Talk:Karl Silberbauer
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Karl Silberbauer is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive. | |||
|
||||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. | ||||||||||||||||||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. | ||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Fascism, an attempt to better organize and unify articles relating to the fascist ideology, its impact on history and present-day organizations closely linked to both of these (ideology and history). See project page, and discussion.
This article may be listed on an index of fascist movements or people. Such listing may be controversial; feel free to contribute to discussions there. The presence of this Talk page-only template only implies that the subject is of interest to the associated WikiProject. |
[edit] old comments
He was acting under orders?!?! Why did he get off? PatGallacher 00:06, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
He was investigated for any evidence of misdemeanor and nothing was found. Otto Frank felt that although Silberbauer arrested him, his family and friends, he behaved decently and that the blame should be with whoever betrayed them, since the arresting officers were obliged to arrest them.Yallery Brown 00:59, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
That may be Frank's personal view, but I was not previously aware that "acting under orders" was a valid defence under Austrian law (or German or Dutch law). Is it then? PatGallacher 12:19, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
It was Otto Frank's personal view, but as he was the only living witness to the arrest, his police statement exonerating Silberbauer was absolutely essential for a possible conviction. What you have to understand is that the Silberbauer investigation happened as a result of the search for the betrayer of the Frank family, who if he or she had been found would have faced criminal charges. Silberbauer himself, as strange as it may seem, did not actually commit a crime by arresting the family, so he got off on a technicality. More on this can be found in Carol Ann Lee's biography 'The Hidden Life of Otto Frank' and in the introduction to the Revised Critical Edition of the Diary. Yallery Brown 22:02, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
PatGallacher, when an officer is sent to arrest someone he is not expected to pass judgement each time on the laws under which the arrest warrant was issued, the evidence to support it, or the government he serves. It just doesn't work that way. You might make a case that anyone who puts themself in a position of being issued such orders by working for the agency that issues them could be considered guilty by default, but the decision was made shortly after the war, by people who were much closer to the events than we are, that this was not the correct way to proceed. I think it is reasonable defer to their judgement. --66.92.68.103 00:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC) Worldwalker, too lazy to log in
- Using that rationale, everyone other than Hitler himself should be declared not guilty. 70.186.172.75 (talk) 19:18, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
