For the past half century, the world has blamed Nazi Germany for the horrible acts that took place during World War II and for the deaths of millions of Holocaust victims. Dozens of Germans, including major Nazi leaders, doctors and lawyers were brought to trial at the end of World War II when they were accused of committing inhumane and immoral acts during the war and their cases were supposed to be brought to justice, however, justice was not served. The Nuremberg Trials were not fair trials for the German defendants because their crimes were not illegal when they were committed, only a handful of Germans were brought to trial, many of the defendants were brainwashed and not responsible for their actions, the court was biased, and the penalties …show more content…
On August 8, 1945, Britain, the United States, France and the Soviet Union signed the London Agreement and agreed to persecute major war criminals from the Holocaust. (“The Final Stages of the War and the Aftermath”). In the agreement, they also granted the right for a fair trial for all of the criminals persecuted in the trials; this right included the right to counsel and the right to cross examine any witness. Another thing they did was to establish the International Military Tribunal which was the tribunal for European war criminals (Scheffer). The Nuremberg Trials took place in the late 1940’s and were conducted by the International Military Tribunal (“The Final Stages of the War and the Aftermath: The Nuremberg Trials.”). The defendants in the Nuremberg Trials were major German war criminals with political, military, propaganda, finance or forced labor backgrounds (Scheffer). The four counts of the indictments were crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the conspiracy to commit any of the other three crimes. The most known trial was the trial of major war criminals. (“The Final Stages of the War and the Aftermath: The Nuremberg
Name: Institution: Course: Tutor: Date: German Collective Guilt I believe that the majority of the German people as a whole were guilty of the Holocaust. Ideally, during the Second World War (WWII) the huge majority of citizens in Germany as well as the overpowered European states took no risks. They were spectators, attempting to get going with their lives the best they could. However, they failed to protest against Nazi domination or endanger their welfare, attempting to overcome their novel rulers by assisting the person in need. Nevertheless, after the end of WWII, many asserted not to have recognized the right nature of Nazi maltreatments as well as the Holocaust.
If you have been in a History class you have probably heard of an event that happened after World War Two called the Nuremberg Trials. These trials were conducted by the United States. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson was appointed to lead the trials (Berenbaum). During these trials they charged with Crimes against the Peace, War crimes and Crimes against Humanity (Berenbaum). Many major Nazi leaders committed suicide before officials could hang them or before even being caught. The famous Doctor Goebbels killed his children then him and his wife committed suicide (Berenbaum). Only twelve out of the twenty-two who stood trial were hanged, twelve, while the rest just got prison time. Besides major Nazi officials, Physicians were put on trial, the people who were part of the mobile killing squads, Concentration camp officials, Judges and Executives who sold concentration camps Zyklon B. You can expect that they had many excuses, but m...
I realize the German people’s complicity. was required in order to enact an efficient system of genocide, but I cannot not. agree with the notion that the Nazis simply provided an outlet by which ordinary Germans were allowed to act on their evil desires. The vast majority of the German people were not willing executioners. However, these people were guilty for failing to protest Hitler’s murderous intentions and policies while there. was still time, and for this, they should be ashamed.
In 1943, under Soviet leadership the first war crime trials were conducted, however the first trial to involve the Allied powers was the Nuremburg International Military Tribunal in 1945 . The International Military Tribunal (IMT), set out to prosecute 22 defendants comprising largely of the administration arm of the Third Reich . The American's initially wished to indict whole Nazi organisations for their crimes. This focus was soon altered to determine the accountability of particular individuals. The accused were tried under at least two of the following four headings devised for indictment. The first count was the "formulation of a common plan or conspiracy"; two, "crimes against peace (planning and waging a war of aggression
The Nuremberg Trials took place in Nuremberg, Germany. Trials began in 1945 and continued into 1946; they lasted roughly two years, trying war criminals and give them varying punishments. At the beginning of the trial, 24 Nazi officials lined up for their trial. But even after this time period, they went on as they collected more criminals from hiding. Shortly after the war, people
Even if a suspected Nazi were to be found alive and tried, it would be difficult to come to a conviction. After seventy years, virtually all eyewitnesses have passed away, and most of the documentation destroyed or lost. Additionally, proving that an individual was guilty of a greater crime would be nearly impossible. It is safe to assume that those still alive would have been in their early 20’s during the war and had only been simple guards and low ranking officers, likely guilty of no greater crime. Considering all of these facts, it can be concluded that of the 4,000 names available, a fraction of them can be located, a fraction of those are still alive, and an even smaller fraction deserves to be tried. However, there are some who believe that those affiliated with the third reich in any way should continue to be hunted down. Those who desire most for the Nazi’s to face justice are the survivors of the holocaust. Martin Greenfield describes how he vowed to, “return and kill the [Nazi’s] wife”, after he escaped. This evidence of hatred, among the countless other cases, show the rightful feelings the
Hitler had a main goal of claiming territory in Europe. The Nazis forcefully took land that was not theirs and killed many people in the process, as well as capturing many Jews. The Germans were already bad people before the mass murdering of so many people occurred. America, Britain, and the other countries had already demonized the Nazis for their crimes of dictatorship and falsely claiming countries that were not theirs. For the deniers to say that the Holocaust is the reason that Germans were demonized is ignorant, because they have not thought about the other terrible things that Germany had done prior to the genocide of 6 million Jewish people (Holocaust
...s of the Holocaust, the Allies held the Nuremberg Trials of 1945-46, which made the horrifying actions of the Nazis known all over. The Ally forces pressured Germany to create a homeland for those who suffered through the Holocaust. Over the decades that followed, ordinary Germans struggled with the Holocaust’s bitter legacy, as survivors and the families of victims tried to regain their property and wealth that was taking away during the Holocaust. In 1953, the German government made payments to individual Jews and to the Jewish people as a way of apologizing for the crimes which were committed by the German people.
Every year or so, something happens in the media that brings us all back to the atrocities of World War II, and the German persecution of the Jews. It seems that the horrors of that time can only be digested and understood in small bites. How else can we personalize and comprehend a tragedy of that magnitude? Most of what we read and view in the media about the holocaust is a perspective from the Jewish experience. Recently, however, a question has been posed in regards to finding closure with that troubling piece of history from the German conscience. Can one German's experience reflect the tendencies of the entire country with regards to passion, denial, guilt, and finally justice?
In early October 1945, the United States, Great Britain, France, and Russia issued an indictment against 24 men and six organizations.2 The indictment appointed against these men and organizations contained four courts: conspiracy to wage aggressive war, crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The trial at Nuremberg opened on November 20, 1945.3 For judgemen...
One of the most well-known trials is the Nuremberg trials. The Nuremberg trials were a sequence of 13 trials that took place in Nuremberg, Germany, from 1945 to 1949. According to history.com, “Nuremberg had been the site of annual Nazi propaganda; holding the postwar trials there marked the symbolic end of Hitler’s government.” The people that were going to be charged were Nazi Party Officials, high-ranking military officers, German industrialists, doctors, and lawyers. They were charged with crimes against peace and humanity. The leader of the Nazi’s, Adolf Hitler took his own life before he could be tried. During the trials, the m...
The jury plays a crucial role in the courts of trial. They are an integral part in the Australian justice system. The jury system brings ordinary people into the courts everyday to judge whether a case is guilty or innocent. The role of the jury varies, depending on the different cases. In Australia, the court is ran by an adversary system. In this system “..individual litigants play a central part, initiating court action and largely determining the issues in dispute” (Ellis 2013, p. 133). In this essay I will be discussing the role of the jury system and how some believe the jury is one of the most important institutions in ensuring that Australia has an effective legal system, while others disagree. I will evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a jury system.
Is our justice system fair to all? Although the answer to this question is an opinion, there are pieces of evidence and commentary to defend this argument. The process of the legal system itself is all an opinion because in the end, the only person whose judgments matter is the judge himself. Over time, the wrong people have been arrested for the wrong things. Living in the United States, a country where crimes are committed constantly; we count on this system to make the right decisions. It is important that each case is treated equally when carrying out justice to keep the United States a safe place, to form a nation with good education, and to teach people from judging right from wrong. However, sometimes rights are taken from the wrong people. Our legal system is creating a dangerous path for African Americans in our country because of its’ highest per capita incarceration rate, its’ favoritism towards those in power, and its failure to carry out justice to protect people from the dangerous acts of those who are defined as criminals.
The Nuremberg Trials was unethically run and violated the rights of the Nazi leaders who were convicted of committing crimes against humanity. Primarily because the Allies sought to use the trials as a way to remind the Germans, who won the war ‘again’. Thus making it similar to the Treaty of Versailles in (19- ), through implying this notion of “Victors’ Justice”. Nevertheless, the Allies did to an extent ‘try’ to make the tribunal as ethical as possible,
Prior to WWII any concept of international human rights would not have been able to be Kept. State sovereignty was still the norm leaders around the globe followed when it came to international relations. Of course that all changed after the atrocities committed by the Nazi regime in the Holocaust were exposed to the global community. After what had happen to the Jewish population in Europe at the hands of Hitler's army was reviled to the world, the international community realized that there was something to the whole idea of human rights that could quite possibly go beyond the recognizable sovereignty of independent states(Collaway, Harrelson-Stephens, 2007 p.4). December 17, 1942 was the date that leaders of the allied forces of WWII that included the US, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union came together and issued the first declaration that officially noted and acknowledged the mass murder of European Jews and settled to find a solution to prosecute those responsible for violence against civilians. Because of the type of acts that were committed some political leaders advocated for summary executions instead of trials (Collaway, Harrelson-Stephens, 2007). If you really think about it by doing this the allied forces would have been defeating the purpose of what they were trying to accomplish which was to make those responsible for the acts to pay but by giving them a f...