 |
I shall also prove that the firm of Krupp according to its
organization cannot be compared to an official organ or a military
hierarchy. It is impossible to apply a pattern to a business enterprise that
might appear suitable for a supreme official organization. There may be some
kind of “responsibility” in the case of persons who have to direct
the affairs of state and who are competent for laws and government orders. It
will be shown that Krupp was such a large and complicated economic enterprise
that one cannot hold its business executives “responsible” by means
of a mere hyphen on a chart for events which are very far removed from the desk
of a member of the management, both literally and figuratively speaking. In
presenting the case for the prosecution, moreover, it has already been clearly
shown in several cross examinations that boxes and connecting lines in the
prosecution’s schemes are nothing more than unsubstantiated and arbitrary
configurations. In the presentation of evidence, too, everything remained at
the alleged stage. The defense will show that, merely on the basis of the
actual circumstances prevailing at the Krupp enterprise, such as its size and
the number of its plants and workers, it is impossible to make a deduction of
criminal responsibility from such a game of circles and crosses. Finally, I
shall endeavor to compare the Krupp structure, in its form of business
organization under German law, with the American forms of business enterprise
and their corresponding legal concepts.
As regards my client, Dr.
Friedrich Janssen, I have already pointed out that the prosecution produced no
concrete evidence for the different counts of the indictment that would
indicate any connection on the part of Dr. Janssen with the material so
abundantly produced. In regard to count one of the indictment, a war of
aggression, I shall prove that my client could not have had the slightest
influence on the conversion of the Krupp firm to armament production, nor did
he personally wish for or help to bring on the war.
Until 31 March 1943
he was head of the Krupp office in Berlin, and as such, he had no influence on
the measures taken by the management in Essen. Had the prosecution proved
something which it failed to do that the management in Essen helped to bring
about war, such hypothetical proof would not justify the conclusion of any war
promoting activity on the part of my client. In April 1943, when Dr. Janssen
came to Essen, all the wars of aggression enumerated by the prosecution had
already been under way for some time. Even if the standpoint of the prosecution
were to be adopted, because of this time element alone my client could only be
charged with waging a “defensive |
169 |
. 
