The Demjanjuk case: Travesty, justice, or something else?

[Piggy]

Just wondering what other JREF'ers think of the Demjanjuk case.

Does he deserve to die in prison because of his participation in the Nazi death camp system? (Please note that we're not in the CT forum... Holocaust deniers, please start another thread.)

Does he deserve to go free because he was merely guilty of the human weakness of saving his own life at the expense of others'?

Or something else?

On Thursday, this principle faced its sharpest test: Should a man who really was just following orders, and nothing else, be convicted and sentenced for the greatest single crime in human history?

In the end, the German court in Munich answered yes: John Demjanjuk, a 91-year-old Ukrainian-born former Ohio auto worker, was guilty of having contributed to the mechanized murder of 27,900 Jews in the Sobibor concentration camp in Poland in 1943.

He was sentenced to five years in prison, but freed in order to organize appeals.

Mr. Demjanjuk is in some ways the ultimate test case of the Fourth Nuremberg Principle. As a 23-year-old man who had barely survived Stalin’s Soviet army, he had been imprisoned by the Nazis and had only escaped the death camps himself by volunteering to take a job with the German SS as a death-camp guard, the prosecution argued.

His prosecution offered a rare and radical interpretation of the Fourth Nuremberg Principle. Prosecutors argued that all employees of the death camp, however lowly, were party to its genocidal purpose. He had never been a member of the Nazi Party, and there is no indication that he believed in its ideology or had any idea of the full scope of the Final Solution, Hitler’s plan to exterminate all of Europe’s Jews. He simply guarded their camp.

But the court established, on the basis of physical and documentary evidence, that he worked as a loyal employee, standing guard as hundreds of trainloads of Jews arrived and were marched into gas chambers.

Every one of the guards “knew he was part of an organization with no other purpose but mass murder,” Judge Ralph Alt concluded in his judgment, arguing that Mr. Demjanjuk, however junior his position, was part of the “machinery of destruction” and therefore was as guilty as a senior Nazi officer, under the principles of the Fourth Nuremberg Principle.

In a certain respect, this judgment sets a precedent that is more significant than those meted out to a senior Nazi cabinet minister or general. By sending the message that ordinary employees of tyrants are equally culpable, it might provide a larger deterrent.

 

[Puppycow]

As a 23-year-old man who had barely survived Stalin’s Soviet army, he had been imprisoned by the Nazis and had only escaped the death camps himself by volunteering to take a job with the German SS as a death-camp guard, the prosecution argued.

If this is what the prosecution argued, then I don't think he's a monster, but a man who just tried to survive. Call him a coward. But is cowardice a crime?

Were all known members of the SS and the Nazi Party similarly punished? Were all known employees of the death camps similarly punished? Or is he a scapegoat?

 

[Piggy]

As the Bard said, fear of death makes cowards of us all.

How do you judge someone who is pressed into iniquity?

Right now, in my state, we're having a fierce debate over whether or not to grant amnesty to child prostitutes.

Do they deserve prosecution, or protection?

I see this case in a somehwat (but only somewhat) similar light.

How far can a person go to save his own life? At what point do you say, you've gone too far, and now you're complicit?

 

[Puppycow]

Can anyone tell me how many people were actually punished for the Holocaust?
Here's a starting point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials

he first and best known of these trials was the Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal (IMT), which tried 24 of the most important captured leaders of Nazi Germany, though several key architects of the war (such as Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, and Joseph Goebbels) had committed suicide before the trials began.

(3 of those 24 were acquitted)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsequent_Nuremberg_Trials

In total, 142 of the 185 defendants were found guilty of at least one of the charges. 24 persons received death sentences, of which 11 were subsequently converted into life sentences; 20 were sentenced to life imprisonment, 98 were handed down sentences of varying lengths, and 35 were acquitted. Four defendants had to be removed from trials due to illness, and four more committed suicide during the trials.

But these are trials by the victorious allies, not Germany. I'm also wondering how many people were punished by either West or East Germany or reunified Germany.

 

[stevea]

It seems Demjanjuk was a Uranian Red Army member taken German prisoner of war, trained by the Germans as a POW to be a camp guard (watchman). So perhaps moreso than a German national "pressed into iniquity" without even minimal alternatives.

He spent 25 years in courts with deportations, death sentences passed, reversals, more deportations, retrials on essentially the same charge - it's a non-trivial form of punishment, perhaps more fitting than prison time.

So what is the point of jail time for the 91yo ? Deterrent ? I don't think he's a danger and I doubt the threat of being pursued forever will prevent other atrocities. Retribution & vindictiveness - yeah that's about it.

 

[lionking]

Retribution & vindictiveness - yeah that's about it.

That's my take as well.

 

[Piggy]

So what is the point of jail time for the 91yo ? Deterrent ? I don't think he's a danger and I doubt the threat of being pursued forever will prevent other atrocities. Retribution & vindictiveness - yeah that's about it.

To me, his age isn't particularly relevant.

Suppose it were shown that he did agree with Nazism and was a willing and eager participant in the death of thousands of people.

In that case, I think it would make no sense to argue that there should be some statute of limitations or that his age is some sort of argument for leniency. Did he show leniency for the old and infirm?

When you're talking about truly horrible crimes like that, eluding punishment for any number of years is no justification for evading punishment altogether.

 

[Darat]

To me, his age isn't particularly relevant.

Suppose it were shown that he did agree with Nazism and was a willing and eager participant in the death of thousands of people.

In that case, I think it would make no sense to argue that there should be some statute of limitations or that his age is some sort of argument for leniency. Did he show leniency for the old and infirm?

No but should we measure ourselves by the standards of the Nazi's ideology? I would say not, we are not constrained to options from the Nazi ideology.

When you're talking about truly horrible crimes like that, eluding punishment for any number of years is no justification for evading punishment altogether.

I agree with this but I think each case has to be considered on its own merit, it may be that further imprisonment for this man serves no purpose beyond revenge.

 

[richardm]

So what is the point of jail time for the 91yo ? Deterrent ? I don't think he's a danger and I doubt the threat of being pursued forever will prevent other atrocities. Retribution & vindictiveness - yeah that's about it.

I'm voting "deterrent", as noted in the OP:

By sending the message that ordinary employees of tyrants are equally culpable.

Mind you from what I've read it seems as though he was between a rock and a hard place, but I haven't read all the details of the crime. Perhaps he enjoyed his work a bit too much - I really don't know.

 

[Captain.Sassy]

They originally tried to get this guy as 'Ivan the Terrible', a very sadistic prison guard. He was exonerated of that charge.

I think that prosecuting the kapos in general is wrong, except in extenuating circumstances. I mean, as has been pointed out, these guys were just trying to save their own lives. It's hard to blame them for that. Of course, any German soldier disobeying orders to shoot a Jew would probably have been shot himself so where do you draw the line?

Were Jewish kapos prosecuted?

 

[Piggy]

No but should we measure ourselves by the standards of the Nazi's ideology? I would say not, we are not constrained to options from the Nazi ideology.

Agreed. But there's also the principle of justice to consider. You don't give a rapist a month's probation, you don't give a child molester a $25 fine, and you don't give a murderer a 6-month stint of community service.

In my hypothetical, if he had been a willing participant -- say, if he'd been a German who joined the party early, volunteered for the Army, and requested to work the camps -- then I'd say he deserves severe punishment no matter his age or physical condition.

I agree with this but I think each case has to be considered on its own merit, it may be that further imprisonment for this man serves no purpose beyond revenge.

True, but there's something to be said for revenge.

For instance, if a man had brutally murdered my young daughter, tortured her to death, and was not captured until he was 91 years old, I'd want him put in jail for the short remainder of his life. There's no statute of limitations for murder for a good reason.

The desire of victims to see perpetrators punished can be called revenge, I suppose, but if so, it's a kind of revenge that I think we need to accept as valid.

So in the end, for me anyway, I think they key question here isn't his age, given the severity of the crime, but rather to what extent was he a willing participant and to what extent was he merely guilty of being a human who wanted to save his own skin?

 

[Thunder]

was this guy accused of any acts of murder or violence?

did he ever actually kill someone or hurt someone?

or did he just stand guard?

..and what were his options if he did not serve as a guard at the camp?

 

[Mycroft]

I think this is a case where you need to separate what should happen from a legal sense from what you want to have happen.

In a legal sense, yeah, he's guilty. That's what the court said.

Personally? I don't feel any particular need to see this guy punished, but neither do I feel sorry for him.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Didn't the Israelis not bother with him a while back? I seem to recall (perhaps incorrectly) that Israeli prosecutors didn't bother.

Beyond that, concur with lionking's point.

 

[JoelKatz]

50 years from now, the man on the Seal team who shot Osama may find himself being tried for murder. He was just following orders too.

I honestly don't think you can have a rule of law if following the law of that place at that time is not a defense to any future accusation of criminality. A future society may consider it a gross violation of human rights for a government to regulate what substances a human being may put in their body. Does this mean nobody can be a police officer today without risking being jailed by a future international court for violating the human rights of people they caught possessing drugs?

 

[Chaos]

This trial should have happened 60 years ealier.

That said, I think the questions are: Did he do anything beyond the minimum cooperation needed to save his life (or of he did more, he he know it wasn´t necessary)? And did anyone die because of him who would have lived otherwise?

If the answer to both questions is no, I say let him go.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

It's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham.

 

[little grey rabbit]

Can anyone tell me how many people were actually punished for the Holocaust?
Here's a starting point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials
(3 of those 24 were acquitted)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsequent_Nuremberg_Trials


But these are trials by the victorious allies, not Germany. I'm also wondering how many people were punished by either West or East Germany or reunified Germany.

Quite a few people did get punished in West Germany, but there was (previously) a relatively high standard for being convicted. Hitherto it was not sufficient to actually have been in a death camp to be convicted, you actually had to have been witnessed doing something.

For example in the Belzec trial
Josef Oberhauser : 4 & ½ Years Imprisonment
Karl - Alfred Schluch : Acquitted & Released
Ernst Zierke : Acquitted & Released
Heinrich Unverhau : Acquitted & Released
Werne Dubious : Acquitted & Released
Erich Fuchs : Acquitted & Released
Robert Jührs : Acquitted & Released

The Sobibor Trial
Bolender, Kurt --- Suicide --- Burner
Dubois, Werner --- 3 years imp. --- Burner, driver
Frenzel, Karl --- Life imp. --- Burner
Fuchs, Erich --- 4 years imp. --- Driver
Ittner, Alfred --- 4 years imp. --- T4 office
Jührs, Robert --- Acquitted --- Male nurse
Lachmann, Erich --- Acquitted --- ?
Lambert, Erwin --- Acquitted --- Builder
Schütt, Heinz-Hans --- Acquitted --- Office chief
Unverhau, Heinrich --- Acquitted --- Gas chamber assistant
Wolf, Franz --- 8 years imp. --- Photographer
Zierke, Ernst --- Acquitted --- Driver

The Treblinka Trial
Kurt Franz : Life Imprisonment
Erwin Lambert : 4 Years Imprisonment
Otto Stadie : 7 Years Imprisonment
Albert Rum : (Died during the Trial)
Gustav Müntzberger : 12 Years Imprisonment
Otto Horn : Acquitted & Released
Willy Mentz : Life Imprisonment
Heinrich Matthes : Life Imprisonment
Franz Suchömel : 6 Years Imprisonment
August - Wilhelm Miete : Life Imprisonment

Not one of the survivors remember John Demjanjuk at Sobibor (and there were at least 30 alive in the late 70s and 80s when Demjanjuk first gain publicity). Not one of the Germans remembered him. The only person who supposed to have remembered him at Sobibor was someone executed in the late 1940s by the Soviets and left an affidavit that listed Demjanjuk as being at Sobibor.

It is the first time ever that someone has been convicted solely for being present at a camp. And the first time ever that someone has been convicted solely on the basis of two documents, both of which emerged from NKVD archives in the late 70s.

 

[Captain.Sassy]

Hey Little Grey Rabbit:

I hear you're a holocaust denier. If so, that's pretty wack. But anyways, whether or not you think the holocaust happened you seem like you know a lot about the trials and stuff. So can you answer my question above re. Jewish kapos and prosecutions post-WWII? I googled it halfheartedly and all I could find in 45 seconds was some copypasta about 'prosecuting Jewish kapos raised ethical dilemmas' or some such, and the names of some prosecuted kapos but I couldn't tell if they were regular German or Yiddish names.

So, if you got a second...?

thanks in advance,
CS

 

[little grey rabbit]

Hey Little Grey Rabbit:

I hear you're a holocaust denier. If so, that's pretty wack. But anyways, whether or not you think the holocaust happened you seem like you know a lot about the trials and stuff. So can you answer my question above re. Jewish kapos and prosecutions post-WWII? I googled it halfheartedly and all I could find in 45 seconds was some copypasta about 'prosecuting Jewish kapos raised ethical dilemmas' or some such, and the names of some prosecuted kapos but I couldn't tell if they were regular German or Yiddish names.

So, if you got a second...?

thanks in advance,
CS

You may be confusing Kapos with the "Sonderkommando". "Sonderkommando", in todays parlance, refers to Jews who took a special part in the extermination process either assisting in cremation, or in the escorting prisoners to gas chambers, collecting and sorting belongings etc. These were exclusively or almost so, Jewish. In reality Sonderkommando could refer to a lot of things, literally it is just a "Special Team" or a "Special Commando", but when it is used today it is usually in the context I describe.
A Kapo was just a prisoner who had been put in charge of a work team or a barrack or something along those lines. An individual Kapo could be good or bad. They weren't specially Jewish, in fact possibly Jews were less likely to make it to be a Kapo, but being a Kapo does not imply that person had done anything wrong per se. In some camps, eg Buchenwald, communists are supposed to have monopolised the Kapo positions. In Auschwitz it was mostly Polish catholic politicals, some communists and some Jews. Often genuine criminals would get the Kapo positions, which would explain why they have a bad reputation. But just agreeing to be responsible for counting prisoners in a barrack and being in charge of food distribution (for example) does not make you an evil person.

There has been no trial of a sonderkommando that I am aware of. A few kapos did end up on trial, especially on the Soviet side.
I suggest you post the question in the Holocaust Denial thread (with suitable disclaimer) in Conspiracies section, a lot of the people who post there are just idiots - but a couple are genuinely well-informed - for example Nick Terry and perhaps Lemmy Caution. And if they know the answer, they are usually happy to oblige