Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to believe that WW2 War Criminals should still be bought to Justice

27 replies

daisychain01 · 24/07/2013 12:10

This is a hot topic but (I believe) important - there is a Reuters report via Yahoo news.yahoo.com/last-chance-hunt-nazi-war-criminals-start-germany-151837838.html which talks about the Last Chance Hunt. I have not used the word Nazi in the title, I really don't want this AIBU to be inflammatory.

My AIBU is that I believe, even if there is only 2-3 more years for these suspected war criminals to be alive, given that they are in their 90's, they should still bought to justice in a court. Even if they only have a month to live. They should be tried and sentenced to the same standards as anyone, but they should be held to account and shamed, even in their twilight years?

The other perspective, which I have heard argued (and massively winds me up) is that they are now old and frail and that there is no point in doing that, because it is too difficult to prove and they aren't a danger to society any more.

Just because something is difficult and they aren't a danger, doesn't surely mean they should not answer to the henous crimes committed? Or should we let it go, as we move through the generations?

OP posts:
HeySoulSister · 24/07/2013 12:13

A tough one!

Itsjustafleshwound · 24/07/2013 12:18

Yes, they should be tried but it also has to be fair. The evidence and witnesses are either compromised or absent

NotYoMomma · 24/07/2013 12:21

if they have concrete proof and evidence then I would say yes

if its all 'there may be some evidence' - your name is on one document but everyone else is dead so cant comment etc I would probably leave it

squoosh · 24/07/2013 13:01

YANBU.

Plenty of the victims of their war crimes during WWII were old and frail, were they shown any compassion?

If strong enough evidence exists they should definitely be convicted.

TylerHopkins · 24/07/2013 13:04

By the time it got to trial I think the remaining criminals would be dead anyway.

ChickensHaveNoEyebrows · 24/07/2013 13:07

YANBU. If they can be found, the law should be set in motion. I don't care if they never make it to court, they should know that justice has caught up with them.

YouTheCat · 24/07/2013 13:07

I think going after old men who were guards carrying out orders is just a waste of time.

None of the big players are left or I would say it was worth pursuing.

There are still war crimes being committed today - so how about going after them instead?

HollyBerryBush · 24/07/2013 13:07

Difficult one really. Im always reminded of the Shawshank Redemption where Red is up in front of the parole board and he says the 16yo boy who committed the murder is not the man standing there now.

If you were a rank and file 'nobody' ordered to do something or be murdered yourself, thats different to someone giving the orders. And who are the witnesses going to be?

AKissIsNotAContract · 24/07/2013 13:07

I agree they should be pursued. Even if they are not brought to justice it might make them reflect on their actions and make their last few years of life a bit more uncomfortable.

filee777 · 24/07/2013 13:09

I would rather see the perpurtrators of the Iraq war brought to justice to be honest with you. Who is going to 'bring' these people to justice exactly? The countries who spend millions and millions terrorising the middle east? Will we 'bring justice' to geriatric nazi supporters whilst sending drones into Pakistan? Or funding Israel?

Seriously, focus on the now, the killing now and the deaths now.

TylerHopkins · 24/07/2013 13:11

Good point Holly. If the 'nobody' hadn't carried out the orders he would have probably been shot himself. The person who gave out the orders is the one to go after imo.

Also agree with Youthecat re the war crimes happening today.

No one will ever forget what happened, I just don't think it would be possible to convict anyone at this late stage.

Mimishimi · 24/07/2013 14:10

YANBU - I think they should go after all war criminals though and the Nazis were/are not the only ones in WW2 or afterwards.

ANormalOne · 24/07/2013 14:28

They absolutely should be bought to account for their crimes, their victims never got to live their twilight years out in peace, why should they?

Jan49 · 24/07/2013 14:36

I think it's too late. Sad These criminals have already had their lives in freedom since the war, maybe constantly looking over their shoulder and fearing arrest, but nonetheless free. There's also the problem of finding adequate evidence and witnesses and secondly the criminals may well die before the trial ends. Also, how can anyone prove whether they acted out of fear and to save their own life or willingly went along with it?

The only advantage I can see to continuing to pursue them is that it stops the criminals feeling they can finally relax and feel safe from arrest.

Beeyump · 24/07/2013 14:54

The Nazi guards 'just following orders' issue always makes me feel very uncomfortable - because I have a horrible feeling that's what I would have done too, to save my own skin. I don't know for sure of course, and hopefully never have to find out! But still.

squoosh · 24/07/2013 14:54

The Reader is about a Nazi guard. It asks those questions.

Beeyump · 24/07/2013 14:55

I was just thinking of The Reader!

GherkinsAreAce · 24/07/2013 14:58

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

arabesque · 24/07/2013 15:00

They would probably be dead within a couple of years and it would really be their children, grandchildren and maybe great grandchildren who would suffer the shock and shame even though they weren't even around or would have been very small children during the war.
I think, at this stage, its probably not worth it for the pain and upheaval it would cause innocent people. I would imagine some of them, as they got older and further removed from the fanaticism that propelled or forced them at the time to go along with things, have lived with a heavy burden on their conscience that is probably worse than a gaol sentence.

SixPackWellies · 24/07/2013 15:00

I also believe that they showed no compassion for the old the vulnerable and the frail. So none should be shown to them.

Beeyump · 24/07/2013 15:01

No, I don't think it should be a defence. But I can see how it could happen...anyway, feel I'm getting into deep water now, and certainly don't want to cause any hurt or offence.

McNewPants2013 · 24/07/2013 15:06

I think they should because every one deserves justice.

The problem is many people in there 90's will have Heath issues, many lives in care home or are being cared for by relatives or SS.

Original poster
daisychain01 · 24/07/2013 15:07

I feel strongly that, just because it happened long ago, it shouldn't absolve them from facing trial and to give 'closure' to the descendents

In terms of finding evidence, you hear of trials that happened decades ago where new evidence is found and the 'file' is reopened - I think the current urgency is the knowledge that the suspects are very old. There are people who have been continuously and forensically reviewing records, retracing a person's steps, reconstructing their every movement (Simon Wiesenthal is one of the most respected). How they reconstruct it all is beyond me - must be really difficult.

I think a person can be found guilty in absentia (after death) just as they can be posthumously pardoned.

OP posts:
McNewPants2013 · 24/07/2013 15:09

When found guilty I think that any medals received should be taking from them, as they didn't deserve them in the first place.

elfycat · 24/07/2013 15:12

I think they should still be tried. If not what message does that send to today's war-criminal-to-be? Escape long enough and we'll let it go?

Ghastly thought that there are more atrocities happening today Sad

Swipe left for the next trending thread