ChatterBank4 mins ago
Trial Of 96 Year Old Former Nazi Secretary
A former secretary at a Nazi concentration camp has been captured after trying to flee before her trial in northern Germany. Irmgard Furchner, 96, charged with complicity in 11,000 murders, fled her care home and failed to turn up at court. She has since been discovered and arrested and is awaiting trial.
https:/ /www.bb c.co.uk /news/w orld-eu rope-58 747082
The question is should she stand trial after all these years and at her advanced age - or is it too late?
https:/
The question is should she stand trial after all these years and at her advanced age - or is it too late?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.it is too late
even the sixties were too late (+)
nineties much too late - Ivan Jemjanuk
though some good films on it
( his identity pass photo had a clip mark on it showing it had been recycled. But recycled when, by whom and with what intent ?)
Here ( in the instant case) the Feds are saying that the accused was a secretary, and was complicit therefore, and both sides agree she didnt shovel anyone into anything
(+) isnt this the first case of a witness saying - - - he was the butcher of XYZ - his staring eyes, his foul breath, his fiendish laugh.....
and the defence said " that is very odd - here you are on film in 1946 saying the exact opposite". My father commented on it. ALso occurred in the DemJanJuk case, where the Prosecution ended up "OK accepted but we know he was very evil - can you convict him please"
Long post for - oral testimony and memory may conflict with written records to a large degree showing how important the records are
even the sixties were too late (+)
nineties much too late - Ivan Jemjanuk
though some good films on it
( his identity pass photo had a clip mark on it showing it had been recycled. But recycled when, by whom and with what intent ?)
Here ( in the instant case) the Feds are saying that the accused was a secretary, and was complicit therefore, and both sides agree she didnt shovel anyone into anything
(+) isnt this the first case of a witness saying - - - he was the butcher of XYZ - his staring eyes, his foul breath, his fiendish laugh.....
and the defence said " that is very odd - here you are on film in 1946 saying the exact opposite". My father commented on it. ALso occurred in the DemJanJuk case, where the Prosecution ended up "OK accepted but we know he was very evil - can you convict him please"
Long post for - oral testimony and memory may conflict with written records to a large degree showing how important the records are
Some murderers would heave a sigh of relief to know that the passage of time offers a winning post, past which they can be assured that justice has been cheated.
The families of their victims would be less impressed.
You don't get to swerve punishment by the unavoidable process of living to be older than your victims were allowed.
The families of their victims would be less impressed.
You don't get to swerve punishment by the unavoidable process of living to be older than your victims were allowed.
I'm not sure. Was she forced to work for the Nazis? Did she apply for the job, did she have a choice?
IF she applied for the job, as a teenager, did she realise what the Nazis were doing? If she did then I think she should stand trial. If she didn't realise then possibly not as she was probably too frightened to do other than instructed.
IF she applied for the job, as a teenager, did she realise what the Nazis were doing? If she did then I think she should stand trial. If she didn't realise then possibly not as she was probably too frightened to do other than instructed.
How has it taken over 60 years to find her? She was a typist for goodness' sake, not a criminal. Things happen in War, to be a part of these things does not mean complicity. Bring it up to date, if a young girl was forced to do a similar job for the Taliban, on pain of death to herself and family, would she be later brought to trial in the West? She would more than likely be classed as a victim.
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.