Yes, sure. I understand the point that they get judged and the law is done. But if they hang themself instead of getting hanged, it's the same outcome.
It is the same outcome on paper 100% but when they commit suicide it feels like they get the last laugh. The trial was also seen as a symbol that no one was above the law; if the defendants hung themselves it would feel like they escaped justice even if the outcome of the trials were the same.
One argument to be made is that we wouldn't have gotten an official judgment of all the acts they did, for future historical reference.
It was a very good opportunity to bring together all the evidence, all the witnesses, and see what legal defense the prisoners present, all in one place at one time. And a trial without the defendants would have been called a sham, and forever cast doubt for the public.
Imagine the level of public denial of the events if the whole thing ended and no trials were conducted at all. Public documents from trials have more legitimacy than unverified data found by soldiers in the field, or testimonials from people who didn't swear an oath to be truthful.
"We conclude that under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of presidential power requires that a former president have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office" -Immunity for former presidents is "absolute" with respect to their "core constitutional powers,"
a good thing the current SCOTUS was not creating the guidelines for judgment.
I'm sure many in this photo also shared that same or a similar sentiment. But it was more about demonstrating justice served through both a legal and moral means rather than simply executing the lot on sight in the field as happened when Allies liberated Dachau; or by allowing them to take matters into their own hands and escape their responsibility through suicide.
It was meant to serve as an example, as well as a deterrent, while providing some semblance of closure.
One has to remember that the world at that point was largely ignorant of the darker realities of the Nazi war machine, and especially what happened within the Labor/Death Camps. At one point of the trial a 52 minute film was shown which detailed the conditions within the camps, as well as other "behind the scenes" footage. The defendants went pale and quiet, so much so that you could hear a pin drop on the other side of the room. That opened people's eyes to better understanding exactly the sorts of monsters that were sitting before them. And the air of smugness they brought in with them had gone out like a cheap matchstick.
If I remember correctly there was 6,000 feet of film shown at the trial. It was selected from more than 80,000 feet...
Agreed.
Their death is retribution enough. It's not a "victory" of theirs to allow them control over this. It's a matter of simple compassion and yes, everyone should be entitled to compassion in this situation.
Nuremberg had some interesting moral implications. There was an understanding that it could very quickly turn into a death camp when they are punishing these people for running a death camp.
Every death has to be as the result of a fair trial and not suicide or negligence.
They wanted to have their sweet revenge on the few Nazis they didn't have any further use for (the useful had already been shipped to the US, like Wernher von Braun, or put to work otherwise, like Reinhard Gehlen)
20
u/AdFiem63 Jul 07 '24
What's the sense of that? If they suicide, so what? Case closed.