On 30 October 1945, U.S. Army headquarters ordered the establishment of a military tribunal to conduct the Dachau trial. The tribunal was set up on 2 November 1945. It was presided by
major general John M. Lentz, who, like his seven associate judges, wore a uniform during the trial. The prosecution, led by Attorney General
William Denson, was composed of a total of four American
officers. The defence was supported by five American officers and the German lawyer Hans von Posern. Since the language of the court was English, interpreters had to translate the proceedings. Trial observers from Allied states were to take part in the proceedings. The proceedings were opened on 15 November 1945 at 10 a.m., with the prosecution outlining the allegations against the accused. The military judges then established the lawfulness of the court and its jurisdiction over the defendants. The conclusion of the initial phase of the trial was interrupted by two motions for dismissal by the defence. The first motion challenged the jurisdiction of the court. The second claimed that the period during which the crimes had been committed was not defined precisely enough. A third motion referred to the small number of defence lawyers relative to the 40 defendants, claiming that in the case of individual defendants making incriminating statements about their co-defendants, the establishment of an effective defence strategy would be significantly impeded. Hence, they asked for the trial to be split into individual trials. The tribunal dismissed all three motions. It held that the court's jurisdiction was based on the defendants' status as war criminals who were not covered by laws governing the treatment of prisoners of war because the crimes had been committed before they were taken into custody. The second motion was rejected on the grounds that the accused were not primarily charged with individual crimes, but with jointly committing a crime. The motion for division of the proceedings into individual trials was dismissed for the same reason. follows the proceedings, 17 November 1945 The chairman then read out the indictment and explained the rights of the accused in the proceedings. When asked how they plead, the defendants all answered "not guilty". The prosecution then outlined its view of facts of the case and presented evidence. Among the 139 pieces of admitted evidence were 60 photographs, the camp's death books from 1941 and 1942, other incriminating documents and the defendants' testimony. Among the 69 witnesses for the prosecution were former prisoners and officers of the U.S. Army who had been involved in the liberation of Dachau concentration camp and the documentation of the crimes committed there. The officers testified to the bodies in the evacuation train from Buchenwald and the catastrophic conditions in the main camp at the time of liberation. Former prisoners then testified to the inhumane living conditions the camp, including , nutrition, accommodation,
forced labour,
epidemics, medical experiments, selections and executions, mistreatment and killings. In addition to the conditions in the main camp, the catastrophic living conditions in the satellite camps were described. The defence responded with 93 witnessesincluding the accusedand 27 admitted pieces of evidence. Both the defence and prosecution cross-examined witnesses. Those defendants who had been members of the camp staff were accused of mistreating and sometimes killing prisoners; another set of crimes included participation in executions and crimes related to the camp evacuation. The camp doctors and medical staff were charged with taking part in executions by declaring the deaths of the executed and in some cases by participating in the selection, mistreatment, and killing of prisoners. The commandant's staff were accused of bearing the primary responsibility for the disastrous conditions in the camp, thus enabling the system of killings, mistreatment and inhumane neglect. Two of the three prisoner functionaries were accused of mistreating and killing prisoners. The other was accused of participating in executions. The defendants minimised the crimes, invoking
Befehlsnotstand or denying that they were at the scene of the crimes while they were committed. during his testimony, 7 December 1945 Special attention was paid to 74 year old
Claus Schilling, who was by far the oldest defendant in the Dachau camp trial. Schilling, who was neither a member of the
NSDAP nor of the
SS, held a doctorate and
habilitation in
tropical medicine. A respected physician, he had studied under
Robert Koch and specialised in
malaria research beginning in 1898. Even after his retirement in 1936, Schilling continued his research work and was able to convince
Heinrich Himmler of the necessity of developing a malaria vaccine for the war. Soon afterwards, Schilling was provided with an experimental station in the Dachau concentration camp to conduct his malaria studies. From February 1942 to early April 1945, 1,000 to 1,200 concentration camp prisoners were deliberately infected with malaria and subsequently treated with drugs on a trial basis. More than 100, but possibly up to 400, prisoners died as a result of these experiments. Schilling did not deny that the experiments had been carried out. He justified his victims' suffering as being in the interest of science. He therefore asked the court to allow him to complete and document his experiments. Moreover, he claimed that he had nothing to do with the events in the camp itself. The military court rejected Schilling's argument. The defence lawyers attacked the allegation of common design, stating that it was not part of European legal tradition and claiming that it had been applied to the defendants in an arbitrary manner. They reasoned that the trial could only take place because the doctrine had been applied, since proof of individual culpability had not been provided for many of the accused. The defence stated that in the case of former camp commander Weiß, even witnesses for the prosecution had pointed out that the conditions in the Dachau concentration camp had noticeably improved under his leadership. They further claimed that in some cases false witness statements had been used in court and that the fact that some defendants had been involuntarily called to serve in the camp had not been taken into account. In summarising their argument, the defence lawyers stated that the main culprits had to be found in the
Nuremberg Trial and that the Dachau camp trial was guided by a desire for retaliation. The tribunal's chairman announced the sentences on 13 December 1945. 36 death sentences, one sentence of life imprisonment and three other prison sentences with the obligation to perform
forced labour were imposed. In its justification of judgment, the court again pointed out the criminal nature of the jointly committed offence, which made it necessary to sentence all the accused. EugenSeybold ident. HINTERMAYER.jpg|Former prisoner Eugen Seybold identifies
Fritz Hintermayer, 22 November 1945 Theodore Korcz.jpeg|Polish priest Theodore Korcz (left) reads from the Malaria protocols on 22 November 1945 Wilhelm Wagner.jpeg|Wilhelm Wagner during his testimony on 30 November 1945 Friedrich Wetzel.jpeg|Former prisoner Helmuth Breiding identifies Friedrich Wetzel on 22 November 1945 Wetzel testifies.jpeg|Friedrich Wetzel (right) during his testimony on 29 November 1945 Wetzel Friedrich.jpeg|Friedrich Wetzel (seen from the back with number 40) during the delivery of the verdict on 13 December 1945
Individual sentences == Review procedure ==