Table of contents:
Element:
P.38. Evidence inferred from an utterance, a document or a deed.
P.38.1. Evidence inferred from a plan to cause the physical or mental effect conveyed by letter.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
United States of America v. Karl Brandt et al., Case No. 5, Judgement (Military Tribunal No. I), 20 August 1947, reproduced in Trials of War Criminals before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, Proceedings, Vol. 2 (1949-53), p. 277-279:
"Among 10 millions of Jews in Europe, there are, I figure, at least 2-3 millions of men and women who are fit enough to work. Considering the extraordinary difficulties the labour problem presents us with I hold the view that those 2-3 millions should be specially selected and preserved. This can however only be done if at the same time they are rendered incapable to propagate. About a year ago I reported to you that agents of mine have completed the experiments necessary for this purpose. I would like to recall these facts once more. Sterilization, as normally performed on persons with hereditary diseases is here out of the question because it takes too long and is too expensive. Castration by X-ray is however not only relatively cheap, but can also be performed in many thousands on the shortest time. I think at this time that it is already irrelevant whether the people in question become aware of having been castrated after some weeks or months, once they feel the effects."
[ ] "A Polish Jew testified before the Tribunal that while confined in Auschwitz concentration camp he was marched to Birkenau and forcibly subjected to severe X-ray exposure and was castrated later in order that the effects of the X-ray could be studied."
B. Evidentiary comment:
The perpetrators meant to cause the castrative effect, and were aware of other side effects that would occur in the ordinary course of events.
