Truth about hangings of convicted July 1944 defendents

[fredric]

Canaris, like the others hanged at Flossenburg, was not garotted with an iron collar. This technique was not used in the Reich. The story is nonsense. The hangings were done by short-drop suspension with a rope attached to a hook. The condemned were made to climb a short ladder which was pulled away. The executioners reported that Canaris took a long time and that they lifted him twice. This was manual lifting and possibly designed not to prolong but to expedite his death.

It amazes me how these myths warp executions whether in Plotzensee or elsewhere.

You don't have to look far to find accurate accounts.

[fredric]

Anyone interested in documentation of the execution should check the deposition of Flossenburg's medical officer, SS-Sutmbannfuhrer Dr. Hermann Fischer, published in Die Welt, October 1, 1955. Salient portions of his deposition can be found in Canaris, Hitler's Master Spy by Heinz Hohne. Also included is a detailed description of the hanging of Canaris, Oster, Sack, Bonhoeffer adn Gehre. They were hanged with rope nooses attached to hooks that were embedded into the overhanging wooden roof of one of the Flossenburg buildings.

[Desdichado]

Canaris, like the others hanged at Flossenburg, was not garotted with an iron collar. This technique was not used in the Reich. The story is nonsense. The hangings were done by short-drop suspension with a rope attached to a hook. The condemned were made to climb a short ladder which was pulled away. The executioners reported that Canaris took a long time and that they lifted him twice. This was manual lifting and possibly designed not to prolong but to expedite his death.

It amazes me how these myths warp executions whether in Plotzensee or elsewhere.

You don't have to look far to find accurate accounts.

Don't assume that what I wrote was intended to be a factual account of the execution of Canaris. It wasn't. Mueller's testimony was a classic example of "double hearsay." Any lawyer will tell you how difficult it is to get such evidence admitted before a court of law. It is fairly obvious that Cave-Brown does not offer Mueller's statement as proof positive that Canaris was hanged with an iron collar; he simply republishes what Mueller said.

You mention that Canaris's executioners "reported" on his death. If there is a verified written document out there , I would be interested in reading it as Cave-Brown's book is 30 years old and not immune to errors. If one doesn't have to go far to find "accurate accounts," where might I find one? Facts do come to light and when they do, it is the duty of the historian to apprise them and correct any errors. As far as I am aware, Mueller's testimony is unrefuted. Mueller may have misheard or misinterpreted the SS officer's story but, nevertheless, that is what he supposedly heard. As Dr. Mueller was a close friend and confederate of Canaris, he would have a motive to exaggerate the tale if only to boost the reputation of his dead comrade. But, as before, we are left with only speculation.

I agree with you that Canaris likely died as you describe but I cannot suspend disbelief and consider for one moment that Canaris's SS executioners might have shown compassion to Canaris by hastening his death by 'lifting' him. The SS were not known for their humanitarian concerns in these matters. Even if we dismiss the use of an iron collar.it is sheer folly to even consider that the SS executioners would expedite a hanging in a concentration camp on altruistic grounds. Remember that Canaris was a prominent member of the Black Orchestra whose contempt for Hitler, Heydrich, the SD and the SS was well known. Now that is 'nonsense.' You may chose to believe that the butchers at Flossenberg acted nobly, and at great risk to themselves, but I don't think you'll find too many people who will support that view.

Hanging a person from a beam after removing any supports from beneath is conducive to death by slow strangulation. If the SS used a running noose without a stay, then the odds are strong that the victim will die of strangulation rather than having his cervical spine broken. The American hangman at Nuremburg used the short drop method. Although the victims were dropped through a trapdoor, the results were the same. In his memoirs "I was the Nuremberg Hangman" Master Sergeant Woods, U.S. Army, describes how he hanged the condemned in batches. Other witnesses to the hangings state that they heard noises coming from the dying men several minutes after the drop. Woods used the classic hangmans' knot - a noose with the rope wound around eleven times above it - which had long fallen out of favour with other western nations that employed hanging as a means of capital punishment because it prolonged suffering.

The former British public hangman, Albert Pierrepoint, in his book, "Executioner Pierrepoint, shows his contempt for the American and German method of hanging. He witnessed the execution of convicted American servicemen hanged mostly for offences against civillians. Pierrepoint was aghast at the cruelty of it all and when he took over at Shepton Mallet prison, he introduced the long drop method immediately. As you know, the long drop involves the hangman ascertaining the weight and height of the condemned and then comparing it to the formula provided in a book of tables. The rope was then adjusted to suit and then it was stretched out the night before and set in the morning. This method was in use at the time when Hitler came to power so it was not unknown to German executioners but, as I understand it, the guillotine was more widely used than the rope. It was certainly fast but Pierrepoint's record for conducting a hanging from beginning to end was seven seconds.

The reason why Canaris and his fellow 20th of July conspirators were hanged was that such an end was the untimate insult to the German officer corp. A slow lingering death on the end of a rope would no doubt have pleased Hitler whose hatred of the Junker class, whom these men represented, had been raging since his days in the List Regiment. Hitler spoke and his lapdog Freisler rushed off to carry out his orders. I hope the pilot that bombed the Peoples' Court that day later found out he'd killed Roland Freisler. He'd have thrown a party.

Regards D

[michael mills]

Hanging a person from a beam after removing any supports from beneath is conducive to death by slow strangulation. If the SS used a running noose without a stay, then the odds are strong that the victim will die of strangulation rather than having his cervical spine broken.

Strangulation is not slow, as is shown by a number of accidental deaths of high-profile persons practising self-strangulation as an erotic enhancement. The deaths occurred because the persons concerned did not realise how quickly they would lose consciousness once their carotid arteries were constricted.

The use of a running noose with a slip-knot is most conducive to immediate tightening once the full bodyweight of the victim is brought to bear, thereby causing immediate constriction of the carotid arteries and a very rapid loss of consciousness.

[Desdichado]

Anyone interested in documentation of the execution should check the deposition of Flossenburg's medical officer, SS-Sutmbannfuhrer Dr. Hermann Fischer, published in Die Welt, October 1, 1955. Salient portions of his deposition can be found in Canaris, Hitler's Master Spy by Heinz Hohne. Also included is a detailed description of the hanging of Canaris, Oster, Sack, Bonhoeffer adn Gehre. They were hanged with rope nooses attached to hooks that were embedded into the overhanging wooden roof of one of the Flossenburg buildings.

Is the information published in Die Welt republished elsewhere?

[fredric]

For information from the deposition, see Hans Hohe's book Canaris, Hitler's Master Spy.

[Desdichado]

For information from the deposition, see Hans Hohe's book Canaris, Hitler's Master Spy.

Thanks for that information. It surprises me that Cave-Brown didn't refer to the Die Welt article in his original book which was published in 1974. Considering that he was formerly a well-respective journalist on the Guardian, I would have thought that he wouldn't have missed such valuable material. Even if the Die Welt article and Hans Hohe's book on Canaris were only published in German (and this is only an assumption), he should have found them as his book contains much information gleaned from German sources. Cave-Brown devotes a large portion of his book to the activities of the Black Orchestra and Canaris who, allegedly, was in contact with the British Secret Service throughout the war.

I appreciate your passing on this information to me. I'll see if there's any way of doing something useful with it. - D

[fredric]

Thanks for your pleasant comments. Heinz Hohne's book, translated into English from the German by J. Maxwell Brownjohn, was published by Doubleday in 1979. It is a huge book with extensive footnotes and bibliography. It is probably available from your library or via interlibrary loan.[/u]

[jum1801@hotmail.com]

I realize this is an old thread, but I still feel moved to post. I found it while searching for information about the July 20 conspirators. Until I came across some of the posts in this thread, I thought that perhaps I had finally found a forum with a focus on German/Axis participation in WWII which was extremely informative, and had many members who were very serious, almost academic, about their studies of the subject and their desire to accumulate and share knowledge without an ideological subtext. Yes, there were the usual "SS fanboys" who thought as fighters the SS were unmatched in history, etc, etc., (and probably like those tight leather pants). But that in and of itself is a far cry from being an adherent to or proponent of nazism/fascism, so I took it as mere harmless expression of opinion, and perfectly legitimate.

But then I saw the posts of those who would revise history, or who support those who deny the existence of the Holocaust, and/or deny Hitler's culpability in the "Final Solution". I also some solipsistic attempts at muddying the record, using the red herring of a "government job", and pretending history is so confused as to be unknowable. This is all truly disappointing, because I thought AHF had somehow found a way to avoid having its site used as a sounding board for sentiments and arguments that would have pleased Joe Goebbels.

I am surprised no one examined the facts about Mr. David Irving. A place to start is Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Irving (but it should never be relied on for anything more than a jumping-off point). Mr. Irving has been associated with anti-Semitic and racist views and causes since his school years. A supporter of South African apartheid, he has described himself as "mildly fascist".

A few years ago in the UK he sued a historian for libel for calling him a Holocaust denier. In rendering the verdict against him the judge held that him to be, "an active Holocaust denier; that he is anti-Semitic and racist and that he associates with right-wing extremists who promote neo-Nazism." The judge also ruled that Irving had "for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence." Most recently he has served a prison term in Austria for glorifying and identifying with the Nazi Party.

Those are pretty stout reasons for looking askance at anything Mr. Irving might have to say about Nazis, Jews, Hitler, the Holocaust, or the time of day. But he's a very poor source for attempting to undermine the historical record about the torture and murder of the July 20 conspirators.

[David Thompson]

jum1801@hotmail.com -- You wrote:

Until I came across some of the posts in this thread, I thought that perhaps I had finally found a forum with a focus on German/Axis participation in WWII which was extremely informative, and had many members who were very serious, almost academic, about their studies of the subject and their desire to accumulate and share knowledge without an ideological subtext.

The accumulation and sharing of knowledge is inherently ideological. It requires both posters and readers to use their own value systems and goals to decide what is important, what is true, and why. Consequently, what one poster or reader might think of as objective reality might be a mere ideological subtext to someone else.

The presence of ideological subtexts in a post can also have a productive function -- it may provide a strong motivation for another poster to research, collect and present new or generally unavailable information for our readers. See, for example, these research indices in the H&WC section:

The Laws of War
viewtopic.php?t=26829
Documentary threads and posts
viewtopic.php?t=73796

You continued:

But then I saw the posts of those who would revise history, or who support those who deny the existence of the Holocaust, and/or deny Hitler's culpability in the "Final Solution". I also some solipsistic attempts at muddying the record, using the red herring of a "government job", and pretending history is so confused as to be unknowable. This is all truly disappointing, because I thought AHF had somehow found a way to avoid having its site used as a sounding board for sentiments and arguments that would have pleased Joe Goebbels.

The forum was created for the purpose of providing our readers with sourced information and informed discussion on historical issues. Most of our readers understand, appreciate and value the opportunity to find more information, which is why the forum has a large membership and many more visitors. Here is the AHF policy on the subject:

The policy and general purpose of the forum is to provide for an exchange of views and facts on the topic, and to allow discussion of the different points of view. The viewpoints expressed by contributors to this forum are so divergent that general agreement on almost any aspect of the holocaust is unlikely and disagreement will be the rule.

Under these circumstances, in my opinion the best policy is to provide as many facts on the issue as possible, allow the contributors to state their point of view in a civil manner, and let the readers make up their own minds.

H&WC Section Rules
viewtopic.php?t=53962

One of the great benefits of this approach is the ability to correct conceptual and factual errors, for a very large audience of readers.

You also wrote:

I am surprised no one examined the facts about Mr. David Irving.

The facts about Mr. Irving and his history writing have been thoroughly examined in numerous discussions at AHF. There are literally hundreds of threads discussing Mr. Irving's claims, and his past errors. You can also see my comments about Mr. Irving on the first page of this thread, at: viewtopic.php?p=723478#723478 .

Here are just a few of AHF's Irving threads (you can find many more by using the forum search engine):

David Irving and the Klessheim Conference
viewtopic.php?t=17408
David Irving Stops Sale of Evans Book
viewtopic.php?t=17798
Suggested reading - Telling Lies about Hitler
viewtopic.php?t=16859
Hitchens, Kissinger, and the smear of Holocaust Denial
viewtopic.php?t=13989
David Irving
viewtopic.php?t=2900
A question for Michael Mills
viewtopic.php?t=3141
List of double standards and injustice of Nuremberg Trial
viewtopic.php?t=55352
David Irving again
viewtopic.php?t=84080
The End Of David Irving
viewtopic.php?t=73724
On David Irving...
viewtopic.php?t=68794
Dresden, 1945
viewtopic.php?t=1000

[iancandler]

There are a couple of issues I would raise here.

A ladder wasn't used, they used steps as can be seen in some of the archive pictures of the execution chamber in the decapitation thread.

The drop was so small (a matter of inches if any at all) as to be inconsequential, therefore we are really looking at suspension.

It was widely reported that wire nooses where used for these executions, this would have resulted in great pain as they slowly cut into the neck tissue.

Unconsciousness and death could come rapidly but it would have been very much a lottery as to whether the noose hit the right point to cause vagal reflex.

Master Sergeant John C. Woods did NOT use the short drop method, he used the American standard drop method, which meant everyone regardless of weight and build got a standard drop of 5 ft.
Whilst this is enough to result in dislocation and fracture of the neck and spinal chord for a heavy man in excess of 200 lbs it is woefully inadequate for someone of smaller stature.
It was further compounded by him actively seeking to make them suffer by placing the knot at the back of the condemned persons neck as can clearly be seen in footage from some of the executions, this would have resulted in the head being thrown forward onto the chest, the noose sliding up to rest on the jawbone thus missing the vagal point and reducing the constriction on the carotid's, death coming from slow strangulation.

Control over the length of time it took someone to die could only be easily achieved if the person was strapped under the arms as in the Polish and Czech methods of hanging, As the person was hung on a fixed upright and hauled up to the short noose they could be easily raised and lowered to prolong the suffering.
The plotters could have had someone support their legs to alleviate some of the pressure and prolong the process, but this would have been difficult as even when unconscious the body kicks and jerks as it fights the inevitable.

There is no doubt in my mind that the hangings would have been filmed at the time, but no footage has surfaced so far and any taken may have been destroyed.

[paolosilv]

Heinrich Muller, the head of the Gestapo, Albert Blume, reputedly Nazi fugitive's banker, and Friedrich Schwend, a mastermind of the Nazi plan to forge British currency, were all granted sanctuary [in Brazil].


http://www.thefreelibrary.com/UNITED+SH ... a088028600

[ahingston]

The short drop method of hanging was the type generally practiced in Europe from earliest times until the abandonment of the death penalty. It causes death by asphyxiation. A moderate rope or cord was commonly used, and the knot was a slip knot of some type. The drop would have been only about 30 cm in most cases. The long drop method was practiced in the USA (and problably elsewhere, but I don't know), though when it became the preferred method can't say. The Lincoln conspirators were hanged by the long drop method. A much stronger stiffer rope was used, and the knot was the wound (several wraps, often thirteen) knot familiar from Western movies. The knot was, I have read, placed just behind an ear of the prisoner. The drop resulted in the knot snapping the neck and severing the spinal cord. Death would be instantaneous, or nearly so. The drop had to be judged carefully: too short and the prisoner would strangle; too long and the head might pop off altogether. Several factors were involved: prisoner's weight, age, health, general fitness. In most cases, the drop would have been at least 1 meter and possibly as much as 1-1/2 or 2 meters. It was considered something of an art or craft for the hangman to be able to get it right. The hangings of the top Nazis following the Nuremberg trials were by long drop.

[Truncheons]

The British method of hanging was to use the running knot which was fixed under the left ear and the knot kept in place using a rubber grommit.
The noose always makes a clockwise quarter turn for some reason and ends up underneath the condemned mans chin thus breaking his neck by snapping it backwards.If the noose be it an American hangmans knot or British slipknot is placed at the back of the neck then it will strangle the victim and not break his neck.
I read that Göring knew this as he himself said that he had hanged a few people in his time so opted for cyanide.

(i know about this as my great uncle was hanged for murder in Wandsworth prison in the 30's and have a bit of a morbid fascination with it)......