• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Up: 94 year old former SS-Guard convicted for Auschwitz

Status
Not open for further replies.

Snaku

Banned
Prison primarily serves as punishment which among many other things serves to deter other criminals as well as to remove dangerous individuals from the general population. Rehabilitation is a secondary goal of prison, not its primary purpose.

The modern prison system, used for the last few centuries, was indeed invented primarily for rehabilitation. Prisons were previously used for holding prisoners until trial and/or sentencing could be carried out.
 

Zoned

Actively hates charity
Oh boy here we go, the judicial system and JUSTICE isn't a utilitarian system, unless you're some die-hard Benthamite. We don't base our justice system solely on weighing the possible benefits to society and choosing the approach that solely maximizes those benefits. For example, if a famously skilled doctor kills his wife we don't give him a lesser sentence or let him off the hook because the benefits to society would be better utilized if such a skilled doctor was not jailed.

Prison primarily serves as punishment which among many other things serves to deter other criminals as well as to remove dangerous individuals from the general population. Rehabilitation is a secondary goal of prison, not its primary purpose.

Not really. There are numerous cases where the guilty has got lesser sentences than expected due to their good track record. And comparatively to men, women also get lesser sentences for committing same crime.
 

Moff

Member
He was SS working at Auschwitz, he wasn't just some soldier fighting the war. He was participating in the deaths of thousands. He knew what was happening there and kept going along with it.

you would have to define what you mean by "participating"
the reason his trial in the 80s was discontinued was because they could not prove that he actually commited any crime.
knowing about the holocaust is not a crime, not doing something against the holocaust is not a crime, being a corward witthout a backbone is not a crime. hell, even thinking mass murdering people is good is not a crime.

what they are now doing is just prosecuting people for the assumption they commited a crime. and that's just something I cannot approve. in dubio pro reo needs to hold even for the most obvious criminials or it has no worth at all.
 

foxtrot3d

Banned
so what if he was a true believer? he's 94 fucking years old, he can't walk under his own power. he's not hurting anybody. no point in incarcerating him.

When it comes to murder, especially the alleged participation in genocide justice has no time limit. Tell me, let's say he murdered his wife or just his next door neighbor and nobody figured it out until 80 years later should he just be allowed to walk free?
 

Toxi

Banned
So you want kids and babies to be prosecuted as well D: ?

My point is, there are plenty exceptions in every justice system and for good reasons.
Children are not granted the same privileges as adults because they are not considered to be responsible enough to use them. By that standard, we cannot hold them to the same standard as adults in court.

The elderly have the privileges of adults, so there is no good reason to exempt them from the process.
 

The Llama

Member
Honestly at this point, why bother. Society gains nothing from this.
I want to do criminal defense work, I'm biased.
 

Snaku

Banned
When it comes to murder, especially the alleged participation in genocide justice has no time limit. Tell me, let's say he murdered his wife or just his next door neighbor and nobody figured it out until 80 years later should he just be allowed to walk free?

There has been no allegation that he participated in genocide.
 
What a waste of time! The dude is 94 and prosecuting him is not bringing any justice nor is it doing anything for the greater good of society. The Nazi's were defeated 70 years ago. Everyone who fought on the German side represented the Nazi's and contributed to the atrocities knowingly or not, but only the people at the very top who created this ideology should have been held responsible. If it weren't for them these crimes never would have been committed.
 

By saying no? by not joining the army? The Nazis were too few to effectively control the nation through force. They relied on active participation of the general population to achieve their aims. Previous Nazi efforts like the Jewish business boycott and the T4 program were shutdown due to public outcry. Even those involved in the execution squads were allowed to say no. If only they did but they made their choice and humanity suffered for it.
 
He could've stopped the genocide but he did nothing! death to the old man!

There is literally nothing he could have done.

By saying no? by not joining the army? The Nazis were too few to effectively control the nation through force. They relied on active participation of the general population to achieve their aims. Previous Nazi efforts like the Jewish business boycott and the T4 program were shutdown due to public outcry. Even those involved in the execution squads were allowed to say no. If only they did but they made their choice and humanity suffered for it.

None of that would have stopped the genocide, though.
 

lawnchair

Banned
When it comes to murder, especially the alleged participation in genocide justice has no time limit. Tell me, let's say he murdered his wife or just his next door neighbor and nobody figured it out until 80 years later should he just be allowed to walk free?

my opinion? absolutely.
 

foxtrot3d

Banned
There has been no allegation that he participated in genocide.

He's being tried for 300,000 counts of murder, so yeah they are alleging he somehow participated in the genocide. A trial will prove whether such allegations are true or false.
 
When it comes to murder, especially the alleged participation in genocide justice has no time limit. Tell me, let's say he murdered his wife or just his next door neighbor and nobody figured it out until 80 years later should he just be allowed to walk free?

Do you think such a thing could be proven?
 

aerts1js

Member
I doubt he willfully worked at that concentration camp. He was most likely assigned and was following orders. 75% of the people in this thread yelling for revenge likely would have done the same.
 
This trial is running since april and is bigger than Mr. Gröning himself. Since his crimes are 70 years ago and he actively spoke out against holocaust deniers his sentence looks like three years of jail, but the lawyers representing the accusation feel uncomfortable in letting a man who helped the Holocaust knowingly go with only three years of jail time.

At his age, he'll be lucky to serve 1 and will be released.

I think the circumstances of how he came to join the Army and the Nazis should play a role in this sentencing for war crimes.

I would have much less sympathy for someone who voluntarily wanted to commit wartime atrocities in the name of Germany.
 
What would BJ Blazkowicz do?

Fuck him. Nazi scum. Normally I'd say let it go but Nazism is the special exception. Master race that wanted to rule the world for all eternity? You get to be pursued by the wheels of justice for all eternity.

By saying no? by not joining the army? The Nazis were too few to effectively control the nation through force. They relied on active participation of the general population to achieve their aims. Previous Nazi efforts like the Jewish business boycott and the T4 program were shutdown due to public outcry. Even those involved in the execution squads were allowed to say no. If only they did but they made their choice and humanity suffered for it.

This times a thousand. You all could learn something from Don't Be A Sucker.
 

foxtrot3d

Banned
there's no point in putting decrepit old murderers in jail.

Wrong, there is a point it's just one that personally doesn't hold much weight to you. The argument for many people would be that Justice is served by ensuring that no criminal, especially an alleged murderer, escapes the law no matter how long it takes for them to be caught.

Do you think such a thing could be proven?

Ever heard of DNA evidence? It's what has allowed people rotting in jail for decades to finally be exonerated.
 

MrChom

Member
At best try him, convict him, then send him back home. Locking him up is a waste of money, what's it going to do? Punish him? He's 94, the likelihood is any prison would basically just turn into a nursing home anyway...not like the foods any different between them. Is he meant to learn something? Pretty sure he's not going to learn something in 3 years he hasn't learned in the last 70? For the principle of the thing? Who are we demonstrating it to? Again, if you were 18 when the war ended you are 88 now...

What he saw, and allowed to happen was beyond abhorrent.

...but at some point we have to admit that any action we take is pointless unless you want revenge...at which point you might want to look at yourself instead of him.
 

Hagi

Member
That was one of the least horrific photos that I could find. I think people in this thread should spend a few moments looking through images of the horrible crimes committed at the camp before arguing for leniency just because he is an old man.

I'd rather look at proof he did something than proof that general atrocities were committed at the camp. I mean establishing he has victims and appealing people to look for horrific photos seems a bit emotionally manipulative.
 

MUnited83

For you.
Oh boy here we go, the judicial system and JUSTICE isn't a utilitarian system, unless you're some die-hard Benthamite. We don't base our justice system solely on weighing the possible benefits to society and choosing the approach that solely maximizes those benefits. For example, if a famously skilled doctor kills his wife we don't give him a lesser sentence or let him off the hook because the benefits to society would be better utilized if such a skilled doctor was not jailed.

Prison primarily serves as punishment which among many other things serves to deter other criminals as well as to remove dangerous individuals from the general population. Rehabilitation is a secondary goal of prison, not its primary purpose.

Look at the US stats for a second. Prison as a punishment is a fucking terrible philoshophy and does nothing to deter other criminals.
 
you would have to define what you mean by "participating"
the reason his trial in the 80s was discontinued was because they could not prove that he actually commited any crime.
knowing about the holocaust is not a crime, not doing something against the holocaust is not a crime, being a corward witthout a backbone is not a crime. hell, even thinking mass murdering people is good is not a crime.

what they are now doing is just prosecuting people for the assumption they commited a crime. and that's just something I cannot approve. in dubio pro reo needs to hold even for the most obvious criminials or it has no worth at all.

He was an accomplice to the crimes committed at Auschwitz. I'm under the opinion that if someone actively helps a crime occur they should be prosecuted for it. He did more than just know about the holocaust. He was SS for christ sakes.
 

lawnchair

Banned
Wrong, there is a point it's just one that personally doesn't hold much weight to you. The argument for many people would be that Justice is served by ensuring that no criminal, especially an alleged murderer, escapes the law no matter how long it takes for them to be caught.

He's not going to escape being dead in like a year. what does society stand to gain by jailing old helpless men?
 
Ah the same guy who testified against the nazi's after the war at nuremburg, aided the alies, took part in numerous documentaries over the years and whilst there was so disgusted he requested transferring anywhere else (including the front and certain death)

This was a man who joined his national army after being caught up in the propaganda not realising the full horror of what they were, joined what the propaganda considered the elite branch of the military. Then when placed at this death camp and learning the full horror of what his country was doing he requested an out, to go even to his own death and refused. He then completed his job for the short time left of the war (1944 he was sent there iirc)
this was a glorified admin assistant at a Auschwitz and up until this trial he was considered a source, a witness someone to go to for accounts from the german military side, someone so far down on the totem pole of people who deserved punishment he was rightfully ignored.

Now that all those who could be prosecuted who really should be brought to justice have been or died they are scraping the barrel seeking vengeance on anyone - this is vengeance now not justice, this man sought to atone for his 'sins' (of bearing witness and being in the army) and up to now it seemed everyone considered he had.
 

Gonzalez

Banned
Most of you guys don't believe in that Heaven & Hell stuff anyway. So why not punish the guy for all the horrible things he did before he bites it?
 

Moff

Member
He was an accomplice to the crimes committed at Auschwitz. I'm under the opinion that if someone actively helps a crime occur they should be prosecuted for it. He did more than just know about the holocaust. He was SS for christ sakes.

but he did not do more than knowing, he did not actively help any crimes, at least they could not prove that in the 80s.
 

flkraven

Member
I want to reverse the question for the people on the other side of the fence. What is the point of not putting him in jail? How do we benefit by not jailing him?
 

njean777

Member
Waste of money and time if you ask me. He has had to live with the guilt all his life, now whether he feels it is another discussion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom