Irmgard Furchner, 99, was found guilty in 2022 of being an accessory to killings at Stutthof concentration camp
A German court has rejected an appeal by a 99-year-old woman who was convicted of being an accessory to more than 10,500 murders during her role as a secretary to the SS commander of the Nazis’ Stutthof concentration camp during the second world war.
The federal court of justice upheld the conviction of Irmgard Furchner, who was given a two-year suspended sentence in December 2022 by a state court in Itzehoe, northern Germany.
She was accused of being part of the apparatus that helped the camp near Danzig, now the Polish city of Gdansk, function. She was convicted of being an accessory to murder in 10,505 cases and an accessory to attempted murder in five cases.
I wonder if she loses any sleep about it these days
Honestly? Good
I mean, fuck all nazis, obviously. But a woman who was a secretary in the 1930s/1940s? And she got a two year suspended sentence? This just sorta reeks of performative.
I get it, she was a secretary at a camp. So it’s not like she didn’t know. But either do it for real or don’t because she’s old and gonna die soon. This sort of honorary prison time thing—especially for a woman in that era? It’s just a strange…way of for the cards to fall. I don’t know how to describe it. Nor how to really feel about it. Seems like, for 10,500 murders, it’s light. But for a woman under the Nazi regime? I mean…how much agency did she really have? I dunno. Like I said, just feels weird.
She had certainly enough agency to refuse to work at a concentration camp. It’s not like those were the only jobs available for women at that time.
Also, not prosecuting her would likely be illegal since state prosecutors cannot decide to simply ignore crimes they don’t feel like prosecuting:
§ Section 258a Obstructing prosecution in office
(1) If, in the cases referred to in section 258(1), the offender is appointed as a public official to cooperate in the criminal proceedings or in the proceedings ordering the measure […] the penalty shall be a custodial sentence of six months to five years, or in less serious cases a custodial sentence of up to three years or a monetary penalty.
§ Section 258 Obstruction of justice
(1) Any person who intentionally or knowingly prevents, in whole or in part, another person from being punished or subjected to a measure […] in accordance with the Criminal Code for an unlawful act shall be liable to a custodial sentence not exceeding five years or to a monetary penalty.
Okay. So then prosecute the shit out of her. That’s my point. If she deserves it, don’t throw some sort of honorary sentence at her. She either deserves it because of her part, and you don’t sort of have some vague notion of her being guilty if she weren’t so old, or you don’t prosecute her. See what I’m saying? I’m not saying she’s surely culpable or not, it’s just that this feels so half-assed and performative. Two year suspended sentence? So they’re just gonna let this person guilty of being an accessory to 10,500 murders off on a light sentence. Get ere I’m coming from? I see the argument going both ways. This just felt like they couldn’t decide which way to take and they’re going for appearances and that’s all.
Throwing the book at her would not make it past appeals because it would be excessive punishment and violate numerous laws about sentencing length.
Here is how the constitutional court described what factors into the severity of a punishment (1977):
Compensation for guilt, prevention, resocialization of the offender, atonement and retribution for wrongs committed are described as aspects of an appropriate penal sanction.
But there is no compensation, no prevention and no resocialization which could increase the severity of the punishment. Will she ever be at risk of assisting in the murder of 10,000 people again? Absolutely not.
By the way, 2 years of probation is the longest probation possible by law. Any longer and she would have to go to prison - which would be thrown out in appeals.
Just think about the slaughter going on today at Gaza and the myriad of willing participants. Even if it’s mínimal i would hope these people would be held accountable to some degree, even if it is performative its an indicator that the current culture and government recognizes the crime their previous generation committed
Let me blow your mind: It is performative as well as a real trial.
I mean…how much agency did she really have? Most likely none.
What I find odd is why wait so long? She is 99. Is this justice for anyone at this point? In the news, several people in their 90s were charged with crimes during WW2. It just seems oddly late, as you said, performative.
What I find odd is why wait so long?
It all takes a while.
Short version: a couple decades ago they decided that it’s too hard to impossible to find solid evidence against “small cogs” in the system. But that changed a couple years ago and now they are digging up cases where they can solidly proof that they were (in)directly involved in murdering the people.
And murder doesn’t have statute of limitation. same with assistance to murder.
The case against her was already started in 2022 and she was found guilty. But they appealed. This appeal was now rejected by the courts.
And as she’s quite old, it doesn’t make much sense to stick her in jail. Also, as she was only 18-19 when it happened, they ruled it accordingly under milder youth-law.
The main reason is: it’s bad if the state doesn’t follow through with murder cases. Even if it’s 80 years later
show trial. If the punishment for being an accessory to over 10.000 murders is two suspended years, could’ve just not had a trial at all. Would’ve saved some resources.
It would show the judicial system in a bad light if it would let slide a proofable case of (assistance to) murder. Even if it’s 80 years later.
Show trial? Kind of. But also a trial on principle. Murder doesn’t have a statute of limitations
Irmgard Furchner, 99, was found guilty
Irmagerd. Ferkher.
The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for The Guardian:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
