Wolf Murmelstein, a regular reader of this blog, has submitted a letter with some information for a new topic of discussion.
The following words were written by Wolf Murmelstein:
Dear furtherglory, Hermie and other readers of this blog!
In various comments here, the question of the post WWII and Holocaust trials has arisen; I want to reply to all of these comments.
From personal experience, and from historical research, I will admit that some of those [post-war] trials were driven by political rivalries for positions, or to prevent some really informed person from giving evidence concerning many wrong doings, which occurred during World War II: For example: denunciations by careless talk, appropriations of Jewish owned assets, etc..
Another chapter [of history] refers to the interest of the Communist Parties in weakening the middle class in the countries where they rose to power. This was said by Clement Gottwald on April 10, 1945 in a speech to party activists at Kosice. On that day, at Theresienstadt, we were still in danger of being shot in a mass shooting.
So in the East, as well as in the West, the Communist Parties enlisted former Nazis and Fascists to testify. By this means, many of the former Nazis could avoid being put on trial for wrongdoing, as long as they obeyed [Communist] party orders.
Where there had not been any political interest, many accusations leading to judiciary investigations had been found baseless. The accusations were due to hysteria and the persecution complex of traumatized persons. By stating this, the judge could avoid the start of procedures for slander.
In many trials, the statements of the defendants would have been precious historical documents.
I am quoting from memory, but I could find many other examples besides what is quoted below:
Herr Oskar Groening had been employed in the sorting of money and jewels, taken from the victims. By doing this, he avoided being sent to the battlefront in the East.
Herr [John] Demjanuk stated in Munich Court [in Germany] that he had had only one choice: Enlisting in the SS auxiliary or starving to death.
At the Auschwitz trial, it was stated by a defendant that selection started only after the [transport] train with the police escort had left the “station”; clearly this was done for better secrecy.
At the Nuernberg [IMT] trial, Papen had been acquitted, but two years later, he was sentenced by a German court for his high responsibility for the Nazi rise to power.
This subject deserves better analysis and research.
Hope that this letter will be offered for discussion.