Article: From the Courtroom. Mistreatment of Jews and Denunciation

Your browser does not support viewing this document. Click here to download the document.

Tiroler Nachrichten, No. 235, Wednesday, October 15, 1947, p. 2.

Article: From the Courtroom. Mistreatment of Jews and Denunciation
"Yesterday before the People's Court, the continuation of the trial against 48-year-old municipal collection officer of the Security Watch Theodor HALLER and 51-year-old actor Josef Schäffer, which was adjourned on September 16, took place. As already reported, Haller was accused of taking the elderly married couple POPPER from their apartment in the Saggen on the night of November 10, 1938, and driving them in Schäffer's car to the Sillzwickel, where the elderly couple, both over 70 years old, were pushed into the Sill River. However, they were able to free themselves from the cold water and found friendly shelter with a family in the nearby knacker's house. After this disgraceful act against the old people, the accused and their helpers encountered another SA troop near Goethestrasse, who were escorting the Jewish woman Mrs. ROSENSTEIN dressed only in her nightgown. The woman was placed in Schäffer's car and was also to be taken to the Sillzwickel. Schäffer allegedly refused this, and thereupon Haller is said to have pushed the woman out of the car, where she then remained lying on the meadow. Haller was also accused of repeatedly visiting the then-imprisoned police majors Ringer, Mauerberger, and Rieger in their cells in the following period, in his capacity as a police officer together with Police Inspector WALTER, insulting them and particularly mistreating Rieger.
Already in the first hearing (September 17, 1947), Haller defended himself with a flood of words and tried to portray everything as harmless as possible. The accused retained this tactic in the continued hearing as well. Thus, the entire action against the Jews had been 'unsympathetic' to him; he claimed to know nothing at all about the incident with Mrs. Rosenstein, even though the co-accused Schäffer clearly and unequivocally stated that Haller had pushed the woman out of the car onto the meadow. Haller also acted in denial when Police Major Rieger, as a witness, told him directly to his face that it was he – Haller – who had mistreated him in the cell and that it was also he who had selected the police officers to be sent to the Dachau concentration camp. Haller described the statements made by the various police officers in the first hearing as their attempt to present themselves as martyrs and now to burden him – of course wrongly – with everything possible. Of course, he could no longer remember unpleasant incidents for him due to the long time that had passed.
In the course of his justification, Schäffer admitted to having led a group of SA men to the old people's home on instructions, without knowing why; only when he was supposed to drive to the Sill again with Mrs. Rosenstein did he vaguely suspect what was going on, and that is why he refused to drive there again. Haller, on the other hand, admitted to insulting the imprisoned police officers but denied having denounced anyone. Police Lieutenant Gustav Walter, brought from custody, stated that he had never heard anything about Haller ever mistreating any of the inmates.
The People's Court sentenced Haller to six years of severe imprisonment. Schäffer was acquitted."

Verdict in the Innsbruck Pogrom Trial: Six Years of Prison for the Main Perpetrator

October 14, 1947 – Nearly nine years after the horrific events of the November 1938 pogroms, the Innsbruck People's Court has reached a first verdict. In yesterday's hearing, the investigation into former police sergeant and municipal assessment officer Theodor Haller and actor Josef Schäffer was concluded. While Schäffer was acquitted, the court sentenced Haller to six years of severe imprisonment. This verdict against a key local perpetrator of the Pogrom Night is a remarkable testament to the early judicial reappraisal in Austria, yet it also exemplifies the limits and contradictions of post-war justice in an occupied country.

The Verdict and the Conflicting Testimonies

Yesterday's hearing brought new, shocking details to light and clearly revealed the defendants' strategies of justification. The charges were attempted murder, aggravated assault, and denunciation.

• The Mistreatment of the Popper Couple: It was confirmed that Haller and Schäffer took the elderly Popper couple from their apartment and drove them to the Sillzwickel, where the over-70-year-olds were pushed into the icy river. They escaped death only through their own will to survive and the help of a family in a nearby house.
• The Case of Rosa Rosenstein: Another SA squad brought the Jewess Rosa Rosenstein, clad only in a nightgown. While Schäffer claimed to have refused to drive her further to the Sill, he accused Haller of pushing the woman out of the car onto the meadow—an accusation Haller completely denied.
• The Denunciation and Mistreatment of Police Colleagues: The most serious new allegations concerned Haller's subsequent behavior. Police Major Rieger appeared as a witness and directly confronted Haller, stating that he had assaulted him in his cell and had actively participated in selecting police officers for deportation to the Dachau concentration camp. Haller dismissed all claims, labeling his colleagues' testimonies as an attempt to portray themselves as martyrs.

The defense strategies of the two accused could not have been more different. Josef Schäffershowed a degree of cooperation, admitting his role as a driver but denying any knowledge of the deadly intent of the "action." Theodor Haller, however, who had already distinguished himself in the first hearing with a "torrent of words," stuck to his line: the action against the Jews had been "disagreeable" to him, he could no longer remember unpleasant details after so long, and all incriminating witness statements were invented or exaggerated.

Historical Context: Justice in the Shadow of Occupation

The verdict of October 14, 1947, must not be viewed in isolation. It is embedded in the complex political and judicial landscape of post-war Austria, specifically in Tyrol.

1. Tyrol in the French Occupation Zone: Tyrol (with the exception of North Tyrol east of the Zillertal, which belonged to the US zone) was under French administration. The French occupying power pursued a comparatively strict denazification policy and encouraged the judicial prosecution of Nazi crimes. Allied pressure was a key driver for the activity of the People's Courts. The verdict against Haller is thus also a product of this international pressure for accountability.
2. The People's Courts: As explained in the previous article, the Austrian People's Courts were an instrument for prosecuting Nazi crimes. Their verdicts were often inconsistent and reflect the societal ambivalence of the time: on one hand, the will to purge; on the other, the soon-emerging desire for a "clean slate" and the reintegration of former Nazis. The comparatively mild sentence of six years for a main perpetrator of attempted murder (and the acquittal of his accomplice) shows this ambivalence. It followed a pattern where direct physical violence against Jews during the Pogrom Night was often judged more leniently than other Nazi crimes.
3. The Specificity of Innsbruck: The Haller/Schäffer case represents the exceptional brutality of the November Pogrom in Innsbruck, which historians classify as one of the worst in the entire German Reich. However, the judicial reappraisal of this local violence remained fragmentary. This verdict is a rare document that names and convicts a specific perpetrator.

Conclusion: An Ambivalent Sign of Reappraisal

The verdict of October 14, 1947, is an important yet ambivalent document of contemporary history. It proves that immediately after the war in Austria—under Allied pressure—attempts were made to hold the perpetrators of the November Pogroms accountable. It names the deeds concretely and convicts the main perpetrator.
At the same time, the verdict raises questions: Why was Schäffer, the driver who brought the group to the crime scene, acquitted? Did the court consider six years of imprisonment appropriate atonement for the attempted murder of two defenseless elderly people? Haller's justifications and the contradictory witness testimonies also show how difficult it was to ascertain the truth in a society deeply entangled in Nazi rule.
​
For the NS-Widerstand website, this case exemplifies the long and arduous path of judicial reappraisal in Austria. It shows that resistance was not only the active fight against the regime but also, after 1945, the painstaking legal and societal work of clarifying the crimes and—as far as possible—establishing justice. This process was shaped by the conditions of the occupation era, by societal mechanisms of repression, but also by the unwavering commitment of individuals like witnesses Rieger and Mauerberger, who spoke the truth.

This blog post continues the analysis of the first hearing on September 17, 1947. Both articles are based on original reports from the "Tiroler Nachrichten" and are part of our series on the judicial reappraisal of Nazi crimes in Tyrol.