ChatterBank2 mins ago
Squeezing The Last Drop?
89 Answers
Is this really neccessary, an admin teenager tried nearly eighty years on?
https:/
https:/
Answers
Like others, I feel that this lady, when a girl, didn't really have a choice. She was a typist. Had she refused to work or protested - her life would probably have been forfeit. Other Germans who were not Nazis had to keep the country running - postmen, bus-drivers etc.. Are they also guilty of something in helping the regime to exist? There was nothing in her...
18:19 Tue 20th Dec 2022
// i think the judgement is cruel and unfair... //
1. Going on the run during the trial.
2. 40 days were to elapse before she broke her
silence and apologise for her involvement.
3. Marriage to an SS squadron leader.
The reasons above illustrate she didn't quite act in a way that would help her own case!
Had she held her hands up and come clean, my sympathies would have been outpouring and in favour of her. That simply wasn't the case.
Perhaps you have more details about the case which would persuade me to think otherwise?
1. Going on the run during the trial.
2. 40 days were to elapse before she broke her
silence and apologise for her involvement.
3. Marriage to an SS squadron leader.
The reasons above illustrate she didn't quite act in a way that would help her own case!
Had she held her hands up and come clean, my sympathies would have been outpouring and in favour of her. That simply wasn't the case.
Perhaps you have more details about the case which would persuade me to think otherwise?
So is she on trial for what she did or for her behaviour in 2021?
Untitled, the way the accused behaves during a trial will always be taken into consideration; it's one of the reasons for having a trial. This may or may not be fair: someone who turns up in a suit and tie may get a better hearing than someone in ripped jeans and tattoos. Someone who speaks clearly and briskly may be thought more reliable than someone who stutters and stumbles.
Someone who apologises immediately may be looked on more favourably than someone who waits 40 days.
It's because the person as much as the offence is on trial; and judges and jurors (and anyone else listening in) will inevitably form an opinion of the accused. As ZS says, she did her credibility, and her case, no favours.
Untitled, the way the accused behaves during a trial will always be taken into consideration; it's one of the reasons for having a trial. This may or may not be fair: someone who turns up in a suit and tie may get a better hearing than someone in ripped jeans and tattoos. Someone who speaks clearly and briskly may be thought more reliable than someone who stutters and stumbles.
Someone who apologises immediately may be looked on more favourably than someone who waits 40 days.
It's because the person as much as the offence is on trial; and judges and jurors (and anyone else listening in) will inevitably form an opinion of the accused. As ZS says, she did her credibility, and her case, no favours.
she may well have had nazi views… she would have been 8 when Hitler came to power and racist/antisemitic attitudes were far from uncommon before that…
i take your point jno about defendant behaviour jno… the judgement still sits poorly with me… they admit that the prosecution is largely symbolic but fascism has reinvented itself and is alive and well in the modern day… it won’t be beaten by poking at the corpse of nazi germany!
i take your point jno about defendant behaviour jno… the judgement still sits poorly with me… they admit that the prosecution is largely symbolic but fascism has reinvented itself and is alive and well in the modern day… it won’t be beaten by poking at the corpse of nazi germany!
I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt, yes; but because she married him AFTER the war & there is no evidence that she met him at the camp, (you can't rely on Wiki which says "probably") It seems that he was definitely a member of the SS, but of which type I don't know.
The two main constituent groups were the Allgemeine SS (General SS) and Waffen-SS (Armed SS). The Allgemeine SS was responsible for enforcing the racial policy of Nazi Germany and general policing, whereas the Waffen-SS consisted of the combat units of the SS, with a sworn allegiance to Hitler.
He was one the lowest ranking non-commissioned officers & if he was in the combat units, it doesn't mean he is culpable of what went on in the camps which is implied in the OP article.
The two main constituent groups were the Allgemeine SS (General SS) and Waffen-SS (Armed SS). The Allgemeine SS was responsible for enforcing the racial policy of Nazi Germany and general policing, whereas the Waffen-SS consisted of the combat units of the SS, with a sworn allegiance to Hitler.
He was one the lowest ranking non-commissioned officers & if he was in the combat units, it doesn't mean he is culpable of what went on in the camps which is implied in the OP article.
the basis on which she was judged to be aiding and abetting genocide
complicity in murder - Stutthof wasnt a death camp.
as for coercion - duress is a defence in English law
Oh
Duress is a defence at common law to all crimes except murder, attempted murder and treason involving the death of the sovereign: R v Gotts [1992] 2 AC 412. The defence is not available to a person charged with murder as a principal or as an aider, abettor, counsellor or procurer: R v Howe [1987] A.C. 417.
The one eyed cop killa - I thought the person that he holed up with, for a week end, has successfully pleaded 'duress' - "he said he would kill me and my family if I didnt do as he said"
complicity in murder - Stutthof wasnt a death camp.
as for coercion - duress is a defence in English law
Oh
Duress is a defence at common law to all crimes except murder, attempted murder and treason involving the death of the sovereign: R v Gotts [1992] 2 AC 412. The defence is not available to a person charged with murder as a principal or as an aider, abettor, counsellor or procurer: R v Howe [1987] A.C. 417.
The one eyed cop killa - I thought the person that he holed up with, for a week end, has successfully pleaded 'duress' - "he said he would kill me and my family if I didnt do as he said"
complicity cases ( English) here
https:/
https:/
Latest Posts
Body & Soul9 mins ago
News11 mins ago
Books & Authors13 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles14 mins ago
Can The Council Remove A Medically...
Law14 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.