"Resettlement of the Jews [Aussiedlung der Juden].

Under this designation the extermination of the Jews took place in Auschwitz and other places. The order for this probably comes from the Führer or rather the Reichsführer-SS personally."

• telegram of 14 July 1942 mentions "special Jewish trains [Judensonderzüge] from Belgium, France, Holland ... for labour to Auschwitz" (source)
  
  

• train schedule order for August 1942mentions that "until further notice daily a special train [Sonderzug] with resettlers runs from Warsaw Danzig train station to Treblinka and the empty train back..." (as cited above).

"Freight trains" [Güterzüge]

Transport of Hungarian Jews arriving in Auschwitz-Birkenau:

(Das Auschwitz Album, Wallstein-Verlag, p. 107)

• He did observe narrow gauge rails in Birkenau used for transporting building material to the building sites and imagined the rest himself.

• He could have heard about the project to build an unloading terminal in Birkenau and supposed it was about to get finished soon. Already in 1941 it was envisaged to extend the rail line into the "POW camp Birkenau". The project was, however, only completed in 1944 for the destruction of the Hungarian Jews in Auschwitz.

SS photographs of the extermination of the Hungarian Jews in Summer 1944 picture the selection process ("Aussortierung") at the ramp in Birkenau:

"Originally, according to the RFSS order, all Jews transported to Auschwitz by Eichmann were to be exterminated without exception. This was also the case with the Jews from the Upper Silesia region, but even with the first transports of German Jews came the order to select all working Jews, men and women, and use them in the camp for the armaments industry."

"The unfit" [Untauglichen]

While Auschwitz was a centre of selecting forced labour, its other function was to exterminate those considered unfit for work. On 16 December 1942, the Gestapo chief Heinrich Müller suggested Himmler to deport 45,000 Jews from Byalistok and Theresienstadt to Auschwitz yielding some 30,000 to 35,000 unfit Jews:

"In the number of 45,000 is included the unfit appendix (old Jews and children). When an appropriate scale is applied, at least 10,000 to 15,000 workers can be obtained by the selection of the arriving Jews in Auschwitz."

(Die Verfolgung und Ermordung der europäischen Juden durch das nationalsozialistische Deutschland 1933–1945, Band 16, Document 45 [p. 210])

The figures of unfit Jews selected at the ramp was recorded by the Political Department and reported to the RSHA in Berlin (see Auschwitz SS Men Confessing on Tape: Josef Erber). In the case of transports from Berlin and Theresienstadt, the Auschwitz SS forwarded the record of how many unfit Jews had been taken out from the arrivals and how many had been killed to the WVHA:

(Sterbebücher von Auschwitz 1, Dokument 56)

The term "gesonderte Unterbringung" was a default euphemism for extrajudicial killings in Auschwitz, see also "Separate accommodation" in Auschwitz: a code word for extrajudicial executions and Auschwitz-Birkenau Selection List of 21 August 1943.

The so-called Auschwitz album has two sections on women/men "no longer fit for work":

(Das Auschwitz Album, Wallstein-Verlag)

It is most telling that the Jewish people selected as unfit for work can be last seen near the crematoria on the photographs of the Album. There is not a single photo which would indicate that they survived their arrival in Birkenau (unlike those people selected for work, which the SS photograher pictured after the hygienic treatment).



"biggish house" [größeres Haus]

This was crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau, which the Auschwitz commandant apparently showed to his SS visitors. As Jean-Claude Pressac notes"on 4th May 1943, only Krematorium II was complete and operational, while Kr III was not yet ready".

Franke-Gricksch could have seen and may have been told about crematorium 3 at the other side of the road. It is in accordance with his take-home message that the victims are tricked into their fate and do not suffer that he does call the crematorium what he presumed how an ignorant person and victim would see it, a biggish house.

The Auschwitz Album pictures the groups of Jews selected as unfit for work lining up or waiting near big buildings - the crematoria.

At crematoria 4 & 5:

 At crematoria 2 & 3:

"Basement rooms..." [Kellerräume]

Construction drawing of the crematorium with its basement rooms in cross-section:

...which are accessible from the outside [die von aussen zu betreten sind]

Sketch of the central construction office Auschwitz showing the future direct access to the undressing cellar from the outside:

Google satellite image of the crematorium 2 ruin with steps down the undressing basement marked with a circle:

"...descend 5 or 6 steps..." [5 - 6 Stufen herunter]

The number of steps to the undressing room was 10 according to Pressac. The Sonderkommando prisoner David Olere has shown a similar figure in his drawing of crematorium 3:

(David Olere. Un Peintre Au Sonderkommando a Auchwitz, 1989, p. 47)

"...and come to a long, well built and ventilated basement, fitted with benches on the right and left. It is brightly lit, and above the benches are numbers. The prisoners are told that they are to be disinfected and washed ready for their new tasks. They therefore have to undress completely to be bathed. In order to avoid any panic or disorder, they are told to arrange their clothes neatly and leave them under a number so that they can find their things again after the bath. Everything proceeds in complete calm."

Construction drawing of the elongated undressing cellar with access steps:

(source)

Work schedule sheet noting that work has been done "on ventilation in undressing cellar" of crematorium 2:

(Schüle, Industrie und Holocaust, p. 459)

Construction document mentioning the "ventilation of the undressing room" of the crematorium:

(Schüle, Industrie und Holocaust, p. 458)

The testimony of the Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höß includes a similar scene as described in the report:

The extermination process took place in Auschwitz as follows. The Jews destined for extermination were led, as calm as possible, to the crematoria. In the undressing room they were told in their language by the prisoners of the Sonderkommando employed there that they are now bathing and delousing, that they should put their clothes neatly together and, above all, remember the place so that they could move their clothes quickly after the delousing could find again. The prisoners of the Sonderkommando themselves had the greatest interest in making the process quick, calm and smooth.

 (Broszat, Kommandant in Auschwitz, p. 257)

And from a different perspective by Miklos Nyiszli, who performed work for the SS doctors in the crematorium:

"At the crematorium, they descended 10-12 concrete steps and entered an empty, underground room with a capacity of 2000. The first row stopped instinctively at the entrance, but once they read the signs 'Disinfection' and 'Bath' printed in all major languages, they were reassured and descended the steps. They were immediately ordered to undress; there were benches and numbered clothes hooks along the walls of the room. As part of a careful misinformation strategy, the SS reminded everyone to memorize their number to make sure they would find their clothes after the bath without problem."

(Miklos Nyiszli, 28 July 1945, deposition)


The undressing scene as pictured by the Sonderkommando prisoner David Olere:

(David Olere. Un Peintre Au Sonderkommando a Auchwitz, 1989, p. 52)

"They then go through a small corridor..."

Construction drawing with corridor between undressing room and gas chamber (with added labels and arrows):

"...and arrive in a big basement room that resembles a shower room"

Transfer inventory of crematorium 2 with "14 showerheads" along the "gas-tight door":

Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höß:

"After the undressing, the Jews went into the gas chamber, which was provided with showers and water pipes and completely made the impression of a bathroom."

 (Broszat, Kommandant in Auschwitz, p. 257)

A forensic investigation of the ruins of the crematorium 2 in Birkenau did find "a small disk 8 cm in diameter embedded in the path less than one meter to the east of the gas chamber. The disk shows many small perforations (more readily seen on the reverse side) in a manner consistent with the front plate of a showerhead" (Daniel Keren, Jamie McCarthy, and Harry W. Mazal, The Ruins of the Gas Chambers: A Forensic Investigation of Crematoriums at Auschwitz I and Auschwitz-Birkenau, published in Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Oxford University Press, Volume 18, Number 1, Spring 2004, available online here).

 
"In this room, there are three big pillars. Into these it is possible from above, outside the basement, to lower certain products."

There had been four (instead of three as stated by Franke-Gricksch) wire-mesh columns in the gas-chamber into which Zyklon-B pellets were lowered from the top of the roof (see also Rebuttal of Mattogno on Auschwitz, Part 2: Gas Introduction at the Crematoria). According to Pressac:

The explanation of this error is that Franke-Gricksch must have just gone a few paces into Leichenkeller 1, not down to the end, and thus noticed only three of the four columns.

(Pressac, Technique and Operation of the Auschwitz Gas Chambers, p. 239)



"After 300 to 400 people have gathered in this room, the doors are closed and from above the containers with the products are lowered into the pillars. When the containers reach the floor of the pillars, they produce certain substances that put the people to sleep in one minute."

German documents referred to the homicidal gas chamber of crematorium 2 as "gassing cellar" and "gas cellar":

 (source)

(close-up photo from Van Pelt, The Case For Auschwitz, p.210)

(source)

The killing process was described by Höß as follows:

The doors were now quickly screwed tight and the gas was immediately thrown by the disinfectors available into the introduction hatches through the ceiling of the gas chamber in a duct to the ground. This caused the immediate evolution of the gas. Through the observation hole in the door, one could see that those closest to the introduction duct immediately dropped dead. It can be said that death was instantaneous for about a third. The others began to stagger, scream and gasp for air. But the screaming soon turned into a rattle, and in a few minutes all lay. After 20 minutes at the latest no one moved anymore. Depending on the weather, humid or dry, cold or warm, depending on the nature of the gas, which was not always the same, on the composition of the transport, many healthy, elderly or sick, children, the effect of the gas lasted five to ten minutes. The unconsciousness appeared after a few minutes, depending on the distance from the introduction duct. Screaming, older, sick, weak and children fell faster than healthy and younger.

(Broszat, Kommandant in Auschwitz, p. 257-258)


The maximum capacity of the gas chamber was at the order of 2000 - 3000 people according to testimonies.

The gas chamber had only a single door to the anteroom. Pressac explained this mistake as follows:

This is probably due to confusion with the double door of Leichenkeller 2 leading to the corridor, through which he had just come before having a quick look over the threshold of Leichenkeller 1.

(Pressac, Technique and Operation of the Auschwitz Gas Chambers, p. 239)

One minute to "put the people to sleep" could be the official claim to gain acceptance for the killing method, but that did not correspond to reality inside the gas chamber. A sudden silence after a few minutes is what some ear-witnesses reported from the outside.


"A few minutes later, the door on the other side is opened..."

A gassing time of about 20 min is usually presumed to make sure that everybody was dead. The ventilation was turned on, but the Sonderkommando prisoners could have entered the gas chamber with gas masks already at this point.

There was no exit door on the other side, but the victims were pulled out through the same door as they entered alive. At some point, the Auschwitz SS installed a separating wall with a door in the gas chamber to cope with smaller transports more easier, but it is questionable that such was implemented as early as May 1943. Furthermore, it would not explain why this door was the exit to the elevator.

Jean-Claude Pressac explained this error as follows:

"This can be explained only if there was some kind of break in his visit to the crematorium that caused him to lose his bearings somewhat. His error becomes comprehensible if we assume the following itinerary: descent from the outside to the undressing room [Leichenkeller 2], walk through its entire length to the double door at the far end, through this into the short corridor and then the vestibule, from which he took a few steps into the gas chamber [Leichenkeller 1], whose operation was then explained to him. He emerged from the basement via the northern stairway into the yard. then entered the ground floor of the crematorium through the north entrance and was shown into the furnace room. Here the virtues of the Topf furnaces were extolled, probably while he was standing before Furnace 1. Then he took the corpse lift down to the basement, in front of the entrance to the gas chamber (where, not recognizing the vestibule he had passed through some time before, he thought this was ANOTHER door to the gas chamber). He probably went back up to the ground floor on the corpse hoist and left the Krematorium through the main, north, door. The “break” thus occurred when he emerged from the basement by the northern stairway, instead of more logically taking the corpse hoist directly up to the furnace room."

(Pressac, Technique, p. 239)


"...leading to a lift"

Construction drawing with elevator next to the gas chamber door. On 13 March 1943, the prisoner's metal workshop completed"1 goods lift with a minimum payload of 300 kg. including the fitting of suitable winches, cable and motor and the guide rail" for crematorium 2.


"The hair of the corpses is cut off and the teeth are broken out (gold teeth) by qualified people (Jews). It has been observed that Jews have hidden jewels, gold, platinum, etc. in hollow teeth"

The scene as pictured by Sonderkommando prisoner David Olere...

(Olere, David Olere. Un Peintre Au Sonderkommando a Auchwitz, 1989, p. 55)

... and described by the Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höß:

"The gold teeth of the corpses are removed by the Sonderkommando and they cut the women's hair."

(Rudolf Höß, Die Endlösung der Judenfrage, quoted in Broszat, Kommandant in Auschwitz, p. 258)

Memo of the commander of the security police and service Whiteruthenia Eduard Strauch of 20 July 1943:

I can stress again that they blame my men and me with barbarism and sadism while merely doing our duty. Even the fact that Jews, who were to be specially treated, had been properly removed their gold teeth by medical specialists had been an issue for discussion. Kube countered that this kind of treatment was unworthy of a German man and a Germany of Kant and Goethe. If the German reputation in the world was undermined, then it was our fault. Apart from this, it was also true that my men would satisfy their desires with these executions.

(NS 19/1770, p. 10)


"After this the corpses are loaded into the lift said go to the first floor"

The author meant "ground floor" with "first floor".

The scene as pictured by Sonderkommando prisoner David Olere...

(David Olere. Un Peintre Au Sonderkommando a Auchwitz, 1989, p. 57)

... and described by the Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höß: 

"After that, they were brought up with the elevator in front of the now heated ovens."

(Rudolf Höß, Die Endlösung der Judenfrage, quoted in Broszat, Kommandant in Auschwitz, p. 258)


"There, there are 10 big crematorium furnaces in which the corpses are burned."

A contemporary view of the oven room of crematorium 3 (with 14 out 15 oven openings visible):

(Yad Vashem Archives, Digital Collection)

A numerical mistake in the number of "crematorium furnaces". The crematoria 2 and 3 had five furnaces, each with three muffles yielding 15 oven muffles.

The Auschwitz researcher Jean-Claude Pressac explained this error as follows:

"Franke-Gricksch probably did not go the whole length of the furnace room, but stood at the western entrance in front of the first furnace and listened to the explanations given. It could be that the figure ten was the total he was given for the capacity of Krematorien II and III together (10 three muffle furnaces)"

Also, Franke Gricksch might have remembered 5 ovens with double-muffles (Höß committed the same mistake in a post-war interrogation)


"As fresh corpses burn particularly well, the whole process requires only ½ to 1 Zentner of coke"

Fresh corpses from a gas chamber are still warm and require indeed less fuel than older corpses stored in a morgue.

On 4 November 1941, the oven builder Topf & Söhne explained to the Auschwitz construction office that "frozen bodies go to the cremation, which requires more fuel":

(Schüle, Industrie und Holocaust, p. 436)

The meaning of the figure of 25 to 50 kg coke for the "whole process" is unclear. The amount appears too low for all ovens. It seems too high for a single corpse. It may describe the total amount of coke per load of multiple corpses (without considering the initial preheating of the ovens, which required a lot of energy).


"The work itself is carried out by Jewish prisoners who will never leave this camp"

The Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höß:

"All the work in the extermination process was carried out by Jewish Sonderkommandos."

"Equally strange was the whole behaviour of the Sonderkommandos. They all knew quite well that when the actions were ended, they would meet the same fate as the thousands of their racial comrades, whose destruction they helped considerably."

(1st quote from his manuscript the Final Solution of the Jewish Question, Auschwitz trial DVD; 2nd quote from his "autobiography" in Broszat, Kommandant in Auschwitz, p. 195)

The vast majority of the about one thousand Jewish Sonderkommando prisoners were indeed liquidated in Auschwitz, and only a small number of about 100 SKs managed to survive (Friedler, Zeugen aus der Todeszone, p. 307) because of the hesitant behaviour of the Auschwitz SS in the last weeks of the camp.

As Geheimnisträger (bearer of secrets) doomed to death, the Sonderkommando prisoners were separated from the rest of the camp inmates, both in terms of accommodation (either in their block or the crematoria) and appearance. While ordinary Auschwitz prisoners were dressed in blue/grey striped uniforms (with exceptions like the so-called Kanada-Kommando sorting the effects taken from the deported Jews), the Jewish Sonderkommando had to wear dark trousers with light shirts as apparent from the secretly taken Sonderkommando photographs from Summer 1944:

A report from the local police station in Auschwitz of 7 October 1944 reads that "prisoners escaped from concentration camp Auschwitz II from the Sonderkommando (crematorium), mostly Jews ... characteristics: close-cropped, tattooed number on the left forearm. Clothing partly civil with red stripes".


"The result to date of this “resettlement action”: 500,000 Jews."

The figure of 500,000 "resettled" Jews is exaggerated as about 330,000 Jews had been deported to Auschwitz until May 1943 according to the data in Piper, Die Zahl der Opfer von Auschwitz aufgrund der Quellen und der Erträge der Forschung 1945–1990.

Interestingly, around the same time, a figure of 500,000 killed Jews circulated among prisoners allegedly based on information obtained in the Political Department. The escaped Auschwitz prisoners Alfred Wetzler and Rudolf Vrba reported in April 1944:

"At the beginning of the year [1943], the political department in Auschwitz received 500,000 release forms... but they were filled in with the data of those gassed and were deposited in the archive."

(Die Verfolgung und Ermordung der europäischen Juden durch das nationalsozialistische Deutschland 1933–1945, Band 16, document 108, p. 371)

The figure also made its way into secret reports of the Nazi news agency Internationales Institut für die Aufklärung über die Judenfrage monitoring foreign news on the Jews in Poland:

(BArch R 58/7222)

500,000 seems like an inflated figure disseminated by the Auschwitz SS at the time (possibly based on operation time, capacity, estimated transports, instead of actual records they were not allowed to keep). The Auschwitz SS Administration did not have to know about exact figures, since they were responsable for the (registered) inmates, but not for those sent immediately to the gas chambers without registration in the camp's books.

Another point: the Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höß may have felt to boast the Auschwitz death toll to catch up with the reports on those of the Aktion Reinhardt camps Treblinka, Belzec, Sobibor.

In his post-war manuscript on the Final Solution of the Jewish Question, Höß provided more or less decent totals for the Jewish deportations to Auschwitz. According to him, he learnt the figures "from Eichmann or his staff" - quite possible only in 1944.  

The death toll of 500,000 up to May 1943 is far too low for a post-war forgery with much higher figures floating around at the end and after the war. The Soviets claimed some 4 Million deaths for Auschwitz. The Auschwitz escapees Rudolf Vrba and Alfred Wetzler reported that 1.765 million Jews were gassed in Auschwitz between "April 1942 to April 1944".


"The present capacity of the “resettlement action” furnaces: 10,000 in 24 hours."

According to the Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höß, the crematoria had the following maximum cremation capacities.

"As I said earlier, crematoria I and II were able to burn about 2,000 bodies within 24 hours, more was not possible without causing any damage, and facilities III and IV should be able to burn 1500 bodies within 24 hours, to my knowledge these numbers have never been reached there. "

(Rudolf Höß, Die Endlösung der Judenfrage, quoted in Broszat, Kommandant in Auschwitz, p. 259)

In addition to the crematoria (completed or almost finished), the Bunker 2 extermination site (a former farmhouse converted into homicidal gas chambers with open air cremation trenches) still existed at the time. In Höß's calculation, the site could account for 3,000 victims per day. Thus, the camp commandant could arrive to a maximum capacity of 10,000 people per day.

Or in his own words for the Nuremberg prison psychologist Gustave Gilbert:

"In Birkenau there were five installations - two large crematoria, each of which had a capacity for receiving 2,000 persons in the course of 24 hours. That is to say, it was possible in one gas chamber to put to death up to 2,500 persons; in five double ovens heated with coke it was possible to burn at the most 2,000 bodies within 24 hours; two smaller installations could eliminate about 1,500 people, with four bigger double ovens to each of them. Furthermore, there was also one open-air installation - that is, an old farmhouse was sealed and turned into a gas chamber, which could also contain 1,500 persons at one and the same time. The incineration was carried out there in an open pit on wood, and this was practically limitless.In my estimation, it was possible to burn there, in 24 hours, up to 8,000 persons in this way. Hence it was possible to exterminate and eliminate up to 10,000 people within 24 hours in the installations described above. As far as I am aware, this number was attained only once in 1944, when delays occurred in the arrival of trains, and consequently five transports arrived together on one day."

When the crematorium 2 was planned in 1941, the Topf company estimated a capacity of 1440 adult male corpses per day (Birkenau was planned as POW camp at the time). The figure made its way into the well-known draft of a letter by the central construction office Auschwitz to the SS-WVHA of 28 June 1943:

(Schüle, Industrie und Holocaust, p. 460)

Considering the large proportion of children, the Auschwitz SS could have easily calculated with 2000 corpses per day for gassing victims.

He [Pressac] does not explain, though, why there should be propaganda falsehoods in a confidential, internal SS report.

For example, Pressac does not even try to explain how Jewish "Sonderkommando" members could have begun their gruesome work of hauling bodies from the "gas chamber" only "a few minutes" after the killings without themselves promptly falling victim to the residual poisonous vapors.

To this day, no original German report of 1943 has been presented bearing the name or signature of Alfred Franke-Gricksch, nor Alfred Franke. If Ekkehard's story is true, any wartime document should bear the nom de plume "Franke".

• The document reports about someone's trip to Auschwitz, which indeed took place at the time. Check.


• It recounts the event from a perpetrators' point of view. Check.


• The document describes the mass extermination with numerous details, far beyond what was circulating as rumours among outsiders. Check. 

Another serious error on Pressac’s side is the fact that he attempts to attribute the erroneous figures in the documents at times to Franke-Gricksch’s SS guide, at other times to Franke-Gricksch himself.   

But, for some strange reason, the “report” does not mention the seven concrete pillars holding up the ceiling of the room.

it is altogether unbelievable that, when describing the alleged extermination of Jews, the guide would not have called things by their proper names, like dropping the very name of the installation, crematorium, which the document refers to as a “house.”

Not even Zyklon B is ever mentioned in this “report,” according to which the killing was done with “certain agents” or “particular substances which made the people fall asleep within a minute,” saying that “the containers with the substances are lowered into the columns.”

But in the account there is no mention of any “interruption,”

Without even taking into account that Franke-Gricksch must have been aware of the arrangement and the orientation of Leichenkeller 1 – either because he had entered Leichenkeller 2 from the outside yard where one could see the upper part of Leichenkeller 1 emerging from the ground, or because in the “report” the introduction columns for the sleeping agent introduced “from above, from the outside of the basement” are mentioned. Hence Franke-Gricksch would never have imagined another door at the far end of that room where there was only a wall and soil!

The explanation of the 10 ovens (item 6) makes no sense either, because if Franke-Gricksch had not seen one or several of the ovens farthest away when standing near the first, then he would have given a figure less than 5 for the ovens, or, for the muffles, a multiple of 3, e.g. 9 or 12 (as each oven had 3 muffles), but certainly not ten.

When it comes to the cremation capacity of the furnaces in Crematorium II – 10,000 corpses in 24 hours – Pressac falls back on what he calls propagandistic exaggerations by the camp SS.

"Even in the plumbed teeth, one has found gems of immense value."

I can't leave my life without writing these last lines to you because I'm being overwhelmed by the torments that you need to know about.

1. Standing on the brink of an abyss from which there is no return, I give you my dying word of honor that I am innocent of the crimes that I have confirmed in the investigation.

[...]

3) I had no "way out" but to confirm and develop the accusations and testimonies of others: or else I would have been "not disarmed".

4) Except for the external moments and the argument 3) (above), I, thinking about what is happening, built up a concept of this kind:

There is some big and bold political idea of general purge a) in connection with the pre-war time, b) in connection with the transition to democracy. This purge captures (a) those responsible, (b) those who are suspicious, and (c) those who are potentially suspicious. They could not do without me here. Some are being neutralized in this way, others in a different way, and others in a third way. The insurance point is that people inevitably talk about each other and forever instill distrust in each other (I judge by myself: how angry I am at Radek, who has babbled about me! and then I myself have gone down this path...). Thus, the leadership has a full guarantee.

For God's sake, don't get me wrong about blaming myself here, even for thinking about myself. I grew up so much out of children's diapers that I understand that big plans, big ideas and big interests cover everything, and it would be petty to put the question of my own person along with the world-historical tasks, lying primarily on your shoulders.

But here I have both the main torment and the main painful paradox.

5) If I was absolutely sure that you think so, I would feel much calmer. Well, well, that's it! You need to, so you need to. But believe me, my heart is poured with a hot stream of blood when I think that you can believe in my crimes and deep down you yourself think that I am really guilty of all the horrors. Then what? Do I myself help a number of people to get deprived (starting with myself!), that is, I do evil! Then it is not justified by anything. And everything gets confused in my head, and I want to shout and bang my head against the wall, because I am the reason for the death of others. What should I do? What to do?

How were those arrested prepared for face-to-face confrontations, and especially face-to-face confrontations, which were conducted in the presence of members of the Government?

The arrested persons were specially trained, first by an investigator, then by the head of the department. The preparation consisted in reading out the testimony given by the arrested person to the person with whom the confrontation was to be carried out, explaining how the confrontation would be conducted, what unexpected questions the arrested person might be asked and how he or she should respond. In essence, there was collusion and a rehearsal of the forthcoming confrontation. After that, the arrested person was summoned by EZHOV or, pretending that he accidentally walked into the investigator's room where the arrested person was sitting and was talking to him about the forthcoming confrontation, asking if he was feeling firm, whether he would confirm and, by the way, inserting that members of the government would be present at the confrontation bet.

Usually EZHOV was nervous before such face-to-face confrontations, even after talking to the arrested person. There were cases when an arrested person while talking to EZHOV made a statement that his testimony was not true, that it was a lie.

[...]

Preparation of the trial of RYKOV, BUKHARIN, KRESTINSKY, YAGODA and others

Actively participating in the investigation in general, EZHOV withdrew from the preparation of this process. Before the trial there were confrontations of the arrested, interrogations, clarifications, in which EZHOV did not participate. He talked to YAGODA for a long time, and this conversation concerned mainly the YAGODA's belief that he would not be shot.

EZHOV spoke several times with BUKHARIN and RYKOV, and also assured them in order to calm them down that they would not be shot in any case.

Once EZHOV talked to BULANOV, at that he began the conversation in the presence of the investigator and me, and ended the conversation alone [with Bulanov], asking us to leave. And BULANOV began to talk at that moment about the poisoning of EZHOV. What was the conversation, EZHOV did not tell me. When he asked [me] to come back, he said: "Hold on well during the process - I will be asking for you not to be shot". After the process, EZHOV always expressed regret about BULANOV. During the shooting EZHOV suggested that BULANOV be the first to be shot and did not enter the room where he was shot.

Undoubtedly, EZHOV was in charge of the need to cover up his connections with the arrested right-wing leaders who were going to a public trial.

As for the poisoning of EZHOV. The idea of his poisoning was put forward by Yezhov himself - day after day stating to all the deputies and heads of departments that he feels bad, that as soon as he stays in the office, he feels some metallic taste and smell in his mouth. After that, he began to complain that his gums started to bleed and his teeth started to loosen. EZHOV began to say that he had been poisoned in his office, and thus inspired the investigators to obtain evidence, which was done with the use of the Lefortovo prison and the use of beatings.

According to the assistant prosecutor of the USSR G. M. Leplevsky in his private conversation, Vyshinsky almost ruined the whole production:

"You know, Stalin said that the Art theater even from a price list can make an artistic thing, a theatrical production, - in this case the NKVD has prepared a price list, from which the Prosecutor's Office and the court - must make a real production, not in our interest to make from this production a farce with a landlord and nails in eggs. You can't irritate Rakovsky and others, because they can start saying something else.

[Ibid. [TsA FSB. F. 3., Op. 5, D. 953]. L.262]

[...]

The defendants were carefully prepared before and during the trial, persuaded and accommodated in every possible way in case of obedience and willingness to follow the script. Thus, Rakovsky told his cellmates after the trial:

"The thesis of my speech at the trial, my last word, I coordinated with the investigators ... Lately everything was at my service up to and including olives" [AP RF. F. 3, Op. 24, D. 456, L. 107.]

Before the beginning of the trial, Yagoda was given a meeting with his arrested wife, Averbakh, and Yagoda was assured that she was free, for this purpose she was re-dressed and combed before the meeting [Ibid.]. And at the very beginning of the investigation, in 1937, when Yagoda still showed intransigence, he was simply beaten. His investigator N. M. Lerner at first did not believe in Yagoda's complaints that he was being beaten, but soon he became convinced of it:

"One day, it was in Lefortovo prison, I was interrogating Yagoda. Yezhov, Frinovsky and Kursky came into my office, and at Ezhov's suggestion I left the office. When some time later I was allowed to come back, I saw a bruise on Yagoda's face under my eye. Showing me a bruise, Yagoda asked me: "Now you believe that I am being beaten" [AP RF. F. 3, Op. 24, D. 456, L. 95.]

After their conviction, Radek and Sokolnikov began, among the other inmates, to assert their innocence and the staging of the entire process. Undoubtedly, this led to the fact that in May 1939 a decision was made to "liquidate" them.

[...]

Other convicts in this case, Stroilov and Arnold, who also retracted their testimony, were kept in the NKVD prison in Orel until the autumn of 1941, and on September 11, 1941, by the sentence-in-absence of the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR, passed without any justification, were executed among other prisoners.

The fate of the former head of the Prokopievsky city department of the NKVD Ovchinnikov, who was in touch with Arnold, is also of some interest in this respect.

Ovchinnikov in December 1940 was convicted by the Military Tribunal of the West Siberian district to 10 years of imprisonment. While in custody, he told his inmates about the falsification of the case against Arnold and announced his intention to write a statement about it.

On March 24, 1941, without any additional materials, Ovchinnikov's case was reviewed and he was sentenced to death by the Military Tribunal.

In reviewing the materials of the remaining trials listed in the present note, the Commission found that the charges of treason, espionage, terror, preparation and execution of the murder of S.M.Kirov, brought against the convicted persons, were not proved by the case materials.

Testimony on the merits of these charges with a confession of guilt was obtained from the convicted persons as a result of the application of illegal methods of investigation to them: deception, blackmail and measures of physical coercion.

Levin, Kazakov and Pletnev fully admitted their guilt in court for committing these crimes, but after the conviction, already in 1939, Pletnev, during the interrogation in the NKVD and in his subsequent complaints, stated that his testimonies about the killing of A.M.Gorky and V.V.Kuibyshev were false and were given by him under the physical and moral coercion of the investigators.

Later, through the use of illegal methods of investigation (gruelling interrogations, persuasions, threats), similar testimony about the Trotskyist-Zinovievsky clandestine centre was obtained from other arrested persons, and investigators often demanded such testimony on behalf of the party and in the name of the unity of the party. In the course of the investigation, some of the arrested persons retracted their so-called confessions and went on hunger strikes, demanding an objective investigation, but all this was not taken into account. The arrested were forced to sign "statements" prepared in advance by the investigators, the content of which corresponded to the previously received guidelines on the creation of the case of the United Trotskyist-Zinovievsky Center.

[...]

Pyatakov and other participants of the "parallel center" were also accused of organizing the terrorist act against Molotov, using for this purpose the accidental car accident that happened to Molotov's car on September 24, 1934 in Prokopievsk. As it is now established, there was no attempt on Molotov's life. The car accident came down to the fact that the car, in which Molotov was driving from the station, drove off with the right wheels into the roadside ditch, tilted down and stopped. None of the people in the car were injured. Molotov moved to another car and drove on. There was no investigation into this fact at the time. It was regarded as negligence on the part of Arnold, who was the head of the garage of the Prokopievsky department of mines. Arnold was reprimanded for this by the party city committee. Soon this reprimand was removed from him. There are reports that Arnold had his reprimand lifted at the direction of Molotov, to whom Arnold wrote a letter.

In 1936, Arnold was arrested by the NKVD and from him they obtained a statement that the car accident was committed intentionally, on behalf of the "Trotskyist center", in order to commit a terrorist act against Molotov. He also confirmed this testimony during the hearing. However, after the trial, in his complaints, and then during the interrogations in the NKVD of the USSR, Arnold retracted his earlier testimony and stated that he had not made any attempt on Molotov's life, and that he had given false testimony about it as a result of coercion from the investigation officers.

Molotov knew that the accusation of some persons in the attempt on his life was false, as he was well aware of all the circumstances of the road accident. However, he took no action to refute the version of the intentional attempt on his life and to rehabilitate the people who were wrongly accused of such a serious crime.

[...]

By means of exhausting and, as a rule, night interrogations with application of so-called "conveyor system" and " stands", persuasions, threats and use of agents, which were given provocative tasks, from all accused in the case of "Anti-Soviet Trotskyist Center" NKVD structures have achieved full confession of guilt.

[...]

After the trial, the NKVD authorities established a thorough undercover surveillance of Sokolnikov, Radek, Stroilov and Arnold in places of detention. According to the agents' reports, all these persons talked about their innocence and told how the trial in their case had been falsified. Sokolnikov and Radek harshly criticized Stalin and spoke about his involvement in the falsification of the case of the "Anti-Soviet Trotskyist Center" and other open trials of the time. These classified materials were reported to Stalin.

In May 1939, Radek and Sokolnikov were secretly killed in prisons by former NKVD officers serving their sentences for political and official crimes on behalf of Beria and his deputy Kobulov. As can be seen from the explanations of the former NKVD officials Fedotov and Matusov, during the development of the NKVD operations for these murders, Kobulov, demanding impeccable execution, stressed that they are carried out with Stalin's knowledge.

Stroilov and Arnold were shot in September 1941 among 170 prisoners of the Orel prison by sentence-in-absence of the Military Collegium, passed in accordance with the decision of the State Defense Committee, signed by Stalin. The proposal to shoot the prisoners was made by the NKVD of the USSR in Stalin's name.

[...]

The content of some interrogation reports was coordinated with Stalin before they were signed by the interrogated persons. For example, on September 23, 1936, after the confrontations of Sokolnikov with Bukharin and Rykov in the Central Committee of the VKP(b) and the interrogations of Bukharin and Rykov, Vyshinsky sent these protocols to Stalin with the following additions: "If you approve these documents, I will have these documents signed by the appropriate persons. (Materials of the inspection of the case of the Right-Trotskyist Block, vol. 3, p. 48).

[...]

A significant role in the entire investigation of the case of Bukharin, Rykov and others was played by the provocative testimony of the arrested Astrov. In particular, Astrov acted as one of the main exposers of Bukharin at the confrontation which was held on January 13, 1937 by Stalin, Molotov, Kaganovich, Voroshilov, Ordzhonikidze and Ezhov. Some time after the confrontation with Bukharin Astrov was freed from custody, although he confessed to guilt at the time. In his explanations to the KPK of the Central Committee of the CPSU of April 18 and 24, 1961, Astrov reported that the testimony given by him in 1937 was fictitious and was dictated by the NKVD officers (Materials of the inspection of the case of the "Right-Trotskyist bloc", vol. 6, pp. 65-93, 104-128).

It was also established that Radek and Sokolnikov, who "denounced" Bukharin and Rykov, when serving their sentences in prisons, told that they had given false testimony against them (Materials of the inspection of the case of the "Anti-Soviet Trotskyist Center", vol. 12, pp. 1-47).

[...]

The investigation into the case of Bukharin, Rykov and others was carried out with gross violations of socialist legality, up to and including the application of physical methods of influence to those arrested. In Ezhov's archive, in one of his notebooks, his inscription was found: "Beat Rykov". There is also information that Krestinsky, Yagoda, Pletnev and some other accused were subjected to beatings (Archive of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Ezhov's archive, d. 217; materials of the inspection of the case of "Pravo-Trotskyist bloc", vol. 5, p. 46-54, 138, vol. 8, p. 64, 78).

It turned out that the testimony about his enemy activity was received from Krestinsky by means of cruel tortures that was confirmed by the doctor of Lefortovo prison A.A. Rozenblum.

The rehabilitated member of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union since 1917 T. Sapronov N.K. in his statement reported that, being in prison in 1937 and being in Lefortovo prison in the same cell with Krestinsky N.N., whom he knew since 1930 from joint work, he had to be a witness when Krestinsky returned after each interrogation in the cell beaten to death. Leaving prison, Krestinsky requested him, Sapronov, if he survived, to tell when it would be possible that he, Krestinsky, had always worked honestly for the Communist Party and the Soviet government all his conscious life, and if anything happened to him, asked him not to consider him an enemy of the Soviet people.

At the first meeting of the open trial for the right-wing Trotskyist bloc Krestinsky did not admit his guilt in anything, but stated that during the preliminary investigation he "did not voluntarily speak" and therefore gave false testimony about his counter-revolutionary activities, but did not inform the prosecutor about the falsehood of these testimony during the interrogation because he believed that his "statement will not reach the leaders of the party and the government.

In the course of the investigation of the case against participants in the so-called "anti-Soviet right-Trotskyist bloc", the investigative materials related to them, as well as the undercover developments stored in the KGB under the USSR Council of Ministers, were examined. At the same time, all of the defendants prosecuted in the present case were checked against the State's historical and special archives, where the materials of the tsar's guards and the trophy holdings of German, Polish and French intelligence and counter-intelligence bodies are kept.

All the defendants prosecuted in the present case pleaded guilty to the charges against them. However, the verification revealed that, for the most part, these confessions were coerced and did not reflect the truth.

Thus, RAKOVSKY H. G., having testified about his active participation in the "right-wing bloc" and cooperation with Japanese and English intelligence agencies, after the trial repeatedly declared his innocence and claimed that he was forced to give knowingly false testimony during the investigation. Agent "Anri", who was detained together with RAKOVSKY in the Orlov prison, reported on March 17, 1940 that RAKOVSKY: "completely refutes his guilt, considering everything that was in the process and investigation as a comedy. Sometimes he casually claimed that all his testimony was under pressure" (arch. case No. 300956, vol. 9, p. 181)

Another agent "Dima", who was also in one cell with RAKOVSKY, reported on April 2, 1941, that RAKOVSKY in conversations with him categorically denied his involvement in the right-wing Trotskyist bloc, said that the protocols of his interrogation were falsified and at the same time stated: "I was outraged when ARONSON (investigator) wrote a protocol, which said that we wanted to restore capitalism. Listen," I told him, "that's just illiterate". He threw the crumpled protocol in the face. In general, when I wrote in a different way than they wanted, they always did so..." (Ibid., p. 322)

The former employee of the USSR NKVD Y. A. ARONSON, who was interrogated on July 3, 1956, confirmed that the investigation of RAKOVSKY was indeed conducted in an atmosphere of gross violation of the norms of socialist legality.

After the trial RAKOVSKY, referring to his advanced age and sick state, repeatedly filed applications, in which he applied for clemency. However, the requests of RAKOVSKY were not satisfied.

In this connection, on May 17, 1941, RAKOVSKY said: "I decided to change my tactics: so far I have only asked for clemency, but I have not written about my case. Now I will write a statement demanding a review of my case, describing all the "secrets of the Madrid court" - the Soviet investigation. Let the people, through whose hands all sorts of statements pass, know exactly how our affairs and processes are " cooked up " because of personal political revenge. Maybe I will die soon, maybe I am a corpse, but remember... One day corpses will talk" (arch. case No. 300956, vol. 9, pp. 239-240)

[...]

KRESTINSKY in the course of the investigation testified that he was an active participant of the "anti-Soviet right-Trotskyist bloc" and in October 1933, during his vacation abroad, with the assistance of Bessonov, he had a meeting with L. TROTSKY and SEDOV in the city of Meran. During this meeting, TROTSKY, according to KRESTINSKY, gave him a directive for the establishment of the united forces of Trotskyites, right-wing and military conspirators in the Soviet Union, the need for the use of terror, wrecking and sabotage in the fight, as well as for the establishment of agreements with foreign governments to overthrow the Soviet state system.

However, these testimonies of KRESTINSKY do not find confirmation in the operative materials of the foreign section of the NKVD SSSR, which was carrying out undercover surveillance of TROTSKY abroad. There is no data in the NKVD's archive documents on the presence of TROTSKY and SEDOV in Meran, and there is no data on their meeting with KRESTINSKY in general.

[...]

BESSONOV, having confirmed during interrogations the fact of the meeting of KRESTINSKY with TROTSKY and SEDOV in 1933 in the city of Meran, stated after the trial that all his testimony was fictitious.

Agent "Blagin", who was kept with the BESSONOV in Solovetsky prison on May 6, 1939, said that BESSONOV reported about the trial in the case of the "anti-Soviet Trotskyist right-wing bloc" as follows:

"The whole trial is a complete fiction of the NKVD, no true crimes were committed by any of the accused ... (arch. case No. 101492, vol. 1. p. 27)

Another agent "Nikitin" on September 29, 1939 reported:

"BESSONOV about the process of the right-Trotskyite center (1938) said that all of it is a complete conspiracy, a very rough falsification. For example, KRESTINSKY took money from the German government back in 1922 and the following years and handed it over to TROTSKY, but that all this is not a counter-revolutionary thing, because according to the Treaty of Versailles Germany could not train military personnel on its territory, it conspired with the Soviet Union to organize several military schools in Kazan and other cities of the USSR, and for this it paid money to the ambassador KRESTINSKY for the People's Commissar of the Military TROTSKY. This was known in the party and Soviet circles of leaders. (arch. case No. 101492, vol. 2, p. 83-84)

On April 29, 1939 agent "Grachev" on the same occasion reported: "Characterizing the process as a mere 'comedy', the inmate BESSONOV said that all that was said at the trial by the accused was forced testimony and in fact no one had plotted anything against the Soviet authorities" (ibid., vol. 1, p.d. 22).

[...]

Another witness of the prosecution who testified in the case of the anti-Soviet bloc, former member of the Central Committee of the Party of the Left Socialist Revolutionaries B. D. KAMKOV, as seen from the testimony of the arrested BRYUKHANOV, who was held with him in the same cell, told him:

"All three recent trials were as much blackmail as the previous ones. There is not a single drop of truth in them. Neither ZINOVIEV nor BUKHARIN had any counter-revolutionary conspiracy work. Espionage, diversions, sabotage, terror, killing are all lies fabricated by the NKVD. Testimony was obtained from the accused through torture, blackmail, beatings, threats, threats to kill their families, arrests of wives, etc., by means of physical and mental coercion. At the same time, means of bribery, mollifying of the accused were used, life was promised, etc...". (arch. case No. 967389, separate package).

After the end of the trial of BUKHARIN and others, KAMKOV was tried on charges of joining an illegal terrorist organization in Arkhangelsk and spreading "heinous defamation in connection with the trials of right-wing Trotskyites in prison".

On August 29, 1938, during the consideration of the case in the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR, KAMKOV didn't find himself guilty of anything and was sentenced to execution.

[...]

This charge was brought against the leaders of the right-wing Trotskyist bloc, including YAGODA, and the well-known doctors PLETNEV D. D., LEVIN L. G., KAZAKOV I. N., former secretary of the USSR NKVD BULANOV, secretary of A. M. GORKY - KRYUCHKOV P.P. and assistant to V. V. KUIBYSHEV - V.A. MAKSIMOV-DIKOVSKY.

All of the defendants pleaded guilty to the charges. However, the available materials indicate that these confessions are invalid.

Thus, PLETNEV, who confessed during the investigation and in court his guilt in the organization on behalf of YAGODA of killing A. M. GORKY and V.V. KUIBYSHEV, after his conviction on June 11, 1939, appealed to comrade V. M. MOLOTOV with the following statement:

"I was convicted in the case of Bukharin. At the investigation I admitted the charges brought against me, and at the trial I did not deny them. I was defamed. The charge against me is false. My confession was forced. But I did not think it was possible to make this statement in court like Krestinsky. I have been in prison since December 1937. My health has deteriorated dramatically. I am 66 years old. The point on which the accusation was based was a meeting with Yagoda, during which he allegedly threatened me and my family and demanded my participation in the killing of Gorky. This meeting never happened, neither in August, nor in June according to the subsequent version. I only saw Yagoda once in my life during his stenocardy attack. I saw him in a consultative manner. I had no conversations with Yagoda except about his illness. I have been faithful to the Soviet power all my life since October of 17 and under the leadership of the party I gave all my strength and knowledge to my Motherland. Now I am deprived of all this. I swear on all the good things to me of my innocence. I ask for a review of my case. Please allow to interrogate me for this, or give me the opportunity to submit a detailed petition in a closed envelope. (Supervision proceedings #7343-9, p. 6)

3. This statement was sent to Beria by the Secretariat of comrade V. M. MOLOTOV.

Since then, PLETNEV repeatedly made similar requests. With regard to one of them, the former USSR Prosecutor BOCHKOV informed the Secretariat of comrade V.M. MOLOTOV:

"The reasons stated in the complaint of PLETNEV D.A. and, in particular, his retraction of his testimony, are a provocative attack and continuation of enemy work... The review of the case was denied, and D. D. Pletnev was informed about it. (Supervision proceedings, No. 7343-9, p. 26)

[...]

The inspection also revealed that the materials on the so-called "poisoning" of EZHOV were completely falsified.

On April 16, 1939, FRINOVSKY testified about it during the interrogation: "NIKOLAEV-ZHURID falsified the case of so-called Yezhov's mercury poisoning with my participation and on Yezhov's instructions. The case was handled by NIKOLAEV personally. Yezhov suggested that he was ill from poisoning, and NIKOLAEV and I took hold of it and under a lot of pressure obtained evidence about it from BULANOV, then from the courier of Yagoda ... and then from Yagoda himself.

NIKOLAEV got a pharmacy can of mercury from somewhere, which he turned into tangible evidence of Yezhov's mercury poisoning. NIKOLAEV also secured the corresponding expert opinion on poisoning. (arch. case No. 975181, vol. 2, p. 62)

The testimony of FRINOVSKY was also confirmed by EZHOV.

The State Special Archive of the USSR found no materials indicating a link between persons in the case and foreign intelligence agencies.

[...]

Due to the fact that the overwhelming majority of NKVD employees involved in the case of the so-called anti-Soviet Trotskyist right-wing bloc were subsequently executed, it is not possible to study the situation in which the investigation of this case was conducted.

Nevertheless, even those materials, far from being exhaustive, obtained in the process of inspection, testify to the brutal abuses and provocations, as a result of which confessions of the arrested were obtained.

A number of former employees of the NKVD interrogated in the course of the inspection testified about the existence of such an arrangement in 1937-1938 when the very fact of placement of the person under investigation in Lefortovo prison had already obliged the investigator to beat him up. At night, EZHOV walked through the offices of the investigators together with other senior officials and personally showed how to "get the right" testimony.

The former employee of the NKVD of the USSR Ya. A. ARONSON, who took part in the investigation of the case of the anti-Soviet right-wing Trotskyist block, was interrogated in 1956 and testified about it:

"The period of the end of 1937 and the beginning of 1938, when the investigation of this case was conducted, was a period of the mass beatings of the arrested. I remember when EZHOV often visited the prison, usually at night, and went to the offices of the investigators. His whole conversation usually came down to the following: "Who are you interrogating, what does he give? Give it to him properly!" EZHOV was accompanied by VOLODZIMIRSKY and others, who sometimes immediately showed how to 'give'."

ROSENBLUM A. A., who worked in 1937-1938 as the head of the sanitary unit of Lefortovo prison, was interrogated in 1956, stated:

"While working in the sanitary unit of Lefortovo prison, I saw many arrested people in a serious condition after beatings during the investigation, in particular, I rendered medical assistance to MARYASIN, who was severely beaten during the investigation.

A former NKVD officer BLAT, who tried to commit suicide and who was also severely beaten, was in a very serious condition...

...KRESTINSKY was taken to the sanitary unit in an unconscious state from the interrogation. He was severely beaten, his whole back was a continuous wound, there was not a single live spot on it. As I remember, he was lying in the sanitary unit for three days in a very serious condition.

I visited the YAGODA often. He used to complain about his heart... I saw a big bruise on his face under his eye once."

Other former employees of the NKVD also testified about the beatings of the arrested. Thus, the witness LERNER N. M., who took part in the interrogation of YAGODA, stated on June 2, 1956:

"...YAGODA repeatedly complained to me that he was beaten during interrogations. I did not believe him and told him about it.

Once, it was in Lefortovo prison, I was interrogating YAGODA. EZHOV, FRINOVSKY and KURSKY came into my office, and at the suggestion of EZHOV, I left the office. When, after a while, I was allowed to return, I saw a bruise on YAGODA's face under the eye. When he showed me the bruise, he asked me, "Do you believe I'm being beaten now?" In addition, I personally saw BULANOV with the marks of beatings on the face." The above-mentioned ARONSON also confirmed that he knew about the beatings during the investigation of the arrested RYKOV, SHARANGOVICH and YAGODA, and testified:

"Personally, I myself heard a complaint about the beating from RYKOV. RYKOV had to confront NIKOLAYEVSKY. RYKOV was the first to be brought in, he looked pitiful and depressed. I don't remember exactly, I or LULOV asked him: "What is it, why do you look like this?" RYKOV replied to this, and I remembered it very well: "I am discouraged," and to the following question - why? - he answered, "They beat me".

As the internal prison agent of "BLAGIN" reported, BESSONOV told his cellmates:

"He, BESSONOV, signed the charge against him because otherwise he was threatened with fascist reprisals. While in Lefortovo, he saw former members of the Central Committee who had been beaten during the investigation - here he named PTUHA, a former member of the TsK VKP(b), LAVRENTYEV, a member of the Central Committee and others. KRESTINSKY was severely beaten and wore a plaster bandage during the trial. (arch. case No. 101492, vol. 1, p.d. 27) The above testimony about the beatings of the arrested in the case of the anti-Soviet right-Trotskyite center, of course, does not reveal the whole picture, because this period was characterized by the most rampant violence in the investigation and it was then that the beatings acquired such a character that the cases of homicide during interrogations were not uncommon. [...]

As it is now established, the following were killed during investigations: on October 14, 1937 the head of the Science Department of the TsK VKP(b) BAUMAN K. L., on December 1, 1937 the head of the Political Department of the People's Commissariat of Sovkhozy, the old Bolshevik SOMS K., December 11, 1937 - Employee of the Comintern ANVELT, May 5, 1938 - Deputy Head of UNKVD of the Leningrad Region SOSTE M.Ya., November 9, 1938 - Marshal of the Soviet Union BLYUKHER and others.

It should be noted that the detainees were pushed to self-incrimination and other false incrimination of others not only by direct physical but also by mental violence. Threats of reprisals against relatives, threats of beatings, shouts of the beaten arrested - all this was used by investigators to obtain "confessions". A former investigator ARONSON testified:

“I personally did not apply physical measures to RAKOVSKY, obviously that's why he didn’t testify to me anything about espionage (RAKOVSKY pleaded ”guilty" in espionage to other investigators). I admit that I could apply other measures of influence to him - measures of a mental order: threats against him personally, threats to arrest family members. I remember, in particular, that RAKOVSKY was announced the arrest of his wife, and her fate was made dependent on his testimony. Such was the interrogation system of those arrested, introduced on a mandatory basis by the then leadership of the NKVD of the USSR. ”

Rakovsky himself told in the Orel prison cell as follows about the situation during the investigation into his case, as can be seen from the report by agent "Dima": “... when they make it clear to you from the very first day that you should lie about yourself and about the others, dirty your name and honor, then you are seized by rage, indignation. You begin to fight, to resist, but then, when they tell you, as ARONSON said: “Old man, you will give in, give evidence”, when you are told that your family will be destroyed, that you will be shot, you give up. When they told me that my wife would be put in Lefortovo, I screamed and grabbed my head - it meant that she would die. Fear for the family, the understanding that you are sending it to death, fear and the desire to live, complete hopelessness, and then party automatics, the habit of obeying the party - make you lie and do the devil knows what. All this is a lie, here in all these cases there is not a drop of truth ”, (arch. case No. 300956, vol. 9, p. 321)

Then he said:

“I rode from Butyrki to Lefortovo, and from Lefortovo to Lubyanka. Every night I was waiting for the execution. In Lefortovo, in this terrible prison, where the screams of tortured people were heard, the groans of women, shots during executions and the constant noise of aircraft engines, my claws were suddenly cut off - I realized that they wanted to torture me. Soon they called me at night. I appeared before NIKOLAEV, AGAS and another type who was torturing for them. When I entered, they told me that I was a spy. “Me, a spy?” “Yes, you. And you will tell us about your activities yourself. ” I realized that this is the end, that the only way to salvation is through maximally blaming yourself. This is a dialectic ... Everything went here - the Japanese, the British. I sometimes got confused myself in what I said ”(ibid., p. 322)

BESSONOV, while serving his sentence in prison, categorically denied his guilt, and spoke of the reasons that pushed him to false testimony:

“At first the lieutenant, who was interrogating me, and then the major of state security warned that if I did not give the testimony they needed, they would make a minced meat out of me. And indeed, a few days later I was called late in the evening in a hitherto unknown to me room. There were already 5 lads there, and on the table lay the necessary accessories - a rubber truncheon, gloves, a stick and something else.

The major, rubbing his hands, asked me about the testimony, and when I saw this, I got the wind up a little, because I already knew about the beatings to death ... I decided to lie. Well, thus I became a counter-revolutionary. And the trial was a complete comedy. ” (ibid., vol. II, ld 61)

The convicted doctor PLETNEV vividly reported from prison about the system of beatings, threats, blackmail and provocations. In a statement dated June 8, 1940, he wrote: “For three years I have been suffering from investigation to investigation, from court to court, from prison to prison with my complete innocence ...

... the case of the killing of GORKY and KUIBYSHEV. I turned to you about him, but the investigative apparatus did not allow any talk about this, insisting several times on taking back statements by me, which I did not do.

... the case arose from the testimony of YAGODA, who, according to his personal statement, called me to his place in mid-August 1934 and with threats demanded from me my complicity with Dr. LEVIN in the killing Gorky. To my denial of this fact, from the investigator GERZON there was a beating. I pointed out that this fact could not have taken place, since I was on a business trip from July 20, 1934 to the beginning of October. The next day, with certificates from the passport office ... my words were confirmed and the fact of my alibi in August 1934 was established. Then the investigator said to me: “If the high leadership assumes that you are guilty, then even if you were 100% right, you you will be 100% guilty anyway. ” Threats followed against me, my wife, and finally, an alternative was offered to me by the head of the SPO LITVIN, the head of the investigative unit KAGAN and the investigator GERZON, either, with my stubbornness, life in prison and death in it, or with a “confession”, filing of an application “to clarify” the time of meeting with YAGODA in June 1934 (and I saw YAGODA for the first time in my life in 1935) and 2-3 months after the trial, complete liberation and scientific work - in a word, “repeating the fate of RAMZIN”. This was indirectly confirmed by EZHOV. The result is known. I trusted government bodies so much that I could not even think of the idea of ​​lying and blackmailing by someone, especially a member of the Politburo ... Help me, I am dying innocently. I only ask you to be personally interested, and not to transfer it to the investigative apparatus. Prejudice reigns there. If the NKVD took someone, then he’s guilty. Put yourself for a moment in my position and you will see the whole depth of my suffering. Believe me. I could still say a lot in my defense ... ”(prison personal file, pp. 206-207)

The "processing" of those arrested in the case of the Trotskyist center did not stop day and night. During interrogations, investigators did this, and in the cells there were specially planted people. About one of these people, RAKOVSKY, after his conviction, told his cellmates:

“In Lefortovo, they put LIBERMAN to me... They let me write my statements in the cell. When I brought them, if they didn’t like them, they tore them and threw them in my face. When I consulted with LIBERMAN, my testimonies always satisfied the investigators. He served as a transfer authority, he dictated their will to me, through him I asked for their advice ...

In the end, I didn’t care, because I was lying, and he couldn’t hurt me, but on the contrary, he facilitated my work ”(arch. case No. 300956, vol. 9, p. 324)

[...]

Thus, the lives of RADEK and SOKOLNIKOV, formally no less guilty, than their fellow accused from the same case, who even before the arrest of Bukharin and Rykov were witnesses of the prosecution against them, were saved.

From the materials available in the KGB archives, it can be seen that SOKOLNIKOV was transferred from prison to Moscow in autumn 1937 for use as a witness in the upcoming trial of BUKHARIN, RYKOV and others, but was returned back due to his refusal to speak in court.

When Sokolnikov and Radek began to expose the falsity of past trials in prison, they were killed.

[...]

How the arrested gave confessions on request of investigators, is clearly visible from testimonies of the former employee of NKVD TSERPENTO P. I.:

"In the summer of 1937 ANTIPOV was interrogated personally by LITVIN... In this record of interrogation it was written that ANTIPOV in September, 1936 received the instruction on creation of the reserve center of right from RYKOV. When this testimony was submitted to RYKOV, RYKOV categorically denied a meeting with ANTIPOV in September, 1936 and insisted that it was in 1932.

Then LULOV in my presence persuaded RYKOV to confirm ANTIPOV's testimony, saying that it was beneficial for him, RYKOV, to testify this way...

During the preparation of the trial of RYKOV, BUKHARIN and others (at the end of 1937), I learned from GLEBOV that now ANTIPOV is writing completely new statements, in which, in particular, he says that the reserve center of the right was established in 1932, at the same time GLEBOV suggested to me to re-interrogate RYKOV in accordance with these new statements.

When I expressed surprise that ANTIPOV managed to circumvent LITVIN, giving him false testimony, GLEBOV told me that there was nothing to be surprised about, because ANTIPOV is such an arrested person, who is ready to give any testimony in any direction.

On GLEBOV's order before the trial I had to persuade RYKOV to admit his first testimony, in which it was said about the creation of the reserve center of the right in 1932, and not 1936." (arch. case No. 982027, vol. 1, pp. 222-223)

As TSERPENTO further testified, RYKOV, signing one of the new versions of "his" testimony, said:

"One advises not to testify about ANTIPOV, while the other (i.e., I) requires evidence against him. I don't know who to listen to. (arch. case No. 982027, vol. 1, pp. 30-31)

As is known, at the first meeting of the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR on March 2, 1938, the arrested KRESTINSKY did not confess guilt and renounced the testimony given by him during the investigation. At the same time KRESTINSKY explicitly said that he had not testified voluntarily before and had not retracted his testimony during the investigation only out of fear that his statement would not reach the leaders of the party and the government. (Court report, pp. 54, 58)

This refusal caused disarray among the members of the Military Collegium, and the court adjourned. However, the next day KRESTINSKY confirmed the testimony he had given at the investigation and said that the day before he had allegedly automatically declared his innocence under the influence of a sense of false shame (ibid., p. 146).

The investigation revealed that KRESTINSKY was testifying in the process of investigation being subjected to brutal beatings, and, consequently, his refusal to testify in court had real grounds.

Former employee of the NKVD SSSR ARONSON testified about the circumstances related to the testimony of KRESTINSKY in court:

"I, like many other employees, was present at the trial. At the first meeting, KRESTINSKY withdrew his earlier testimony and pleaded not guilty. This statement caused disarray for Vyshinsky, who was in charge of the process.

During the break, we, the investigators, discussed what had happened and discussed how to get out of this situation. NIKOLAEV (leading the case of RAKOVSKY) then said that he would try to settle the incident. When the defendants were being taken from the court, KRESTINSKY was taken along with RAKOVSKY. The next day, KRESTINSKY confessed guilt and confirmed all his earlier testimony. I think, and so said the investigators afterwards, that Krestinsky was not beaten, but persuaded by RAKOVSKY. They said that RAKOVSKY, who had a great influence on KRESTINSKY, told him something like this: "You have to admit guilt, everybody admits guilt, and a non-repentant will be seen by the court as an unrepentant enemy, and will be shot, while a confession will save your life. The family of the confessed person will not suffer, and if you refuse, they will also be repressed. This has had such an impact on KRESTINSKY that he did not try to retract the evidence given during the investigation until the end of the trial.

[...]

RAKOVSKY told the same story in the Orel prison:

"When the trial was going on, the investigators did not leave me, they were encouraging, they talked about the impression that this vile comedy made on me. (arch. case No. 300956, vol. 7, p. 325)

The former NKVD officer LERNER, who was involved in the investigation of the case, was interrogated as a witness in July 1956:

"I did not follow through with the investigation of the YAGODA case, the last 6-8 months I have been dealing with other cases and had no relation to the investigation of the case.

However, when the trial started, obviously, given that I had a good relationship with YAGODA, at the direction of the administration of the People's Commissariat, I was present at the whole trial and during the breaks of the trial I played chess with YAGODA...

During the trial, or rather during the breaks in the process, YAGODA often asked me whether he would be shot or not.

I also know that before the trial, YAGODA was given a date with his wife AVERBAKH. Earlier, at the direction of the People's Commissariat, I repeatedly told YAGODA that his wife was free, although in fact she was arrested.

Therefore, before the date, YAGODA's wife was re-dressed and brought to such a state as to give the impression that she did not come from prison, but as if she was free. For this purpose, a hairdresser was specially invited to visit her, who was cleaning her up, putting on her appropriate clothes and returning her hand-watches that had been taken away from her earlier.

According to the words of the former head of the Leningrad region's UNKVD LITVIN, I know that Yahoda was the last one to be shot, and before that he and Bukharin were put on chairs and forced to watch the execution of the sentence against other convicts".

After the conviction RAKOVSKY told his inmates: "I coordinated my theses at the trial, my last word with the investigators... Lately everything was at my service up to the olives". (arch. case No. 300956, vol. 7, p. 325)

This story by RAKOVSKY is fully confirmed in the archival documents of the NKVD. It is clear from them that such a situation took place not only with regard to the RAKOVSKY, but also with regard to other defendants in the present case.

Thus, in the archival files at RAKOVSKY and GRINKO, typed theses of their future testimony in court were found. When comparing these theses with the testimony given by RAKOVSKY and GRINKO in court, it turned out that they are identical in terms of structure and meaning, and some phrases of them are almost verbatim repeated in the transcript of the trial.

Moreover, the same archival materials also contained drafts of the "last words" of the defendants of RAKOVSKY, RYKOV and GRINKO, and the materials on RAKOVSKY contained even two variants of the "last word" in court.

As it was established by the inspection, the falsification of documents of the investigative case was not limited to the investigation, but also continued in court.

In the archive of the State Security Committee under the Council of Ministers of the USSR a transcript of the court session on the case of the anti-Soviet Trotskyist right-block with various handwritten amendments and inserts was found.

The study of this transcript and its comparison with the official text of the trial transcript shows that the testimony recorded in the court was subsequently changed, and in some cases these changes were in the nature of strengthening and perverting the testimony of the defendants.

[...]

In view of the established facts of gross violation of the law during the investigation of the case of the Trotskyist right center both in the process of preliminary investigation and in court, it is also important that all the defendants who survived later withdrew their testimony and told about the process as a falsified investigation and trial. All of them (RAKOVSKY, BESSONOV and PLETNEV) were shot on September 11, 1941 by the verdict of the Military Collegium, which, having grossly violated the law, passed this verdict not only without summoning the accused to court, but even having no case on their accusation.

Thus, as a result of the analysis of all the materials of the case and additional inspection it is possible to assert that the majority of the persons convicted in the present case took an active part in the opposition struggle, but the accusation that in the following years they created the right Trotskyite bloc and carried out organized anti-Soviet activity is falsified and in this part they are subject to rehabilitation. 

The SS-[...] belonged from 10.6.1942 - 5.4.1943
"     SS-[...]    "     "  July 1941 - 5.4.1943
"     SS-[...]    "     "  8.12.1941 - 5.4.1943, and
"     SS-[...]    "     "  8.12.1941 - 5.4.1943

to the SS-Sonderkommando Kulmhof.

Their activity with this Sonderkommando, which consisted in the immediate fight and annihilation of state enemies, took place under constant use of life and required in particular a manly and strong mental attitude. The activities of those named were of crucial importance for the solution of one of the most important ethnic problems. Numbers 1 to 4 are worthy of the award in every respect. A criminal or disciplinary procedure does not exist against them.

Posen, 16 June 1943
Secret State Police
State Police Headquarters Posen
[signature Steinberg]

Advocates:
The Inspector of the Security Police and Security Service Posen
[signature Damzog]
SS-Oberführer and Oberst der Polizei
[rubber stamp]

The Documents

He [Reichskommissar Ukraine Erich Koch] said:I am losing 500,000 Jews here. I have to take them away because the Jews are the element of uproar. But in my area the Jews have actually been the whole artisans. Now they want to build colleges and middle schools so that we can build here the national Ukrainian state, which will fight once against Russia. I am not even able to mend the boots for the worker who has to work here. I can not because no craftsman is there anymore. The Jews are all gone.