PDA

View Full Version : 65 years since start of Nuremberg Trial



antiestablishmentarian
21-11-2010, 11:23 AM
Yesterday was the 65th anniversary of the beginning of the Nuremberg Trial. At this trial, 22 of the top surviving leaders of Nazi Germany were tried, with 19 convicted on one of the 4 charges. It was a groundbreaking trial for a number of reasons.
Firstly the charges themselves were extremely controversial, especially Counts 1 and 2, Conspiracy and Crimes Against Peace. Conspiracy was criticised as it was not a legal doctrine on the continent and as such was unknown in Germany and argued to be an example of a breach of nulle sine poena leges, that is the doctrine of no punishment where the act was not a crime at time of commission.

Also, the conspiracy charge bore little historical relationship to the crimes committed by Nazi Germany- Hitler's aggressions weren't part of an overarching master plan which was set out by him from the inception of the NSDAP. In many instances they were a reaction to external events (such as the Anschluss, spurred on by the Nazi's fear and anger at Schussniggs rebuffal of Hitlers ultimatum), although of course in each of the attacks he undertook there was an underlying aggressive intent towards the subject of the attack: Poland, Czechoslovakia, Austria and France, all contained territory which was deemed by German militarists, nationalists and irredentists to be German and which he sought to bring back within the 3rd Reich, while other countries which were occupied or invaded were done so with the intention of gaining Lebensraum and allowing for economic exploitation & population settlement, especially in the western Republics of the USSR. However the foreign policy of Hitler was more often improvised than planned, and conspiracy was an unconvincing attempt to net the bigger Nazi's and some of those who were too small fry or were not in positions to be held responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Crimes Against peace was also an experimental doctrine- the legal foundation used to justify this charge was the Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1929 whose signatories swore to eliminate aggressive war as a way of resolving differences, however this Pact, while making aggressive war illegal, did not provide for any penalty or means of enforcement in cases of breach, and one of the framers of the pact, Kellogg himself, stated that it didn't expressly outlaw war and that discretion to launch aggressive war remained at the discretion of individual states. Moreover, the charge itself was not properly defined by either the Tribunal or the different Charters which provided the legal framework for the Tribunal's jurisdiction- this led to some bizarre convictions on the count, such as that of Rosenberg, who was not involved in any planning of war and seems to have been convicted on the basis of his writing a number of disgusting books urging Hitler to invade the USSR and take it for Lebensraum: he was clearly morally guilty of aggressive war through his war-mongering, but moral guilt doesn't equal actual guilt, so to convict him of this count was unjust.

It would have been better to eliminate the 1st charge, conspiracy, and extend the definition of aggressive war to include economic assistance towards planning the war, something which would have put alot of major industrialists (among Hitlers key backers during the period 1931-33) in the dock for their use of capital to rearm the Wehrmacht and to push for expansion into Czechoslovakia for economic reaons. That would also have netted some of those who were acquitted by the Tribunal especially Schacht, who should have been convicted for his role in reflating the German economy and helping the development of the war economy.

There were other controversial aspects of this trial too, but I won't go into them here unless they're raised by others. What do people think themselves of Nuremberg?

kozlov
21-01-2011, 05:48 PM
Very interesting, the Bush family lent the Nazis loans as capitalist bankers:mad:

Apjp
22-01-2011, 01:51 AM
Its a history worth forgetting that should never be forgotten. My own belief is that more german people were trampled on and silenced than brainwashed. they are not a stupid people, and they are many. there were never more than a few hundred thousand at hitlers speeches. I firmly believe people were too scared to resist at first, but in time they did. the book valkryie is one of the greatest i have ever read. True germans trying to crush the monstrous nazis. Of course some of the generals knew hitler was dangerous to say the least, but only turned on him when it was too late. I know there were many stories of soldiers deserting the army and students and ordinary people being shot dead for protesting and handing out leaflets. There was a permanent internal resistance. that must never be forgotten. Its easy to follow the yank line that they all brought it on themselves. Many did, even more did not. This was before access to real media was readily available too. A vulnerable people cna be very gullible. But I stand by what I said-I believe a majority were blackmailed, just like in Stalinist russia and the show trials. Of course it should also be noted that in many cases documented the Army did not know of the killings by the SS of not just jews, but every type of people. one story summed up the thoughtcrime era hitler presided over. in Valkryie a german soldier wept like a baby when meeting his general one day. the general asked what happened. he said he had to sit through hours of a train ride with the ss saying they killed 250000 jews and poles, serbs, slavs etc. he was disgusted and could not say even what he thought. so he exploded in rage and tears at his general and that was a factor behind the many assassination attempts on hitler. apparently many more german soldier heard such horrors and didnt sign up for such inhumanity. I guess there are different levels of inhumanity in war. You have soldiers who have to be inhuman to kill and you have monsters.

TotalMayhem
22-01-2011, 02:03 AM
The thread is about the Nuremberg trials, not about resistance in the Third Reich.

There's much more to it than "Valkyrie" but that should be explored in a separate thread.

Munnkeyman
22-01-2011, 04:10 PM
I always thought they were just show trials to be honest.

Here's a great resource for material.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/imt.asp
I always wondered would they have tried and attempted to hang
Erwin Rommel?

Although veering slightly off topic the Dachau Trials, specifically the Malmedy massacre trial, were more of a miscarriage of justice.


The prosecution's evidence was based primarily on affidavits collected before the trial from the defendants and from witnesses. The prosecutors admitted that many statements had been obtained from the defendants by various ruses and tricks such as beatings, mock executions and other methods of torture. These illegal procedures were not repudiated by the court despite repeated defense objections, and the affidavits were accepted when they accused the informant himself and co-defendants

Which was in complete violation of The Hague and Geneva Conventions.
Before the trial the defendants were classified as civilian internees rather than prisoners of war.



Together with 42 other defendants, Joachim Peiper was sentenced to death by hanging on 16 July 1946.
The sentences generated significant controversy in some German circles, including the church, leading the commander of the U.S. Army in Germany to commute some of the death sentences to life imprisonment. In addition, the Germans' defense attorney, U.S. military attorney Lt. Col. Willis M. Everett, appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, claiming that the defendants had been found guilty by means of "illegal and fraudulently procured confessions" and were subjects of mock trial. The turmoil raised by this case caused the Secretary of the Army, Kenneth Royall, to create a commission chaired by Judge Gordon A. Simpson of Texas to investigate. The commission was interested in Malmedy massacre trial and other cases judged at Dachau.
The commission arrived in Europe on 30 July 1948 and issued its report on 14 September. In this report, it notably recommended that the twelve remaining death sentences be commuted to life imprisonment. The commission confirmed the accuracy of Everett's accusations regarding mock trials and neither disputed nor denied his charges of torture of the defendants. The commission expressed the opinion that the pre-trial investigation had not been properly conducted and that the members felt that no death sentence should be executed where such a doubt existed.
In response, General Clay commuted six more death sentences to life imprisonment. He however refused to commute the six remaining death sentences, including Peiper's, but the executions were postponed. The turmoil caused by the commission report and an article by Judge Edward L. Van Roden caused the U.S. Senate to investigate the trial.
In its investigation of the trial, the Senate Committee on Armed Services came to the conclusion of improper pre-trial procedures, including a mock trial, but not torture as sometimes stated, had indeed affected the trial process. There was little or no doubt that some of the accused were indeed guilty of the massacre.
Ultimately the sentences of the Malmedy defendants were commuted to life imprisonment and then to time served. Peiper himself was released from prison on parole at the end of December 1956, after serving 11 and a half years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joachim_Peiper#The_trial



Strangely enough U.S. soldiers were never found guilty of warcrimes around
Dachau such an incident in which Americans executed German prisoners happened within half a mile of the Dachau courtroom. On April 29, 1945, the day that the SS surrendered the camp at Dachau, American soldiers of the 45th Thunderbird Division of the US Seventh Army lined up surrendered Waffen-SS soldiers against a wall and machine-gunned them down in the SS Training Camp, next to the concentration camp. This was followed by a second incident, on the same day, which happened at a spot very near the courtroom: the killing of SS guards at the Dachau concentration camp after they came down from their guard tower and surrendered with their hands in the air.
A third execution of German soldiers who had surrendered on April 29th, known as the Webling Incident happened in the village of Webling on the outskirts of of the town of Dachau. American soldiers of the 222nd Regiment of the 42nd Rainbow Division executed soldiers of the German Home Guard after they had surrendered. The Home Guard consisted of young boys and old men who were forced into service in the last desperate days of the war to defend their cities and towns.


Is Peipers own words, describing distortions of events that happen in war-time situations.
Before his murder in Traves, France in 1976, Peiper described how his unit's tactics in rapidly attacking Russian villages was distorted after the war:


For a long time I commanded III Battalion, Panzergrenadier Regiment 2 of the Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler. This unit made quite a name for itself for its night attacks in Russia and was known in divisional and corps areas as the "Blowtorch Battalion".
Our troops used this highly practical tool in the winter to pre-heat the engines in our vehicles, to heat water quickly for cooking and many other things. There was also a saying among the soldiers in those days when they were given a task: 'we will soon torch that.' The vehicles even used a blowtorch as their tactical symbol.
During post-war interrogations, however, this name was twisted from the "Blowtorch Battalion" to the "Arson Battalion". It was suggested that the blowtorches were used to burn down houses. In action our armoured personnel carriers were in the habit of going into the attack at full speed with guns blazing. As the Russian houses mostly had thatched roofs, it was inevitable that they would catch fire during the battle. It would certainly be unnecessary for troops to dismount from their vehicles and use blowtorches to set houses on fire when they would almost certainly have already been set on fire as a result of the shooting that was going on, but it was one more allegation with which to blacken the image of the Waffen-SS troops.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joachim_Peiper#Post-war_reputation




To quote Maj. Gen. J.F.C. Fuller



"For fifty or a hundred years, and possibly more, the ruined cities of Germany will stand as monuments to the barbarism of their conquerors.
The slaughtered will be forgotten,the horrors of the concentration camps and gas chambers will dim with the passing of the years; but the ruins will remain to beckon generation after generation of Germans to revenge.“

TotalMayhem
22-01-2011, 04:42 PM
I always wondered would they have tried and attempted to hang Erwin Rommel?

You can bet the farm on that, Rommel was one of Hitler's most devout and fanatic commanders.

His glorification as member or supporter of the resistance (which he certainly wasn't) alsways puzzled me.

concernedparent
22-01-2011, 04:59 PM
Rommel was one of Hitler's greatest supporters.

He only began to turn against Hitler when the war was deemed to be unwinnable against the allies.

His concern at that stage was for the decimation of his country not of the Nazi party.

Plus the fear that Germans had of the Russians arriving at the gates of Berlin

Munnkeyman
22-01-2011, 05:00 PM
You can bet the farm on that, Rommel was one of Hitler's most devout and fanatic commanders.

His glorification as member or supporter of the resistance (which he certainly wasn't) alsways puzzled me.

Definitely not a member of the resistance to any degree, although he was made aware of their intentions Dr. Karl Strölin and maybe?? von Stülpnagel.
But he certainly was no fan of Adolf Hitler.:confused:

antiestablishmentarian
22-01-2011, 05:16 PM
[QUOTE]I always thought they were just show trials to be honest.

Here's a great resource for material.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/imt.asp
I always wondered would they have tried and attempted to hang
Erwin Rommel?

I don't know about Rommel given his stature, but considering the treatment they gave the other military commanders (esp. Jodl & Doenitz) I think that's a fair assumption on your part. The transcripts are fascinating reading, volumes one and two are probably the best as they contain all the material about Counts One and Two.



Although veering slightly off topic the Dachau Trials, specifically the Malmedy massacre trial, were more of a miscarriage of justice.



Which was in complete violation of The Hague and Geneva Conventions.
Before the trial the defendants were classified as civilian internees rather than prisoners of war.




Strangely enough U.S. soldiers were never found guilty of warcrimes around
Dachau such an incident in which Americans executed German prisoners happened within half a mile of the Dachau courtroom. On April 29, 1945, the day that the SS surrendered the camp at Dachau, American soldiers of the 45th Thunderbird Division of the US Seventh Army lined up surrendered Waffen-SS soldiers against a wall and machine-gunned them down in the SS Training Camp, next to the concentration camp. This was followed by a second incident, on the same day, which happened at a spot very near the courtroom: the killing of SS guards at the Dachau concentration camp after they came down from their guard tower and surrendered with their hands in the air.
A third execution of German soldiers who had surrendered on April 29th, known as the Webling Incident happened in the village of Webling on the outskirts of of the town of Dachau. American soldiers of the 222nd Regiment of the 42nd Rainbow Division executed soldiers of the German Home Guard after they had surrendered. The Home Guard consisted of young boys and old men who were forced into service in the last desperate days of the war to defend their cities and towns.


Is Peipers own words, describing distortions of events that happen in war-time situations.
Before his murder in Traves, France in 1976, Peiper described how his unit's tactics in rapidly attacking Russian villages was distorted after the war:




To quote Maj. Gen. J.F.C. Fuller

Interesting. It always struck me the sheer hypocrisy of the US when it came to war crimes and their right to try others like the Nazis (who deserved punishment). The US knew for instance of the Bodo League massacres in Korea where communists and leftists were rounded up and shot. Estimates of those killed reach at least 200,000, while up to 1,200,000 may have died as a result of it. There are many photos in existence of US troops watching over these atrocities.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=2008-12-06_D94TJ7800

Derelict
22-01-2011, 05:24 PM
...

Strangely enough U.S. soldiers were never found guilty of warcrimes around Dachau such an incident in which Americans executed German prisoners happened within half a mile of the Dachau courtroom. On April 29, 1945, the day that the SS surrendered the camp at Dachau, American soldiers of the 45th Thunderbird Division of the US Seventh Army lined up surrendered Waffen-SS soldiers against a wall and machine-gunned them down in the SS Training Camp, next to the concentration camp. This was followed by a second incident, on the same day, which happened at a spot very near the courtroom: the killing of SS guards at the Dachau concentration camp after they came down from their guard tower and surrendered with their hands in the air. ...

:) Good for the Yanks. They were well within their rights.

You need to read up on "The Laws of War on Land" - and on Dachau concentration camp.

The SS was not the Army and it had firmly ignored the Geneva Convention, both in in regard to PoWs and to civilians - so its members had no entitlements under International Law, and could be shot out of hand.

(And if I was Tony Blair I'd be worried.;))

TotalMayhem
22-01-2011, 05:26 PM
But he certainly was no fan of Adolf Hitler.:confused:

The letters to his wife reveal what a great admirer of Hitler he was.

Derelict
22-01-2011, 05:41 PM
What do people think themselves of Nuremberg?

I'm old enough to remember the pictures in the newspapers and magazines. And at times I have encountered concentration-camp survivors (the first one I met, in the early 1950s, was a young wrecked-and-crippled Salesian priest).

I remember reading that War Crimes trials was a Russian idea. The US was thinking of shooting every German senior officer and their civilian equivalents.

TotalMayhem
22-01-2011, 05:51 PM
The US was thinking of shooting every German senior officer and their civilian equivalents.

I think you're confusing the "US" with Messrs Dexter White and Morgenthau

Munnkeyman
22-01-2011, 06:01 PM
:) Good for the Yanks. They were well within their rights.

You need to read up on "The Laws of War on Land" - and on Dachau concentration camp.

The SS was not the Army and it had firmly ignored the Geneva Convention, both in in regard to PoWs and to civilians - so its members had no entitlements under International Law, and could be shot out of hand.

(And if I was Tony Blair I'd be worried.;))

Let's be clear the Waffen-SS was under the control of the OKW
(High Command of the Armed Forces) during wartime, therefore they were informally part of the Army. Orders came from the OKW.
The SS-Totenkopfverbände were a seperate organisation and were under the command of Himmler.
This is a technical issue that was brushed over at the Nuremberg Trials.

You can't tarnish all with the same brush.
A vast majority of those troops would have been
subject to conscription (1943 onwards) and would have
been therefore subject to involuntary servitude.

Unwarranted killing is still murder.

Griska
22-01-2011, 06:24 PM
The fact is, though, Hitler was immensely popular. Far more so than the Nazis, and that is an important distinction.

Also, to round up people, whether they are part of the army or not, who surrender and execute them is murder. Murder is illegal.

Munnkeyman
22-01-2011, 06:44 PM
The letters to his wife reveal what a great admirer of Hitler he was.

He was an admirer of some of his qualities but not the man, who he thought to be insane by 1942 at the latest.

According to Desmond Youngs autobiography of Rommel written in 1950.


On November 3rd, when the withdrawal of had already started, came an order from O.K.H., the German Army Command.

"The position requires, that the El Alamein position be held to the last man.
There is to be no retreat, not so much as one millimetre! Victory or death."

Signed - Adolf Hitler.

He circulated the order to his troops knowing the order was ridiculous and that to obey it would make a greater disaster certain.
Von Thoma, one of his subordinate commanders, said "I cannot tolerate this order of Hitler" and withdrew his troops to which Rommel turned a blind eye.
Bayerlein asked " What can I do in the face of this order of Hitler's"
Rommel being diplomatic stated " I cannot authorise you to disobey it."



Nevertheless Rommel and what was left of the Afrika Korps started their retreat.
Those are actions that you would not associate with a with someone who was
"one of Hitler's most devout and fanatical commanders".

It smacks of insubordination to be honest.
Certainly not devout or fanatical.
Rommel's actions spoke a lot louder than his words.

Anyhow I think that's a topic for another thread?

TotalMayhem
22-01-2011, 07:20 PM
He was an admirer of some of his qualities but not the man, who he thought to be insane by 1942 at the latest.

November 1943:


Rommel aber schöpfte neue Tatkraft aus seinem kurzen Zusammensein mit Hitler. Begeistert schrieb er an seine Frau: "Welche Kraft geht von ihm aus! Mit welchem Glauben und welcher Zuversicht hängt sein Volk an ihm!"

Rommel, however, drew energy from his short meeting with Hitler. He excitedly wrote to his wife: "What power emanates from him! The faith and confidence which his people have in him!"

After the failed assassination attempt on July 20, 1944:


Seiner Frau gegenüber äußerte er: "Zu meinem Unfall hat mich das Attentat auf den Führer besonders stark erschüttert. Man kann Gott danken, daß es so gut abgegangen ist."

To his wife he said: "In addition to my accident I was particularly shocked by the assassination attempt on the Führer. Thank God that all went well."

And there is his illusion of asking the Fuehrer permission to negotiate with his old pal Montgomery to fight the Russians together with the Western allies.


Anyhow I think that's a topic for another thread?

Indeed

Apjp
22-01-2011, 08:44 PM
The thread is about the Nuremberg trials, not about resistance in the Third Reich.

There's much more to it than "Valkyrie" but that should be explored in a separate thread.

Of course it is. but its all relative. everything that happened in germany from 1914-1945 is a train of events that allowed these things to happen. It is vital, for the sake of the human spirit of decency and self sacrafice-man's unique character-that we remember that even in the darkest foulest most evil hells on earth there were people doing what people do-standing up for what is right. You cannot seperate the two completely. I believe that had the assasination attempts succeeded there would have been many lives saved and the war would have ended sooner. then things may have been more sane in the end-including thr trials.

TotalMayhem
22-01-2011, 09:09 PM
I believe that had the assasination attempts succeeded there would have been many lives saved and the war would have ended sooner.

Then why didn't von Stauffenberg to pull a gun and blew the man's brains out. Instead they decided to go ahead with plan where too many things could go wrong (and wrong they went). A plan that included 'collateral damage' but allowed von Stauffenberg to escape.

I know, as usual, they were asked to hand over there pistols, but hey, they managed to smuggle a bomb.

Then there was another plan reported, where they intended to prepare the backpacks of three soldiers of the guard batallion with explosives and blow them up remotely when Hitler was taking their parade. Quite heroic, eh?

Personally, I have rather little regard for the 'heroes' of Operation Valkyrie.

Apjp
22-01-2011, 09:14 PM
Then why didn't von Stauffenberg to pull a gun and blew the man's brains out. Instead they decided to go ahead with plan where too many things could go wrong (and wrong they went). A plan that included 'collateral damage' but allowed von Stauffenberg to escape.

I know, as usual, they were asked to hand over there pistols, but hey, they managed to smuggle a bomb.

Then there was another plan reported, where they intended to prepare the backpacks of three soldiers of the guard batallion with explosives and blow them up remotely when Hitler was taking their parade. Quite heroic, eh?

Personally, I have rather little regard for the 'heroes' of Operation Valkyrie.

well at least they tried. its easy for us to sit here and judge them. they joined the army because they were products of their time. Put yourself in nazi germany and try to think of how hard even getting a bomb together to kill hitler, himler etc would be. then theres the whole problem that ye would have to execute all the nazi leaders and organize mass aressts of the SS. The reality is these people did their best and should be commended for it. Certainly almost killing Hitler is no mean feat!

A new lovers arrival
22-01-2011, 11:13 PM
I had read the Albert Speer Spandau dairy book. It gives a good view into the relationship between a lot of the lads locked up after the trial, Hess, Doenitz, Neurath, Raeder and von Schirach.

Hess I thought suffered a lot there.

Would recommend the book, i found it at a library sale some years ago.

Here is something i found at the time when i was googling after reading the book.



In 1945, an army psychologist named G.M. Gilbert, was allowed to examine the Nazi leaders who were tried at Nuremberg for war crimes. Among other tests, a German version of the Wechsler-Bellevue was administered. Here are the results:

# Name IQ

1 Hjalmar Schacht 143
2 Arthur Seyss-Inquart 141
3 Hermann Goering 138
4 Karl Doenitz 138
5 Franz von Papen 134
6 Eric Raeder 134
7 Dr. Hans Frank 130
8 Hans Fritsche 130
9 Baldur von Schirach 130
10 Joachim von Ribbentrop 129
11 Wilhelm Keitel 129
12 Albert Speer 128
13 Alfred Jodl 127
14 Alfred Rosenberg 127
15 Constantin von Neurath 125
16 Walther Funk 124
17 Wilhelm Frick 124
18 Rudolf Hess 120
19 Fritz Sauckel 118
20 Ernst Kaltenbrunner 113
21 Julius Streicher 106

Notice that there is a clear correlation of IQ with social status. Notice, as I've pointed out before, that success in the practical socio-econimc sense usually goes to those with IQs between 125 and 150. And finally, notice that there are no towering IQs in the 150 plus range, as one would expect from theoreticians. None of these men were original thinkers.

TotalMayhem
22-01-2011, 11:20 PM
The banker tops the list. ;)

Of course, all charges were dropped.

A new lovers arrival
22-01-2011, 11:49 PM
The banker tops the list. ;)

Of course, all charges were dropped.

It would be interesting to see the cabinet + the top banking people involved in own current turmoil tested in a similar manner. I would especially like to see what Conor & Brian Lenihan & Cowens scores were. Would like to see Michael McDowell and Charlie McCreevy on such list also.

TotalMayhem
22-01-2011, 11:56 PM
As for the conclusions, I assume, Joseph Goebbels would have easily passed that 150 mark.

Munnkeyman
22-01-2011, 11:57 PM
Hess I thought suffered a lot there.





Throughout the investigations prior to trial Hess claimed amnesia, insisting that he had no memory of his role in the Nazi Party. He went on to pretend not to recognise even Hermann Göring — who was as convinced as the psychiatric team that Hess had lost his mind. Hess then addressed the court, several weeks into hearing evidence, to announce that his memory had returned — thereby destroying his defence of diminished responsibility. He later confessed to having enjoyed pulling the wool over the eyes of the investigative psychiatric team.


Here's G.M. Gilbert's assessment of Rudolf Hess.




REPORT OF PRISON PSYCHOLOGIST ON
MENTAL COMPETENCE OF DEFENDANT HESS (*) (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/v1-29.asp#1)

17 August 1946
SUBJECT: Competence of Defendant Rudolf Hess TO : General Secretary, International Military Tribunal.
1. In compliance with the Tribunal's request, the following facts and studied opinions are submitted with respect to the competence of Rudolf Hess, based on my continual tests and observations from October 1945 to the present time, in the capacity of prison psychologist:
2. Amnesia at beginning of trial. There can be no doubt that Hess was in a state of virtually complete amnesia at the beginning of the trial. The opinions of the psychiatric commissions in this regard and with respect to his sanity have only been substantiated by prolonged subsequent observation.
3. Recovery. On the day of the special hearing in his case, 30 November 1945, Rudolf Hess did, in fact, recover his memory. The cause of his sudden recovery is an academic question, but the following event probably played a part: Just before the hearing f told Hess (as a challenge) that he might be considered incompetent at that time and excluded from the proceedings, but I would sometimes see him in his cell. Hess seemed startled and said he thought he was competent. Then he gave his declaration of malingering in court, apparently as a face-saving device. In later conversations he admitted to me that he had not been malingering, and that he knew he had lost his memory twice in England. During the months of December 1945, and January 1946, his memory was quite in order.
4. Relapse. At the end of January I began to notice the beginnings of memory failure. This increased progressively during February, until he returned to a state of virtually complete amnesia again about the beginning of March, and he has remained in that state ever since. (At the beginning of relapse, Hess expressed anxiety over it, saying that no one would believe him this time after he had said he had faked his amnesia the first time.) The amnesia is progressive, each day's events being quickly forgotten. At present his memory span is about one-half day, and his apprehension span has dropped from 7 to 4 digits repeated correctly immediately after hearing.
5. Competence and sanity. I have teed the application of Dr. Seidl both in German and in English, and wish to make the following comment:
a. Lay discussion of psychiatric concepts does not help throw any light on this case, because psychiatrists themselves are not in agreement on the definition of terms like "psychopathic constitution", "hysterical reaction", etc., and these terms have entirely different meanings in English and German usage.
b. The psychiatric commissions have agreed, and my further observations have confirmed, that Hess is not insane (in the legal sense of being incapable of distinguishing right from wrong or realizing the consequences of his acts).
c. Hess did recover his memory for a sufficient period of time (2-3 months) to give his counsel ample cooperation in the preparation of his defense. If he failed to do so, it was the result of a negativistic personality peculiarity, which I have also observed, and not incompetence.
d. There has been no indication in his case history or present behavior that he was insane at the time of the activities for which he has been indicted. His behavior throughout the trial has also shown sufficient insight and reason to dispel any doubts about his sanity. (He may have gone through a psychotic episode in England, but that in no way destroys the validity of the previous two statements. He has exhibited signs of a "persecution complex" here too, but these have not been of psychotic proportions.)
e. In my opinion, another examination by a psychiatric commission at this time would not throw any further light on the case, because the clinical picture is the same and the conclusions would necessarily be the same as those of the original psychiatric commissions, to wit: Hess is not insane but suffering from hysterical amnesia. I have discussed this case with the present prison psychiatrist, .Lt. Col. Dunn, who has recently examined Hess, and he is also of the opinion that Hess's present mental state is apparently the same as that indicated in the original psychiatric reports, which he has read.
/ s / G. M. GILBERT, Ph.D.
Prison Psychologist

Notes:
(*) This report was referred to Counsel for Defendant Hess by order of the tribunal, 20 August 1946, in reference to the motion of 2 August 1946 on behalf of the defendant. This motion, which reviewed at length the previous examinations and psychiatric history of Defendant Hess, was a request "to subject the Defendant Hess once more . . . to an examination by psychiatric experts with regard to his ability to stand trial and his soundness of mind."
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/v1-29.asp

A new lovers arrival
23-01-2011, 12:08 AM
Here's G.M. Gilbert's assessment of Rudolf Hess.

I dont see what connection you are making to my statement. Bit a comment would be nice.

Munnkeyman
23-01-2011, 12:30 AM
I dont see what connection you are making to my statement. Bit a comment would be nice.

Rudolf Hess was a bit of a chancer. Forgetting that he was in the Nazi party and all that:rolleyes:. I'd find it hard to have any sympathy for him myself.
Hysterical amnesia, and self induced at that.
I'd like to know what he brought with him when he flew to the U.K., especially seeing as Winston Churchill had some sympathy for him.
(I suppose we'll find out in five years.)

I wonder how accurate those I.Q. test are and how relevant they are to todays tests?

A new lovers arrival
23-01-2011, 12:50 AM
Rudolf Hess was a bit of a chancer. Forgetting that he was in the Nazi party and all that:rolleyes:. I'd find it hard to have any sympathy for him myself.
Hysterical amnesia, and self induced at that.
I'd like to know what he brought with him when he flew to the U.K., especially seeing as Winston Churchill had some sympathy for him.
(I suppose we'll find out in five years.)

I wonder how accurate those I.Q. test are and how relevant they are to todays tests?

My point is that he suffered a lot more then the other prisoners in Spandau, according to what I read in that book.

He may also have had an undiagnosed ulcer condition while in prison, today ulcers can be easily treated by antibiotics. He used to cry out at night with the pain. He was ostracised by his other fellow prisoners also, as Speer was as well to an extent.

The IQ tests of course cannot factor in the states of mind of the prisoners at the time. But they would be culturally normed to some extent (an objection which many people have of comparing different countries IQs in tests today) If Hess was genuinely ill mentally and physically his IQ would have been underestimated by these tests too I reason.

Hopefully more info will come out in the future, what is coming out in 5 years time?

Munnkeyman
23-01-2011, 01:11 AM
My point is that he suffered a lot more then the other prisoners in Spandau, according to what I read in that book.

He may also have had an undiagnosed ulcer condition while in prison, today ulcers can be easily treated by antibiotics. He used to cry out at night with the pain. He was ostracised by his other fellow prisoners also, as Speer was as well to an extent.

The IQ tests of course cannot factor in the states of mind of the prisoners at the time. But they would be culturally normed to some extent (an objection which many people have of comparing different countries IQs in tests today) If Hess was genuinely ill mentally and physically his IQ would have been underestimated by these tests too I reason.

Hopefully more info will come out in the future, what is coming out in 5 years time?

I was thinking that too. I always thought for example that Albert Speer would have had a higher I.Q. than most in that coterie.

There are documents and files that were kept by the SIS and MI6 pertaining to Hess and his interrogation in storage that are still under the Official Secrets Act and these will be released in 2016.
There has always been a shroud of mystery over the whole flight to Scotland
as to how it was set up and what bargaining chips Hess brought with him.

TotalMayhem
23-01-2011, 01:24 AM
I always thought for example that Albert Speer would have had a higher I.Q. than most in that coterie.

Not really. I think the test is a pretty accurate reflection. Although 106 for Streicher strikes me as too high, this guy was as thick as two planks

Baldur v. Schirach is another interesting name, his grandson Ferdinand made himself a name as trial lawyer and bestseller author (http://cleverbooks.com/ebooks/Fiction/Crime).

A new lovers arrival
23-01-2011, 01:46 AM
128 for speer is quite high. Almost 2 STD above the norm.

His seed are doing well too
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,524911,00.html