German court convicts 97-year-old ex-secretary at Nazi camp

Cypress said:
I would have to be intimately familiar with the details of the case to say anything conclusive, but absent any other convincing evidence I assume the German prosecutors proved in court, beyond a reasonable doubt, that she knew that her place of employment was engaged in genocide, and that even with that knowledge she still chose to provide material, logistical, and administrative support to an operation engaged in mass murder.
Click to expand...

Then why try her as a juvenile? Seems that her service didn't warrant more serious charges. So this was the easiest way to let her go, and still serve justice.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
so you want to rely on a false equivalence position to ignore your support for human rights violations? good one.
Click to expand...

Do you honestly not realize how pathetic and disgusting your defense of a literal Nazi is? What's on your guilty conscience that you're on the side of the fucking Nazis?

Republicans, if you don't purge this filth from your party, you will continue to lose support and members. When your compatriots are on the side of the Nazis you can bet your ass that we normal people will oppose you with unfailing determination.
 
moon said:
Finding a secretary guilty of thousands of murders debases the entire system of justice for death camp victims , 20 million of them, including 6 million Jews.
If a secretary can be found guilty then so can a plumber, a carpenter, a garage mechanic and indeed a barbed wire manufacturer.

The fire-bombings of Dresden and other cities incinerated hundreds of thousands of people just because they were German- and the atomic-bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki incinerated their populations simply because they were Japanese.
The virtue-signalers that pursue minions have shot themselves through the head.
Click to expand...

Agree with you about the secretary and the fire bombing of Dresden but there was and remains after 75 plus years a value in the Hiroshima bombing, a value that made Nagasaki unnecessary. Once the bomb came into existence its eventual use in human conflict was inevitable. Now that our morbid curiosity has been addressed and the lesson of Hiroshima absorbed there is a chance it won't happen again.
 
Walt said:
Funny how a court can find her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but that is not enough for the trumpers.
Click to expand...

First, EE isn't a Trumper.

Second, Trumpers are not known for being very smart or very rational.

EE's question centers on both reasonable statute of limitations and the rationale behind going after a 97 year old woman who served as teenage secretary. Even though I agree the Germans had several good reasons for doing it, it's not irrational to ask those questions.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
EE's question centers on both reasonable statute of limitations and the rationale behind going after a 97 year old woman who served as teenage secretary. Even though I agree the Germans had several good reasons for doing it, it's not irrational to ask those questions.
Click to expand...

If we are going to execute people for being an accomplice for one murder, that they did not know was going to definitely happen, can we really have a statute of limitations of being an accomplice for thousands of murders that she knew was definitely going to happen? If 77 years wipes away guilt, then shouldn't we give every convicted murder the chance to get to that 77 year point.

If we decide the punishment for murder should be execution, then we should execute no matter how long they get away with their crime. A longer time hiding from the crime should be considered a crime in and of itself.
 
Eagle_Eye said:
Then why try her as a juvenile?
Click to expand...

She committed her crimes when she was under 21, which in the German system means she should be tried as a juvenile. It has nothing to do with the severity of the crime. She could have executed a million children with her own hands, and if she did it under age 21, she would be tried as a juvenile.

That being said, juvenile sentences can be for decades, so it is not a joke to be tried as a juvenile.

The man who assassinated Archduke Ferdinand, and started WWI, was named Princip. He committed his crime, that went on to cause the death of maybe 40 million people, when he was just 19 years old. The Austro-Hungarian Empire tried him as a juvenile, which meant execution was impossible.

Austro-Hungary was willing to start a war that killed millions, but was unwilling to execute the guilty party, because he was 19 years old.
 
Walt said:
If we are going to execute people for being an accomplice for one murder, that they did not know was going to definitely happen, can we really have a statute of limitations of being an accomplice for thousands of murders that she knew was definitely going to happen? If 77 years wipes away guilt, then shouldn't we give every convicted murder the chance to get to that 77 year point.

If we decide the punishment for murder should be execution, then we should execute no matter how long they get away with their crime. A longer time hiding from the crime should be considered a crime in and of itself.
Click to expand...

I agree that the act of murder, be it directly or as an accomplice, should not have a statute of limitations.

However, I do see a difference in sentencing between that given to the shooter in a bank robbery and a getaway driver listening to Dad Rock in the car even though both are charged with the same crime.

The trial of the secretary was Just, IMO, as was her suspended sentence of two years.
 
Walt said:
She committed her crimes when she was under 21, which in the German system means she should be tried as a juvenile. It has nothing to do with the severity of the crime. She could have executed a million children with her own hands, and if she did it under age 21, she would be tried as a juvenile.

That being said, juvenile sentences can be for decades, so it is not a joke to be tried as a juvenile.

The man who assassinated Archduke Ferdinand, and started WWI, was named Princip. He committed his crime, that went on to cause the death of maybe 40 million people, when he was just 19 years old. The Austro-Hungarian Empire tried him as a juvenile, which meant execution was impossible.

Austro-Hungary was willing to start a war that killed millions, but was unwilling to execute the guilty party, because he was 19 years old.
Click to expand...
Princip was rightfully tried for the assassination of the leader of the Austrians occupying his country. Trying him for WWI would be as silly and unjust as trying the secretary for all the deaths caused by the Third Reich.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
I agree that the act of murder, be it directly or as an accomplice, should not have a statute of limitations.
Click to expand...

She is an accomplice, not just to one murder, but to over 10,000 murders. She worked hard to keep a job where she got to assist with murders all around her. The commandants office was in the center of the camp. She saw horrible things, and was happy to be part of it.

She has been given a token sentence for her severe crimes. I am OK with that. But saying she deserves to get away with her crimes is just crazy to me.

Dutch Uncle said:
However, I do see a difference in sentencing between that given to the shooter in a bank robbery and a getaway driver listening to Dad Rock in the car even though both are charged with the same crime.
Click to expand...

If we give her the lightest sentence imaginable for being the accomplice to murder, one year. One year for each of the 10,000 people she was an accomplice in killing. That is 10,000 years.

The enormity of the crime is hard to convey. Every day she went to an office where she knew she would directly involved in dozens of murders. Texas executes a get away driver in one murder... THIS IS OVER 10,000!!!

Dutch Uncle said:
The trial of the secretary was Just, IMO, as was her suspended sentence of two years.
Click to expand...

She is going to be dead soon anyway. It was important that she be tried, and given the evidence be found guilty.

From my understanding, she is very lucky that all the witnesses are dead now. She was more deeply involved than many are trying to make her sound.
 
Walt said:
...She is going to be dead soon anyway. It was important that she be tried, and given the evidence be found guilty.

From my understanding, she is very lucky that all the witnesses are dead now. She was more deeply involved than many are trying to make her sound.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

My understanding is that she was a paper-pusher. Yes, part of the problem but not on the same scale as those pushing people into gas chambers and pushing the button or simply shooting them.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
First, EE isn't a Trumper.

Second, Trumpers are not known for being very smart or very rational.

EE's question centers on both reasonable statute of limitations and the rationale behind going after a 97 year old woman who served as teenage secretary. Even though I agree the Germans had several good reasons for doing it, it's not irrational to ask those questions.
Click to expand...

I agree it is not unreasonable for EE to float this as a question.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Princip was rightfully tried for the assassination of the leader of the Austrians occupying his country. Trying him for WWI would be as silly and unjust as trying the secretary for all the deaths caused by the Third Reich.
Click to expand...

The Austro-Hungarian Empire declared war on Serbia, knowing that it would cause a greater war, as revenge for his actions. They considered his actions to be serious enough to kill millions of people over, but not Princip, because Princip was a juvenile. Oddly enough, the Austro-Hungarian Empire drafted people younger than Princip to fight and die in war. They were willing to draft as young as 16 years old, but not willing to execute as younger than 20. Austro-Hungary destroyed Serbia, and killed huge numbers of civilians with no trial... Many of the killed Serbians were children.

In the USA, we try juveniles in adult court a lot, but in other countries that is a line they will not cross. The Austro-Hungarian Empire was willing to kill millions, even children, but was not willing to try Princip as an adult.

Princip was convicted of high treason, and double murders, and was sentenced to the maximum a juvenile could get, 20 years. Had he lived, he would have been released in 1934... Even assuming he had been kept in prison after the surrender of Austro-Hungary.
 
Walt said:
The Austro-Hungarian Empire declared war on Serbia, knowing that it would cause a greater war, as revenge for his actions. They considered his actions to be serious enough to kill millions of people over, but not Princip, because Princip was a juvenile. Oddly enough, the Austro-Hungarian Empire drafted people younger than Princip to fight and die in war. They were willing to draft as young as 16 years old, but not willing to execute as younger than 20. Austro-Hungary destroyed Serbia, and killed huge numbers of civilians with no trial... Many of the killed Serbians were children.

In the USA, we try juveniles in adult court a lot, but in other countries that is a line they will not cross. The Austro-Hungarian Empire was willing to kill millions, even children, but was not willing to try Princip as an adult.

Princip was convicted of high treason, and double murders, and was sentenced to the maximum a juvenile could get, 20 years. Had he lived, he would have been released in 1934... Even assuming he had been kept in prison after the surrender of Austro-Hungary.
Click to expand...

I disagree that Princip be tried for starting WWI.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavrilo_Princip#Imprisonment_and_death
Imprisonment and death

Princip was chained to a wall in solitary confinement at the Small Fortress in Terezín, where he lived in harsh conditions and suffered from tuberculosis. The disease ate away his bones so badly that his right arm had to be amputated. In January 1916, Princip unsuccessfully attempted to hang himself with a towel. From February to June 1916, Princip met with Martin Pappenheim, a psychiatrist in the Austro-Hungarian army, four times. Pappenheim wrote that Princip asserted that the First World War would have occurred even if the assassination had not taken place, and that he "cannot feel himself responsible for the catastrophe".

Gavrilo Princip died on 28 April 1918, three years and ten months after the assassination. At the time of his death, weakened by malnutrition and disease, he weighed around 40 kilograms (88 lb; 6 st 4 lb).[53] The Terezin prison would later be taken over by the Nazis and transformed into the Theresienstadt Ghetto- ironic because Princip is sometimes argued to have set off a butterfly effect leading to the Holocaust.
Click to expand...
 
Dutch Uncle said:
My understanding is that she was a paper-pusher.
Click to expand...

She did stenography... In torture sessions. She picked which members of the clerical staff have not been performing well enough, so they could be executed. Just basically pushing papers that meant the death of people. The commandant's office was in the center of the concentration camp, so she had to walk through death just to get to her desk.

Like I said, she is very lucky the last witness died a few years back. They could have personalized it all.

Dutch Uncle said:
Yes, part of the problem but not on the same scale as those pushing people into gas chambers and pushing the button or simply shooting them.
Click to expand...

It was mainly a manufacturing concentration camp. So most of the direct killings were by gun, for falling behind on production, and were done under orders typed up by her(more of that paper pushing). The indirect killing was from starvation, exposure, and other not caring about the people... Which she cheerfully walked past every day.

And it was cheerfully. She fought hard to get and keep that job. She was very happy to be in the middle of so much death.
 
Walt said:
She did stenography... In torture sessions. She picked which members of the clerical staff have not been performing well enough, so they could be executed. Just basically pushing papers that meant the death of people. The commandant's office was in the center of the concentration camp, so she had to walk through death just to get to her desk.

Like I said, she is very lucky the last witness died a few years back. They could have personalized it all.



It was mainly a manufacturing concentration camp. So most of the direct killings were by gun, for falling behind on production, and were done under orders typed up by her(more of that paper pushing). The indirect killing was from starvation, exposure, and other not caring about the people... Which she cheerfully walked past every day.

And it was cheerfully. She fought hard to get and keep that job. She was very happy to be in the middle of so much death.
Click to expand...

How many 18 year olds are idiots, in your opinion? IMO, most of them are not very rational.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top