To be precise, the facility was manned on a rotating basis by the four occupying powers. The Americans, British, French and Soviets took turns operating Spandau from 1946 until 1987. Rotation included both guards and management-everyone was swapped out. Without looking it up, I think the rotation was on a monthly basis. Kind of expensive in terms of manpower. 60 prison staff on duty on-site at any one moment, a total of 240 needed over the course of a year, just to guard one guy. A bit excessive, in my opinion.
Was Albert Speer’s sentence at Nuremberg justified?
- Thread starter Captain Homicide
- Start date
My point still stands. Trial investigators and historians never found a single instance where a German was threatened with career or physical harm for refusing to obey an order to commit atrocities. There were more than enough volunteers and true believers to carry out the Holocaust and other atrocities that they never had to threaten people on the spot. If someone didn’t want to participate the person would either be transferred by their superiors or they would be given an ancillary task like guard duty for the time being. They understood it was grisly work that not everyone could carry out. Not every member of the Einsatzgruppen and camp staff spent their time hurting and killing people face to face. Logistical duties still needed to be carried out even if it wasn’t something as simple as typing up reports on how many people were killed the week before.
They were evil fanatics in every sense of the word and they would have been executed regardless because the evidence was so powerful but considering Himmler, Bormann and Goebbels were actually intelligent and well spoken individuals especially in regards to their beliefs I would really like to have seen what they would have said if tried and questioned by prosecutors. I imagine Goebbels would have put on quite the performance throughout. The same goes for Hitler if he lived assuming he was healthy enough to take the stand. Even Goering did a fine job on the stand and managed to embarrass the prosecution on occasion.
Last edited:
12 death sentences were carried out in total for war criminals executed at the *other* Nuremberg trials, but many more were condemned by American military courts sitting at Dachau or elsewhere. The US executed at least 277 Germans or other Axis war criminals in Europe between 1945-1951. By "other Axis war criminals", I mean mostly Austrians, and I think, a few Slavs who cooperated with the Nazis. No Italians were executed by the US for war crimes.
Not totally. Leading war criminals/ top power figure types are often very charismatic when they want to be. So their is a real risk given time that the prisoners will charm the guards and staff.
True. But to my understanding Himmler didn't possess the charm of others. To all but the most devoted rank and file he was seen as kind of a creep.
Bormann didn't exactly have a way with people, either... my impression of Bormann is that he generally got his way through bullying, coercion and leverage... and by controlling most direct access to Der Fuehrer... how he would've done on the stand at Nuremberg, I don't know...
It's how they got their hands on power in the first place.
It's hard for us to believe, but Hitler was extremely charismatic and charming. We see him as creepy because he's Hitler. (And possibly because he resembles the old Addams Family episodes from the 1960s.)
The interesting thing about Himmler on trial is how him actually being on hand to defend himself would throw a wrench in everyone else's efforts to scapegoat him for their own actions. It could be a much shorter trial.
If Himmler had made the stand I'd say disregarding everything else the Tribunal would quickly sentence him to hang for the creepiness alone.
It's part of the reason why the Party needed Goering. Before he turned into a bloated drug addicted wreck he was the only one who could hob knob with German high society and the aristocracy at dinner parties and not creep them out or act like a upjumped peasant.
rotation was monthly. When the allies agreed on that, they thought they would have dozens, if not hundreds of prisoners.
Not the 7 they had at first, and only Hess for the last 20 years. But during the cold war, it was hard to change things.
The prison was torn down and partly turned into a parking lot and the rest of the area used for a furniture store. Might be IKEA, but I am not sure.
Only some trees, planted by war criminal prisoners in the 1950s remain.
Geon
Donor
Understand please, I support the death penalty and I don't want this thread to degenerate into a pro/con debate on the subject. However, 277 were executed but thousands of German soldiers and SS troops who participated in these atrocities escaped judgement for years. I agree with @Alparen that there is always a danger of the innocent perishing. That is one reason I believe the penalty must be judiciously used at best. But when you have someone like Himmler or Bormann or Speer whose guilt is proved beyond any conceivable doubt I feel there needs to be some justice that speaks to the enormity of their crime. Should all those involved in the Showa be held accountable? If we were to do that we would have to execute a sizable portion of the German population. As pointed out in the book Hitler's Willing Executioners by Daniel Goldhagen there were very few "innocents" in Germany. A good portion of the population either participated directly or indirectly in the Holocaust. Example: the train conductors, the bureaucrats who aided in the paperwork, I could go on.
My point is, most of the German population was guilty of this crime to one extent or another. (Note I say most not all) All of them should not stand trial by any means. But the leadership that made the decisions that led to this should be held to strict account for what they did.
I can imagine Robert Jackson starting his examination of Himmler by saying “I would like to make note of the fact that the defendant looks extremely creepy. He’s not even wearing his SS uniform and he still looks creepy as hell. Is this evidence of his guilt? No, but it’s certainly something to consider.”
True. Once Reinhard Heydrich showed someone a photo of Himmler and said “The top half is the teacher but the lower half is the sadist." My point was even if Himmler’s entire defense was “I did what I believed to be right and was following Hitler’s orders” he would be able to articulate himself well and wouldn’t collapse on the stand like some other people. It would have been quite interesting to see.
Eh, I really have no interest in debating the morality-or potential lack thereof-of the death penalty. I was just contributing a specific data point to address a comment that had been made.
Hess wasn't going to be charming anyone. He could absolutely have been safely released, but by that point Spandau's value was in serving as an espionage clearing house.
The predominant theory about why the Soviets refused to release Hess even into the 80's was that they were using the prison, which was in the middle of Western Berlin, as a hub of their spy network in the city.
Agreed.
I have often thought that were I to lose my memory and forget who Hitler was, then, assuming he was in civvies rather than Nazi uniform, I could pass him in the street without giving him a second glance.
To my eyes at least, Goebbels, Himmler and Hess *do* look distinctly creepy, but Hitler doesn't. Nor does Goering particularly.
In my opinion also Von Papen and others of his ilk should have been shot on general principle for their spectacular lack of judgement.