Berlin – Andre Lassague came to Brandenburg an der Havel from France this Friday. He is a joint plaintiff in one of the last trials against a suspected Nazi perpetrator. On this day, Lassague reports on the fate of his father, who was arrested as a member of the French resistance in autumn 1942 and deported to the Sachsenhausen concentration camp in early 1943. Lassague said as a witness that he was taken to the infirmary in February 1944. After that, his father’s health got weaker and weaker. According to his comrades, his father was burned on March 27 in the concentration camp’s crematorium. “His comrades weren’t sure if he was completely dead when he was cremated,” said Lassague.
Josef S., the defendant, is only a few meters away. He is said to have been part of the murderous machinery in the Sachsenhausen concentration camp. The indictment accuses the 100-year-old man of having assisted the murder of thousands of prisoners as an SS guard from 1942 to 1945.
At the beginning of the day of the trial, the psychiatric expert should have testified as a witness who had examined the very old defendant for the ability to stand trial. But it did not get to that. Stefan Waterkamp, the defendant’s attorney, had requested that the medical practitioner’s information may not be used, and this request was complied with by the 1st major criminal division of the Neuruppin Regional Court.
Background: The expert should be questioned in the proceedings as a witness to the information provided by Josef S. “In the run-up to the discussions with my client, the expert had assured that he would not ask any questions about the offenses accused here,” said Waterkamp about his application. The expert did not respond to this with one question. “That is why the Chamber has granted my motion because of the fairness requirement.”
Josef S. had denied having worked in the concentration camp
After the written report, Josef S. commented on the allegations at an investigation. This should not be used because the expert asked a question that aimed too closely at the allegations, it said in the court’s decision. Even spontaneous statements by the accused to a detective may not be used in the process at the request of the defense attorney.
Stefan Waterkamp had already stated at the beginning of the process that his client would not comment on the allegations. On the second day of the trial, however, Josef S. made a spontaneous statement in court that denied having been active in the Sachsenhausen concentration camp.
At the end of the day of the trial, according to the expert opinion, Josef S. is only able to negotiate two to two and a half hours a day, the presiding judge Udo Lechtermann urged the accused to testify about his activities during the Second World War. The defendant has already declared twice that he was not in Sachsenhausen, but in the Lithuanian army, said Lechtermann. “If it was like that, it would be helpful if you could tell us what you did in Lithuania – then we can check it out.”
Historical expert is expected
If, however, as read in the indictment, the defendant served as an SS guard in the concentration camp, the question arises as to whether the 100-year-old should not explain this accordingly during the trial. “That could dictate decency,” warned the presiding judge. This could be a satisfaction for the survivors and descendants of the concentration camp involved as co-plaintiffs.
The defendant’s attorney, Stefan Waterkamp, said when asked that he would discuss this with his client. But he could not yet say whether he would make a statement on the next day of the trial next Thursday.
On this day, the historical expert will be heard for the first time. The investigators had tracked down Josef S. through documents from archives that documented the activity of a man with his name, birthday and place of birth in the SS guards of the concentration camp.
.