# What's the most effective defense in a war crimes trial? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 2, 2012, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138 "2012-01-02T13:31:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hypnagogic_jerk/32/4252_2.png) [@Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypnagogic_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/21 "2012-01-03T19:20:04Z")
> [@abel29a](#): > > And just how many political crimes did he have time to commit during the eight days he was Führer? AFAIK he was convicted for various actions taken as Commander of the Uboat fleet and Commander of the German Navy, not for those last few days nominated as Führer. Also he wasn’t Führer, but Reichpräsident. But you’re right, his conviction was officially for military crimes, not political ones. He wasn’t a politician and wasn’t very much involved in politics. Though I do remember reading that he blamed Speer for his conviction, believing that if Speer hadn’t convinced Hitler to name him his successor, he probably wouldn’t have been sent to prison. From Speer’s own account, Hitler asked him what he thought of Dönitz, and Speer confirmed that he’d probably do a good job. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2012, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/22 "2012-01-03T20:31:10Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > Of course we all know Germany does a very good job of handling war criminals. In Afghanistan a German Colonel blew up 100+ civilians and _a German prosecutor_ cleared him of any wrongdoing. I had forgotten this, but Googled around and found a reference to what I assume you are talking about: > **[Kunduz Bombing Affair: German Colonel Wanted to 'Destroy' Insurgents](https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/kunduz-bombing-affair-german-colonel-wanted-to-destroy-insurgents-a-669444.html)** > > In his report on the controversial air strike in Kunduz on Sept. 4, German Colonel Georg Klein says he gave the order to attack because he wanted to "destroy" two hijacked fuel trucks as well as insurgents surrounding them. Klein's report is a key... ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2012, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/23 "2012-01-04T04:47:26Z")
> [@constanze](#): > > Be an American soldier. You won’t be handed over to Den Haag by your govt. - in fact, the US govt. will invade any country holding you with the intention of handing you over - and instead, you will be tried in front of an US military court, where you will get away with a slap on the wrist, whether it’s My Lai or Abu Ghraib or just killing a couple of civilians in their homes in Iraq. **[Moderator Warning]** **constanze** , political jabs are not permitted in General Questions. If this were a first offense, I would make this moderator note. Unfortunately remarks of this kind seem to be habitual with you, so I am making it an official warning. Do not do this again. Colibri General Questions Moderator ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2012, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/24 "2012-01-04T11:46:54Z")
At the original Nuremberg War Crime Trials, 2of the 24 defendants (8%) were acquitted of all charges. Both had been active in other political parties competing with the Nazi party. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2012, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/25 "2012-01-04T14:50:50Z")
> [@t-bonham@scc.net](#): > > At the original Nuremberg War Crime Trials, 2of the 24 defendants (8%) were acquitted of all charges. Both had been active in other political parties competing with the Nazi party. Three. You’re forgetting Hans Fritzsche. ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2012, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/26 "2012-01-06T12:59:44Z")
Reading the Wikipedia page about the Nuremberg Trials was an eye-opening experience. I’m forced to conclude that even the Nuremberg Trials were more show trials than real justice. They made up their own rules of evidence, didn’t share evidence with the defense, and even tried some radio personality in place of Josef Goebels (at least that guy was acquitted). The Chielf Justice of the US Supreme Court declared it a “high-grade lynching.” ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2012, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/27 "2012-01-06T19:43:10Z")
But it was a step up from Stalin’s suggestion. I read someting about during Yalta or one of those conferences, the leaders were discussing how to deal with the Gemans afte the war. Stalin said “Simple. We just shoot the top 50,000 Germans.” FDR thought Stalin was joking and said “wouldn’t 49,000 be enough?”. Churchill had no illusions about Stalin. Apparently they settled on actual trials to determine who had behaved badly during the war, and agreed that just serving the government was not enough. That’s how they decided on “crimes against humanity”. They also had to show that you could not get off by claiming “I vas only followink orders.” ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2012, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/28 "2012-01-06T20:01:11Z")
> [@Diceman](#): > > Reading the Wikipedia page about the Nuremberg Trials was an eye-opening experience. I’m forced to conclude that even the Nuremberg Trials were more show trials than real justice. They made up their own rules of evidence, didn’t share evidence with the defense, and even tried some radio personality in place of Josef Goebels (at least that guy was acquitted). The Chielf Justice of the US Supreme Court declared it a “high-grade lynching.” It was bound to be a mess. The concept of “war crimes” didn’t really exist prior to Nuremberg, so there was a real question about what law the defendants should be tried under. Lots of them never left Germany’s pre-war borders. What were they supposed to be tried for? After all, most of the things they did were legal under German law in effect at the time. In the end, it was easiest to try them under Weimar-era and earlier law the Nazis hadn’t seen fit to repeal. ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2012, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/29 "2012-01-07T01:18:31Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > But it was a step up from Stalin’s suggestion. I read someting about during Yalta or one of those conferences, the leaders were discussing how to deal with the Gemans afte the war. Stalin said “Simple. We just shoot the top 50,000 Germans.” > > FDR thought Stalin was joking and said “wouldn’t 49,000 be enough?”. Churchill had no illusions about Stalin. Apparently they settled on actual trials to determine who had behaved badly during the war, and agreed that just serving the government was not enough. That’s how they decided on “crimes against humanity”. They also had to show that you could not get off by claiming “I vas only followink orders.” Didn’t Eisenhower suggest shooting every SS officer over captain, or something like that? I don’t want to spread a scurrilous accusation, but I’ve read it (no cite). And a version that he was persuaded (at the time, obviously) to raise the cut-off rank? ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2012, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/30 "2012-01-07T02:15:03Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > It was bound to be a mess. The concept of “war crimes” didn’t really exist prior to Nuremberg, so there was a real question about what law the defendants should be tried under. Lots of them never left Germany’s pre-war borders. What were they supposed to be tried for? After all, most of the things they did were legal under German law in effect at the time. Which is why none of the defendants were charged with crimes committed in Germany between 1933-1939. This was solely a war crimes trial. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2012, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/31 "2012-01-07T03:31:00Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > The US trials are not shams, but the investigations leafing up to them may be. The best example is the Abu Graib investigation of prisoner abuse… A more recent example would be the coverup of the friendly-fire death of Corporal Tillman… Going a bit further back, the investigation of the explosion aboard the USS Iowa comes to mind… Also not a proud moment of recent American military jurisprudence: [http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1999-03-05/news/9903050144\_1\_ashby-flinch-marine-corps](http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1999-03-05/news/9903050144_1_ashby-flinch-marine-corps) > [@Diceman](#): > > …The Chielf Justice of the US Supreme Court declared it a “high-grade lynching.” Nitpick: It’s “Chief Justice of the United States”: [Who’s America’s top judge? - The Straight Dope](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2975/who-is-america-s-top-judge) ---
**Author:** ![Paralogic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Paralogic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paralogic)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2012, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/32 "2012-01-07T03:32:23Z")
> [@Ranchoth](#): > > …what’s the most effective defense I can present if I’m ever put on trial for war crimes? I was ordered to do so! ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/33 "2012-01-11T20:06:48Z")
> [@Paralogic](#): > > I was ordered to do so! Did you read the first post? ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/34 "2012-01-11T23:04:09Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > Did you read the first post? No, apparently nobody ordered him to do so. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2012, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/35 "2012-01-12T03:22:21Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Does _anyone_ send its soldiers to the World Court for war crimes trials? Seems like mostly what are tried there are last regimes losers who are then captured by the current regime, or caught outside their boarders There’s no requirement that the accused should be tried by the ICC. According to the treaties, this is supposed to happen only if they aren’t properly prosecuted in their home countries. Besides, not that many people have been prosecuted by the ICC, so it’s a bit difficult to assess what the “rules of the game” are. Finally, a nitpick (or not a notpick, not sure). The World Court isn’t the same thing as the ICC we’re talking about here. The “World Court” (ICJ), which has been around for a long time, settles disputes between states (say, a disagreement between two countries over fishing rights in an area) and doesn’t prosecute individuals. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2012, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138/36 "2012-01-12T03:47:47Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > There’s no requirement that the accused should be tried by the ICC. According to the treaties, this is supposed to happen only if they aren’t properly prosecuted in their home countries. > > Besides, not that many people have been prosecuted by the ICC, so it’s a bit difficult to assess what the “rules of the game” are. > . As I thought. Thus the USA properly prosecutes it’s own war criminals, there is no reason to send them to the ICC. **constanze** was wrong. Of course there is always a argument that the prosecution is too lenient (or too severe.). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-most-effective-defense-in-a-war-crimes-trial/608138.md?page=1)