am only speaking the truth. I have taken an oath on all this. Hence I am unable to say anything on the basis of hearsay.

Dr. Servatius: The witness has not, in fact, answered my question, but I have no further questions.

Presiding Judge: I am not sure whether there has not been a misunderstanding here. Was there anything in this written statement about the Hungarian gendarmerie?

Dr. Servatius: In his written testimony, he only spoke favourably about Vasdenyei and about Horthy, and he does not mention others. I asked him if he did not know of a more negative attitude on the part of the Hungarian gendarmerie and of the Gestapo, and he replied that he had no personal knowledge of this; consequently I do not have any more questions.

Presiding Judge: Mr. Bach, do you have any questions to the witness?

State Attorney Bach: I do not wish to re-examine.

Judge Halevi: You said that there were transports, deportations, from Kistarcsa before July 1944. My question relates to those deportations which were prior to July 1944, and I want to know who took the Jews from your camp and loaded them on the freight-cars?

Witness Brody: SS men.

Q. Not merely the SS commander, but also SS soldiers?

A. Yes.

Judge Halevi: Thank you.

Presiding Judge: Thank you very much, Dr. Brody, you have completed your testimony.

State Attorney Bach: The next witness is Mrs. Elisheva Szenes.

Presiding Judge: Madam, do you speak Hebrew?

Witness Szenes: Not too well.

Presiding Judge: What language do you wish to speak?

Witness Szenes: Hungarian.

[The witness is sworn.]

Presiding Judge: What is your full name?

Witness: Erzsi Elisheva Szenes.

State Attorney Bach: Mrs. Szenes, you were born in Slovakia, were you not?

Witness Szenes: Yes.

Q. Did you study journalism as a profession?

A. Yes.

Q. And, in fact, you worked for a Hungarian newspaper?

A. Yes.

Q. Perhaps you would tell the Court, when the deportations from Slovakia began, how you succeeded in escaping to Hungary? Please describe, in a general way, the manner of your escape.

A. In Slovakia, in Michalovce, they first of all arrested the young girls. This severely shocked the families, since they had not believed that they would actually take the girls, the young women and the single women, first. I was also among them.

During those days I still managed to escape and to hide. But later on, I nevertheless fell into their hands and I was included in one transport which had already been deported, but at the very last minute I succeeded in getting away from there as well. I should say that, on 5 May, as far as I know, about 3,000 Jews were deported from Michalovce.

Q. In what year?

A. This was in the month of May 1942. The Jews were deported from Michalovce and later on they sent postcards saying that they had been deported to Lublin. On the postcards it said: “Almost all of them are already in the Hradok.”

This was the name of the cemetery in Michalovce. It also said: “We have not yet met Wiesner.” Wiesner was the baker, hence this meant that they had hardly eaten any bread.

Q. Perhaps you would tell us how you managed to reach Hungary?

A. The Hungarian writers sent a cabled application on my behalf to Tiso, the President of the State, requesting that I should not be deported, but they received a negative reply. Thereafter I received advice from the well-known writer Sandor Marai, that I should try to escape to Hungary.

I also want to add that the deportations from Slovakia were carried out with absolute brutality. They hurled the girls who were half-fainting on to buses and from there to freight-cars.

Previous | Index | Next

Q. Dr. Brody, who were the first Jews to be arrested, and where were they taken?

A. They began making arrests right from the very beginning. There were two categories of arrests. The first was an operation according to a list, when SS men rounded up about 280 hostages whose names were recorded there from the outset.

Q. And what was the second category of arrests?

A. The second category of arrests was carried out without any selection. First of all, at the railway station, they arrested all the Jews who were trying to leave or as they arrived. Similar arrests were made at the Danube ports, and there, at one of the ports, the first personality to be seized was Janos Vazsonyi, an ex-member of Parliament, the son of Wilmos Vazsonyi, a former Minister of Justice, who had been intending to travel by ship to Bahia.

Q. What camp were they taken to?

A. May I first be permitted to add that, not only at the railway stations but also at the train terminals, they seized people who were travelling to the suburbs, such as Ujpest and Kispest.

Q. Now, perhaps, would you please reply to the previous question?

A. They brought the hostages to the building of the  Rabbinical Academy bearing the name of Franz Josef, a building which the Germans had requisitioned for this purpose right from the first day. The remaining prisoners who were arrested at random were brought to a place of detention on Mosonyi Street.

Q. Where were these prisoners taken to ultimately? What was their final destination?

A. When these places became full in the course of a day or two, the prisoners were taken to Kistarcsa, to the concentration camp at Kistarcsa, which was about 17 kilometres from Budapest.

Q. Who had to pay for the accommodation and the necessities of life of these prisoners?

A. The Gestapo men informed the Jewish Council that they would not be responsible for the maintenance of the detainees, but that they were imposing this obligation upon the Jewish Council.

Q. Were you given a particular task in connection with the camp at Kistarcsa?

A. Yes. Samu Stern, who was the head of the Jewish Council at that time, charged me with dealing with the economic problems of the prisoners of Kistarcsa, and the handling of the affairs of the detainees in general.

Q. Perhaps you can tell us what this task implied?

A. From the first moment, we organized the feeding of the inmates of the camps.

Presiding Judge: This Stern – was he Hofrat Stern?

Witness Brody: Yes. He was the past chairman of the Pest community and was then chosen to be chairman of the Jewish Council.

State Attorney Bach: Did you receive a special document which enabled you to travel to Kistarcsa and back?

Witness Brody: Yes. I have with me here the original permit which was signed by Samu Stern, and on it also the permit of the police and the SS Command, together with their signatures. I cannot now determine exactly whose signature appears on this permit, but I believe it is the signature of Krumey.

Q. I see that something has been erased from the top of the document. Can you explain why it was deleted?

A. Yes. The text of the permit was written inside in Hungarian and in German by the Jewish Council. Outside there is the confirmation by the State Police of Budapest, and underneath this there is the confirmation by the SS.

At SS headquarters they felt themselves affronted because of this, for the confirmation of the Hungarian police was written above their own confirmation, and they erased it. In this way the Hungarian police were obliged to confirm this again after their confirmation.

State Attorney Bach: With the Court’s permission, we have here copies of that document. Perhaps we may submit them to the Court. The Court will be able to compare them with the original and then return the original to the witness.

Presiding Judge: Please hand the document to us, and we shall give it back to him immediately.

State Attorney Bach: This is actually our document No.  1445.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/1146.

State Attorney Bach: Dr. Brody, you, in fact, visited Kistarcsa every day?

Witness Brody: Yes. I visited Kistarcsa daily; however, this did not start on 19 March but some time in May. Perhaps I may be allowed to make a comprehensive statement about Kistarcsa.

State Attorney Bach: Perhaps it would be better if he first answered my questions. If he has something to add, he could do so at the end.

Presiding Judge: [to interpreter] He should first answer the questions. If he should want to add something, we shall  allow him to do so at the end.

State Attorney Bach: Who was the commandant of Kistarcsa?

Witness Brody: The commandant of Kistarcsa was Istvan Vasdenyei, a chief superintendent of police, which more or less corresponded to the rank of a police major.

Q. What was your relationship with the commandant Vasdenyei?

A. On the first day that I went to Kistarcsa I asked Vasdenyei to be permitted to speak to him alone. I staked everything on one card and asked him whether it was clear to him that the Germans had lost the war. He replied to me: “Why do you ask that?” I answered: “It depends upon this how we shall be able to cooperate.”

Q. Perhaps the witness can put it more concisely: Was the relationship with Vasdenyei actually a positive one towards you and the detainees, or was it negative?

A. Vasdenyei’s attitude to me, and also to the detainees, was very good, and many hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Jews owe their rescue to Vasdenyei.

Q. We shall come to this point. Did you ever see SS men inside the camp?

A. I constantly saw SS men in the camp.

Q. Which of the SS officers did you see in the camp?

A. Amongst the SS officers whom I saw in the camp were Novak, Hunsche, Lemeke. I do not remember the names of the others.

Q. Was it clear to you what was the function of those officers in regard to the Kistarcsa camp?

A. Yes, I remember they had two functions. On the one hand they used to bring in the new detainees; on the other hand they took care of the transport of the detainees from there, for deportation.

Q. When, for any reason, you wanted to procure the release of some Jew – or a Jewish boy – from the camp, who had to give the authorization for that?

A. Only the SS could give permission for that. But Vasdenyei helped us very much.

Q. Dr. Brody, please tell the Court what happened on 12 July 1944?

A. At the beginning of July we received information, according to which the Regent had forbidden all further deportations.

Q. Perhaps, before you continue with your answer, let me ask you: How many deportations were there from the Kistarcsa camp which are known to you?

A. I cannot give you a precise date, but I know that the first train left already in April, and Janos Vazsonyi was also deported on it. After that they always sent trains out when the camp filled up.

This became more frequent when they arrested the Jews of the towns surrounding Budapest, from Ujpest and Kispest. I remember this well, since on one of the trains they deported my brother Bela Brody of Ujpest, who had been the inventor of light bulbs filled with krypton gas.

We hoped that at the beginning of July there would be no more deportations. To my great surprise, Vasdenyei notified me on the evening of 12 July, in confidence, that on the 14th of the month the Germans were preparing to take away an additional 1,500 persons from Kistarcsa, and that the Germans had ordered a special train to Kistarcsa.

Q. When you learned about this, what did you do?

A. When I got to know about it, I got in touch, that same evening, with the directors of the Jewish Council, Samu Stern, Ernoe Petoe, Karoly Wilhelm; I told them about it, and I requested action in two directions. My first request was that the Jewish Council should prepare food parcels for 1,500 people, so that these people should not die from starvation during the journey.

Q. Perhaps you can inform us what happened to this train that departed, as a result of Jewish intervention?

A. We gave food to the people, and at the same time the leaders of the Jewish Council sought to make contact with the Regent, in order to foil the plan to take the train out.

Presiding Judge: This is not an answer to the question that was asked. You were asked as follows: What happened, in the end, to this train?

Witness Brody: The Regent gave an order that the train should not proceed. Since the train had already left, the Regent ordered a major of the gendarmerie, Lullay, to halt the train while it was still in Hungarian territory. And Lullay managed to reach the train at the town of Hatvan and gave orders for it to be sent back, and the train arrived back at Kistarcsa in the evening. This was the sole deportation train in the eleven years of Nazi domination, ever to be turned back in its tracks.

State Attorney Bach: These 1,500 people who were sent to Kistarcsa, did all of them remain in Kistarcsa that day, or were they split up amongst various camps?

Witness Brody: Since not all of these 1,500 had previously been in Kistarcsa, but about 300 souls came from Csepel, Horthyliget, and also from Mosonyi Street, it was impossible to send all of them back there.

Q. Hence, where did they place the others?

A. Accordingly, on the next day, Vasdenyei sent about 280 persons to Sarvar, which was an auxiliary camp to that of Kistarcsa.

Q. What was the next thing that happened to these people who travelled on this train and returned to Kistarcsa?

A. We all rejoiced, together with these people, since we believed that their troubles were over and that they had finally been saved.

Q. And so, what happened to them?

A. On 19 July, in the morning, SS men, under the command of Novak, appeared with many cars.

Q. Who else was there that you knew, apart from Novak?

A. Lemeke.

Q. Were you yourself there personally on that day at Kistarcsa?

A. I was there personally, and I was in Vasdenyei’s office when Novak and Lemeke came in.

Q. Please tell the Court what happened then.

A. Novak told Vasdenyei that it was forbidden for anyone to leave the office. He forbade the use of the telephone. And he declared that, on Eichmann’s orders, he was going to take those 1,500 persons, who had been placed in the railway coaches on 14 July, since Eichmann – allow me to quote this in German as I heard it said – “Eichmann laesst es sich nicht gefallen, dass seine Befehle kontrakariert werden, selbst vom Reichsverweser nicht” (Eichmann will not tolerate his orders to be countermanded, not even by the Regent of the state himself).

Q. What happened after that?

A. After that, an order was issued for everyone to go out into the courtyard, and the SS men began throwing them with great brutality into the trucks. Amongst them were people  who walked on crutches and, if I remember correctly, there was one invalid chair and there were sick people; but they were told that they could leave all these things behind, for anyhow they would not be needing them any more.

Q. Who said these things? Who shouted out these words?

A. The SS men who were throwing the people about or who were forcibly loading them on to the trucks; Lemeke told Vasdenyei he should also dispatch Brody, since he, too, was to be deported. And Vasdenyei ordered his secretary, named Istvan Vass, to accompany me to headquarters.

Q. Did he say anything more about you – any personal accusation against you? Did Lemeke add any personal accusation as to why you had to be deported?

A. Yes: “Brody hat uns schon sehr viele Unannehmlichkeiten gemacht (Brody has already caused us a great amount of unpleasantness).

Q. Did he also mention a particular unpleasantness?

A. He attributed to me the fact that he was obliged to bring back the transport of 14 July.

Q. Can you tell us something about the number of people who had to be deported? You said earlier that some of the people were transferred previously to Sarvar. Was there a discussion in regard to that?

A. Yes. Novak stated that he wanted to take those people who had been on the train on 14 July. To this Vasdenyei answered that it was impossible to do so, since 280 persons had already been transferred to Sarvar. To this Novak responded that then he would take 280 others in their stead, but that he insisted on a total of 1,500. Then Vasdenyei began pleading with Novak not to take others as substitutes for those people, and after much persuasion Novak agreed.

Thus only 1,220 souls were then deported, and in this way we rejoiced, together with Vasdenyei, that at least 280 had been saved.

Q. You were telling us earlier how these people were thrown into the trucks. Where were you standing, and where did you see that?

A. I? Certainly…it was possible from the first floor to observe the courtyard where they were being put on to the trucks.

Q. You told us about cripples. What about elderly people?

A. Yes, I even remember old women, eighty years of age, being thrown in this manner on to the trucks. I also remember, in particular, the widow of Sandor Flussig, who had been a member of the Upper House and chairman of the Stock Exchange, a woman of eighty, who was unable to take care of herself and who was sick.

Presiding Judge: Mr. Bach do you still have many questions?

State Attorney Bach: Not many, but it will still take some time.

Presiding Judge: We shall adjourn at this point. The Session will be resumed at 15.30. The witness must be present in Court.

Previous | Index | Next