Does Age excuse Everything?

I’ve pondered this question since watching the 2 night programme on James Bolger finishing last night and I still haven’t come to conclusion.

I appreciate its at the other end of the age scale but no less relevant surely?

As we all know on here, you are still the same person even though many things about you will change as you age. If you have committed a serious crime and never been caught or punished then of course you should pay whatever your age. If that means you die in a cell then so be it. You have had a life, and maybe many years of life, that which was denied your victim or victims.
We've seen the Yorkshire Ripper, Hindley, Brady and others die in prison. They were not released because they were old and neither should they be. So a Nazi criminal should also pay for the rest of their life, however short that may be.

What Chestnut says.

When it comes to crime age shouldn't be a free pass and people should be held to account whatever their age.

When it comes to attitudes and behaviour age is also not an excuse to continue unacceptable behaviour - ie racism, sexism etc. No one is too old to learn if they are still in possession of their faculties.

Those war criminals were monsters and should be brought to justice whenever they are caught and whatever their age.

There was a very complex and interesting programme on PBS America called 'Radical Evil' about the Nazi death squads, who gunned down about 2 million Jews. These were young men ordered to shoot large groups of helpless men, women and children, over and over again. The programme asked how this could happen, that ordinary young men could do such a thing. They committed mass murder but were they responsible when you consider the complexity of the offence? They could not refuse the orders, they were brain washed into believing it was the right thing to do, and the human brain learns how to adapt into acceptance of what is required when it has no choice. Very complex issue.

The programme asked how this could happen, that ordinary young men could do such a thing. One imagines they were terrified, as well as brainwashed

Well said Chestnut. I still cried at the film not long ago---"The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas ". Age didn't come into it then !

Not quite the case in point Chestnut but also an interesting question. I’m currently reading about the Buchenwald medical experiments, absolutely sickening acts carried out by those who had given an oath to preserve life. Primum non nocere indeed.

Age should not be a defence, in my opinion.

I honestly don’t know, if someone has dementia, or a severe mental illness would they know why they were being punished, or even that they were?

I don’t think it excuses it but feel that it gives the reason for it. Just a small but subtle difference.

Someone with dementia or severe mental illness is already in many ways dead to this world, and obviously should not be imprisoned, but they should be incarcerated, whether in a care home or mental health unit.

However you cannot be tried if you are incapable of defending yourself or instructing a lawyer, this was why the late Grenville Janner was never tried on the charges he faced. We can never know whether he was innocent or guilty because he was not mentally able to stand trial.

Otherwise I am in total agreement with chestnut

We have wondered a good distance away from my question, but that is the nature of online discussions. I feel it’s important for these things to be dragged out into the light. Lest we forget.

I think this is an interesting and incredibly complex question which has to be context dependent. I don’t feel able to generalise from the case in the link. I think the most important issue is where was the person in the chain of command, how much were they contributing to decision making? I don’t think age comes into it at all if justice is being pursued. The US ( don’t know about other countries) have statute of limitations for what seem to me some very serious crimes. I don’t agree with that at all. You should never be too old or the crime too long ago for prosecution to be possible. However, the person needs to be fit to plead.

Spot on chestnut.

That’s a hard question, I think on balance my reaction is yes, they should not go unpunished even though all it can do for the victims/or rather their families is presumably to provide closure . Is it just punishment or vengeance .?
Lest we forget is absolutely correct.
I read Primo Levi’s book “if this is a man” and many of the things he said have stayed with me. Chilling.

Thank you everyone for your thoughts, really interesting!

Absolutely fine with the idea of Nazis dying in jail. 100%

Nazis were adults. They knew what they were doing. They may have been indoctrinated but they didn't care about the age of the people they killed or worked to death. Some SS men who had undergone the same indoctrination were so horrified by what they saw that they asked to be transferred to the frontlines on the Eastern Front. They preferred to risk death than be that evil. Simon Wiesenthal's life was saved by an SS guard. So it was possible to not take part/alleviate some of the suffering. Why should we care how old these torturers and murderers are? They may have had no choice were they were posted but some of them enjoyed their power. Lock those ones up and throw away the key.

On the other hand, children who commit crimes aren't able to comprehend the horrors of what they do in the same way as adults and each should be judged on their own merits. Mary Bell committed murder when she was 11 but after a few years was released and has gone on to live a normal life. It was a mistake (albeit a massive one) of childhood. The Bulger killers are another case in point. Both were released. One has gone on to be a decent person. The other committed further crimes as an adult and has been dealt with accordingly.

I think this is why justice must always be objective. I know families and victims want retribution and I totally understand it. I would be the same. But not all crimes are the same and each should be judged impartially.

I don’t think it’s true to say all German soldiers were Nazis. And certainly as the war progresses to its bitter end, younger and younger German conscripts were used.

I don't believe that age should be an excuse to avoid punishment. But, the peer pressure to commit offences is tremendous, to the point of being impossible to overcome. A soldier in the army, for instance, is not completely free to decide whether or not to obey an order. It would take more moral courage than the average person possesses, to refuse to obey because of a moral objection.
We are social animals and not programmed to act entirety on an individual level.

Antonia

I don't believe that age should be an excuse to avoid punishment. But, the peer pressure to commit offences is tremendous, to the point of being impossible to overcome. A soldier in the army, for instance, is not completely free to decide whether or not to obey an order. It would take more moral courage than the average person possesses, to refuse to obey because of a moral objection.
We are social animals and not programmed to act entirety on an individual level.

I agree - there are examples of British soldiers accused of committing war crimes /crimes throughout history. It’s as ever context dependent. The man in the link was I think only a teenager at the end of the war and from what I’ve read 16 year olds were conscripted in the last two years as there was such a shortage. Many conscripted by this time would have been hungry and in poor health with no options. As a pp said we have to differentiate between justice and vengeance

Some of those nazi soldiers towards the end of the war were only 14 years old. They had been brainwashed throughout their lives. I wouldn’t hold that particular group responsible for any of it though they did need ‘re-education’ afterwards. What of the Cambodians in Khmer Rouge who were atrocious and got off totally scot free for all their war crimes? They should have been jailed for life, they were as bad as the nazis.