1) Why are trials of former Nazi perpetrators still taking place more than 70 years after World War II and the Holocaust? 2. What is the motivation for holding trials so long after the crimes took place? What are the challenges of doing so? 3. Why do some people argue that the trials are still necessary? For whose bene?t are the trials being held? 4. How do the twenty-?rst-century trials of former Nazis add to your thinking about the purpose of trials? What do they show you about the complexity of holding individuals accountable for genocide and mass Violence? 5. A statute of limitation is a law that restricts the time that a person can be tried for a crime. Its purpose is to ensure that convictions are based upon evidence (physical or eyewitness) that has not deteriorated with time. Does deciding not to prosecute Nazi war criminals in the 21st Century who are now in the 905, constitute a statute of limitation on murder? 6. Olga; W the "Accountant of Auschwitz," is quoted at the end of the film as saying: "For me, there is no question that i am moraiiy guilty. i ask for your forgiveness. Whether i am criminally responsible, you must decide" What is your opinion of the Oskar Groening case? Was justice served through the verdict and sentence? Explain your answer.

pur-new-sol

Related Questions