Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ivan the Terrible - John Demjanjuk Extradited to Germany

124»

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    Morlar wrote: »
    There is no comparison whatsoever between your ridiculous posting of the ferg stats jpeg from wiki, demanding people agree with them etc etc and my quoting an article above.

    Its another ridiculous claim in a long line coming from you. Let's recap the highlights of your record on here since you began posting not that long ago

    A)

    The time you insisted that it was not ;

    'The crimes of the soviet regime'

    but that it was

    'the 'crimes' of the soviet regime'

    A ridiculous position to take.

    B)

    That time you said that when the author longerich explicitly referred to 'Police battalion 102' as being in a location they were not at, doing something they did not do (at a time when they were somehwere else doing something else), you insisted the author did not make a mistake.

    Instead he just meant something completely different. But you continously refused to accept this was a mistake on his part. He just meant a completely different group. Ridiculous position to take.

    C)
    The time you posted a jpeg from wiki purporting to be the worlds first global definitive pow mortality rates and then demanded everyone had to accept your completely unverified, context-less statistics. Also that if people did not accept them they needed to provide alternative data & that discussion was impossible without acceptance, also that refusal to accept the jpeg meant a bias. Yet another ridiculous position to take.

    I am sorry but for a relatively new poster you have a high record for posting complete and utter clangers. Then refusing to accept the fact & becoming argumentative. I'd say your credibility on this forum is minimal at best in my view.

    Which brings us to today, criticising a source without claiming any substantive factual error on their part. Using slur, and innuendo and intellectually dishonest claims of anti-semitism against the author rather than discuss any factual inaccuracies in their work.

    Particularly when you have been repeatedly asked to illustrate any factual inaccuracies or errors in the P. B. article I quoted above.

    Mary Robinson, Orla Guerin and Former USA President Carter, (among a long, long, list of others) have all been accused of anti-semitism at one point or another. Any public figure (particularly in the America) runs the risk of that intellectually dishonest slur if they take a public stand on an issue which is not inline with the position taken by pro-israel advocacy groups. This is not america. I simply don't accept that allegation as a criteria for discounting sources. I'd say the prevasive threat of this allegation and the constant use of it is intended to stifle debate and open discussion.

    So firstly I do not accept the accusation in this instance. Anyone can allege or accuse a public figure of anything. He has not been convicted of anything whatsoever in that direction to the best of my knowledge.

    Secondly - even if and that is a huge IF it were true, it would not relate to, or diminish the factual accuracy of the article I posted.

    Wow- someones in a bit of a knot!!! I am reminded of the film American pie: "Remember that time at band camp".
    This is your standard drivel (forgive me but I had to speed read it) to distract from being pulled up again for posting nonsense, on this occasion from a widely recognised anti-semite. If you cannot stand over your post without going into this type of irrelevent diatribe then I ask, why post in the first place. There are so many contradictions contained in your post that I could dismantle it quite easily but I prefer not to get embroiled in that type of argument so I will hold off for the moment. Rather I ask, do you have anything of note to add on the subject of discussion contained in the thread.

    I will try and take you back to the subject that has relevence; John Demjanjuk and the courts verdict on him.

    Do you think it is valid to charge him in Germany when the charge relates to acts committed in Poland?

    Can you add anything to the facts known in the case- i.e. did he volunteer for SS or was he forced into duty?

    What of his none co-operation in the trial- Why do you think he did not co-operate with investigations or do you say he did?

    Do you think he should be left alone due to his age regardless of his innocence or guilt?

    Do you doubt the German experts on the SS documentation? If so on what grounds?

    Would you agree with Bausch:
    "Should foreigners pay for the crimes of the Germans … in order to acquit Germany of its responsibility alone for the Holocaust?" Busch said

    A proper answer to this would constitute debating the subject matter which I would prefer.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    Wow- someones in a bit of a knot!!! I am reminded of the film American pie: "Remember that time at band camp".
    This is your standard drivel (forgive me but I had to speed read it) to distract from being pulled up again for posting nonsense, on this occasion from a widely recognised anti-semite. If you cannot stand over your post without going into this type of irrelevent diatribe then I ask, why post in the first place. There are so many contradictions contained in your post that I could dismantle it quite easily but I prefer not to get embroiled in that type of argument so I will hold off for the moment.

    Typical ad hominem, non answer from you.

    Here in a well articulated format, is a reasonable expression of the main issues with this case :

    http://buchanan.org/blog/the-persecution-of-john-demjanjuk-4743

    You can attempt to dismiss this viewpoint/expression on any basis you wish.

    However you have yet to point out a single factual inaccuracy with it.

    It is not for you to deem which source is worthy of inclusion in a thread, least of all you, considering your habit for referencing amateur blogs and soviet propaganda ministry information (in addition to the points around your credibility mentioned above).


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,371 ✭✭✭Fuinseog


    Tony EH wrote: »
    "Demjanjuk was charged with 28,060 counts of being an accessory to murder, one for each person who died during the time he was accused of being a guard at the Sobibor camp in Nazi-occupied Poland. There was no evidence he committed a specific crime. The prosecution was based on the theory that if Demjanjuk was at the camp, he was a participant in the killing — the first time such a legal argument has been made in German courts."

    I'm at a loss for words.

    no German court would dare acquit anyone connected to the holocaust. As such being tried in Germany is as impartial as the Nuremberg trials were.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    Morlar wrote: »
    Typical ad hominem, non answer from you.

    Here in a well articulated format, is a reasonable expression of the main issues with this case :

    http://buchanan.org/blog/the-persecution-of-john-demjanjuk-4743

    You can attempt to dismiss this viewpoint/expression on any basis you wish.

    However you have yet to point out a single factual inaccuracy with it.

    It is not for you to deem which source is worthy of inclusion in a thread, least of all you, considering your habit for referencing amateur blogs and soviet propaganda ministry information (in addition to the points around your credibility mentioned above).



    It should not be a bolt from the blue to dismiss an anti-semite viewpoint considering the subject matter but it is in line food critics and other reliable opinions that you prefer I guess. I have tempered your souce already by revealing his past ramblings which render this latest rant meaningless and predictable and yet you persist in delusion. I note you conveniently don't contradict these articles which shred Buchanans credibility.

    In any case why not answer the queries relating to the case rather than this type of bickering? Theres nothing to be afraid of
    I will try and take you back to the subject that has relevence; John Demjanjuk and the courts verdict on him.

    Do you think it is valid to charge him in Germany when the charge relates to acts committed in Poland?

    Can you add anything to the facts known in the case- i.e. did he volunteer for SS or was he forced into duty?

    What of his none co-operation in the trial- Why do you think he did not co-operate with investigations or do you say he did?

    Do you think he should be left alone due to his age regardless of his innocence or guilt?

    Do you doubt the German experts on the SS documentation? If so on what grounds?

    Would you agree with Bausch:
    Quote:
    "Should foreigners pay for the crimes of the Germans … in order to acquit Germany of its responsibility alone for the Holocaust?" Busch said

    A proper answer to this would constitute debating the subject matter which I would prefer.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,821 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    marcsignal wrote: »
    It certainly is a bizarre legal precedent alright :confused:

    By the logic they are using, that would give them grounds to string up every waiter who served dinner at the Wannsee Conference, or to nobble someone like 'Rochus Mich' the Berlin Bunker telephone operator. It's like claiming that he's complicit in some way, because he was present in the bunker with Hitler when decisions were being made, and that he had not passed on messages/orders they couldn't have been carried out.

    The Germans have gone way ott on this one.

    Well, I'll say it like it is. The Jews want their prosecution, no matter what and the Germans are too weak to tell them to **** off.

    It's as simple as that.

    However, in saying that, I'll be very surprised if he does a single hour in a prison. It's probably a show conviction, for a show trial. The Germans want to be seen doing something.

    Seriously though, you'd think after years and years of hounding this man, they'd at least have SOMETHING solid on him.

    What a farce.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    In any case why not answer the queries relating to the case rather than this type of bickering?

    The points you raised about jurisdiction and whether or not the accused co-operated with the prosecution are a mixture of not entirely relevant and completely irrelevant.

    The core issues are covered in the Patrick Buchanan article :

    http://buchanan.org/blog/the-persecution-of-john-demjanjuk-4743

    This is the article which you have been unable to find any inaccuracies in and so seek to dismiss it on the basis of a slur made by jewish advocacy groups against the author.

    The same slur as has been made against many public figures like Mary Robinson, Orla Guerin and former president Jimmy Carter to name but a few.
    Tony EH wrote: »
    Seriously though, you'd think after years and years of hounding this man, they'd at least have SOMETHING solid on him.

    What a farce.

    Farce would be a good word for it. Possibly the last big showtrial and it leaves a bitter legacy.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,072 ✭✭✭marcsignal


    Tony EH wrote: »
    What a farce.
    Morlar wrote: »
    Farce would be a good word for it. Possibly the last big showtrial and it leaves a bitter legacy.

    +1

    And there was some suggestion that this would open the door on new prosecutions in Germany :confused:
    Seriously, what's next? A 'sins of the fathers clause' enabling the children or grandchildren of former ss members to be tried?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    Morlar wrote: »
    The points you raised about jurisdiction and whether or not the accused co-operated with the prosecution are a mixture of not entirely relevant and completely irrelevant.

    The core issues are covered in the Patrick Buchanan article :

    http://buchanan.org/blog/the-persecution-of-john-demjanjuk-4743

    This is the article which you have been unable to find any inaccuracies in and so seek to dismiss it on the basis of a slur made by jewish advocacy groups against the author.

    .

    Sure he spends half his article spouting about the SS card being a forgery because the FBI said this in the 1980's. How innacurate do you want. The FBI (1 single FBI officer by the way) reckoned this without actually ever having possesion of the item concerned, making their judgement on 2nd hand evidence, photos of the card!!! It is spoofing of a ridiculous nature given that specialists in this case examined the ID card using modern forensic evidence. And this according to you is part of the core of the case!!!! The whole article is focused on pseudo cold war ramblings that are a trademark of the fool who wrote it. Modern forensic science may be doubted by you and this article but I am going to take the views of the scientist who testified in this case if you dont mind.
    What complete rubbish it (your article) is- I think you need me to break this down for you piece by piece to get to the real 'core'.

    The core of the argument is that this man may well have been at Sobibor, The evidence seems to prove completely that he was there (contrary to Buchanans view). Your focus should be that Demjanjuk could have been at this camp in an innocent role such as paperwork of some kind or counting money or gold teeth, etc. He could have carried out this role whilst being disgusted at what went on around him, afraid to speak out for fear of death. I probably shouldnt second guess but I imagine this is a big part of what people think is 'farce' about the case. Other points relating age, evidence, trial location, etc, can all be debated but are not the 'core' issue. Its also why an appeal should be interesting.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    can you link to some of these forensic specialists who have authenticated the ID card?????

    So if Demjanjuk is basicly guilty of

    Being there & Other offences

    when can we expect to see Roucus Misch and others tried for simmilar offences?????


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    As per the points raised in the article :

    There is no eyewitness evidence whatsoever.
    No evidence of a specific crime.
    The entire prosecution revolved around the ID card. The fact that the FBI previously dismissed the kgb supplied card as a forgery makes it a key aspect of this case.

    You can not ignore the fact that this same man was tried on similar charges previously in a death-penalty case which convicted him of being someone completely different. So this all makes the kGB supplied ID card key to the case. This obviously does not mean that other factors such as the absence of 'evidence of a specific crime' can be ignored. By anyones standards this is a bizzare and flimsy legal case, requiring special laws not previously used in Germany.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,072 ✭✭✭marcsignal


    Morlar wrote: »
    By anyones standards this is a bizzare and flimsy legal case, requiring special laws not previously used in Germany.

    Exactly, I find the application of a hashed up Ad-Hoc law, in order to secure a prosecution pretty disturbing. It's got a wiff of Roland Freisler about it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    Would people here think that if it was proven he had played a willing and active part at Sobibor, i.e. shooting prisoners, etc (in the classical depiction of a cruel camp guard) that he should be punished? I'm not saying he did this just trying to get a view or 2 on it. Opinions can be justified if a poster wants to make clear why there view is in a certain way.

    Also (or perhaps linked to above) does the fact that he was wrongly charged previously have any bearing on his treatment now?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    Opinions can be justified if a poster wants to make clear why there view is in a certain way.

    It's not for you to impose pre-conditions on the expression of views/opinions/thoughts etc.
    Also (or perhaps linked to above) does the fact that he was wrongly charged previously have any bearing on his treatment now?

    The fact that he was wrongly identified, wrongly prosecuted and wrongly convicted, in a previous death-penalty case as being someone completely different - is relevant in terms of the reliability of the ID process.

    It shows the unreliability of identifying a 90yr old as having been at one place, at one time, during a chaotic war 66 years ago. Add to that the fact that the FBI deemed the id card he was convicted upon to be a kgb forgery. Also the fact that there were no eyewitnesses to place him there, in fact eyewitnesses in the israel charge placed him somewhere completely different and of being a different person. It does all add up to make the whole thing a farce.

    Not to mention the fact that the id card even IF true would only place him at a location.

    Still no evidence of any specific crime.

    Hardly meets the 'beyond reasonable doubt' standard. Putting someone at a specific location and presenting no evidence whatsoever of a specific crime, but instead extrapolating that well if was there he must have done X,Y,Z, seems to imply an presumption of guilt.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    Morlar wrote: »
    It's not for you to impose pre-conditions on the expression of views/opinions/thoughts etc.

    Jaysus -you are hard work. I ask a simple generalised question- I would be interested in the answer from some of the more open minded posters to garner a consensus. Your whole post just repeats what you already said.

    Any takers for this?
    Would people here think that if it was proven he had played a willing and active part at Sobibor, i.e. shooting prisoners, etc (in the classical depiction of a cruel camp guard) that he should be punished? I'm not saying he did this just trying to get a view or 2 on it. Opinions can be justified if a poster wants to make clear why there view is in a certain way.

    Also (or perhaps linked to above) does the fact that he was wrongly charged previously have any bearing on his treatment now?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    Jaysus -you are hard work. I ask a simple generalised question-

    Maybe you shouldn't try to put conditions on the discussion or on who can answer or how they can respond.
    I would be interested in the answer from some of the more open minded posters to garner a consensus. Your whole post just repeats what you already said.

    Any takers for this?

    It's a public forum, you can choose to ignore posters if you disagree with their view, but it is an open forum.

    For the record I have already responded to your specific question here :
    Morlar wrote: »
    The fact that he was wrongly identified, wrongly prosecuted and wrongly convicted, in a previous death-penalty case as being someone completely different - is relevant in terms of the reliability of the ID process.

    It shows the unreliability of identifying a 90yr old as having been at one place, at one time, during a chaotic war 66 years ago. Add to that the fact that the FBI deemed the id card he was convicted upon to be a kgb forgery. Also the fact that there were no eyewitnesses to place him there, in fact eyewitnesses in the israel charge placed him somewhere completely different and of being a different person. It does all add up to make the whole thing a farce.

    Not to mention the fact that the id card even IF true would only place him at a location.

    Still no evidence of any specific crime.

    Hardly meets the 'beyond reasonable doubt' standard. Putting someone at a specific location and presenting no evidence whatsoever of a specific crime, but instead extrapolating that well if was there he must have done X,Y,Z, seems to imply an presumption of guilt.

    Which you chose to ignore. The other part of your post is a hypothetical scenario based on the assumption of this mans guilt.

    It adds nothing to the discussion in my view other than to create the association in peoples minds that this man must have done something.
    Would people here think that if it was proven he had played a willing and active part at Sobibor, i.e. shooting prisoners, etc (in the classical depiction of a cruel camp guard) that he should be punished? I'm not saying he did this just trying to get a view or 2 on it. Opinions can be justified if a poster wants to make clear why there view is in a certain way.

    To answer that hypothetical scenario of guilt would probably depend on the case for the hypothetical defence. This is an actual survivor of stalin's holdomor, consrcipted into the red army, the same red-army you have frequently expressed were treated inhumanely in German captivity. If he chose to work for the Germans it would depend on whether or not he did it in order to survive, what specifically were his duties etc etc However as regards the actual case rather than this new 'hypothetical guilt case' the relevant points are above. Specifically around the 'beyond reasonable doubt' issue and the apparent 'presumption of guilt'.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    Morlar wrote: »
    Maybe you shouldn't try to put conditions on the discussion or on who can answer or how they can respond.

    It's a public forum, you can choose to ignore posters if you disagree with their view, but it is an open forum.

    For the record I have already responded to your specific question here :

    It is a public forum, correct, thus I asked for proper responses as opposed to your reply which avoided answering my question. I did'nt ignore your reply, I just disregarded it as it didnt answer what I asked. You may have reasons why you don't want to answer it directly but you should allow others to do so.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    For anyone not that interested in a 'presumption of guilt-scenario based offshoot' to the thread, there is an interesting reality-based thread on the Demjanjuk trials (specifically the kgb card) here :

    http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=177122

    It contains among other things informative, factual posts made by a fee-based researcher who worked on the original Demjanjuk trial. It also contains a link to a site here (labelled a 'denier site' for an unknown reason) dedicated entirely to the question of the ID Card :

    http://www.xoxol.org/traw/photo.html

    In fact if you look at this close up picture here it does seem to show that the ID card contains a picture from different document which has been added to it (note the mis-stamp and staple holes). This may explain the russian refusal to allow experts to remove the card from the embassy premise (in addition to what is beneath the picture).

    http://www.xoxol.org/traw/id-demjanjuk-staple-holes.jpg

    The FBI-denounced ID card is also mysteriously identical to a card identifying a differnt soldier - check the handwriting and location of pen marks on both of these cards :

    Card A

    http://www.xoxol.org/traw/id-demjanjuk-outside-610x418.jpg
    http://www.xoxol.org/traw/id-demjanjuk-inside-610x424.jpg

    Card B

    http://www.xoxol.org/traw/id-demjanjuk-outside-molodukr.jpg

    I would recommend reading the 3-page thread to anyone interested in this subject.

    The axis history thread also contained this article which puts an interesting angle on recent developments. As a USA citizen he would have needed a high standard of evidence against him before extradition to face foreign charges. This was circumvented by withdrawing his citizenship, so he was deported rather than extradited. However Demjanjuk may now be in a position to revive his US nationality. The judge also confirms fraud on the part of the prosecutors in the case of his original deportation trial.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/us-judge-appoints-public-defender-for-demjanjuk-on-trial-in-germany-for-alleged-war-crimes/2011/05/10/AFPX7OjG_story.html
    CLEVELAND — A public defender was appointed Tuesday to represent the U.S. legal interests of a retired Ohio autoworker on trial in Germany for alleged Nazi war crimes, raising the prospect of renewing the decades-old case in

    American courts.

    U.S. District Court Judge Dan Polster issued a brief order approving the federal public defender’s request to represent John Demjanjuk, 90.

    The judge said the appointment won’t affect Demjanjuk’s German trial, where a verdict could come as early as Thursday on more than 28,000 counts of accessory to murder on allegations he served as a death camp guard. He has pleaded not guilty.

    Demjanjuk doesn’t have any current legal proceedings under way in the U.S.

    However, the judge indicated Demjanjuk could revive his U.S. denaturalization case based on a 1985 FBI report recently uncovered by The Associated Press. The FBI report challenged the authenticity of a Nazi ID card used as evidence in the German trial.

    “It is the responsibility of the court to insure the integrity of court proceedings,” the judge’s order said. “There has already been one confirmed instance of fraud against the court in the first denaturalization trial.”

    In a 1993 review of the American denaturalization hearing that led to Demjanjuk’s extradition to Israel, a U.S. appeals panel concluded that the U.S. Justice Department’s Nazi-hunting unit engaged in “prosecutorial misconduct that seriously misled the court” by withholding evidence that might have helped Demjanjuk.

    Polster cited federal rules allowing cases to be reopened based on various reasons, including new evidence.

    Polster said his order appointing the public defender’s office to represent Demjanjuk wasn’t a finding or even speculation about the authenticity of the Nazi ID card.

    In any case, Polster said, “Should Demjanjuk be found guilty of a criminal offense in Germany, he will need to serve whatever sentence the court in Germany imposes.”

    Federal prosecutors had opposed the appointment of a public defender, saying there were no current legal proceedings in the U.S. involving Demjanjuk, he hadn’t asked for a public defender and he has an attorney who has agreed to defend him for free.

    The AP reported in April that the 1985 file indicated the FBI believed a Nazi ID card purportedly showing that Demjanjuk served as a death camp guard was a Soviet-made fake.

    His defense attorneys have repeatedly claimed that the card and other evidence against him are Soviet forgeries. The FBI report provides the first known confirmation that American investigators had similar doubts.

    In three decades of U.S. hearings, an extradition, a death sentence followed by acquittal in Israel, a deportation and the German trial, the arguments have relied heavily on the photo ID from an SS training camp that indicates Demjanjuk was sent to the Sobibor death camp in occupied Poland.

    The German court rejected a defense request to suspend the trial so that defense attorneys could travel to the U.S. to examine the new material.

    Polster said Demjanjuk’s German attorneys are aware of the 1985 document.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    Morlar wrote: »
    For anyone not that interested in a 'presumption of guilt-scenario based offshoot' to the thread, there is an interesting reality-based thread on the Demjanjuk trials (specifically the kgb card) here :

    http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=177122

    Its not even a challenge arguing this one with you Morlar- Yet again you shoot your self in the foot. This is an extract from your link:
    He noted as particularly important the way the FBI said the KGB presented evidence to the U.S. Department of Justice: allowing the material to be viewed only at a Soviet embassy or consulate but not examined by document experts.

    "It's very explicit, and the same thing happened here," Busch said, noting he could view two Russian-held Nazi "transfer lists" from 1943 only at the Russian Consulate in Munich. The documents indicate a guard named Demjanjuk was sent to Flossenbuerg concentration camp and to Sobibor.

    "The Russians said we could look at them but that we couldn't do anything with them, couldn't examine them, and then they took them away," Busch said.

    So your 'reliable' FBI sources made there judgements without expert analysis? This really is codswallop of a particularly high calibre! and all to avoid a proper discussion on the subject, a totally abhorrent line of posting given the serious issues of justice involved.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    The fact that the soviets withheld physical examination of the ID document, and withheld the original alleged eyewitness (now deceased) does not re-inforce the view taken by you that it's therefore genuine.

    If anything, it would indicate that the KGB withheld it because they had something to hide.

    Your repeated attempt to downplay the FBI conclusion that the document is a forgery tends to show a reluctance on your part to discuss the most vital piece of 'evidence' that exsists in this case. To simultaneously claim that on your part this is in pursuit of the truth, and with resepect to the 'serious issues of justice involved' is disingenous and hypocritical of you to say the least.

    For a more balanced and informed view on this issue I would recommend the Axis history thread referenced in the post above :

    http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=177122


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,072 ✭✭✭marcsignal


    Would people here think that if it was proven he had played a willing and active part at Sobibor, i.e. shooting prisoners, etc (in the classical depiction of a cruel camp guard) that he should be punished?

    I'd have to say yes, but, adding to that, it would be more important to me, that if this precedent was set, then it should apply to all war criminals everywhere, not just nazi ones from ww2. Yes, I'm talking about Iraq, Gaza etc. To make such a fuss over things that happened 65 years ago, and conveniently ignore whats happening today, makes a joke out the whole concept.

    For example, surviving Mau Maus from Kenya are actually managing to put together a strong case over their brutal treatment in concentration camps set up by the British in the 50s. As well as financial compensation, I would like to see someone from the British Military, go through the ringer for this, like John Demjanjuk, but I doubt it will ever turn out that way.
    Also (or perhaps linked to above) does the fact that he was wrongly charged previously have any bearing on his treatment now?

    That's a tough one. Strictly speaking, he was wrongfully accused. The case ate up 5 years of his life. Should he be compensated for that ?

    Relating to Demjanjuk, how do you appropriately punish someone of his age ?
    Hang him anyway ? House arrest ? I'm not a legal person, and don't have the training or qualifications to answer that. However, I've said already, I find the application of Ad-Hoc law in order to create a legal case, where one might not have existed in the statute books, in this instance, disturbing.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,371 ✭✭✭Fuinseog


    Demjanjuk is different to cases such as what happened in Iraq in the way those who are pursuing them yield an an incredible amount of power and easily influence governments.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,072 ✭✭✭marcsignal


    Fuinseog wrote: »
    Demjanjuk is different to cases such as what happened in Iraq in the way those who are pursuing them yield an an incredible amount of power and easily influence governments.

    that's what it seems to boil down to :(


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    This man has died
    John Demjanjuk, who was found guilty for his role as a guard at a Nazi death camp in World War II, has died aged 91, German police say.

    He had been sentenced in May 2011 by a German court to five years in prison, but was released pending an appeal.

    He died at a home for the elderly.

    The court said Demjanjuk, 91, was a guard at Sobibor camp in Nazi-occupied Poland in 1943. He denied this, saying he was a prisoner of war and a victim too. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17414127


  • Registered Users Posts: 271 ✭✭Artur.PL


    This man has died
    and very good.
    I have to say it: happy days.


Advertisement