Will this trial be the last of its kind?

[PureX]

Knowing and approving, yes, she did that. And it involved approving gruesome conditions, heinous torture and genocide. She was a part of that.

It doesn't matter what she approved of or didn't. She had no say at all in any of it happening. Do you think her disapproval would have changed anything? Do you think her approval made it worse, somehow? Do you think the nazis gave a crap what some teenage girl thought of their "final solution"? I don't.

And even now, she is free to think whatever she wants about it. Maybe she still 'approves' of what happened. So what? Are we convicting people for what they think, now?

 

[Debater Slayer]

A precedence of using time amd letting the clock expire to evade charges must not be set.
She knew what she was doing, she saw what was going on, she also had to have smelled it. And she apparently also heard about it in the office.

What could she have done to help the victims or stop the crimes as a secretary, though? Would she have been able to quit her job and flee the country safely, for example?

A lot of "veterans" who have participated in wars of aggression and killing of innocents have gotten off the hook because they were forced to obey orders or were merely acting under the banner of state-sanctioned military operations. Should they be prosecuted as well?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It is likely the German justice has found evidence of connivance, even during the aftermath. After all, after the Liberation, so many Germans cooperated with the Soviet army and the US army.

Consider this point:

The Jews were turned into scapegoats. Just look at the irrational political beliefs of some here and you can see how many knew and did not care.

 

[Estro Felino]

I see little reason for anyone in this life to care what she did 80 years ago as a teenage girl living through a war. She killed no one. And we were all stupid teenagers, once upon a time.

As you know, there are crimes that never go prescribed, not even a century later. This is the case. But the German Justice is fair by 1) giving her just 2 years sentence 2) suspending the aforementioned sentence.
The German Justiz couldn't have surely cheered on her, could it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

As you know, there are crimes that never go prescribed, not even a century later. This is the case. But the German Justice is fair by 1) giving her just 2 years sentence 2) suspending the aforementioned sentence.
The German Justiz couldn't have surely cheered on her, could it?

The question is why did it take so long in the first place.

 

[PureX]

As you know, there are crimes that never go prescribed, not even a century later. This is the case. But the German Justice is fair by 1) giving her just 2 years sentence 2) suspending the aforementioned sentence.
The German Justiz couldn't have surely cheered on her, could it?

We have plenty of people in this country that would "approve" of the Nazis' final solution. But we can't convict them for what they approve or don't approve of. It's not a crime to approve of genocide.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It doesn't matter what she approved of or didn't. She had no say at all in any of it happening. Do you think her disapproval would have changed anything? Do you think her approval made it worse, somehow? Do you think the nazis gave a crap what some teenage girl thought of their "final solution"? I don't.

And even now, she is free to think whatever she wants about it. Maybe she still 'approves' of what happened. So what? Are we convicting people for what they think, now?

It's not what she thought but what she factually did.

What could she have done to help the victims or stop the crimes as a secretary, though? Would she have been able to quit her job and flee the country safely, for example?

The best she could have done is not be a part of it. But she was and she was a cog in a machine of genocide.

A lot of "veterans" who have participated in wars of aggression and killing of innocents have gotten off the hook because they were forced to obey orders or were merely acting under the banner of state-sanctioned military operations. Should they be prosecuted as well?

Superior Orders don't always get people off, and during the Nuremberg Trials it became a defense for a lesser sentence. It was also a no in the trial over the My Lai Massacre.

 

[pearl]

The Jews were turned into scapegoats. Just look at the irrational political beliefs of some here and you can see how many knew and did not care.

I think that's exactly it. Given the state of Germany post WWI, the Jews, with their love of art and education, were blamed and became that 'scapegoat. for all the ills that befell Germany.

 

[Debater Slayer]

The best she could have done is not be a part of it. But she was and she was a cog in a machine of genocide.

That's why I'm asking whether she could have avoided it. Some dictatorial regimes go so far as to kill people who refuse to serve them. While that doesn't erase what said people do, it is something to consider when analyzing what they could or couldn't have done in that situation.

Superior Orders don't always get people off, and during the Nuremberg Trials it became a defense for a lesser sentence. It was also a no in the trial over the My Lai Massacre.

If we follow that argument to its logical conclusion, it seems to me that it implies that every single soldier and officer who killed someone while participating in an American war of aggression should be prosecuted. Would that be realistic or fair, though? I'm undecided on that question, myself.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I see little reason for anyone in this life to care what she did 80 years ago as a teenage girl living through a war. She killed no one. And we were all stupid teenagers, once upon a time.

How many teens do things that are a part of hundreds of thousands of people being murdered?

 

[SomeRandom]

How many teens do things that are a part of hundreds of thousands of people being murdered?

Whilst I agree she should at the very least have a criminal record for her involvement, I mean she was after all still just a minor at the time.

We all like to think that people shouldn’t become mere cogs in the machines of dictatorships. And I agree, that shouldn’t happen
But survival instinct often kicks in and folks will merely just fall into line. A sad reality of our species. That’s adults, never mind teenagers

Maybe her family were true believers and she was forced to get a job for the Nazis to keep them happy. Maybe her family were threatened so she cooperated.
Maybe she just didn’t want to die. Maybe she herself was a true believer. Maybe her job only offered her limited knowledge of what was truly happening there.


Don’t get me wrong here. All Nazis should burn for all I care.
I‘m just saying.
It’s easy to say that we would have fought back. Our families weren’t involved or threatened (as the case may be.)

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Whilst I agree she should at the very least have a criminal record for her involvement, I mean she was after all still just a minor at the time.

We all like to think that people shouldn’t become mere cogs in the machines of dictatorships. And I agree, that shouldn’t happen
But survival instinct often kicks in and folks will merely just fall into line. A sad reality of our species. That’s adults, never mind teenagers

Maybe her family were true believers and she was forced to get a job for the Nazis to keep them happy. Maybe her family were threatened so she cooperated.
Maybe she just didn’t want to die. Maybe she herself was a true believer. Maybe her job only offered her limited knowledge of what was truly happening there.


Don’t get me wrong here. All Nazis should burn for all I care.
I‘m just saying.
It’s easy to say that we would have fought back. Our families weren’t involved or threatened (as the case may be.)

If it follows trends they won't actually make her go to jail and she'll be dead within a few years anyways.

 

[SomeRandom]

If it follows trends they won't actually make her go to jail and she'll be dead within a few years anyways.

Well she is in her 90s
It would be a bit useless to send her to jail now. If anything it would make us seem like the callous ones if that happened. Which is sadly ironic but there you go

 

[Heyo]

I understand the desire to prosecute. The need, even. But I, personally, feel this was a bit excessive. A teenage book-keeper knew what was happening but kept the books, anyway. Perhaps even approved at the time. But she personally killed no one. She had no one killed. And she had no say whatever in the decision to kill people. And it was eighty years ago.

C'mon, that's beyond any reasonable degree of vengeance.

It isn't vengeance and it has little to do with the special case at hand. It has everything to do with the conviction of the German people to never forget what happened and to never let it happen again. Part of that conviction is to prosecute everyone who was once part of the regime, even if only a little cog.
And it tells the living that "I was just following orders" is no excuse.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Well she is in her 90s
It would be a bit useless to send her to jail now. If anything it would make us seem like the callous ones if that happened. Which is sadly ironic but there you go

I believe the only one who wasn't 90-something in these recent trials is a guy in his 100s. They tend to try them, sentence them, not really send them to jail, and most have died within the year.
But, as I've been saying we can't set a precedence that all one needs to do is evade detection long enough for people to have a sense of pity for you they wouldn't have had decades ago.

 

[Viker]

Surely...but most Germans didn't commit any crime. So they were not in on it.

If you yourself witnessed a crime or have information about the crime, and do not come forward about it, you would then be culpable and an accessory after the fact. That's how such laws work universally. Most Germans from then are not accused of any specific crime, legally binding that is. Most didn't give a **** either. Of course, that is a matter for moral judgement.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If you yourself witnessed a crime or have information about the crime, and do not come forward about it, you would then be culpable and an accessory after the fact. That's how such laws work universally. Most Germans from then are not accused of any specific crime, legally binding that is. Most didn't give a **** either. Of course, that is a matter for moral judgement.

Seems to me they give a big ****.

It isn't vengeance and it has little to do with the special case at hand. It has everything to do with the conviction of the German people to never forget what happened and to never let it happen again. Part of that conviction is to prosecute everyone who was once part of the regime, even if only a little cog.
And it tells the living that "I was just following orders" is no excuse.

 

[SomeRandom]

I believe the only one who wasn't 90-something in these recent trials is a guy in his 100s. They tend to try them, sentence them, not really send them to jail, and most have died within the year.
But, as I've been saying we can't set a precedence that all one needs to do is evade detection long enough for people to have a sense of pity for you they wouldn't have had decades ago.

Prosecute them for the next 100 years, I say

 

[Heyo]

Seems to me they give a big ****.

That is after we got our arses kicked.

 

[Estro Felino]

They knew and saw things going on.

If we need to tell things right, Auschwitz was the largest petro-chemical industrial complex in the entire world.
Built by the IG Farben, the biggest chemical company in the world.
Whose headquarters are now the University of Frankfurt AM if I am not wrong.

Who owned the IG Farben? Warburg...and many others who were not Germans.
So...saying that the Germans were in on it...is not historical truth.

In Nuremberg the entire IG Farben was condemned for crimes against humanity.


And only in Italian (not in English, I wonder why...actually I do know why) I have found out who owned the IG Farben: