English Translation

8( T t d was carried out, it must be noted that at that time such a condition was permissible if a second doctor, after examining the health condition of a patient, considered that a continuation of pregnancy would worsen an existing condition, or could even endanger the life of the mother. Through this examination by a second doctor, the public was already established, so to speak, and the performing physician was covered in every respect. There were no precise P'Guidelines for the interruption of pregnancy" and also no expert commission, as now in the Reich and also in the Sudetenland. These new guidelines point to a much stricter scale than was the case at the time. It is now impossible to judge the case from Czechoslovakia according to the Reichsdeutsche guidelines (which only came into force in the Sudetenland from 1 Marz l940 onwards!) and to apply, as it were, a law retroactively. However, this was done in my case and only in this way could one be sentenced. Only two-three doctors were charged, although at least 80% of the Sudeten German doctors acted under the previous conditions and had to do so, because they had no experts as now. It is very regrettable, but the doctors could not do otherwise at the time. This question had changed considerably with the ideal connection of the SDP to the NSDAP in May l938, and so the doctors were able to do so even then according to the directives now in force. In addition, only the old- Reichs-German Sech-lergemen were admitted to the trial, who were in complete ignorance of both the legal and economic and social conditions in the Rschechoslovakia and were therefore indivisible according to the strict guidelines which were already in force in the German Reich at that time, although the cases charged were carried out in 1935, 1936, 1937 and one case in February 1938. At that time, the official physician in Tepl, (Sudetendeutscher) Dr, Schmiedl, who was admitted as an expert witness, was able to explain the point of view of this issue of abortion in the Czech Republic. These were submitted by the defense in turn 2 certificates, which had led astättenx to the interruption of pregnancy, and he had to state that under these circumstances the intervention was justified at that time. When the defense announced that, recently in the negotiations, this 2 case was not considered justified by the old-time German expert, who was acting according to the new guidelines, and thus contributed substantially to the overall judgment, the submission of such further attestations was no longer considered. The doctor, who under the conditions of that time carried out pregnancy interruptions in Tescho-Slovakia, is now condemned according to the rules and laws now in force, although he did not then get and know these guidelines, and on this question there was a laxer attitude. Is this attitude to this question not to be held responsible by the judiciary itself at that time? After all, the prosecutors in Czechoslovakia were well aware of the Hanhobeung at the time, otherwise they could not have stopped the proceedings in the numerous cases taken up at that time.Can these prosecutors be held responsible, because in the year l935 and continuously they did not follow the strict "guidelines on abortion" as they came into force from 1 March l940 in the Sudeten- land and did not turn to a Gutach- ter Commission, which did not exist then? But this position is taken by the doctor!