an extradition request by the government of an Eastern European country. No
particulars of this alleged extradition request were provided. ... The
Commission confirmed that an extradition request had not been received by the
Canadian government and that the Berlin Document Center had no record on the
subject.
CASE NO. 121. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by the RCMP, whose source of information was the Department of the Solicitor
General which, in turn, had received the information from a private citizen.
It was alleged that this individual may have been a doctor who experimented on
concentration camp prisoners. ... The interview established that the
complainant was not in a position to place the subject in a Nazi war camp nor
was she in possession of names of witnesses able to connect the subject with
wartime criminal activities. ... [T]he subject would have been only 15 to 20
years old during the war, hardly an age to have the position suggested above.
CASE NO. 122. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by an anonymous note. The only allegation initially made was that the subject
was a war criminal and was living at a certain address in Canada. ... [T]he
evidence ... indicates the individual has lived all his life in Canada and was
drafted into the Canadian army for a short time in 1942.
CASE NO. 133. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by the RCMP, whose source of information was Mr. Sol Littman. It was alleged
that the subject under investigation had been a member of the SS. ... These
investigations revealed that the subject was born in 1933 and would therefore
have been between 6 and 12 years of age during the war.
CASE NO. 156. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by Mr. Sol Littman. Mr. Littman alleged only that the subject had been a
"propagandist for the party." When contacted by the Commission, Mr. Littman
indicated that he had no further evidence or information. ... On the basis of
the foregoing [itemized investigation], no evidence of participation in or
knowledge of specific war crimes is available.
CASE NO. 158. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by a private citizen. The only allegation initially made was that the subject
was a war criminal because he was so wealthy and of German background. ...
The Commission was advised [by several German sources] that it had a record of
the subject which indicated his membership in the Luftwaffe (air force).
CASE NO. 171. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by ... the Jewish Documentation Centre in Vienna. ... According to the year
of birth, this person would have been only five or six years old at the end of
World War II.
CASE NO. 179. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by an anonymous letter. The allegation initially made was that the subject was
the owner of a shop who behaved curiously regarding the sources of the store's
goods. ... The subject is the spouse of the individual who is reported in
Case No. 180. Both were denounced in the same anonymous letter. ... The
Commission checked the shop itself and concluded that the complaint is entirely
spurious and unfounded.
CASE NO. 180. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by an anonymous letter. The only allegation initially made was that the
subject was the owner of a shop who behaved curiously regarding the sources of
the store's goods. ... The Commission also checked the shop itself and
concluded that the complaint is entirely spurious and unfounded.
CASE NO. 190. This family's surname was brought to the attention of the
Commission by Mr. David Matas [chairman of the Jewish National Legal
Committee], whose source of information was an anonymous letter claiming the
family came from a foreign country and deserved investigation because they were
"recluses." There was no specific allegation of involvement in war crimes made
against this family.
CASE NO. 202. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by the Canadian Jewish Congress, whose source of information was a private
citizen. There was no specific allegation of involvement in war crimes made
against this individual, and the information received was irrational. ... The
Commission contacted the wife of the subject, who stated that she did not know
the citizen (who made the allegation) and that her husband never had any
business dealings with a person by that name. The Commission also tried to
locate the complainant but to no avail.
CASE NO. 247. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission
by the Canadian Jewish Congress, whose source of information was a private
citizen. There was no specific allegation of involvement in war crimes made
against the individual. ... The Commission was advised by the German Military
Service Office ... that it had a record of a person with the same name as the
subject, which indicated that he was a pilot in the Allied Air Force and had
