De åtalade nazisternas advokater

Hade advokaterna också dödspatruller efter sig? Var advokaterna också torterade?

[…]all legislatures have approved court rules that allow a court to recognize facts that constitute common knowledge without requiring proof from the parties.

A doctrine of evidence applied by a court that allows the court to recognize and accept the existence of a particular fact commonly known by persons of average intelligence without establishing its existence by admitting evidence in a civil or criminal action.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedicti...udicial+Notice

Shoah-myten behandlas vid dessa skåderättegångar som ett av alla vedertaget uppenbart faktum i stil med att vatten fryser vid 0 grader Celsius. Vid vanliga rättegångar får försvaret inte ifrågasätta naturlagar och liknande, eftersom det skulle kunna förhala processen ad infinitum. Detta kallas "judicial notice" på engelska och "Offenkundigkeit" i de tyskspråkiga länderna. I Tyskland och Österrike m.fl. länder jämställs Förintelsen (till skillnad från alla andra historiska händelser) med dylika ovedersägliga fakta och behandlas som något absolut vilket inte får ifrågasättas eller dissekeras av den åtalade eller hans försvarsadvokater. Om försvaret trots allt försöker dryfta någon aspekt av "Förintelsen" i syfte att fastställa att den åklagade av rimliga skäl tvivlar på Förintelsen eller att hans argument är sakliga och korrekta, riskerar även de att anklagas för "förnekande". I Tyskland kan även expertvittnen åtalas för "förintelseförnekande" om de lägger fram en expertrapport som inte stämmer överens med åklagarsidans syn på de historiska skeendena.

Sanningen är inget försvar i dessa rättegångar och därför är de just skåderättegångar och inget annat.

Mer om rättsläget i Tyskland kan läsas bl.a. här:
http://www.vho.org/tr/2003/2/Rudolf203-219.html

https://www.flashback.org/showpost....6&postcount=96

Since 1989 I have been defending persons accused of holocaust denial in Germany and Austria. Along with Colonel Hajo Herman, I defended General Remer. In both Germany and Austria, I have defended Gerd Honsick. I am now defending David Irving in Austria and Ernst Zündel in Germany. All the courts have rejected all motions to submit proofs. There was acquittal only in Austria where eight jurors decided the question of guilt or innocence. There are no acquittals in these cases when the judge decides the question of guilt or innocence.
The courts reject all motions to submit evidence because of judicial notice about the homicidal gas chamber. [“Judicial notice” is used to translate the German word “Offenkundigkeit,” which means “obviousness.” If something is alleged to be “obvious,” then it cannot be questioned or even discussed in the court.] It is completely wrong to use judicial notice. A fact based on judicial notice is not a real fact. Rather it is only an opinion about a fact. This opinion can be correct but can also be false.
The ugly reality is that the courts do not demand any factual proofs. And Article 21 of the London Statue of August 8, 1945 forced the courts not to demand any factual proof. That dominates and controls all holocaust trials right up to today. There is a very long list of people who have suffered and still suffer a serious loss of freedom because they questioned the holocaust. David Irving is in Austrian prison and Ernest Zundel in German prison. Forty-two friends of Gerd Honsik spent a total of 114 years in prison because they peacefully express opinions that did not advocate violence. In Germany every year c. 10,000 people are prosecuted and persecuted for holocaust denial.
http://www.holocaust.nu/printnow.aspx?aid=281

Sylvia Stolz is a German lawyer who defended Ernst Zündel at his trial for denying the Holocaust in February 2007. During that trial she called the Holocaust “the biggest lie in world history.” (quote from a third-party translation) Zundel was convicted and is serving five years in prison. Stolz was in turn tried for the same offense and is currently serving a 3 1/2 year prison term. She also was banned from the practice of law for five years. [1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvia_Stolz
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id...onid=351020604

The Munich District Court has sentenced former Nationalist Attorney Horst Mahler to six years in prison.The 72-year-old was charged with a variety of opinion crimes.Two weeks ago he was sentenced to ten months imprisonment for similar crimes of conscience by a court in Landshut.A third sentence is still to be pronounced by Potsdam Court.In that trial, likewise on charges of uttering criminal opinions, the prosecutor has asked for four years and nine months.Mahler’s combined sentences come to 12 years and 5 months.
http://www.radicalpress.com/?cat=471

»Häxhammaren» tillåter en anklagad att hafva sakförare, men tillägger: »Försvarar defensorn sin för kätteri misstänkte klient öfver höfvan, så är det rätt och
billigt, att han betraktas såsom vida brottsligare än häxmästaren eller häxan själf, nämligen såsom en häx- och kättarepatron, som är farligare än en häxmästare.
Misstanken emot honom bör stiga, i samma mån som han beter sig ifrigt i försvaret.»
http://runeberg.org/display.pl?mode=...magi&page=0122

De här advokaterna har försvarat nazisterna enligt god sed, [...]

I'd like to describe my experiences and observations since the publication of my first-person report about Auschwitz. When I wrote my report, I was criticized on the grounds that, although I was in the camp and saw nothing of mass gassings, that fact did not necessarily mean that there were none. All the same, I can say with certainty that there were no mass gassings at Auschwitz. I don't write under a pen name. I even gave my address and telephone number. I have received thousands of letters and calls. Many of those who contacted me can confirm my statements, but are afraid to do so publicly. Some of those are SS men who were brutally mistreated and even tortured in Allied captivity.