We want the world to be a better place. But we can't do it alone. It doesn't work that way. We need you. If you can help today—because every gift of every size matters—please do. Home Subscribe Donate. About Us Key Staff Testimonials. Search form Search. Published on.
Thursday, September 21, In Justice Today. Cassandra Stubbs. Jones County Courthouse Wikimedia Commons. Black folks and 2.
For example, some of them who hang around our little store act up and carry on. After studying the Bible, I have wondered if black people even have souls. Integration started in Genesis. To request permission for republishing or redistributing of CNS content, please contact permissions at cns catholicnews. By Catholic News Service. A three-judge panel from the Appeals Division of the Supreme Court of Victoria said it would announce its judgment at a later date, giving no indication of when that would be.
Legal counsel for Cardinal Pell, who will celebrate his 78th birthday June 8 and is a former key adviser to Pope Francis, argued before the judges that: The conviction was "unreasonable" given the evidence presented at trial; the defense should have been able to show an animated video demonstrating how the cardinal could not have been where the victim said he was; and that the cardinal should have been allowed to stand before the jury and enter his plea of not guilty. Cardinal Pell attended the two-day hearing June wearing his clerical collar, which he had not worn at his sentencing hearing in March.
Then, he received a six-and-a-half-year sentence after being found guilty in a December trial of sexually assaulting two choirboys at St. Patrick's Cathedral in The cardinal took notes during the livestreamed hearing and looked relaxed, reporters in the courtroom noted. Cameras were trained only on the bench during the hearing.
Cardinal Pell was accompanied in the courtroom by his close friend, Chris Meaney, business manager for the Archdiocese of Sydney, his niece and several others. On the first day of the hearing, Pell's attorney, Bret Walker, argued that there were 13 reasons why it was improbable that Cardinal Pell, then archbishop of Melbourne, had assaulted the boys after presiding over Sunday Mass in the cathedral; a few weeks later he assaulted one of the boys a second time, according to court testimony.
Under any civilized judicial system he could have been impeached and removed from office or convicted of malfeasance in office on account of the scheming malevolence with which he administered injustice. Upon the evidence in this case it is the judgment of this Tribunal that the defendant Rothaug is guilty under Count three of the indictment.
In his case we find no mitigating circumstances; no extenuation. The defendant Schlegelberger was born on 23 October in Koenigsberg. He received the degree of Doctor of Law at the University of Leipzig in and passed the higher State law examination in He is the author of several law books. His first employment was as an assistant judge at the Local Court in Koenigsberg. In he became judge at the District Court at Lyck. In he was appointed judge of the Local Court in Berlin and in the fall of the same year was appointed as an assistant judge of the Berlin Court of Appeals.
He was then appointed Councillor of the Berlin Court of Appeals in , where he worked until On 1 October he was appointed Privy Government Councillor and department chief. Schlegelberger testified that he made no use of the Party, that he never attended a Party meeting, that none of his family belonged to the Party, and that Party attitudes often rendered his position difficult. However, upon his retirement as Acting Minister of Justice on 20 August , Schlegelberger received a letter of appreciation from Hitler together with a gift of ,00 RM.
Later, in , Hitler gave Schlegelberger the special privilege to use the , RM to purchase a farm, which under the rule then prevailing could have been purchased only be an expert agriculturist. Schlegelberger states that the , RM were on deposit in a Berlin German bank to his account when the collapse came. Thus it is shown that Hitler and Schlegelberger were not too objectionable to each other.
These transactions also show that Hitler was at least attempting to reward Schlegelberger for good and fathful service rendered, in the performance of some of which Schlegelberger committed both war crimes and crimes against humanity as charged in the indiectment. In this speech Schlegelberger declared:. Schlegelberger's attitude toward atrocities committed by the police must be inferred from his conduct. A milking hand, Bloodling, was sentenced to death in October , and during the trial he insisted his purported confession had been obtained as a result of beatings imposed upon him by the police officer Klinzmann.
A courageous judge tried Klinzmann and convicted him of brutality and sentenced him to a few months imprisonment. Himmler protested against the sentence of Klinzmann and stated that he was going "to take the action of the Hauptwachtmeister of the police Klinzmann as an occasion to express gratitude for hiss farsighted conduct which was only beneficial to the community.
Schlegelberger resigned. The damage was done. If the judiciary could slay their thousands, why couldn't the police slay their tens of thousands? The consequences which Schlegelberger feared were realized.
The police, aided by Thierack prevailed. Schlegelbergcr had failed. His hesitant injustices no longer satisfied the urgent demands of the hour. He retired under fire.
In spite of all that he had done he still bore an unmerited reputation as the last of the German jurists and so Hitler gave him his blessing and , RM as a parting gift. We are under no misapprehension. Schlegelberger is a tragic character He loved the life of intellect, the work of the scholar. We believe that he loathed the evil that he did, but he sold that intellect and that scholarship to Hitler for a mass of political pottage and for the vain hope of personal security. He is guiltv under Counts two and three of the indictment. Redirecting to: www.
Close this pop-up window to remain on this page. A Commentary on the Justice Case by Doug Linder c No one contends, of course, that German judges and prosecutors destroyed as many lives as did the SS, Gestapo, or other agencies of the Nazi machine. The Ex Post Facto Principle The defendants claim protection under the principle nullum crimen sine lege , though they withheld from others the benefit of that rule during the Hitler regime.
Anybody who said something different expresses a wish that does not describe the actual legal facts. Under the Nazi system, and even prior thereto, German judges were also bound to apply German law even when in violation of the principles of international law, As stated by Professor Jahrreiss:. This, however, is not to deny the superior authority of international law. Again we quote a statement of extraordinary candor by Professor Jahrreiss:.
He was bound by international law. Therefore, he could commit acts violating international law. Therefore, he could issue orders violating international law to the Germans. On 26 April Hitler addressed the Reichstag in part as follows:. On the same day the Greater German Reichstag resolved in part as follows:.
Therefore—without being bound by existing legal regulations—in his capacity as leader of the nation, Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, governmental chief and supreme executive chief, as supreme justice, and leader of the Party—the Fuehrer must be in a position to force with all means at his disposal every German, if necessary, whether he be common soldier or officer, low or high official or judge, leading or subordinate official of the Party, worker or employee, to fulfill his duties.
In case of violation of these duties, the Fuehrer is entitled after conscientious examination, regardless of so-called well-deserved rights, to mete out due punishment, and to remove the offender from his post, rank and position, without introducing prescribed procedures. The assumption by Hitler of supreme governmental power in all departments did not represent a new development based on the emergency of war.
The conception of Hitler as the Supreme Judge was supported by the defendant Rothenberger. In the same document the defendant Rothenberger expounded the National Socialist theory of judicial independence. He said:.
Rebollar-Vergara Defendant gets into an argument with a guy and his buddy ups and shoots him, then sloppy questioning happens in the grand jury room. Thou shalt prepare a table before me, agaynst them that trouble me: thou hast annointed my head w t oyle, and my cup shal be ful. In this revision a larger number of scholars were engaged than upon any former, and the arrangements were such as secured that upon no part of the Bible should the labour of fewer than seven persons be expended. Defendant Confesses Once at the hospital defendant apologized to the Sergeant for not telling him the truth earlier and stated he defendant had shot himself. The Shooter He testified that there was nothing blocking his view and he described defendant as an African-American male, with long dreads half pinned back, who was wearing black jogging pants, and a gray hoodie bearing black writing and the hood was hanging down. To such desire emphatic expression has been given in various ways through full two generations, with an ever increasing intensity, and by representative men amongst all Christian communities.
He is to convey to the German judge the will of the Fuehrer by authentic explanation of the laws and regulations. At the same time he must upon the request of the judge give binding information in current trials concerning fundamental political, economic, or legal problems which cannot be surveyed by the individual judge.
Thus it becomes clear that the Nazi theory of the judicial independence was based upon the supreme independence of the Fuehrer, which was to be channelized through the proposed liaison officer from Fuehrer to judge. On 13 November , Goering, in an address before the Academy for German Law, expressed similar sentiments concerning the position of Hitler. To the same effect we quote Reich Minister of Justice Dr. Thierack, who, on 5 January , said:. On17 February the defendant Under-Secretary Dr.