Irmgard Furchner, 99, was found guilty in 2022 of being an accessory to killings at Stutthof concentration camp

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.

  • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    16·
    3 months ago

    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.

    • TheFriarEnglish
      2·
      3 months ago

      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.

      • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
        5·
        3 months ago

        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.