I N THE SECOND week, the indictment was read out. It took a day and a half to read—a day and a half in the subjunctive. The first defendant is alleged to have . . . Furthermore she is alleged . . . In addition, she is alleged . . . Thus she comes under the necessary conditions of paragraph so-and-so, furthermore she is alleged to have committed this and that act . . . She is alleged to have acted illegally and culpably. Hanna was the fourth defendant.
The five accused women had been guards in a small camp near Cracow, a satellite camp for Auschwitz. They had been transferred there from Auschwitz in early 1944 to replace guards killed or injured in an explosion in the factory where the women in the camp worked. One count of the indictment involved their conduct at Auschwitz, but that was of minor significance compared with the other charges. I no longer remember it. Was it because it didn’t involve Hanna, but only the other women? Was it of minor importance in relation to the other counts, or minor, period? Did it simply seem inexcusable to have someone available for trial who had been in Auschwitz and not charge them about their conduct in Auschwitz?
Of course the five defendants had not been in charge of the camp. There was a commandant, plus special troops, and other female guards. Most of the troops and guards had not survived the bombing raid that put an end one night to the prisoners’ westward march. Some fled the same night, and vanished as surely as the commandant, who had made himself scarce as soon as the column of prisoners set off on the forced march to the west.
None of the prisoners should, by rights, have survived the night of the bombing. But two did survive, a mother and her daughter, and the daughter had written a book about the camp and the march west and published it in America. The police and prosecutors had tracked down not only the five defendants but several witnesses who had lived in the village which had taken the bombing hits that ended the death march. The most important witnesses were the daughter, who had come to Germany, and the mother, who had remained in Israel. To depose the mother the court, prosecutors, and defense lawyers were going to go to Israel—the only part of the trial I did not attend.
One main charge concerned selections in the camp. Each month around sixty new women were sent out from Auschwitz and the same number were sent back, minus those who had died in the meantime. It was clear to everyone that the women would be killed in Auschwitz; it was those who could no longer perform useful work in the factory who were sent back. The factory made munitions; the actual work was not difficult, but the women hardly ever got to do the actual work, because they had to do raw construction to repair the devastating damage caused by the explosion early in the year.
The other main charge involved the night of the bombing that ended everything. The troops and guards had locked the prisoners, several hundred women, in a church in a village that had been abandoned by most of its inhabitants. Only a few bombs fell, possibly intended for the nearby railroad or a factory, or maybe simply released because they were left over from a raid on a larger town. One of them hit the priest’s house in which the troops and guards were sleeping. Another landed on the church steeple. First the steeple burned, then the roof; then the blazing rafters collapsed into the nave, and the pews caught fire. The heavy doors were unbudgeable. The defendants could have unlocked them. They did not, and the women locked in the church burned to death.
第二周，法庭宣讀起訴書。宣讀起訴書用了一天半的時間，使用了一天半的虛擬式。被告首先犯有……此外她犯有……再有她犯有……因此她觸犯了某條某款，此外她犯有這種罪行和那種罪行，她的行為是違法的和犯罪的。漢娜是第四名被告人。
這五名被告都是克拉科夫一所小集中營的女看守?？死品蚴菉W斯威辛的一個外圍集中營。一九四四年春，她們從奧斯威辛被派往那里。她們是代替在一家工廠的爆炸中被炸死或者炸傷的女看守們。在那家工廠里，集中營里的女囚犯們要做工。指控之一是被告?zhèn)冊趭W斯威辛的行為，不過，與另一項指控相比，這一指控又顯得不那么重要了。我已不記得另一項指控是什么了。它們與漢娜毫無關(guān)系而只涉及到另外幾位女看守嗎？難道與另一項指控相比對奧斯威辛的指控就不重要了嗎？或者它本身就不重要？一個在奧斯威辛呆過并由此而被捕的人卻不是因為他在奧斯威辛的行為而遭到指控，這不顯得令人難以容忍嗎？
當然了，這五名被告并不是那所集中營的頭頭。集中營有一名指揮官，一個警衛(wèi)隊還有其他女看守。一天夜里，囚犯們被趕著西行，途中遭到轟炸，大部分警衛(wèi)隊的人和女看守在轟炸中喪了生，有幾位當天夜里開了小差，而指揮官出發(fā)不久就逃得無影無蹤了。
那些囚犯在那天晚上的轟炸中本不該有任何人能活下來，但是還是有一對母女活了下來。那位女兒寫了一本關(guān)于集中營和那次西行的書，并在美國付樣。警察和檢查院不僅找到了這五名被告，而且還找到了幾位證人，西行隊伍在一個村子遭到轟炸時他們就住在那個村子里。最重要的證人就是那位女兒和她的留在以色列的母親。女兒專程來到了德國。為了向她的母親取證，法庭、檢查官和辯護人去了以色列。那是審理過程中我沒經(jīng)歷到的一個片段。
最主要的一項指控是在集中營中進行的挑選。每個月大約有六十名婦女被送出奧斯威辛，同樣也有這個數(shù)目的婦女被送進來，這個數(shù)目不包括在這期間死掉的。所有的人都清楚，這些婦女在奧斯威辛將被殺掉，這些被送進來的都是在工廠里木能再做工的。那是一家彈藥廠，盡管彈藥廠本身的工作并不繁重，但是在那家彈藥廠里，婦女們幾乎沒做她們本該做的工作，而是要參加建筑，因為年初的一次爆炸使工廠遭到嚴重破壞。
另一項重要指控涉及那個遭到轟炸的夜晚，一切都結(jié)束于那一夜。警衛(wèi)隊和女看守們一起把好幾百號的女囚徒關(guān)在了一個村子的教堂里。大部分村民已經(jīng)逃離。沒有落下幾枚炸彈，轟炸的目標也許是附近的火車道，或者一座工廠，也許是在空襲一座大城市之后還剩幾枚炸彈，于是隨意亂投下一枚炸彈剛好擊中了警衛(wèi)隊和女看守們過夜的牧師住宅，另一枚炸彈落到了教堂的塔上。起初是搭著了火，接著是教堂的房頂，然后教堂的全部屋梁火光沖天地塌陷到了教堂的里面，于是，教堂里面的全部椅子都開始著火。沉重的大門紋絲不動。那些被告完全可以把門打開，但是她們沒有這樣做，那些被關(guān)在教堂里的婦女都被燒死了。
The five accused women had been guards in a small camp near Cracow, a satellite camp for Auschwitz. They had been transferred there from Auschwitz in early 1944 to replace guards killed or injured in an explosion in the factory where the women in the camp worked. One count of the indictment involved their conduct at Auschwitz, but that was of minor significance compared with the other charges. I no longer remember it. Was it because it didn’t involve Hanna, but only the other women? Was it of minor importance in relation to the other counts, or minor, period? Did it simply seem inexcusable to have someone available for trial who had been in Auschwitz and not charge them about their conduct in Auschwitz?
Of course the five defendants had not been in charge of the camp. There was a commandant, plus special troops, and other female guards. Most of the troops and guards had not survived the bombing raid that put an end one night to the prisoners’ westward march. Some fled the same night, and vanished as surely as the commandant, who had made himself scarce as soon as the column of prisoners set off on the forced march to the west.
None of the prisoners should, by rights, have survived the night of the bombing. But two did survive, a mother and her daughter, and the daughter had written a book about the camp and the march west and published it in America. The police and prosecutors had tracked down not only the five defendants but several witnesses who had lived in the village which had taken the bombing hits that ended the death march. The most important witnesses were the daughter, who had come to Germany, and the mother, who had remained in Israel. To depose the mother the court, prosecutors, and defense lawyers were going to go to Israel—the only part of the trial I did not attend.
One main charge concerned selections in the camp. Each month around sixty new women were sent out from Auschwitz and the same number were sent back, minus those who had died in the meantime. It was clear to everyone that the women would be killed in Auschwitz; it was those who could no longer perform useful work in the factory who were sent back. The factory made munitions; the actual work was not difficult, but the women hardly ever got to do the actual work, because they had to do raw construction to repair the devastating damage caused by the explosion early in the year.
The other main charge involved the night of the bombing that ended everything. The troops and guards had locked the prisoners, several hundred women, in a church in a village that had been abandoned by most of its inhabitants. Only a few bombs fell, possibly intended for the nearby railroad or a factory, or maybe simply released because they were left over from a raid on a larger town. One of them hit the priest’s house in which the troops and guards were sleeping. Another landed on the church steeple. First the steeple burned, then the roof; then the blazing rafters collapsed into the nave, and the pews caught fire. The heavy doors were unbudgeable. The defendants could have unlocked them. They did not, and the women locked in the church burned to death.
第二周，法庭宣讀起訴書。宣讀起訴書用了一天半的時間，使用了一天半的虛擬式。被告首先犯有……此外她犯有……再有她犯有……因此她觸犯了某條某款，此外她犯有這種罪行和那種罪行，她的行為是違法的和犯罪的。漢娜是第四名被告人。
這五名被告都是克拉科夫一所小集中營的女看守?？死品蚴菉W斯威辛的一個外圍集中營。一九四四年春，她們從奧斯威辛被派往那里。她們是代替在一家工廠的爆炸中被炸死或者炸傷的女看守們。在那家工廠里，集中營里的女囚犯們要做工。指控之一是被告?zhèn)冊趭W斯威辛的行為，不過，與另一項指控相比，這一指控又顯得不那么重要了。我已不記得另一項指控是什么了。它們與漢娜毫無關(guān)系而只涉及到另外幾位女看守嗎？難道與另一項指控相比對奧斯威辛的指控就不重要了嗎？或者它本身就不重要？一個在奧斯威辛呆過并由此而被捕的人卻不是因為他在奧斯威辛的行為而遭到指控，這不顯得令人難以容忍嗎？
當然了，這五名被告并不是那所集中營的頭頭。集中營有一名指揮官，一個警衛(wèi)隊還有其他女看守。一天夜里，囚犯們被趕著西行，途中遭到轟炸，大部分警衛(wèi)隊的人和女看守在轟炸中喪了生，有幾位當天夜里開了小差，而指揮官出發(fā)不久就逃得無影無蹤了。
那些囚犯在那天晚上的轟炸中本不該有任何人能活下來，但是還是有一對母女活了下來。那位女兒寫了一本關(guān)于集中營和那次西行的書，并在美國付樣。警察和檢查院不僅找到了這五名被告，而且還找到了幾位證人，西行隊伍在一個村子遭到轟炸時他們就住在那個村子里。最重要的證人就是那位女兒和她的留在以色列的母親。女兒專程來到了德國。為了向她的母親取證，法庭、檢查官和辯護人去了以色列。那是審理過程中我沒經(jīng)歷到的一個片段。
最主要的一項指控是在集中營中進行的挑選。每個月大約有六十名婦女被送出奧斯威辛，同樣也有這個數(shù)目的婦女被送進來，這個數(shù)目不包括在這期間死掉的。所有的人都清楚，這些婦女在奧斯威辛將被殺掉，這些被送進來的都是在工廠里木能再做工的。那是一家彈藥廠，盡管彈藥廠本身的工作并不繁重，但是在那家彈藥廠里，婦女們幾乎沒做她們本該做的工作，而是要參加建筑，因為年初的一次爆炸使工廠遭到嚴重破壞。
另一項重要指控涉及那個遭到轟炸的夜晚，一切都結(jié)束于那一夜。警衛(wèi)隊和女看守們一起把好幾百號的女囚徒關(guān)在了一個村子的教堂里。大部分村民已經(jīng)逃離。沒有落下幾枚炸彈，轟炸的目標也許是附近的火車道，或者一座工廠，也許是在空襲一座大城市之后還剩幾枚炸彈，于是隨意亂投下一枚炸彈剛好擊中了警衛(wèi)隊和女看守們過夜的牧師住宅，另一枚炸彈落到了教堂的塔上。起初是搭著了火，接著是教堂的房頂，然后教堂的全部屋梁火光沖天地塌陷到了教堂的里面，于是，教堂里面的全部椅子都開始著火。沉重的大門紋絲不動。那些被告完全可以把門打開，但是她們沒有這樣做，那些被關(guān)在教堂里的婦女都被燒死了。