Nazi war criminal being extradited to Germany

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

The war crimes commisions are quite accurate in their identifications of suspected criminals.

Get this guy off of US soil. The pain he feels is a fraction of what his victims felt. Give him some pain killers and let him defend himself in Germany.
 
He was tried in Israel before (on different charges) and was convicted but it was overturned when the charges were found to be incorrect which is surprising for the Israeli's. Sure he is guilty on one level or another and should be deported, hopefully there will be a conclusion soon.
 
Well, glad they finally got the guy, just wished it had been during Nuremburg, maybe he could've gotten the death penalty then. Do they still have a death penalty in Germany, or has it been abolished?

What's wrong w/ bread and water and hard labor for life? Not exactly in this case, but in general?
 
Is that what's holding up the extradition process? heck...that's a relatively easy fix. Just update the database as "falsified documents, ship back immediately". He should be gone before the morning donut break is over.
 
Hmmm,
very interesting this thread. You are talking about a person who commited crimes ( that is fact ), and he should be brought to jail ( thats fact and right ),
but now think and than think again, because :

I.

Werner von Braun were also responsible for killing persons for his rocket program and afterwards he was brought to the States and no one called for a trial ( is there a difference between useful and not useful criminals )

II.
You called for Nuremburg. From the legal point of view this trial was illegal, because the rules and the paragraphs were made after the crimes and in roman law there is a rule which is learned by every student in th first semester at university " nulla poena sine lege " ( no punishment without existing law).
Otherwise we can say only the victor can say whats right or wrong and than its illegal under the point of legal focus.

III.
Some called for death penalty and if its in Germany in use. Especially the americans should think about the use of death penalties. And please inform other countries and their law system.
And no, the Germans learned from the past ( during 1942-1945 the german criminal courts sent over 15000 persons from ilf to death without the luxury of revocing a higher court ) and many mistakes were made; how many mistakes are made by US courts in the last 50 yrs ?

IV.
Some said that he should sent to Israel. Look under point II. Mr. Demjanjuk commited no crimes in Israel or against israel citizens, because Israel was founded after 2nd World War.

V.
If he will be sent to germany he will get his trial. If he will be sent to prison thas another question.

VI.
And if we are talking by crimes done during war times, we have the ICJ in The Hague which is still waiting for some US citizens, because they wont be punished in the States.
 
What's wrong w/ bread and water and hard labor for life? Not exactly in this case, but in general?

Well, that scenario isn't out of my mind, I just don't know if in Germany, prison is more about "rehabilitation" than punishment. That, and I like the old Hammurabi law, "An eye for an eye," albeit in a very long and painful manner.
(Hope this isn't too morbid).
 
Werner von Braun were also responsible for killing persons for his rocket program and afterwards he was brought to the States and no one called for a trial ( is there a difference between useful and not useful criminals )

He didnt lie on his application, and was allowed in here for national security reasons.

II.
You called for Nuremburg. From the legal point of view this trial was illegal, because the rules and the paragraphs were made after the crimes and in roman law there is a rule which is learned by every student in th first semester at university " nulla poena sine lege " ( no punishment without existing law).
Otherwise we can say only the victor can say whats right or wrong and than its illegal under the point of legal focus.

How about Germany being guilty of numerous violations of the Geneva Convention, and of crimes so severe and ugly, they themsleves were criminal even if there was no law.

V.
If he will be sent to germany he will get his trial. If he will be sent to prison thas another question.

That is what is at issue. I have no doubt his civil rights will be looked after by Germany.

VI.
And if we are talking by crimes done during war times, we have the ICJ in The Hague which is still waiting for some US citizens, because they wont be punished in the States.

The US is not a signatory to that court, therefore it has no jurisdiction. And numerous legl scholars around the world have said that individuals wanting redress from the US must use the US courts as they have been historically independant from most political matters.
 
The US is not a signatory to that court, therefore it has no jurisdiction. And numerous legl scholars around the world have said that individuals wanting redress from the US must use the US courts as they have been historically independant from most political matters.

Just for my clarification (an believe me, I'm no expert by a long shot :) ), isn't it true that the highest judges in the USA are appointed by the president? How could they be political independent in that case?
 
II.
You called for Nuremburg. From the legal point of view this trial was illegal, because the rules and the paragraphs were made after the crimes and in roman law there is a rule which is learned by every student in th first semester at university " nulla poena sine lege " ( no punishment without existing law).
Otherwise we can say only the victor can say whats right or wrong and than its illegal under the point of legal focus.
Are you actually serious? If your caught up in the lack of laws regarding some of the heinous acts committed, you have must exist in a theoretical dreamworld that is completely disconnected from reality. Put down the textbook!
VI.
And if we are talking by crimes done during war times, we have the ICJ in The Hague which is still waiting for some US citizens, because they wont be punished in the States.

Because I would trust an international court system... more theoretical nonsense.

Just for my clarification (an believe me, I'm no expert by a long shot :) ), isn't it true that the highest judges in the USA are appointed by the president? How could they be political independent in that case?

If you are talking about the US Supreme Court, they must also be confirmed by the Senate. But, I agree that judges are not actually politically independent, for the most part.
 
Perhaps it's time to take a shovel and find some evidence of ash and bones.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back