What Is The Validity Of The Nuremberg Trials

The Nuremberg Trials is the best-known trail regarding World War II and the Holocaust. This trial took place from November 20th, 1945- October 1st, 1946, and was not the only trial for prosecuting those involved with the horrific acts of the Holocaust. This trial tried major war criminals of being responsible for what happened during the Holocaust. The prosecution and defense attorneys followed the American and British law. The legal proceedings followed the 4 Allied countries that made up the judge tribunal: The British Empire, France, America, and the Soviet Union. Each Allied power had 2 judges, 1 main judge, and an alternate. The Defendants were also allowed to choose their own lawyers. 24 individuals and 6 Nazi’s organizations

The Nuremberg Trials were held in Nuremberg, Germany from the 20th of November 1945 to the 1st of October 1946, 24 of the Nazi leaders were tried for their crimes against humanity, however only 22 trials were officially carried out due to Robert Ley committing suicide and Gustav Krupp von Bohlen deemed unfit for trial before their hearing. It was considered to be controversial as all Nazi officials at one time claimed that they were simply following orders from a higher power and that they weren’t to blame for their crimes because they were acting in self defence. Hermann Göring also committed suicide the day before his scheduled execution. Also a few of Hitler’s accomplices committed suicide before they had a chance to be trialled. These adjustments to the expected outcome of the Nuremberg Trials caused controversy amongst everyone who knew of the Nazi’s treatment of others, especially Jews. There was also some bias towards the Nazi party from the people conducting the trial as they were mostly from Allied descent and had personal reasons to persecute Nazis simply because they were Nazis without fairly considering their crimes against humanity.

The tribunal was begun by asking the four defendants whether they were guilty or not, and they replied no. The prosecutor, Colonel Lawson, accused that they were guilty as they were part of NAZI’s

At the time of the Nuremberg trials, “crimes against humanity” were new international crimes. The laws criminalized such acts as murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any

Most people know of Hitler being the leader of the nazis and “leading” the war on Jews, but in documents it states that he justedx signed off on it because it was brought up by one of his second in command and one of his most trusted people, but before he could be put on trial Hitler ended his life in his bunker so that he couldn't be captured. So the Nuremberg trials consisted of Rudolf Hess, Joachim Freiherr, Dr. Wilhelm Frick, Heinrich Himmler and many more these names are just some of the biggest because they were all his most trusted comrades. All together they were charged with the genocide of Jews, gypsies, gays, and many more. They were also charged with crimes against peace by invading other countries and taking total control of them, they were also charged with crimes against humanity because of the gruesome and awful ways they treated people and how they killed people and they were also charged with conspiracy to commit such crimes all of these charges are major charges mainly resulting in the death penalty due to the nature of the crimes the only one that wasn't worth the death penalty was the conspiracy to commit because they had planned on what they were doing and hadn't even started it yet. Making this one of the many ways that helped them figure there death toll for the Jews. All of these men were killed because of their crimes and for the role they had in the mass

According to Justice Lawrence, author, the purpose of the Nuremberg Trials, later known as the Doctor’s Trial, was to “not only the punishment of those who were guilty but the establishment of the supremacy of international law over national law and proof of the actual facts” (Lawrence, p. 153) of the atrocious mass genocide known now as the Holocaust. This means that point of these trials were not only to punish the murderous doctors but also to show the world that international law is the highest form of power. A separate form of trials initially took place in Germany, however, it was a “farce” according to Lawrence. “The majority got off and such sentences as were inflicted were derisory and were soon remitted” (Lawrence, p. Yo27153). Due to the growing tension between the German court of law and other countries the Doctor’s Trial was then moved to Nuremberg, and the evidence was eventually over-turned to the United States who would eventually indict 23 doctors on a number of crimes

Victims searched for someone to be punished. They wanted someone to suffer and take responsibility for all the pain and suffering that they endured. All of the, “precedents set in trials against Holocaust perpetrators have guided a new understanding of justice as a tool for seeking accountability, providing affirmation to victims, warning perpetrators, and reflecting society’s highest ideals about truth and justice” (2011 Days of Remembrance). The trials are a crucial stepping stone to the road of justice. They act as a permanent reminder to the world of the mistakes that were made. Germany has paid for its mistakes and has now moved on to become an ally to many nations. This alliance can be taken as a message. The countries can forgive, however, they will never

The War Crimes Trials, also known as the Nuremberg Trials, were a series of two-hundred sixteen court sessions and thirteen trials charging twenty-four main Nazi party officials, highly- ranked military leaders, doctors and lawyers against their involvement with the Holocaust. The trials began on November 20, 1945 at the Nuremberg Palace of Justice in Nuremberg, Germany, due to its significant connection to the Holocaust, and the Nazi Party. The trials were conducted by a U.S., French, British, and Soviet military tribunal, and the trials were authorized by the London Agreement. The charges against those being tried were crimes against peace including planning, starting and waging war; war crimes including violations of laws of war; crimes against humanity

Later, it was proven that the USSR was correct in pushing for a trial to occur. If the United States had continued its argument to not to go through with the trial, it would jeopardize the values that the country was built on. The trials began with a 24,000 word indictment, taking nearly two days to read (Levinson 578). Each of the men was tried on four counts, conspiracy to wage aggressive war, crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity (Levinson 578), by a set of judges and jury that represented each of the Allied countries (fix citation). By having a fair and just trial, it gives the court the power to show that every human, no matter what the crime, has the right to a fair trial and that justice would eventually be served. By exercising the justice system, it also allowed the public to view the magnitude of the crimes committed by the men, and the level of involvement that each of them had in Nazi activity.

After World War II, the victorious associates made a decision to hold a trail for the defeated Nazi officials. These Trails continued from November 20, 1945 till October 1, 1946. In these Tails, defendant use Nuremberg Defense, a legal strategy employed by many of the defendants at the Nuremberg war crimes trials seeking to convict Nazi perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the Second World War, as a defense by claiming they were not guilty of charges against them as they were simply following orders (Rationalwiki). Even though the victors claimed that they would give the defendant a fair trial, on closer examination anyone can see that in reality, these trails were biased and were a victor’s justice (A

In the Nuremberg trials, many verdicts have been made. A few major trails had been trialled, a man named Ernst Kaltenbrunner had been one of the most feared men that has stepped foot in Nazi, Germany. He was known as the Highest ranked leader next to hitler himself. Ernst Kaltenbrunner had been mostly apart of the camps during the holocaust, he had gained a lot of his power year after year due to promotions of working in the Nazi’s Party. In the 4 trials Kaltenbrunner had been in trialled guilty which was then transferred to a death penalty.

The Nuremberg Trials, were set up by the Allies to hold the Nazis accountable for what they had done during World War II. The Nuremberg Trials contained 13 trials, thus many were executed, put to death sentence, received life in prison and, received prison time with varying lengths.

Between 1945 and 1949, about twenty-four major Nazi criminals were tried in Nuremberg, Germany for the four indictments, participation in a common plan for crimes against peace, waging and planning wars of aggression and other crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, though the most important trials were held between November 20th 1945 and October 1st, 1946. Those held after were so-called “lesser war crimes.” Within the trials, there were judges trials, which consisted of sixteen jurists, lawyers, nine Reich Ministry of Justice, prosecutors, judges of special courts, and the People's Court of Germany. These trials lasted from March 5th to December 4th, 1947. Throughout this time ten were found guilty, four were sentenced to life in prison, and four were acquitted of all charges. Throughout all of the judges trials, most of the prisoners were released in the early 1950s for illness, or on retirement pensions.

This paper seeks to canvass the legacy of the Nuremberg Trial; the legal justifications and procedural innovations that were once controversial and which through the turn of the century have now come to be regarded as a milestone towards the application of principles of international law, establishment of a permanent international criminal court enshrined under the Rome Statute and setting new precedents for the international community. Furthermore, the author seeks to juxtapose the legal and political justifications given for the

The Nuremberg Trials were a critical point in the history of international law because it established the fact that humanity has the need of an international shield to shelter and protect. This event was responsible for contributing in the ongoing process of developing rules that are binding between states and nations also known as international laws. The judgment of the trials may be one of the most important events in the history of international law due to the fact that it assisted in establishing laws against war crimes. One of the biggest questions raised was whether causing a war was an international crime that would be punishable or not. Many believed there was no