207
German court rejects appeal by ex-Nazi secretary over role in 10,500 murders
(www.theguardian.com)
I wonder if she loses any sleep about it these days
this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2024
207 points (99.1% liked)
World News
38500 readers
2734 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Honestly? Good
I mean, fuck all nazis, obviously. But a woman who was a secretary in the 1930s/1940s? And she got a two year suspended sentence? This just sorta reeks of performative.
I get it, she was a secretary at a camp. So it’s not like she didn’t know. But either do it for real or don’t because she’s old and gonna die soon. This sort of honorary prison time thing—especially for a woman in that era? It’s just a strange…way of for the cards to fall. I don’t know how to describe it. Nor how to really feel about it. Seems like, for 10,500 murders, it’s light. But for a woman under the Nazi regime? I mean…how much agency did she really have? I dunno. Like I said, just feels weird.
She had certainly enough agency to refuse to work at a concentration camp. It's not like those were the only jobs available for women at that time.
Also, not prosecuting her would likely be illegal since state prosecutors cannot decide to simply ignore crimes they don't feel like prosecuting:
§ Section 258a Obstructing prosecution in office
(1) If, in the cases referred to in section 258(1), the offender is appointed as a public official to cooperate in the criminal proceedings or in the proceedings ordering the measure [...] the penalty shall be a custodial sentence of six months to five years, or in less serious cases a custodial sentence of up to three years or a monetary penalty.
§ Section 258 Obstruction of justice
(1) Any person who intentionally or knowingly prevents, in whole or in part, another person from being punished or subjected to a measure [...] in accordance with the Criminal Code for an unlawful act shall be liable to a custodial sentence not exceeding five years or to a monetary penalty.
Okay. So then prosecute the shit out of her. That’s my point. If she deserves it, don’t throw some sort of honorary sentence at her. She either deserves it because of her part, and you don’t sort of have some vague notion of her being guilty if she weren’t so old, or you don’t prosecute her. See what I’m saying? I’m not saying she’s surely culpable or not, it’s just that this feels so half-assed and performative. Two year suspended sentence? So they’re just gonna let this person guilty of being an accessory to 10,500 murders off on a light sentence. Get ere I’m coming from? I see the argument going both ways. This just felt like they couldn’t decide which way to take and they’re going for appearances and that’s all.
Throwing the book at her would not make it past appeals because it would be excessive punishment and violate numerous laws about sentencing length.
Here is how the constitutional court described what factors into the severity of a punishment (1977):
Compensation for guilt, prevention, resocialization of the offender, atonement and retribution for wrongs committed are described as aspects of an appropriate penal sanction.
But there is no compensation, no prevention and no resocialization which could increase the severity of the punishment. Will she ever be at risk of assisting in the murder of 10,000 people again? Absolutely not.
By the way, 2 years of probation is the longest probation possible by law. Any longer and she would have to go to prison - which would be thrown out in appeals.
Just think about the slaughter going on today at Gaza and the myriad of willing participants. Even if it's mínimal i would hope these people would be held accountable to some degree, even if it is performative its an indicator that the current culture and government recognizes the crime their previous generation committed
Let me blow your mind: It is performative as well as a real trial.
I mean…how much agency did she really have? Most likely none.
What I find odd is why wait so long? She is 99. Is this justice for anyone at this point? In the news, several people in their 90s were charged with crimes during WW2. It just seems oddly late, as you said, performative.
What I find odd is why wait so long?
It all takes a while.
Short version: a couple decades ago they decided that it's too hard to impossible to find solid evidence against "small cogs" in the system. But that changed a couple years ago and now they are digging up cases where they can solidly proof that they were (in)directly involved in murdering the people.
And murder doesn't have statute of limitation. same with assistance to murder.
The case against her was already started in 2022 and she was found guilty. But they appealed. This appeal was now rejected by the courts.
And as she's quite old, it doesn't make much sense to stick her in jail. Also, as she was only 18-19 when it happened, they ruled it accordingly under milder youth-law.
The main reason is: it's bad if the state doesn't follow through with murder cases. Even if it's 80 years later
show trial. If the punishment for being an accessory to over 10.000 murders is two suspended years, could've just not had a trial at all. Would've saved some resources.
It would show the judicial system in a bad light if it would let slide a proofable case of (assistance to) murder. Even if it's 80 years later.
Show trial? Kind of. But also a trial on principle. Murder doesn't have a statute of limitations
Irmgard Furchner, 99, was found guilty
Irmagerd. Ferkher.