Ex-Nazi bookeeper charged [Update: Convicted and sentenced]

[Borgholio]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/bookk ... al-n344796

MAINZ, Germany — Dozens of Holocaust survivors and their relatives from around the world are expected to converge on a German courtroom Tuesday as the so-called "accountant of Auschwitz" is due to go on trial.

Former concentration camp bookkeeper and guard Oskar Groening, 93, is accused of being an accessory to the murder of at least 300,000 Jews.

"Many of the survivors, who are co-plaintiffs in the trial, are stepping on German soil for the first time since the end of Nazi regime," Christoph Heubner, the executive vice president of the International Auschwitz Committee, told NBC News from Berlin.

A total of 63 Holocaust survivors or their relatives from the United States, Canada, Israel and elsewhere have joined the prosecution as co-plaintiffs in the closely-watched trial. Around 30 are expected in court in Lueneburg.

Groening's trial comes 70 years after the liberation of Adolf Hitler's concentration camps.

He is accused of working as a guard at the Auschwitz death camp between May and June 1944, when some 425,000 Jews from Hungary were brought there and at least 300,000 almost immediately gassed to death. German prosecutors allege that Groening was responsible for dealing with the belongings and money stolen from camp victims, which is why he has often been referred to as "the accountant of Auschwitz" in the German media.

As fugitives age, the case is likely to be one of Germany's last Nazi trials. Authorities say it is intended to be "an important signal for the last remaining survivors of the Holocaust."

But while the proceedings highlight Germany's last push to bring Nazi criminals to justice, critics accuse the country's judicial system of "disastrous failings."

Following the Nuremberg trials in 1949, German authorities for decades had only targeted individuals linked to specific atrocities.

An estimated 6,500 Nazis who worked at SS concentration camps were alive at the end of World War II. However, just 43 men from Hitler's elite SS units faced court afterward.

Nine received life sentences, 20 received prison terms between three and 15 years and 10 were acquitted, according to the Fritz-Bauer-Institute in Frankfurt, a Holocaust research center.

"It is a black stain on Germany's map," Heubner said. "The culprits were welcomed in the midst of society and the general public kept silent. Groening was a wheel in the murder machine of Auschwitz and therefore, also had blood on his hands."

The 2011 prosecution of John Demjanjuk, an autoworker who lived in the U.S. for years after the war and was convicted of 28,060 counts of being an accessory to murder, was a game-changer for the German legal system. The court's ruling that Demjanjuk could be convicted on his service record alone, triggered a search for dozens of suspected Auschwitz guards who were still believed to be living in Germany.

According to the federal office investigating Nazi crimes, there are currently 11 open investigations against former Auschwitz guards, and "charges have been filed in three of those cases including Groening's case," prosecutor Thomas Will told NBC News.

If convicted, Groening could face up to a 15-year prison sentence.

"It is important that Groening stands trial, but the survivors had hoped to see prosecution much earlier," Heubner added.

[Tsyroc]

I saw a documentary about Auschwitz and this guy was interviewed in it quite a bit. I think he had largely been forgotten but he was either found or decided to come clean when he reached his late 80s. In his own words he definitely profited from his position while he was stationed there.

[Ralin]

I saw a documentary about Auschwitz and this guy was interviewed in it quite a bit. I think he had largely been forgotten but he was either found or decided to come clean when he reached his late 80s. In his own words he definitely profited from his position while he was stationed there.

Profit how, exactly?

And am I right in understanding that more or less anyone who was in a German uniform at Auschwitz could be tried like this? Just how far removed from the decision making and actual killing someone be before they're not criminally liable?

Not aiming at any specific argument, just curious.

[Tsyroc]

I saw a documentary about Auschwitz and this guy was interviewed in it quite a bit. I think he had largely been forgotten but he was either found or decided to come clean when he reached his late 80s. In his own words he definitely profited from his position while he was stationed there.

Profit how, exactly?

And am I right in understanding that more or less anyone who was in a German uniform at Auschwitz could be tried like this? Just how far removed from the decision making and actual killing someone be before they're not criminally liable?

Not aiming at any specific argument, just curious.

It's been awhile but from what I recall he had stashes of various forms of currency in his locker, plus other small items that he was able to get a hold of because he was an accountant and was involved with cataloging the cash and items of value that were taken from the camps detainees. He was nearly caught for it a couple of times but was tipped off by fellow guards so he had his locker cleaned out when inspected. I don't think he had any contact with the prisoners at all. Think embezzler and the guy who had minor luxury items that were mostly of value because of the shortages of war. At least that's essentially how he portrayed himself in the interviews.

[Ralin]

Not that I want to defend Nazis or anything, but it seems like a pretty big jump from that to "accessory to 300,000 counts of murder"

[Thanas]

It is quite likely that this is nothing but a feel-good effect for the relatives of the victims or for the few surviving victims, as at the age the guy will not see any prison time.

It is quite a shame that we managed to conduct trials against the GDR goons but not against the Nazis.

[Simon_Jester]

Profit how, exactly?

And am I right in understanding that more or less anyone who was in a German uniform at Auschwitz could be tried like this? Just how far removed from the decision making and actual killing someone be before they're not criminally liable?

I would say that the distance of their removal should be "far enough away that they are no longer working at Auschwitz..."

I mean, everyone working there had to know what they were doing. "Accessory to murder" is the kindest thing you can call it.

[K. A. Pital]

I think that everyone who was serving in Auschwitz not only could be tried like this, but should be. Ideally just put to death, quickly. The amount of murder and suffering he inflicted is immense; at this point the right to life is fortfeited.

[Simon_Jester]

Although there is a countervailing argument that after the state has neglected to prosecute a crime for seventy years, holding convictions for the last handful of ninety-year-old men who were guilty in their youth is...

I'm not sure what the right word is, but it does seem a bit problematic.

[K. A. Pital]

So? Neglect on part of the prosecution is of no importance. Nazi concentration camp personnel? Never too old to prosecute. I am sure many of their victims were elderly and children. Time does not erase crimes against humanity, so there is no period after which such people can be pardoned. Note we are not talking about someone who found himself in the German armed forces or NSDAP by occasion. We are talking about KZ personnel.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I think that everyone who was serving in Auschwitz not only could be tried like this, but should be. Ideally just put to death, quickly. The amount of murder and suffering he inflicted is immense; at this point the right to life is fortfeited.

The guy put in for transfer to the eastern front. Twice. He was denied. What would you have had the accountant do? Kill himself? Pull out his pistol and gun down some ramp guards before being riddled with holes, thus going out in a blaze of glory and accomplishing precisely nothing?

Sure, put him on trial. Summary Death because he joined the SS for career advancement opportunities in his 20s and got stationed to Auschwitz as a property clerk seems a bit excessive, even if Germany had the death penalty.

[Grumman]

The guy put in for transfer to the eastern front. Twice. He was denied. What would you have had the accountant do? Kill himself? Pull out his pistol and gun down some ramp guards before being riddled with holes, thus going out in a blaze of glory and accomplishing precisely nothing?

He had a moral duty to refuse to be complicit in this murder, even if that simply meant going AWOL. You say "accomplishing precisely nothing" as if that's a bad thing, but that is all that is necessary - without men like him actively working to make the Holocaust happen, all you've got is Hitler running around Europe with a pistol trying to single-handedly kill the entire Jewish race.

[K. A. Pital]

The guy put in for transfer to the eastern front. Twice. He was denied.

As if lower races weren't routinely exterminated by the SS and Wehrmacht units on the Eastern front...

What would you have had the accountant do? Kill himself? Pull out his pistol and gun down some ramp guards before being riddled with holes, thus going out in a blaze of glory and accomplishing precisely nothing?

Georg Elser may have accomplished nothing, but he is not complicit in the crimes against humanity which Germany was perpetrating.

Summary Death because he joined the SS for career advancement opportunities in his 20s and got stationed to Auschwitz as a property clerk seems a bit excessive, even if Germany had the death penalty.

I merely suggested the death penalty because people who 'join the SS' for career opportunities already are criminals (the SS was ruled a criminal organization in entirety, with the exception of ceremonial cavalry or something) - this guy is not just an SS-man, but an SS-man working at where people were exterminated in the hundreds of thousands as routinely as you clean your teeth. I think that being an SS-man is already a black mark of a criminal, but an SS-man at Auschwitz is like the worst of the worst.

[Borgholio]

He had a moral duty to refuse to be complicit in this murder, even if that simply meant going AWOL.

What if going AWOL meant that the Nazis would murder his entire family and everybody he knows?

See here's my problem...and please understand I'm not trying to defend the Nazis of all people...but it does seem a bit like guilt by association here. If he was one of the people who was responsible shoving people into the gas chambers, I could see him being tried and punished for it. If he was one of the people who decided that gassing the Jews was more "productive" than simply shooting them, then he certainly should be punished. But this guy was a bookkeeper. He was an accountant. It was simply his job to keep records. I don't consider that to be nearly as bad as actually directly having a hand in the murders.

As a question to those who actually study the law...can bookkeepers of criminals such as drug dealers or mob bosses be charged with accessory to the murders committed by their boss or his other minions? If yes then that answers my question, but if no, then it sounds like everybody including people who repaired the fences or delivered supplies to the camp should be charged too.

[Patroklos]

The "accountant" label is itself disingenuous and is just a ploy to make him seem more important than the was. He was not the comptroller of Auschwitz but rather a Sargent equivalent who kept a property log book not unlike a cash register log for instance. This is something I have seaman do IRL, for comparison.

He is what he is and that is terrible enough, there is no need to make up BS nicknames for him that are wildly inaccurate.

As an addition to Borgholio's questions, were any of the train operators or the railroad works responsible for scheduling their movements tried for war crimes? Shipping people you know are stacked like cordwood to their doom seems at least as bad as what this guy did, and plenty actually died in those transits while the trains were under their direct supervision.

[Ralin]

The guy put in for transfer to the eastern front. Twice. He was denied. What would you have had the accountant do? Kill himself? Pull out his pistol and gun down some ramp guards before being riddled with holes, thus going out in a blaze of glory and accomplishing precisely nothing?

He had a moral duty to refuse to be complicit in this murder, even if that simply meant going AWOL. You say "accomplishing precisely nothing" as if that's a bad thing, but that is all that is necessary - without men like him actively working to make the Holocaust happen, all you've got is Hitler running around Europe with a pistol trying to single-handedly kill the entire Jewish race.

Yeah, uh by that logic shouldn't we be trying the individual soldiers who carried out Hitler's invasions? As Stas said, there was plenty of ethnic cleansing and mass murder happening in the Eastern front. And launching a war of aggression causes all of those things on its own, with or without war crimes

[K. A. Pital]

Yeah, uh by that logic shouldn't we be trying the individual soldiers who carried out Hitler's invasions? As Stas said, there was plenty of ethnic cleansing and mass murder happening in the Eastern front. And launching a war of aggression causes all of those things on its own, with or without war crimes

For the war of aggression, it was decided to try only the top brass, because the lower ranks could not be part of the conspiracy to launch an aggressive war of conquest. However, with the SS the logic was different. The organization basically existed to genocide lower races. Ergo, people who voluntarily join it already are criminals. Everything on top is individual prosecution for individual crimes, but the man already is a criminal. The soldiers of the Wehrmacht could possibly have no idea that the SS were perpetuating a genocide behind their back (unlikely, but still feasible, there were millions of soldiers there) - though truth be told, this is not very convincing. The SS knew full well what was happening, how and why.

[TheHammer]

The guy put in for transfer to the eastern front. Twice. He was denied. What would you have had the accountant do? Kill himself? Pull out his pistol and gun down some ramp guards before being riddled with holes, thus going out in a blaze of glory and accomplishing precisely nothing?

He had a moral duty to refuse to be complicit in this murder, even if that simply meant going AWOL. You say "accomplishing precisely nothing" as if that's a bad thing, but that is all that is necessary - without men like him actively working to make the Holocaust happen, all you've got is Hitler running around Europe with a pistol trying to single-handedly kill the entire Jewish race.

That's an easy thing to say and a difficult thing to do. While the policy makers and high ranking officers who gave the orders are certainly accountable, its another entirely to hold relatively low ranking enlisted men who weren't in much position to refuse those orders to the same standard.

[Ralin]

Yeah, uh by that logic shouldn't we be trying the individual soldiers who carried out Hitler's invasions? As Stas said, there was plenty of ethnic cleansing and mass murder happening in the Eastern front. And launching a war of aggression causes all of those things on its own, with or without war crimes

For the war of aggression, it was decided to try only the top brass, because the lower ranks could not be part of the conspiracy to launch an aggressive war of conquest. However, with the SS the logic was different. The organization basically existed to genocide lower races. Ergo, people who voluntarily join it already are criminals. Everything on top is individual prosecution for individual crimes, but the man already is a criminal. The soldiers of the Wehrmacht could possibly have no idea that the SS were perpetuating a genocide behind their back (unlikely, but still feasible, there were millions of soldiers there) - though truth be told, this is not very convincing. The SS knew full well what was happening, how and why.

Conspiracy, no. But the conspiracy doesn't really matter without those millions of soldiers to carry it out, and the war itself caused enough suffering and death all on its own. So if membership in one organization automatically makes one a criminal...yeah, I'd much rather see someone who killed people in uniform in France or Russia or terror bombed English cities tried and imprisoned than someone who (for all I know, I'm just going off what's in the article) was a glorified clerk at Auschwitz.

Whether this was feasible is another matter, but if you're going to put a ninety year old on trial it should be for specific crimes, not being part of an organization

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Whether this was feasible is another matter, but if you're going to put a ninety year old on trial it should be for specific crimes, not being part of an organization

We already try people for being a willing accessory to crimes. How is this any different? The Nazis were notoriously meticulous in their documentation of their work. Someone had to be writing the stuff down. He was one of those who was involved in that.

[TheHammer]

Whether this was feasible is another matter, but if you're going to put a ninety year old on trial it should be for specific crimes, not being part of an organization

We already try people for being a willing accessory to crimes. How is this any different? The Nazis were notoriously meticulous in their documentation of their work. Someone had to be writing the stuff down. He was one of those who was involved in that.

Except its far more complicated then that. When the "government" decides what is and isn't a crime, and its the government who orders you to do something its far more ambiguous than say someone who participates in a bank robbery. Then there's also the aspect of willingness when Aleryium noted above the guy apparently tried to be transferred out of his position and said transfer was denied.

This may not be a popular notion on the board, but I'm someone who happens to think that "I was just following orders" is absolutely a legitimate excuse for your rank and file soldier. They are conditioned to follow orders even when its clear those orders will likely lead to their own deaths. After all, theirs not to reason why, theirs but to do and die. If a superior orders them to do something, and the implication is that its in service of their country and important for the war effort whether they understand or agree with it, then how can we be surprised when they follow those orders? We didn't prosecute the pilots who participated in the firebombing of Dresden even though that was arguably a warcrime. The same could be said of the Hiroshima and Nagaski attacks. Such is the luxury of being on the winning side I suppose... But why then is it so important we punish a relatively low ranking NCO who didn't create the policy, had no realistic means of refusing orders, and no real power to change anything?

[K. A. Pital]

Conspiracy, no. But the conspiracy doesn't really matter without those millions of soldiers to carry it out, and the war itself caused enough suffering and death all on its own. So if membership in one organization automatically makes one a criminal...yeah, I'd much rather see someone who killed people in uniform in France or Russia or terror bombed English cities tried and imprisoned than someone who (for all I know, I'm just going off what's in the article) was a glorified clerk at Auschwitz.

Whether this was feasible is another matter, but if you're going to put a ninety year old on trial it should be for specific crimes, not being part of an organization

It is different. The SS served only the goal of genocide. The army does many things which do not constitute genocide or crimes against humanity (crimes against peace, mostly), but the SS was the principal genocide tool, along with some other ministries and organizations within the Third Reich.

[Thanas]

We didn't prosecute the pilots who participated in the firebombing of Dresden even though that was arguably a warcrime. The same could be said of the Hiroshima and Nagaski attacks. Such is the luxury of being on the winning side I suppose... But why then is it so important we punish a relatively low ranking NCO who didn't create the policy, had no realistic means of refusing orders, and no real power to change anything?

Because while other nations like the US make glorifying war criminals and genociders one of their favorite past times, other nations think that no matter how small the crime, it mgiht be worth prosecuting.

[TheHammer]

We didn't prosecute the pilots who participated in the firebombing of Dresden even though that was arguably a warcrime. The same could be said of the Hiroshima and Nagaski attacks. Such is the luxury of being on the winning side I suppose... But why then is it so important we punish a relatively low ranking NCO who didn't create the policy, had no realistic means of refusing orders, and no real power to change anything?

Because while other nations like the US make glorifying war criminals and genociders one of their favorite past times, other nations think that no matter how small the crime, it mgiht be worth prosecuting.

Why'd you leave out the British?

Regardless, I think holding low ranking NCOs and soldiers as criminals for following orders of their superiors is a rather dubious endeavor.

[K. A. Pital]

Why'd you leave out the British?

He did not. He said other nations like the US, not just the US alone.

Regardless, I think holding low ranking NCOs and soldiers as criminals for following orders of their superiors is a rather dubious endeavor.

What is dubious in holding members of an organization which was a principal tool of genocide as criminals? Are you an idiot? What is 'dubious' about holding not just a member of said organization, but a member of said organization directly involved in genocide (and not, say, being the part of Hitler's ceremonial units)?

The Prosecution has named Die Schutzstaffeln Der Nationalsocialistischen Deutschen Arbeiterpartei (commonly known as the SS) as an organisation which should be declared criminal.
...
SS units were active participants in the steps leading up to aggressive war. The Verfuegungstruppe was used in the occupation of the Sudetenland, of Bohemia and Moravia and of Memel. The Henlein Free Corps was under the jurisdiction of the Reichs Fuehrer SS for operations in the Sudetenland in 1938 and the Volksdeutschemittelstelle financed fifth column activities there.

The SS was even a more general participant in the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Through its control over the organisation of the Police, particularly the Security Police and SD, the SS was involved in all the crimes which have been outlined in the section of this Judgment dealing with the Gestapo and SD. Other branches of the SS were equally involved in these criminal programmes.
...
From 1934 onwards the SS was responsible for the guarding and administration of concentration camps. The evidence leaves no doubt that the consistently brutal treatment of the inmates of concentration camps was carried out as a result of the general policy of the SS, which was that the inmates were racial inferiors to be treated only with contempt. There is evidence that where manpower considerations permitted, Himmler wanted to rotate guard battalions so that all members of the SS would be instructed as to the proper attitude to take to inferior races. After 1942 when the concentration camps were placed under the control of the WVHA they were used as a source of slave labour. An agreement made with the Ministry of Justice on 18th September, 1942, provided that anti-social elements who had finished prison sentences were to be delivered to the SS to be worked to death. Steps were continually taken, involving the use of the Security Police and SD and even the Waffen SS, to insure that the SS had an adequate supply of concentration camp labour for its projects. In connection with the administration of the concentration camps, the SS embarked on a series of experiments on human beings which were performed on prisoners of war or concentration camp inmates. These experiments included freezing to death, and killing by poison bullets. The SS was able to obtain an allocation of Government funds for this kind of research on the grounds that they had access to human material not available to other agencies.

The SS played a particularly significant role in the persecution of the Jews. The SS was directly involved in the demonstrations of 10th November, 1938. The evacuation of the Jews from occupied territories was carried out under the directions of the SS with the assistance of SS Police units. The extermination of the Jews was carried out under the direction of the SS central organisation. It was actually put into effect by SS formations. The Einsatzgruppen engaged in wholesale massacres of the Jews. SS police units were also involved. For example, the massacre of Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto was carried out under the directions of the SS Brigadefuehrer and Major General of the Police Stroup. A special group from the SS central organisation arranged for the deportation of Jews from various Axis satellites and their extermination was carried out in the concentration camps run by the WVHA.

It is impossible to single out any one portion of the SS which was not involved in these criminal activities. The Allgemeine SS was an active participant in the persecution of the Jews and was used as a source of concentration camp guards. Units of the Waffen SS were directly involved in the killing of prisoners of war and the atrocities in occupied countries. It supplied personnel for the Einsatzgruppen, and had command over the concentration camp guards after its absorption of the Totenkopf SS, which originally controlled the system. Various SS Police units were also widely used in the atrocities in occupied countries and the extermination of the Jews there. The SS central organisation supervised the activities of these various formations and was responsible for such special projects as the human experiments and " final solution " of the Jewish question.

The Tribunal finds that knowledge of these criminal activities was sufficiently general to justify declaring that the SS was a criminal organisation to the extent hereinafter described. It does appear that an attempt was made to keep secret some phases of its activities, but its criminal programmes were so widespread, and involved slaughter on such a gigantic scale, that its criminal activities must have been widely known. It must be recognised, moreover, that the criminal activities of the SS followed quite logically from the principles on which it was organised. Every effort had been made to make the SS a highly disciplined organisation composed of the elite of National Socialism. Himmler had stated that there were people in Germany " who become sick when they see these black coats " and that he did not expect that " they should be loved by too many ". Himmler also indicated his view that the SS was concerned with perpetuating the elite racial stock with the object of making Europe a Germanic Continent and the SS was instructed that it was designed to assist the Nazi Government in the ultimate domination of Europe and the elimination of all inferior races. This mystic and fanatical belief in the superiority of the Nordic German developed into the studied contempt and even hatred of other races which led to criminal activities of the type outlined above being considered as a matter of course if not a matter of pride. The actions of a soldier in the Waffen SS who in September, 1939, acting entirely on his own initiative, killed fifty Jewish labourers whom he had been guarding, Were described by the statement that as an SS man, he was " particularly sensitive to the sight of Jews ", and had acted " quite thoughtlessly in a youthful spit of adventure " and a sentence of three years' imprisonment imposed on him was dropped under an amnesty. Hess wrote with truth that the Waffen SS were more suitable for the specific tasks to be solved in occupied territory owing to their extensive training in questions of race and nationality. Himmler, in a series of speeches made in 1943, indicated his pride in the ability of the SS to carry out these criminal acts. He encouraged his men to be "tough and ruthless" he spoke of shooting " thousands of leading Poles ", and thanked them for their cooperation and lack of squeamishness at the sight of hundreds and thousands of corpses of their victims. He extolled ruthlessness in exterminating the Jewish race and later described this process as " delousing". These speeches show the general attitude prevailing; the SS was consistent with these criminal acts

Conclusions: The SS was utilised for the purposes which were criminal under the Charter involving the persecution and extermination of the Jews, brutalities and killings in concentration camps, excesses in the administration of occupied territories, the administration of the slave labour programme and the mistreatment and murder of prisoners of war.

...

In dealing with the SS the Tribunal includes all persons who had been officially accepted as members of the SS including the members of the Allgemeine SS, members of the Waffen SS, members of the SS Totenkopf Verbaende and the members of any of the different police forces who were members of the SS. The Tribunal does not include the so-called SS riding units.

...

Tribunal declares to be criminal within the meaning of the Charter the group composed of those persons who had been officially accepted as members of the SS as enumerated in the preceding paragraph who became or remained members of the organisation with knowledge that it was being used for the commission of acts declared criminal by Article 6 of the Charter or who were personally implicated as members of the organisation in the commission of such crimes, excluding, however, those who were drafted into membership by the State in such a way as to give them no choice in the matter, and who had committed no such crimes.