(Aside: this is sounding more like a Great Debate rather than a BBQ Pit now…)
That is a funny rendition of the Worst Defense Ever and it is true that it would take time. But he didn’t use that defense; he claims he wasn’t either guy. But a quick and hard to beat defense is:
Prosecution: You’re the guy at Sobibor
Demjanjuk: No I’m not
Prosecution: Yes you are
Demjanjuk: You don’t even think I am. You spent millions, gathered evidence for years, and got witnesses to sworn testimony to say I am someone else. Go argue with yourself.
Note that in this version of the W.Nwc.LD.E he doesn’t say he was Ivan at Treblinka killing people.
If the gentle readers/participants in this thread can’t see how that can create a fog of doubt about anything relating to this case then then I guess they really want their weregeld.
This will probably be a rude aside to Ají de Gallina
Ají, it isn’t clear from your quote, but I hope you realize that Demjanjuk was tried and given a death sentence for being this other guy, Ivan at Treblinka. Then, the Israeli Supreme Court saw evidence that he definitely was not this other guy, Ivan, so they overturned the conviction. It isn’t that the W.Nwc.LD.E. would be ‘I was a killing a chick in another town’, it would be: “You already said I was killing a chick in another town on the same day you now say I was killing a guy in this town. Go argue with yourself and make up your mind before starting legal proceedings.”
Either you are confusing you me with another Doper, or you have a very unusual definition of “shitting on everything… offering up examples of my own country as ideal”, because in this thread, I’ve only tried to explain how the German legal system (like most European systems) works different from the US system, and hence, different outcomes. If that’s already offering up an ideal …
Yes, completly right. But also unrelated. Stopping genocide from occurring right now is the job of the UNO bluehelmets and the NATO, the OSZE, the African Union etc. And dealing with it afterwards is what the ICC is for (which, just to remark, the US hasn’t recognized or signed, and is activly opposed to).
You’re confusing the functions of a “world police” to stop murderers in the act, or, even better, before, with the legal system, which deal with justice afterwards. This isn’t an either/or proposition, both are necessary parts of a civilised society.
Furthermore, the object of justice is not primarly “make other bad guys afraid of doing this” because this doesn’t work at all.
And the media did show the survivors and the relatives of the victim, who did count this as closure and justice achieved (until they heard that the sentence isn’t final, and until the re-trial begins, he will go free again, as he is not considered at risk of fleeing given his age and health status).
Not rude at all.
I was simply pointing out that what looks like a bad defense can be a good one.
also, I’m more than willing to be corrected and enlightened on this case.
there is another reason why going on record persecuting employees of odious regimes even when they get to be 90 years old is a bad thing. It teaches other odious regimes and their employees that to fight to the last is better than surrender to the enemy (to us) and hope for mercy, since mercy is not forthcoming.
Maybe North Korean government ought to publish proceedings of this sort of trials for internal consumption by their officer corps. And then they can start rotating each and every officer, from sergeant upwards, through guard service in their concentration camps and publishing their names, fingerprints and photos with corpses of inmates online. Ought to be pretty good for morale in the event of war, I would imagine.
Speer was sentenced to 20 years, and served 20 years. Now you can argue that his sentence, in particular, was hypocritical, and he was rewarded for being the “penitent Nazi”, but he did serve the sentence he was given. Hess was sentenced to life, and died in prison.
Without getting into the specifics of the debate, I do have something to say.
The Milgram experiment shows that over half (65%, but it varies by nationality) of the people in the world would just follow orders, and that’s not even at the pain of death This is the reason I am against prosecuting a guy that just did what he was told. As the old saying goes, “There but by the grace of God go I.”
We need to prove that he was actually complicit, and not just doing what he was told because they made him believe it was right, or at fear for his own life. Otherwise we are punishing someone who is no worse that 3 or 4 billion other people.
The man has been found guilty of being an accessory to 28,000 murders.
You can debate all you want about whether the charges and conviction were valid, given the nature of his job at the camp and the evidence or lack of thereof. So perhaps some of you think he shouldn’t have been convicted, or should have been charged with a lesser crime. And that’s a worthwhile discussion, for you if not for me.
But I can’t see how anyone can argue that a 5 year sentence for the crimes for which he has been convicted is anything other than a travesty. There should be zero chance that he ever walks free again, unless his conviction is overturned on appeal.
He is worse than 3 or 4 billion other people, because 3 or 4 billion other people didn’t do what he did. Lets say you’re right about the Milgram experiment, and 65% of the population would do what he did. Ok, that’s unfortunate, but we don’t punish people for what they would do. We punish them for what they do do.
I don’t know. The survivors I have worked with (and discussed this issue with) have all been in favor of prosecution for their persecutors. It’s not a huge sample, and others obviously may feel differently, but it’s not really up to me to say that it isn’t worth prosecuting these criminals any more, because they got old.
Now punishing the tormentors of a woman who is now 83, who spent her 16th birthday using a butcher’s hook to drag emaciated, naked dead bodies from a typhus “ward” to an incinerator make make the prosecutors “look bad” to you, and may not in your mind “solve a single fucking thing.” But she’d like to see it happen, and her opinion counts more than ours in this.
The survivors will all likewise be dead within a decade barring a few outliers in their eighties who might make it to a hundred.
The world has moved on, and we need to let it die. Let it rest. Let it go a s a dark period in history and remember the lessons we learned. There is no POINT to this.
That’s asinine. Under the right conditions, over half of the people in the world would commit rape, robbery, and murder. That’s not a reason to dismantle the criminal justice system.
That struck me too. Especially as German courts have previously refused to convict people purely for serving at an Aktion Reinhard death camp, for example in the 1963 Belzec trials.
If the new standard of guilt is service at a death camp, there are a number of known German offenders still walking around who should be on trial.
And it occurs to me, under this new standard, is there any reason why surviving Sonderkommandos shouldn’t be prosecuted ?
Where do you get that idea from? The reason these things are illegal is that society has decided they are things they don’t want to happen. The only case where many people would do these things is a complete breakdown of society, and in that case law is irrelevant.
A law banning the military from following orders is fucking stupid. The moral culpability for these deaths lies with whoever ordered them, not with who committed them, and certainly not with someone who happened to be nearby.
But sure, torment an old man because, effectively, his nationality. Because, you know, it’s his fault the Nazi’s invaded his country, and he had to work for them to survive. It makes you look so much better than them.
ETA - The above is all predicated on him even being who he’s accused of being, which is extremely doubtful.
Well there is the survey by Neil Malamuth of UCLA in 1986 which found that 30% of men admitted they would commit rape if they knew there was no chance of being caught. The same survey changed the wording from rape to force a woman into having sex, and the number went up to over 50%.
The the US military is apparently “fucking stupid.” I’m pretty certain all its members are informed they are not to follow illegal orders. Those who order it are certainly responsible, but those who do it are also guilty. Absent willing participation from the Wehrmacht and the German police, as well as (often gleefully undertaken and unrequested) participation by the authorities and the citizens of occupied states, the Shoah could not have happened.
How high does your blanket immunity go? Was Hoess innocent because he didn’t decide Auschwitz should be set up and become an extermination camp?
That’s an insult to all those who did survive without taking part in the extermination of Jews and others.
I don’t feel at all bad about thinking I am much better than someone who participated in the Shoah. Even if a person’s life is on the line, which I don’t believe was the case here, there are things they should not ethically do. And this is one of them.