Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Loose Change Forum > Latest News Section > Reichstag Fire Culprit's Conviction Overturned


Posted by: Lin Kuei Jan 12 2008, 11:43 AM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=507671&in_page_id=1811
German prosecutors said they have formally overturned the conviction of a Dutch communist who was executed after the Nazis accused him of torching the Reichstag parliament building in 1933.

Marinus van der Lubbe, a bricklayer, was convicted of arson and high treason in December 1933 and executed on Jan. 10, 1934.

The federal prosecutor's office said in a statement that it formally "declared that the verdict ... is overturned" on Dec. 6.

It said that it made the move after being alerted to the case by a Berlin lawyer, who it did not identify, and that the conviction was overturned automatically under a 1998 law allowing for the rehabilitation of people convicted of crimes under the Nazis.

Historians still debate whether van der Lubbe, a communist, actually set the Feb. 27, 1933 fire, which came just a month after Adolf Hitler's rise to power and was followed by the suspension of civil liberties.

Some believe the Nazis set it themselves to give Hitler an excuse for his crackdown against what he termed a "communist conspiracy."

Van der Lubbe was the only defendant convicted of arson at the subsequent trial. Four other communists charged with him were acquitted by a Leipzig court.

Federal prosecutors said his conviction was overturned because the death sentence resulted from measures introduced under the Nazis "that were created to implement the National Socialist regime and enabled breaches of basic conceptions of justice."

Posted by: dylan avery Jan 12 2008, 12:35 PM
Damn conspiracy theorist German prosecutors!

Posted by: Arbor Jan 12 2008, 02:09 PM
I have one big problem with this. The Federal Republic of Germany..IS NOT Nazi Germany. I dont think they should have to over-turn rulings of a regime that they did not inherit.

It is a new Germany. Its like the USA overturning convictions of treason handed down by New Amsterdam in 1654.

Posted by: mynameis Jan 12 2008, 02:22 PM
QUOTE (Arbor @ Jan 12 2008, 07:09 PM)
I have one big problem with this. The Federal Republic of Germany..IS NOT Nazi Germany. I dont think they should have to over-turn rulings of a regime that they did not inherit.

It is a new Germany. Its like the USA overturning convictions of treason handed down by New Amsterdam in 1654.

It doesn't matter. Get over yourself.

Posted by: Lin Kuei Jan 12 2008, 02:41 PM
QUOTE (mynameis @ Jan 12 2008, 07:22 PM)
It doesn't matter. Get over yourself.

Owned. laugh.gif

Posted by: Arbor Jan 12 2008, 05:17 PM
you're right. it really doesnt matter.

not owned, by the way.

biggrin.gif

Posted by: IVXX Jan 12 2008, 05:36 PM
QUOTE (Arbor @ Jan 12 2008, 02:09 PM)
I have one big problem with this.  The Federal Republic of Germany..IS NOT Nazi Germany.  I dont think they should have to over-turn rulings of a regime that they did not inherit. 

It is a new Germany.  Its like the USA overturning convictions of treason handed down by New Amsterdam in 1654.

If the Nazis could have held onto Germany, The Federal Republic Of Germany wouldn't be overturning their convictions.

I mean when we toppled Sadam should we not have free those wrongly imprisoned or imprisoned under a rule we didn't agree with?? Should we have not you know, overturned convictions??

One question. By your logic here should we still condemned the Jews or keep that one overturned??

Posted by: Arbor Jan 12 2008, 07:15 PM
in my humble opinion, the nazi regime was simply and utterly criminal. there was no need to overturn the nuremberg laws or any of the other racist laws, as they were criminal and should have been considered null and void.

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)