Third interrogation of Willi Graf

Additional proceedings:

II A – So./Schm. [Special Commission/Schmauß]

Munich, February 19, 1943

Continuation of the Interrogation:

Led forth from prison, Wilhelm Graf, born January 2, 1918 in Kuchenheim, made the following statements:

I stand by my statements made earlier today that I had nothing to do with the production of leaflets nor with the distribution of same. When shown one of the leaflets written by Scholl (Leaflets of the Resistance Movement, and Fellow Students!), I can only state that I had no knowledge of the existence of these documents or of Scholl’s work.

In addition, I am shocked that Scholl could even concern himself with such matters. Whenever I was with Scholl, or associated with him in his apartment, I truly never observed such things.

Question: How is it possible that in contrast to the statements you have made thus far, Scholl maintains that you procured envelopes for him which were to be used in the mailing of leaflets?

Answer: Yes, it is correct that around Christmas 1942, Scholl approached me and asked me to obtain envelopes and matching stationery for him, so he could give it to his friends on active duty.

Since I know from personal experience that stationery and envelopes are currently highly coveted things on the front, I assumed that Scholl’s request was legitimate. I slowly but surely purchased around 40 – 60 envelopes and matching paper in the [stationery] stores and gave them to him. Scholl duly paid me for these things.

The first time I bought such paper for him was in January 1943. The last 3 weeks, I have not been able to obtain anything else for him, because I have not had the time. I also cannot recall that Scholl approached me about this within the last few weeks.

Question: Would you have procured stationery and envelopes for Scholl had you known how he intended to use them, or had you suspected as much?

Answer: If I had had any idea, I first would have tried to warn Scholl or talk him out of it. But since, as I said, I had no idea about Scholl’s prosecutable mode of operation, I saw something [Note 1] special in Scholl’s unreasonable request and fulfilled his wish. I therefore unconsciously became Scholl’s victim. I cannot express my shock clearly enough.

Question: How is it possible that 2 comrades who frequently visit one another in their respective residences could hide something like this from one another?

Answer: I can only answer this question by saying that Scholl must have assumed that I would not participate or that I would try to dissuade him from his schemes. I cannot give any other explanation.

I would particularly like to stress that I in no way aided Scholl with the production or distribution [of the leaflets], nor did I help financially, because I knew nothing about any of his schemes. I therefore can make no statements regarding who may have aided Scholl in this respect.

Of course I know that Scholl is acquainted with the architect Manfred Eickemayr (sic), the painted Wilhelm Geyer, the student Alexander Schmorell, and with a student named Jäger, because these people have visited him in his residence. If I am told that in addition to these persons, Scholl also knew someone named Christoph Probst, then that is correct. Probst is likewise a student whom I met in July 1942 in Munich through Scholl. I am not able to say anything further in this matter. I only know that Schmorell and Probst are old classmates.

I would welcome it if I were confronted with Scholl (sic), because I am certain that he has made no accusations against me.

Recorded by: Signed by Schmauss, Crim. Secr.

Signed by: Signed by Wilhelm Graf.

==========

Note 1: Probably should be “nothing special” – but the word “nothing” is not present in the original document.

==========

Source: NJ1704 (123 – 125)