He shot the hero of the Great Escape in cold blood. But was this one Nazi who DIDN'T deserve to hang? | Mail Online
Interesting read, thanks for sharing. If he was indeed hung unjustly it's really unfortunate but nothing can really change that would bring him back, his name would be cleared posthumous of course. It must really be emotional for his daughter if such claims are coming to light now. Even more interesting are the "partisan" references, wasn't their a debate about such things happening in post war Germany on this forum not too long back?
arrr what a sad story ... who forced him to join the gestapo...what is his history in the gestapo..i refer you to the camp commadant and what he would have done.. so in my service if i too had a family and was a decent sort it would be ok for me to administer the coup de grace to a prisoner..no and i wouldnt. he had the choice the raf prisoner had none..my sympathies go to the flyers family . Soppy story but ill save my tears and have a pint to the murdered blue job and his family at the coming rememberance day.
sound as harsh as you like. the writer states he administered the coup de grace other reports state he and commander left car together leaving driver..discussed something..tild the 2 prisoners to stretch their legs AND both drew pistols and murdered the prisoners of war .
RIP per ardua ad astra...someof us can tell the difference between gallant men and murdering criminals.....Squadron Leader Roger Bushell
I have little sympathy for the man. I agree with Urqh. What were his motives in joining the Gestapo? Had he never seen other atrocities? Come on. This snippet I find quite bothersome Is the writer meaning to imply that his crime lessened with the passage of time? We still pursue war criminals today, and some will be sentenced (I hope) to significant punishment. Sympathy is reserved for Bushell and the other victims of this atrocity.
I never really thought of it like that, good point, I'll have to look into this guy a bit more. A few things in your response: Had he disobeyed an order from Hitler no less he (if he lived) and his family would probably have been sent to a concentration camp, prison, etc as stated in the article, disobeying orders then had more repercussions than it does now. The article states the RAF prisoner was given a choice, he has previously escaped 3 times and was given a warning from the Gestapo saying if he would try to escape again they would kill him. Keep in mind, I'm not justifying or criminalizing anyone, simply pointing out claims made by the author. That being said these are pretty big claims in hindsight, the documentary that attempts to explore this issue airs on November 2nd, it will be interesting to see what evidence the author was able to gather. I just hope it isn't like those History channel documentaries where for 59 minutes they make you believe their alternative theory only you let you know in the last minute that it's completely false!
I deliberately left my opinion out so as to avoid colouring the report, but yes, it's a case of 'how sad, too bad' for me too. He knew what he was doing. There's an article in this issue of ATB concering a German soldier who shot at least two para prisoners on D-Day. He tried to claim he was only following orders at his trial in 1947, and was flatly contradicted by his former CO. He was hanged. But as far as I know, no German/Italian PoWs were shot trying to escape from camps in the UK. One German was shot by a guard during a riot at a camp in the north of England, and the man was suspended pending an enquiry, and then posted to another camp.
To a certain extent yes, Axis POW's did die for various reasons in Allied camps just as the opposite is true. Escaping POW's fell under a different category and were punishable by local law, at least here in Canada. One example was a in a camp called Seebe if I recall, a escaping German POW who was caught, put on trial, etc could face real imprisonment (I assume their rights as a POW would also be stripped at that point). Regarding the specific example you brought out, I'm not saying it's the right thing or even justified. Urqh had asked if they gave the prisoner a choice, I just brought up that according to the findings they apparently did.
that is not what urqh asked at all. the geneva convention on pows covered this totally . the gestapo murdeders knew full well that you are not allowed kill pows no matter how many escape attempts they make. Threatening to do so is in itself an infringement. Having a family of your own is no excuse or defence for murder. For goodness sakes we all have families and we all would not do what these murderes did and use it as an excuse.Gestapo was A lifestyle choice. Murder pows..even threatening is not was not allowed under geneva convention. The murderers family circumstances mean nothing. you murder even in war you will be hunted down mercilessly.
I agree, Urqh. The man was a murderer, pure and simple. Did ne murder under orders? Yes. Did he murder with sorrow? Maybe. The point is, he still committed murder. As you said, he chose to be Gestapo. I'm sure he had ample opportunity to witness the kinds of things the Gestapo did, and still stayed in. "Following orders" has been shown not to be a defense. I think he got what he deserved.
My apologizes for the misunderstanding, following orders is iffy territory, did the person have a smile on their face when they followed? Did they hesitate? Were they remorseful?, etc all these questions playing into it but are not justification. Of course the amount of remorse this will generate for a Gestapo in comparison to say a regular soldier will differ. Of course at this point my thought on the matter is he was guilty because the courts through a trial deemed him to be. I will have to wait until this documentary airs to see if it will change my mind on the matter.
Unfortunately for that stance, Propaganda Minister, Dr. Goebbels, stated in 1944 that any defense argument of that nature (I was following orders) was invalid in the context of war crimes. In an article in the German Press on May 28, 1944, he wrote: "No international law of warfare is in existence which provides that a soldier who has committed a mean crime can escape punishment by pleading as his defense that he followed the commands of his superiors. This holds particularly true if those commands are contrary to all human ethics and opposed to the well established international usage of warfare." Thus he asserted that "following a superior's orders" was NOT a defense for committing a "war crime, nor a crime during wartime" (in this instance concerning downed allied bomber crews who had bombed German cities). And that any citizens who captured them were allowed by Nazi law to kill any they captured, and would NOT be punished for taking out their hatred on the "enemy" for his "war crimes". Some of the allied aircrew were actually lynched by the "citizens courts". That also made "I was a soldier and only following orders" a bit of a hollow claim at the Nuremberg trails as well.
