selection is not intended to be representative, as the overwhelming number of cases are simply

dismissed for lack of evidence - but rather is a sample of cases that upon casual browsing stand

out as being particularly comical, pathetic, or alarming depending upon one's mood. The sample,

furthermore, is far from exhaustive - a vastly greater number of similarly striking cases abound

within the Commission report:

CASE NO. 73. This individual was brought to the attention of the Commission by

Mr. Sol Littman. Mr. Littman made no particular allegation against the

subject, but referred to information obtained from a particular individual as

the source of the subject's name. Mr. Littman further indicated that the

subject resided at an unspecified address in Canada and had been the object of

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