ORIGINAL: IronDuke
ORIGINAL: Kevinugly
I've been trying to find Dietrich's statement that he allegedly made under oath. MacDonald doesn't mention it at all, the 'Jewish Library' link that I gave above only mentions that the US prosecuters tried to make use of it during the trial of Peiper & co. at Dachau and failed. Cole makes a meal of it in his 'Official History' but doesn't quote verbatim. I'm starting to wonder whether Dietrich ever said anything about the 'Terror' order whilst under oath since there surely would be a written record of it - it's one of the big war trials from the perspective of the American military after all.
The whole trial was a mess, and Reynolds in his Peiper biography gives a good account of the mess, without revealing too much of the specifics of the courtroom.
The testimony Von Rom keeps quoting was important to the American case because it showed all troops were guilty of war crimes because all had received the order and understood it. The order (if accepted as evidence) demonstrates pre-meditation, and condemns those who receive and accept it. The irregularities that were alleged about the trial were quite extensive. Perhaps the key element that discredited the wave of terror order was that Peiper's men clearly took hundreds of prisoners both before and after the episode at Malmedy. In other words, they must have disobeyed Hitler's order more often than they obeyed it.
Reynolds says that all the statements were dictated by American interrogators, before being signed by the defendants. I suspect Dietrich said nothing of the sort, it was dictated for him. The evidence would not be accepted in a court of law, heresay or otherwise.
Some of the stuff is laughable. At one point, the US prosecutors persuaded a Belgian citizen to sign a dictated statement alleging his wife was killed by German tank fire. The statement never got read into the evidence, because before he signed it, the Belgian crossed out the words German tank and replaced them with American artillery.
I personally suspect it was a case of a German Panzer crewman suspecting or noticing an american or two at the back of the crowd set off across the fields in escape. (We know some Americans escaped quietly before the shooting started).
The US Soldiers understandably panicked as the shots rang out and began to run (Some witnesses reported the Officers ordered them to stand firm, perhaps realising what would happen). Trigger happy Waffen SS in the vicinity saw the panic and opened up, triggering more running and more shooting. Too many people escaped the massacre for me to be convinced it was wholly premeditated.
I don't buy the argument they were left behind by Peiper and picked up weapons before opening up on the next Waffen SS that came along. These were green troops if memory serves, who had just lost fifty of their number. They were an artillery unit, I seem to remember, and I can't believe they would have done this.
It is Peiper's responsibility. POWS are under the care of those that accept the surrender. I suspect in the general hurry of the advance, the men were not escorted or cared for properly and a tragic chain of events ensued.
In terms of a grudging admiration for Peiper, he seems to have lost all interest in anything when he was told at his interrogation some of his Camrades were providing evidence against him. It may not simply be a case of the Commanding Officer grimly accepting all responsibility. It's also difficult to warm to a man who served Heinrich Himmler on his personal staff for years and remained a NAZI until his death.
Regards,
IronDuke
