Does Age excuse Everything?

I thought we were talking about people who ran the camps and murdered/tortured. I don't think the everyday conscript was any different to our lads. They just wanted it to be over and go home. The Hitler Youth were abused children who had been indoctrinated with hatred and the desire/willingness to die for the Fatherland.

vampirequeen

I thought we were talking about people who ran the camps and murdered/tortured. I don't think the everyday conscript was any different to our lads. They just wanted it to be over and go home. The Hitler Youth were abused children who had been indoctrinated with hatred and the desire/willingness to die for the Fatherland.

As the war went on and losses of men grew, more and more soldiers were posted in camps as guards - many of these would have been young conscripts like maybe the one in the link.,

The latest one I have heard of is a woman who was a secretary to a Camp Commandant when she was a teenager. I can't see why she should be held responsible for the Nazi in charge. She would have grown up during the Hitler era, and probably only realised what was happening after the war when she had grown up.

I think that if every person who worked in the concentration camps was to be prosecuted, then it should have been done at the end of the war or soon after. Unfortunately because of the massive task in front of the allies, minor offenders, and indeed some not so minor offenders, were not dealt with at the appropriate time. It seems somewhat late in the day to be dealing with a guard who must have been around 19/20 at the end of the war. He would have had no say in where he was posted. He will obviously say he didn’t killed anyone himself, but there will be no evidence to that statement. What would he be charged with I wonder? Would the laws applicable today be those under which he was charged or those of the time he was conscripted? It’s very complicated, I just don’t know whether he should be prosecuted or not. Germany says there’s no evidence. No evidence of what? There will be evidence he served, and where, but is that in itself a crime. I have no answers.

It wasn’t so much the age at which the alleged offences took place that I was wondering about, though certainly that should a consideration at any prosecution or trial. It was more the argument that people shouldn’t stand trial or serve a sentence if they are elderly.

Blossoming

It wasn’t so much the age at which the alleged offences took place that I was wondering about, though certainly that should a consideration at any prosecution or trial. It was more the argument that people shouldn’t stand trial or serve a sentence if they are elderly.

Humm yes you were ? I suppose because of the passage of time anyone like the person in your link will have been very young at the time of the ‘offence’.

Not at all, age is not a factor.

Suziewoosie no, I really wasn’t. You can’t tell what I’m thinking over the internet ? That link was one of several and probably not the best illustration. This one is better.
www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/auschwitz-bookkeeper-oskar-groening-german-96-nazi-ss-guard-prison-sentence-court-four-years-a8081981.html

Blossoming

Suziewoosie no, I really wasn’t. You can’t tell what I’m thinking over the internet ? That link was one of several and probably not the best illustration. This one is better.
www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/auschwitz-bookkeeper-oskar-groening-german-96-nazi-ss-guard-prison-sentence-court-four-years-a8081981.html

My ‘yes you were’ comment was agreeing with you not telling you what you meant ? Honest . I do agree as well that choosing a Holocaust linked example wasn’t the best idea. My position in general is quite clear - I don’t believe in statutes of limitations and think a decision to prosecute should just turn on the facts of the case. Nothing else. The age of the accused at the time of the offence may be a mitigating factor in terms of sanction but not in terms of deciding to prosecute,