[Up] [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

FW: More Questions than Answers

  .  “The Court has ruled that American Law follows the Flag.  This ruling made possible the Nuremberg Trials.”

Actually the Nuremberg Trials were in fact military tribunals and were instituted at the insistence of the U.S. which, as citizens of earth, could not condone some of the other suggestions that were made by other participants in the 2nd War to End All Wars.  In 1944, Winston Churchill said of the Nazi’s that they should be “hunted down and shot”. Both the French and Soviet governments favored summary execution. In 1945, the Allies signed an agreement creating the Nuremberg court, officially called “The London Charter of the International Military Tribunal” as the agreement was sign in London. The rules for the “court” are as follows:

 The International Military Tribunal combined elements of Anglo-American and civil (continental) law. Defendants' rights and the rules of evidence differed in several ways from those in American courtrooms: 
 In contrast to the U.S. system, in which the prosecutors must show evidence suggesting there is probable cause to try a defendant, civil law requires that all proof be presented with the indictment. At the International Military Tribunal, some of the proof was presented at the time of indictment, some was not. 
 In contrast to U.S. practice, defendants were permitted to give unsworn statements at the end of the trial. 
 Hearsay evidence was allowed. This often came in the form of statements by individuals not called as witnesses. The statements were read by prosecutors; defendants, on cross examination, were asked to respond to incriminating allegations. In U.S. courts, unlike at Nuremberg, the accused have the right to confront and question his accuser. At Nuremberg, evidence merely had to be "probative" to be admitted. 
 The London Charter did not create a right to a jury trial. 
 There was no right to appeal and no court to which the defendants could appeal. The defendants could ask the Control Council of Germany -- the Allied occupation government, to reduce or change their sentences, and those who were found guilty did seek clemency from the Control Council. Their request was rejected and ten of the eleven defendants who received death sentences were hanged two weeks later. (The eleventh, Hermann Goering, committed suicide several hours before he was to be hanged.) 
 The defendants had a right to an attorney of their choice, although they could represent themselves if they wanted (none chose to do so). The four prosecuting nations paid the attorneys' fees. 
 The defendants also had a right to present evidence in their own defense and to cross-examine any witnesses against them. 
 The law of the London Charter was arguably ex post facto. 

The above is provided by: http://www.courttv.com/casefiles/nuremberg/law.html

If anything the Nuremberg Trials support rather than oppose the current use of military tribunals and further show that the U.S. has in the past used such tribunes, when others would have no semblance of civilized law, quite effectively and with world consent.


[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@quarterman.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://sinclair.quarterman.org/list.html