Lucy followed.
4
Within minutes Mr Bartlett had referred to the reports of killing described to Lucy during the adjournment, some of which had not been publicised at the time of receipt. He then said: ‘As regards the population in France, they may have come across non-specific rumours that some people would not have believed?’
‘Unfortunately’
‘For the rumours were incredible?’ ‘That is part of the tragedy Yes.’
‘Reasonably rejected by any right-minded person?’
‘Not quite, Mr Bartlett. You appear to have missed the point I made before. Cooperation floundered because there were others who did believe the rumours.
‘But you do accept there was room for both positions — acceptance and rejection.’
‘Of course.
Mr Bartlett stopped asking questions. Lucy sensed the turning of a lens, a movement away from the last words to a sharpening of focus on what was about to come next. He said: ‘Would you credit Mr Schwermann with the same beliefs and suspicions as a French policeman aged twenty-three based in Paris?’
Doctor Vallon all but laughed. ‘The proposition is offensive. He was part of the machinery. He had daily contact with Eichmann in Berlin.’
‘There is no room for doubt?’
‘In my view, no.’
‘None whatsoever?’
‘None.’
Lucy felt deep unease. Doctor Vallon was only saying what Mr Bartlett expected him to say
Mr Bartlett said, ‘Would you be so kind as to consider Volume Seven, section A, page two.’
Doctor Vallon was handed a ring-binder. He found the page and gave a nod of recognition.
‘This is a telex from Paris to Department IV B4 in Berlin, dated August 1942,’ said Mr Bartlett.
‘It is.’
‘From Mr Schwermann?’
‘Yes.’
‘To Adolf Eichmann?’
‘Correct.’
‘Please tell the jury what this telex is all about.’
‘It reports that a thousand Jews had been transported from Drancy to Auschwitz.’
‘Turn the page, please. This is a memorandum referring to the same transport. What does it record?’
‘That sufficient food for two weeks had been provided in separate trucks by the French government. ‘
‘This was not an uncommon practice, Doctor Vallon, was it?’
‘No, but-’
‘Don’t be grudging with the facts, Doctor Vallon; it is there in black and white. Provisions were being sent with these passengers.
‘I’m not being grudging with the facts-’
‘This is entirely consistent with resettlement, rather than extermination?’
Doctor Vallon closed the folder and snapped, ‘None of the food was distributed. It was taken by the guards at Auschwitz.’
Unperturbed, Mr Bartlett said mildly, ‘Answer the question, please. The texts are consistent with a perceived policy of emigration, and wholly inconsistent with a policy of execution upon arrival, are they not?’
‘As words on a page, possibly’
‘Don’t scorn ordinary meaning, Doctor. These are words, not runes.
‘I’m well aware of that:
‘Anyone reading these documents could have understood them to reflect a policy of resettlement outside France. Yes?’
‘An ignorant reader might think that fifty years after the event, but not the author. I keep stressing to you, he was a part of the machinery. There are other SS memoranda in these files which expressly state the Jews were to be ausgerottet — eradicated.’
‘Yes, I know,’ said Mr Bartlett in a measured, patient voice. ‘And none of them were written by Mr Schwermann, were they?’
‘No, but-’
‘And there is not a shred of evidence that Mr Schwermann ever read them?’
‘Well, we don’t know. ‘
‘There is no suggestion that he used such language himself?’
‘Not as such, but it is an obvious inference that he-’
‘Doctor Vallon, we’ll leave the jury to do the inferring. Among this mass of documentation there is not a single sentence that demonstrates Mr Schwermann had explicit knowledge of extermination, is there?’
‘There isn’t a piece of paper that says so, no.
‘And there are lots of other pieces of paper that record very different terms to ausgerottet, terms that we know Mr Schwermann read and used.’
Doctor Vallon had guessed the next direction of attack. He said, ‘Yes, and they’re all tarnung — camouflage.’
Mr Bartlett opened a file. ‘Indeed,’ he said warmly ‘Perhaps now is the time to consider the innocence of language, whose ordinary use can so easily trap the unwary, even the likes of yourself. Please turn to File Nine, page three hundred and sixty-seven, and consider the words on the schedule.’
A clerk brought the file to Doctor Vallon, who went on to agree that the German High Command were extraordinarily concerned about the vocabulary to be used when describing the process of deportation to Auschwitz. It was variously described as Evakuierung (evacuation), Umsiedlung (resettlement) and Abwanderung (emigration), or Verschickung zur Zwangsarbeit (sending away for forced labour). Even the architects and engineers at Auschwitz referred to the gas chambers as Badeanstalte fur Sonderaktionen (bathhouses for special actions). Their memoranda recorded the phrase in quotation marks. And, of course, the entire apparatus of genocide was named die Endlosung (the Final Solution).
Mr Bartlett said, ‘The whole point of the exercise is to deceive the reader or listener, is it not? Someone somewhere is expected to believe the surface meaning?’
‘Yes, I accept that.’
‘There were three meetings held in Paris to plan the Vel d’Hiv round-up. Mr Schwermann attended two of them. The understanding was that those arrested would be deported “for labour service” — is that right?’
‘Yes — even though thousands of children would be taken.’
‘Phraseology that Mr Schwermann could reasonably have taken at face value?’ pressed Mr Bartlett.
‘I have already told you, he is one of the deceivers, not one of the deceived. He will have seen other documents that refer to extermination.’
‘Would he? Do you always read the notes of the meetings you miss or avoid?’
‘As a matter of fact I do.’
‘Do all your colleagues?’
‘No. No, they don’t, actually’
‘Thank you, Doctor Vallon.’
Mr Bartlett promptly sat down.
‘That is enough for today,’ said Mr Justice Pollbrook with a weariness of having seen it all before.
