PIIc No 946 (EW1 783-787)

Statement regarding the murder of her brother , Dr Alfred Meyer of Barmen-Düsseldorf, on 16 May 1933

I, the undersigned

Erna Meyer

hereby swear by this affidavit that the following statement is the truth. I am fully aware that this statement is to be used by a Swiss law court and I am aware that those who swear a false affidavit, either deliberately or inadvertently, are subject to severe penalties under the criminal law of all countries including Switzerland and Palestine. For this reason, and of course as a matter of morality which requires me to tell the truth and nothing but the truth, I have considered every word that I have written and fully guarantee the truth of this affidavit.

I had a brother, Dr Alfred Meyer, who was born on 24 March 1898. He left grammar school even before the age of seventeen to join the army as a volunteer; in February 1915 he marched into battle and was a soldier until the end of the war. He was wounded no less than three times but nevertheless went back to the battlefield each time, was awarded the Bayrische Verdienstkreuz and the Iron Cross Second Class, and was promoted to Vizewachtmeister. On returning from the war he completed his education, first at school where he passed the Abitur; he then studied dentistry and set up in practice as a dentist in Wuppertal-Barmen. He had never been active politically, either before or after this; in particular, he had never been a member of the Socialist or Communist Parties, nor had he ever done anything for any of these parties. Even before the revolution of 1933 he knew that there was a certain antipathy towards him in National Socialist circles in Barmen; he attributed this to the fact not only that he was a Jew, but also that one of the leading National Socialists of Barmen, a dentist named Viering, had had his practice opposite my brother’s for some time, and as my brother was very popular with his patients he Viering found it difficult to get a practice.

This Viering had been sued for libel even before the revolution of 1933 because he had stated that my brother was suffering from a sexually transmitted disease. My brother underwent a very thorough examination proving that this accusation was completely false. Consequently, Viering was punished. Viering tried another libel, saying that my brother, in his capacity as a certifying doctor, had produced false certificates for patients to claim on national health insurance. Again, this accusation was proved to be unfounded after the dentists’

professional body had thoroughly examined the case and found my brother to be blameless.

After the beginning of the revolution my brother’s house was immediately searched but nothing was found which might be used against him in some way. These searches were mainly carried out by the following National Socialists: Fischer, Viering, Birkenstock and Noelle. These searches took place at a time when my brother was travelling abroad trying to discover whether there was a possibility for him to emigrate. My brother then returned and even went back to Barmen despite several warnings, because he was of the opinion that he was an honest and upright man, and that running away would be the action of a coward.

Whilst he was in Barmen he felt so persecuted that one night he did not sleep at home but instead at a friend’s. During the night his house was searched again. This search was conducted in such a way that damage to the property was clearly intended. The next day my brother went to the police and asked to be kept in so-called voluntary protective custody because he feared for his life. The police did as he asked and so he spent the time from the end of March until 10 May in protective custody.

I must state, however, that his voluntary stay in protective custody became involuntary during this time because an investigation was started against him, for political reasons. This investigation was extremely hard for him, mainly because he tried desperately for five weeks to have his first interrogation, which in the end was only brought about by friends, including non-Jewish friends, who finally convinced the authorities to carry out an interrogation.

The investigation did not bring anything to light since, as already mentioned, there was nothing that could come to light, and so he was released on 10 May 1933. In the night after his release his house was searched again; he was not at home because he had preferred to spend the night at the house of a Christian family he was friendly with. On that occasion his flat was devastated, all kinds of valuables like record players and records were destroyed, carpets were slashed, lamps were broken, the fully fitted kitchen was torn out. Many valuable goods were stolen, and they even went so far as to take away his suits and shoes.

After this occurrence my brother preferred to leave Barmen and after spending some days somewhere else

he started work as a dentist in Düsseldorf whilst preparing to emigrate. His wife, also a dentist, had a practice in Düsseldorf and the two decided to stand in for each other until they could emigrate, as having only a little money they could not do without an income.

On 16 May the telephone rang in his practice in Düsseldorf. It was Noelle – already mentioned above – who asked whether my brother was there and when the answer was yes he said, thats all I want to know’ and rang off. In the afternoon he rang again and soon after the call my brother left the practice and went to a family he was friendly with. In the street he was followed and soon after he had arrived a car stopped in which there were five people, among them the four mentioned above, who had taken part in the previous searches.

Viering stayed at the wheel, the four others went into the flat, threw my brother onto the floor, tied him up and dragged him into the car. The other people present were also tied up, and as one of them had tried to get to the telephone to call for help before being tied up, the telephone was destroyed, to make any communication with the outside world impossible.

The registration number had been noted by several people but the investigation showed that it was false. The help the police gave us was just a formality with no practical and effective support at all, and so we were not able to discover his whereabouts.

At first we had engaged the National Socialist lawyer KINTZEN in Düsseldorf; he, however, later terminated the brief because the Party had advised him not to engage in this case – a fact we do know for certain.

Some days after my brother had disappeared a forester informed [us] that at the Bewerdam, between Düsseldorf and Barmen, the dead body of a man had been washed up. It turned out to be my brother’s corpse, which had been thrown into the water; his head had been stuck into a sack and his feet tied to a copy machine to prevent the body from surfacing. There must have been very particular circumstances which allowed the body to come up again nevertheless. We ourselves did not get the body –

on the contrary, it was handed over several days later to the chief rabbi in Düsseldorf who in exchange had strict orders not to show his corpse to his relatives. Later we learnt – not from the rabbi but from others who had seen the corpse – that he had been stabbed in the abdomen and other parts of his body; he had been shot in the head twice and his body had been maltreated and mutilated in a disgusting way. The court refused to deal with the case, so the records were sent to Berlin, but are said to have been lost in transit.

By order of the authorities the funeral was secret and very quiet. Any newspapers which reported the case were confiscated. We were dictated the text of the obituary notice, so we preferred to simply inform people that he had died.

I declare again that everything I have described here is the truth and that I have not added or changed anything.

Signed Erna Meyer