|
PRELIMINARY
HEARING
Wednesday, 14 November 1945
THE PRESIDENT (Lord
Justice Lawrence): Is Counsel for Gustav Krupp Von Bohlen in Court?
DR.
THEODOR KLEFISCH (Counsel for Defendant Krupp Von Bohlen): Yes.
THE
PRESIDENT: Do you wish to make your motion now?
DR. KLEFISCH:
Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you make your motion"
DR.
KLEFISCH: Mr. President, gentlemen: As defense
counsel for Krupp Von Bohlen und Halbach, I repeat the request which has
already been made in writing, to suspend the proceedings against this
defendant, at any rate, not to carry out the Trial against this
defendant. I leave it to this High Court to decide whether it should
suspend proceedings against Krupp for the time being or altogether.
According to the opinion of the specialists, who were appointed by this
Court for the investigation of the illness of Krupp, Krupp Von Bohlen
und Halbach is not able, on account of his serious illness, to appear at
this Trial without danger to his life. Their opinion is that he is
suffering from an organic disturbance of the brain and that mental
decline makes the defendant incapable of reacting normally to his
surroundings From that it follows that Krupp is not capable of informing
his defense. Furthermore, the report states that the deterioration of
his physical and mental powers has already been going on for several
years and that since Krupp was involved in an auto accident on 4
December 1944, he can only speak a few disconnected words now and again,
and during the last two months has not even been able to recognize his
relatives and friends. On the basis of these facts one can only
establish that Krupp has no knowledge of the serving of the Indictment
of 19 October. Thus he does not know that he is accused and why. The
question now arises whether, in spite of this permanent inability to
appear for trial, in spite of this inability to inform his defense, and
in spite of his not knowing of the Indictment and its contents, Krupp
can be tried in absentia. Article 12 of the Charter gives the right to
the Tribunal to take proceedings against people who are absent, under
two conditions: First, if the accused cannot be found; second, if the
Tribunal, for other reasons, thinks it is necessary in the interests of
justice, to try him in absentia
1 |
|