A court of assizes chamber of the regional court has not opened the main proceedings against a due aid to a thousand times the murder accused former concentration camp guard, because he’s hearing is, according to the chamber’s capable of. The now ninety-seven years old, is on 3. November 1943 as a guard in the concentration – and extermination camp Majdanek in Poland used to be. On the day there are around 17,000 Jews who had been deported have been killed.
editor in the Rhein-Main-Zeitung, responsible for the Rhine-Main-part of the Frankfurt General Sunday newspaper.
F. A. Z.
The investigation by the Central office for processing Nazi crimes in Ludwigsburg. As a then twenty-two years he had been a member of the SS-Totenkopf-Sturmbanns, called the massacre “action harvest festival”. The victims were shot in the trenches they had to dig. As part of the postal chain, or as a guard on one of the towers, he have been involved in this crime, and the insidious and cruel deeds willfully and knowingly promoted, – stated in the indictment.
250,000 people murdered
In the concentration camp Majdanek were murdered during the Nazi occupation, approximately 250,000 people died of Hunger or diseases. 28 proceedings against guards of the Majdanek concentration camp made by the Central office of the state Prosecutor’s offices. 18 Accused are now dead, in one case there was a conviction.
more than 70 years after the end of world war II, even menial service, must answer ranks in the hierarchy of the concentration camps before the court, is attributable to a change in the criminal legal assessment of the crimes. 2016 of the Federal court of justice upheld the conviction of the SS-char leader Oskar Groening because of “functional aid” to the murder.
main hearing could be life-threatening
According to information this newspaper holds, the Frankfurt court of assizes chamber of the consequences to the accused due to his poor state of health, in particular due to cerebral disturbances, for it is unable to the process. In addition, the judges share the view of medical experts that the with a public main trial, related the excitement for the defendant’s life likely threat would be.
The court based its decision on the Federal constitutional court developed principles. Must be weighed, therefore, the claim of the rule of law, in particular serious crime and to prosecute, against the fundamental right of every accused to a fair trial. Part of this is that this can understand what is happening in court, to be able to adequately defend. Because the defendant was not able to and through a hearing, even his life is acutely in danger, outweighs the right to protection, it says. It does not come into consideration, to negotiate in the absence of the accused. This would only have been possible if he had withdrawn from the process.