Trials of war criminals before the Nuernberg military tribunals under control council law no. 10, volume IIIVarious
History
Trials of war criminals before the Nuernberg military tribunals under control council law no. 10, volume III
Various
Nuremberg Trial of Major German War Criminals, Nuremberg, Germany, 1945-1946; War crime trials -- Germany -- Nuremberg
“I was shocked when I heard the result of the trial. The fact
that Rothaug combined the trial against Seiler, a case of
perjury, with the trial against Katzenberger, shows clearly that
he took over the case of Katzenberger with definite prejudice
and that he was determined to exclude Seiler as a witness for
the defendant. For, according to normal procedure, Seiler
should have been a _witness_ in Katzenberger’s trial
and should have testified for him stating that the charges
against Katzenberger were not true. This normally should have
led to the acquittal of Katzenberger, as otherwise there was
nothing decisive against him. Rothaug’s verdict, in my opinion,
was based solely on blind hatred of Jews. While there were
no reasons for Katzenberger’s condemnation on the ground of
so-called race defilement, there was still less reason to apply
section 4 of the ‘Decree against Public Enemies,’ because if it
was altogether impossible to ascertain when or if Katzenberger
and Seiler had the alleged sexual intercourse, it was still less
possible to explain that this had happened ‘in exploitation of
war conditions.’ To arrive at Katzenberger’s condemnation on the
grounds of so-called race defilement in connection with section
4 of the ‘Decree against Public Enemies,’ it was necessary to
violate all the facts of the case. It has always depressed me
that such a verdict, which cannot be designated as anything but
judicial murder, was pronounced by Rothaug.”
One further sampling of the prosecution’s evidence will serve to reveal
how the protection against double jeopardy, keystone of criminal
procedure the world over, was abrogated and used for the murder of
civilians of occupied countries.
The Nuernberg Special Court, under the leadership of the defendants
Rothaug and Oeschey, used this fiendish practice in the case of Jan
Lopata, a Polish youth brought during the war to work on a German farm.
The accused was sentenced in 1940 to 2 years’ imprisonment by the
Neumarkt local court for indecent assault on his employer’s wife. A
plea of nullity against the decision was filed by the prosecution on
the grounds that the sentence was too lenient and the case was reviewed
by the Reich Supreme Court with the result that it was referred to the
Nuernberg Special Court for retrial. In the court’s verdict sentencing
Lopata to death, the presiding judge (the defendant Rothaug) observed
(_NG-337, Pros. Ex. 186_)--
“The total inferiority of the accused lies in his character and
is obviously based on the fact that he belongs to the Polish
subhuman race.”[54]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account