MOSCOW TRIAL

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXIII, Issue 106, 18 April 1933, Page 7

MOSCOW TRIAL

RUTHLESS COUNSEL | VISHINSKY’S DENUNCIATIONS DEMAND FOR SEVERE PENALTIES ACCUSED MEN FEELING STRAIN. By Telegraph—Press Assn.—Copyright (Received 18, 10.30 a.m.)' MOSCOW, Apiil 17. The faces of Thornton and MacDonald were noticeably strained and Monkhouse looked pale and careworn when the trial (reports of the earlier sessions of which appear on page ten) was resumed. Vishinsky, pounding the table with his fist, continued his address with re- I nowed vigour. Describing the breakdowns in the various power stations, I he declared that sabotage could be the I only reason for these occurrences. I Sometimes doctors in operating left instruments in the body. Something of that sort had happened at Zauisvsky station, which conseqently became pretty sick. Referring to the first Moscow station, he said that the wreckers evidently had a five year plan of sabotaging, which started in 1928. Vishinsky produced a minor sensation by remarking, apparently referring to Gregory: “I am uncertain about the guilt of one of the accused. I will discuss him later.” He described MacDonald as an experienced and clever secret service agent who had been caught red-handed at sabotaging but who had been comparatively honest and brave in confessing. “Guesev,” said Vishinsky, “has confessed to being a sabotageur and a secret service agent, and I will ask for the severest punishment for him.' ’ COMMOTION IN COURT. There was a commotion in the court when Vishinsky referred to Cushny as “working like a crack secret service agent. ’ ’ Cushny jumped up and shouted: “I did not do any spying.” The judge called him to order. After the adjournment, Vishinsky directed his main attack on Thornton, and once turned wrathfully towards him and exclaimed:— “You’ll be no use in America or England. Perhaps you’ll be used as manure for our Soviet fields somewhere. ’ ’ Facing Cushny, be said: “You deny evervthing, but we will unmask you like Monkhouse, Thornton and Nordwall.” Continuing, he declared: “All the prisoners are guilty except Gregory. All of them deserve death; but our courts are not vengeful. Nevertheless, if the court considers it necessary to order that extreme measure, your hands must not shake.” MONKHOUSE DENOUNCED. Vishinsky, concluding, loudly denounced Monkhouse, who, he said, had admitted giving bribes through Thornton that were euphemistically called . presents. Monkhouse had gathered . State secrets. Monkhouse: What constitutes secrets? Vishinsky: We will judge and con- , vict you according to our laws. He described Mlle. Kutusova as a conscienceless pleasure-seeking woman, but pleaded for mitigation, as she ultimately turned State witness. Readdressing Thornton, ho said: “You are a worthless creature. The evidence shows that you are guilty of

espionage, wreckage and bribery.” He added that he saw no reason to uphold the charges against Gregory, who had not harmed the Soviet, but that the punishment meted out to MacDonald, Monkhouse, Nordwall and Cushny I must be as severe as possible. The court, in deciding upon its verdict, must remember that the Soviet did qot seek blood and vengeance, but the defence of the Socialist revolution. 'J he Prosecutor’s most biting phrases were reserved for Thornton and Mlle. Kutusova. Of Mlle. Kutusova he said: '■Rotting in a luxurious motor-car between Moscow and Perlovka. she sold herself for money. She was ambitious to make a foreign career, but her full confession must be considered in passing sentence.’’ Mlle. Kutusova’s face twitched as Vishinsky made insinuations as to her morals and she was near to tears. The closing part of his speech was devoted to an attack on Thornton. Turning to the dock, he said: "You are a coward by nature. ithin 2-1 hours you confessed to betraying and endangering the heads of 27 fellowcountrymen. That is not a lie. It was worse than cowardice—treachery. You are useless both to Russia and to England. Perhaps you will be useful as fertiliser lor our Socialist fields somewhere.” SOVIET AND FOREIGN LAWS. CONTRASTED BY PROSECUTOR. (British Official Wireless.) (Received 18, 12.15 p.m.) RUGBY, April 17. At the Moscow trial Vishinsky said that Monkhouse, in endeavouring to discredit the preliminary examination and the Court was following a lino extracted from the first White Paper. The court could do a great service to humanity if it showed British public opinion the way it had been so cruelly hoodwinked. The first bar in the campaign for mobilising British public opinion was probably Monkhouse. Vishinsky divided the accusations under three headings—wrecking, military espionage, and bribery. He said that the crime was well understood as far as espionage was concerned. The provisions of the law did not apply to persons who informed themselves of sin h tacts as crop yield or <(ifficullics experienced ill Socialist construction He contrasted foreign laws relating to espionage with the Soviet’s law, which, be said, was drafted in accordance with the peculiarities of the Soviet State, just as the laws of other countries were drafted in accordance with their own peculiarities. lit alm ■ with bribery. Vishinsky cited !■>>_'!’ Ii ti-t- and reminded the court

thin according to English laws bribes were punished, both in the case of the giver mid the receiver. The Soviet’s law was even more severe. ‘‘ln the whole ol our criminal code bribery is the biggest crime, as it is the attempt of an enemy to disorganise our country.” "A BRILLIANT CASE. ' Discussing breakdowns, he said it would be necessary to take into account that “we have before us such facts as the confessions of some of the accused.” He discussed the legislation of different countries in this respect, stating: “In England a confession obviates the necessity of • proving charges.” The proof in the present case had, been so irrefutable that the court’s attitude toward only one person had changed since the indictment was read. “We have never had in any other case such conclusive proof oi guilt. It is a brilliant case from the prosecution’s point of view.” Dealing with MacDonald, he said th.it MacDonald had told him he had been overcome by the weight of evidence against him. Vishinsky turned to Guesev ami. accusing him of wreck' i mg acts at Thornton's investigation I -md that Thornton had explained that his object in using a “network of spies” was to obtain information regarding l defensive and offensive capacities. He | admitted that the information which he i alleged Thornton had requested from MacDonald was not exactly defined, tint claimed that it included inlorimiton regarding military enterprises. II MacDonald’s confessions were not true, what had he to gain bv making them? RELENTLESS ATTACK Referring to Thornton’s notebooks regarding monetary transactions, VisInusKy said: ''Alter we have finished dealing with Thornton here lie will also have to give au account of his crimes over there when he goes back.’’ Vishinsky admitted that MacDonald's confessions were “uot absolutely straightforward,” explaining chat this was because he was an experienced spy and had burnt his correspondence, which might have been useful to the Ogpu. Alter a short adjournment Vishinsky resumed with au attack on Nordwall, stating, ‘■fl we are asked whether om grounds are sufficient to charge Nordwall we can answer with the firmest conviction that they are more than sufficient. He was obviously in touch with wreckers and concealed defects in Metro-Vickers equipment, gave bribes and supplied iiiioriiiatiou to Thornton.’' After a long discussion regarding the sum with which the prosecution claimed that Nordwall had bribed Lobanov, Vishinsky said: “Nordwall cannot get away from this coat and will have to wear it himself. It is a warm coat and he will need it.” He concluded his attack on Nordwall by referring to him as “ono of those mentioned in the statement to which the prosecution seemed Thornton's signature (since repudiated) which gives a list of 27 past and present employees of Vickers in Russia and described them as members of an organisation for espionage.” RUSSIANS' DEFENCE. BLAME THROWN ON BRITONS. (Received 18, 1.30 p.m.) MOSCOW, April 17. Kazachiev, opening the defence*on behalf of Guesesokolov and Oleinik, threw the blame on the Britons in order to exculpate his own clients. He said it was funny that Monkhouse and Thornton should be regarded as heroes abroad when they had committed crimes for which they would not be worshipped at home. Smirnoff, MacDonald’s counsel, speaking calmly, impressed even the judges, and obviously roused his clients’ drooping spirits. He rebutted Karazachiev’s assertion that the Britons were responsible for the Russians’ guilt. He said: “MacDonald is an underling who cannot be classed with Monkhouse and Thornton. He had admitted a serious crime, but has pledged himself never to repeat it.” MacDonald passed a note to Ulrich, apparently a plea for a reply, but it was unanswered. The Court adjourned.

FORECAST OF SENTENCES. By Telegraph—Press Assn.—Copyright. (Received 18, 12.35 p.m.) MOSCOW, April 17. Vishinsky ended by declaring that all the accused except Gregory were guilty under Article 58, carrying penalties up to shooting, but their failure must be mitigatorily considered. It is surmised locally that Gregory will be acquitted, MacDonald and Thornton sentenced to ten years’, Monkhouse to three years’ imprisonment, and Cushny aud Nordwall bound over; also that Guesev and Lobanov will be sentenced to death and the other Russian accused to varying terms of imprisonment. The sentences of the Britons might be commuted to exile, since the Soviet is obviously anxious to hear the last of the international aspects of the affair. DEATH SENTENCE UNLIKELY. IMPRISONMENT PREDICTED. (Received 18, 11.30 a.m.) MOSCOW, April 17. The general impression of correspondents is that death sentences on the Englishmen are unlikely, but there is a grave danger of imprisonment. The British United Press correspondent adds: “From conversations with wellinformed Soviet economists, I gather that the Government does not intend to use the trial as a pretext for denouncing the debt to Metropolitan Vickers. My informants believe that the Soviet is most unlikely to impair its record for the punctual payment of ’ foreign obligations. It is understood that two Vickers employees, Buckle and Burke, are ready to continue in Russia to fulfil outstanding contracts if the firm desires. “As for the court scenes, the only laugh this afternoon was when Vishinsky said that the Englishmen not only paid the Russian prisoners for-espion-age *and sabotage, ‘but paid them stingily.’ ” FORCING CONFESSIONS. THE OGPU’B METHODS. (Received 18. 11.55 a.m.) LONDON, April 17. The “Daily Mail” says that Ogpu spies should be expelled from England to prevent the execution of Vishinsky’s threat to investigate Thornton’s activities in London, or else it might result in a repetition of crimes like the murder of Kutepov nt Paris. In a letter to “The Times,” the scientist Professor Tcliernavin, formerly head of the laboratories of the Northern Fisheries Trust, discloses the

Ogpu's methods to extract confessions. Professor Tchernavin, accused of sabotage in 1931, was placed with a hundred others in a cell 75 yards square infested with bugs and lice, and was threatened if he did not sign a confession he would be shot and his wife would bo arrested. Professor Tchernavin refused and was sent without trial to five years’ penal servitude at the Solovetsky concentration camp, from which he escaped in 1932. Tho measures the Ogpu applied to Professor Tchernavin’s follow prisoners included forcing them to stand without food and drink for six days and nights, placing them undressed before windows open to the winter cold, crowding 300 men and women in a single room kept at a high temperature for six days, and thou forcing them to run in batches of 40 from tho room until they signed confessions or | dropped senseless.