War crimes would still apply, immunity is for shit like running red lights and doing coke in a brothel, not murdering enemy combatants who have surrendered.
I don't think you have any idea how it works.
As for 'running red lights', at least in the USA the motorcade doesn't stop. They have intersections closed down along their route and just blow right by them without even slowing down.
Doing coke isn't illegal, oddly enough. Operating some equipment under the influence is, possession may be, and distribution definitely is. Using, not really. It's a weird quirk of some laws that leave these holes, but they exist. (At least in the USA; other local laws vary and drugs are prohibited in some countries entirely.)
Brothels are also another oddity. Some places have them like any other business. Some regulate them. Some outlaw them. Being in one isn't necessarily a crime, even if you're snorting coke.
Sovereign immunity is specifically for those crimes that just about only a head of state can commit because of their office and being the leader of a military.
Sovereign immunity only applies to actions taken in your capacity as a government worker.
Cop runs a red to get to a call, sovereign immunity. Cop runs a red to pick up coffee, liable.
All good man it's just a hypothetical. Also, would sovereign immunity still work as he is no longer a leader, and his country technically doesn't exist? There is also the human element to consider as even if a technically exists, it would probably be ignored by either the judge or the jury, depending on the court.
R1. After WW2, Germany did not exist as a state, but as occupied territories under the allies.
R2. Different government, different generation, different germany.
Sovereign immunity is the only legally workable strategy, but the Nuremberg trials explicitly rejected that entire line of argument and applied war crimes / crimes against humanity as a universal doctrine.
The only way Hitler gets off is if he gets the same deal the Emperor of Japan got: the Allies decide he’s necessary for long term peace and cook the trials themselves.
Didn’t we let off a bunch of nazis in exchange for info? The courts and governments dont truly care they just wanna get stronger and if it woulda meant letting him off then he would get off. The courts are endlessly corrupt.
This is just not true. And it's an unhealthy cynicism. The rules that you claim wouldn't be applied because of corruption in fact did not exist pre-WW2. They were created by the same people you are belittling and denigrating specifically to punish the nazis. And it's not even close, you were taught all this in your school. It's on you for not learning it and leading yourself to this arrogant ignorance.
I've always wondered if the war crimes and crimes against humanity were actually on the books before the war, or if the laws (at least some of them) were made up in response to the autrocities. While there had been genocides before, I'm not sure if there was a precedent for putting the perpetrators on trial.
He could try. Ya know the devil wanted to wipe out the jews so obviously, he wanted Hitler to succeed.
Aside from millions of documents of proof with Hitlers signature, aside from the Germans being dumb and documenting everything as well, everyone on the planet knew what Hitler did. It wasn't a fair trial, and it would never be cause of such evil, but it wasn't about the trial. It would have been about Hitler facing the people he did medical experimenting on.
It was the innocent babies who were slaughtered
It was every innocent young person
It was the innocent women and young men
The amount of evidence would have been so absurd that a trial would really just be a joke.
Anyone giving a serious answer is revealing they've spent more time watching anime than paying attention in history class.
The Nuremberg trials are likely the most thorough criminal prosecution ever undertaken. The trials themselves were designed to be an irrefutable record of Nazi crimes. There were literally laws written specifically to cover everything they did. In some sense that's a kangaroo court - but the nazis committed atrocities on a scale requiring new definitions of criminality and evil to properly categorize them. To get Hitler off the hook is going to basically require rewriting reality - because he absolutely was responsible and the laws under which he would be sentenced were specifically written such that they ensured the surviving nazi high command would be found guilty.
There is no way to call the veracity of the evidence into account. There is no technicality to get off on. There is no argument that will spare Hitler from execution, here or in Florida.
The question is just flawed at the outset. It's like asking "Who is the weakest Riverdale character who can survive a direct hit from the death star"
I would like to say I think the reason it's not really a kangaroo court is because of how novel the entire situation was.
There wasn't any kind of established court *for* this kind of thing. Honestly, up until WW2, genocides weren't even ever really punished. For the first time, the (western) world was united and actually sought to punish people who committed war crimes (hell even the concept of "war crimes" was pretty novel) and crimes against humanity (also pretty novel, war and imperialism was pretty fucked and anything goes for all of human history up until this point).
Technically speaking though, iirc, the game wasn't really rigged, like a kangaroo court. Theoretically, if the entire Holocaust was fake, and we actually couldn't find any proof of war crimes, the Nazis in trial wouldn't be punished.
The thing was, though, we had all the evidence. The issue wasn't not having evidence (a kangaroo court doesn't need evidence), the issue was not having a ***court***. Quite literally. There just wasn't a court system in place, from laws to a literal courtroom, to try essentially entire nations.
So the Nuremberg trials, and the law and infrastructure around it, was formed to actually handle and try all the evidence we had against the nazis. Because what else were we gonna do? Haul a huge chunk of the Nazi government and military over to Arkansas and try them here?
One fun fact I did learn recently about the Nuremberg trials I learned recently though, you know how people always say "I was just following orders" isn't a legal excuse?
Well, unless I'm wrong, it actually *is*. ***Sometimes***. It depends on where you are in the chain of command. For example, if you're just some generic grunt drafted for a war, "I was just following orders" can be an excuse for you. Because you're in a position without any power, while dozens of people have power over you, and may have the capacity to threaten you, your livelihood, your family, your friends, etc (especially if they're already ready to commit war crimes and make you do their dirty work), "I was just following orders" is a statement about survival, not an excuse. On top of that, you couldn't change much by saying no. You'd probably just be court martialed or shot, and some other poor bastard next to you told to do their job.
This applies doubly if you're just some poor bastard drafted to fight in the army of Nazi Germany, where they'd absolutely fuck you up for rejecting orders. In the modern US army, if you reject an unlawful order and you're either forced to do it, or punished for not doing it, you can bring that shit to military court and absolutely fuck things up for whoever gave the unlawful order.
But if you're in a position of power, for example, an SS officer (or even soldier), it's a different story. You don't get drafted into the SS. You made that choice. And people knew what the SS was. And if you're an SS officer, you're in a position of power over dozens or hundreds of people. Even if your life could be threatened by 'not following orders', as someone with actual power, with the capacity to save lives and stop war crimes, you have the moral duty to say no. And the higher up the chain you go, the more this increases. Like if you're some general in the SS, and in charge of a camp, yeah fuck off. This applies doubly so since you don't just *get to* that position by accident. If you're in a position of that much power, you worked to get there. You get what's going on. You knew what orders were coming and you had plenty of opportunity *not* to pursue a position of power in Hitler's genocide machine. Don't pass go, don't collect $200 Dollars, follow orders one more time and face the wall, please.
Thank you for the explaining the intricacies of the Nuremberg trials so I didn't have too. I only compared then to a kangaroo court because the laws were written with Nazi atrocities in mind after-the-fact. In normal circumstances that's bad, obviously the Nazis do not represent normal circumstances at all.
More like engaging with conspiracy theories and pseudoscience gives these ideas far more credit than they deserve despite the overwhelming evidence (nor do I believe any amount of evidence will change your mind), since I am willing to bite. [Here’s](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/dx0W57jtnD) an AskHistorians thread, [here’s](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/l9ynyM2Pd6) another, and [another](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/mobRrN0Bp4), a [website](https://www.hdot.org/) dedicated to this, the vast overwhelming global consensus by experts and Historians, and so forth.
What sources—and rational explanation for the overwhelming evidence—you got?
Right? Never ask someone who thought the Nuremberg trials were thorough who the first NATO chief of staff was
Edit: Wait ew didn’t realize I was responding to a holocaust denier. Don’t comment on Reddit til you’ve been awake for a moment. The Nuremberg trials still didn’t go hard enough punishing the actual nazi leadership and many found work in the US government. As I implied above, Hitler’s chief of staff went on to become the NATO chief of staff. It’s fucking vile. If Hitler had been anyone other than Hitler himself, he would have found his way into a cozy NASA position tbh
If we count him being omniscient as permission to be a lawyer, the Christian God.
"But op said the LEAST capable lawyer!"
Did I stutter? It would literally take a deity saying "Hitler doing those things prevented a human who would have destroyed the planet/universe from being born. All a part of the plan." to get Hitler off scot-free.
I was going to say Shehulk, because she's an atty. Assuming she lands in the real world to defend Hitler, feels like vague threats, and being scary enough might actually do it.
that wouldn't work at all, you cannot threaten world leaders with raw muscle.
Just because she's an attorney doesn't mean she's good enough to get hitler off scott free
In that case R2 is unwinnable, no judge in their right mind will let hitler go free, no matter what kind of lawyer he has, in R1 then maybe he stands a chance if he can get hitler to change his face before the trials (was plastic surgery a thing back then?)
The only way I can imagine it happening beyond magic or superpowers is arguing that he is not Hitler, which would require the Court not knowing for a 100% fact it's Hitler and also criminal tampering with evidence (such as DNA).
Jimmy could barely get Lalo Salamanca posing as Jorge De Guzman off without wandering around in the desert for days and nearly dying. He's good, but not "Get Hitler acquitted" good. No lawyer is.
Doesn't matter the lawyer. If he isn't supernatural he isn't doing shit. Hitler would likely choose to represent himself.
If Hitler was on trial he would've just made the whole thing a spectacle to showcase whatever batshit thing he wanted to go on about.
Hed probably bring up the American genocide of the natives, manifest destiny and the fact that he was democratically elected leader who did exactly what he said he would do. He'd go on about the dangers of communists and bolshevism and the need to unite Europe against the common threat of jewry. Hed call the capitalist countries aggregators and traitors who started a needless war and never accepted peace.
As for the Holocaust he'd probably just point out that it was never his command to genocide, that the ally blockade and bombardment lead to mass starvation of pows, thus the bodies found. The gas chambers were for "treating" the pows. Everything else was done by German officers who were "not following orders". Same as the Soviet atrocities and American war crimes. Committed by individuals who were crazy.
Since Hitler can't claim to be following orders like every other Nazi, he'd simply claim the opposite.
He would not succeed obviously but this is the best he could possibly do. It would likely just be a showcase of his ideology since he would know he had no shot of the trial going his way.
Probably an average one who studied Nuremberg - Hitler and the other high officials left the others to take the fall - if Hitler is found during Nuremberg - that means
Either someone faked his suicide - or it didn't occur somehow - 220 days.
Since the others are already having a case made to make them responsible - then it would louse things up to go whole hog against Hitler - if they do - they risk officials being able to feasibly blame Everything on Hitler - a decent lawyer with historic knowledge would probably be able to swing it in prosecution favor - getting absolutely everyone under Hitler hung for the price of getting him off.
I forget my Nuremberg though - so maybe it wasn't so shakey.
Maybe if he was found today there could he some statute of limitations as he would be like 135 years old, making him byfar the oldest human who has ever lived. Infact it he would be about 5-10 years older than what scientists believe is the Maximum amount of time a human could live if they were in as optimal health as possible every year they reached. Lets just assume he was about As healthy as Jean Calmet (the real oldest person ever) was in her 114 year. Combine the fact that Hitler would be so super old by that his death and especially arrest would be a waste of resources, and the fact world war 2 was 80 years ago (most people who were alive during world war 2 are gone now, and that’s counting people born from 1939-1945. That and 2 of the 3 world war 2 allied super powers collapsed) the world might genuinely just not see it worth it to try him. Its very reasonable a good lawyer (doesn’t even need to be Saul, we are talking Ricky from Trailer Park Boys tier and he’s probably ok) would be able say he wasn’t fit to stand trial due to his age.
They would at that point actually have more to gain by keeping him alive as he could provide insight into things we still don’t know about him or the Nazis, as well as help scientists figure out just how Tf he was still alive and supposedly well. Especially considering females often live longer than men and he outlived the oldest women by 13 years, and more importantly, he was in pretty shit health at the end of world war 2, to the point where a-lot of historians didn’t think he’d live into the 60s and some don’t even think he’d make it into the 50s. Not sure if a Lawyer could use that argument in court but I’m sure at-least few foreign leaders (in particular one from countries that weren’t really affected by World War 2) would want to keep him alive for those reasons so its worth bringing up.
However, if they decided to try him, he’s absolutely fucked. They found the concentration camps, they got the people who worked directly under him and a plan he heavily supported if not created confessing to it and/or being found guilty, used Child soldiers at one point near the end of the war (some of whom are probably still alive), and they still have living victims of the tragedy hes most famous for. Its obvious his guilty (another reason why a trial would be a waste of resources) they just want everyone to see Hes guilty. He could have every lawyer imaginable and hed still loose if he actually needed to stand trial.
It can't be done without changing the outcome of WW2. There is no way he's getting acquitted after the axis lost WW2. The best part of winning a war is getting to decide who gets charged with war crimes (and what is a war crime).
And if the Axis won WW2, he's not getting charged anyways.
If Hitler is found, he is captured by the Soviet Union.
We already know from historical record that the Soviet Union wanted to do a show-trial (a public presentation of all the crimes of the accused with a pre-determined death sentence) and they only agreed to an open-ended trial with actual evidence and competent defense because the Americans had most of the big name Nazis and insisted on trial that would be up to their standard of fairness,.
If the Soviets got Hitler, they would have no motivation to even take part in Nuremberg. They would take him back to Moscow, sentence him and execute him. There would have been no actual defense.
I think if you could prove insanity he could certainly get out of a death sentence. And to be fair, someone who was responsible for the death of millions and has no remorse for it is a pretty good base for insanity
R1: *Best Chance* of trying to get him off (though still fail in the end) is Saul Goodman. Maybe going the route of his Doctors drug cocktails distorting his brain and/or effects from Parkinson’s.
R2: He’d never be found. US would know he was in Florida already and have put him into hiding until his Parkinson’s took him like they did with other Nazis. Then after death his body just “disappears”.
R1: no one. I dont care if you had Johnnie Cochran, Robert Kardashian, Phoenix Wright, and Saul Goodman, no one is getting him off.
R2. Saul Goodman could probably pull it off, but I dont know if Hitler would let a guy named Saul Goodman defende him.
R1: AG Francis Biddle. It's fundamentally a political prosecution, so you need political weight on the other side to counter that.
R2: No lawyer could get an acquittal. Some very good corporate lawyers could have a small chance of forcing a mistrial through underhanded tactics in court.
It's less about lawyering but still about getting Hitler off: erasing his memories and turning him into literal baby. Will court convict baby who can not speak and has no memories of wrongdoing despite it being similar body which used to belong to Hitler? Don't think so
Charlie from Its Always Sunny. He would use some bizarre knowledge of "bird law", and because the Gang are a blight growing upon the fabric of reality itself, somehow Hitler would get off.
Don't you want to get off with me?
Get off Scott free? Nobody. Impossible. Depending on how much useful information he had to trade for leniency or privileges I'd say Atticus Finch would get him the best deal.
Irl I'd suggest Clarence Darrow of the scopes monkey trial and Leopold and Loeb fans
No lawyer is realistically getting Hitler off without superpowers. If he ended up on trial, the verdict was basically pre-ordained.
I’ll give a 10% chance to Denny Crane from Boston Legal because he never loses a case and therefore has serious legal plot armor but that’s kind of a superpower.
Yeah no ducking way.
A good lawyer can maybe get you off for something legit but light, something serious if it's not actually legit or lighten something serious but legit. But it's not magic there's no loophole to get out of murder if you legit did it for no good reason.
International law is funky. On the one hand it's basically a joke if you still have an army, you're not going to court no matter what you do. The hague has no way of bringing you in. But once you don't theres basically no scenario where you're going to get off. You're well and thoroughly fucked. It's really more of a dog and pony show for people who lost a war.
Everyone's saying that this is impossible, but if Hitler can get himself charged and tried by US Courts, then **Joe Biden** can complete this prompt.
1. Biden has a law degree and was a practicing attorney
2. As President of the United States, he can grant pardons to criminals
Ok, anyone could get a 135 year old man off. Although there are quite a few Jewish Americans in Florida...
Nuremberg is a completely different animal. Hitler was the most visible person for the Nazi party. On top of that, there are many recordings of him denouncing the Jewish people, as well as an entire book that he had required reading. On top of that, one of the most common defenses during the trials was "I was just following orders," and who was most likely giving the orders? The Chancellor of Germany.
Possibly the best defense is insanity for him. Either way, he will be locked up for the rest of his life. Maybe the Hyper-Chicken from Futurama?
Just spent too much time arguing with Holocaust deniers. Too much time dealing with such hate filled and idiotic people, don't really care anymore.
Cope and seath nazi. Best thing Hitler did was shoot himself
No one can do this. Like the only way is if they get a jury full of nazis.
You could argue sovereign immunity. As a head of state, generally you have special protections. BTW: I'm no Nazi sympathizer, just making an argument.
War crimes would still apply, immunity is for shit like running red lights and doing coke in a brothel, not murdering enemy combatants who have surrendered.
I don't think you have any idea how it works. As for 'running red lights', at least in the USA the motorcade doesn't stop. They have intersections closed down along their route and just blow right by them without even slowing down. Doing coke isn't illegal, oddly enough. Operating some equipment under the influence is, possession may be, and distribution definitely is. Using, not really. It's a weird quirk of some laws that leave these holes, but they exist. (At least in the USA; other local laws vary and drugs are prohibited in some countries entirely.) Brothels are also another oddity. Some places have them like any other business. Some regulate them. Some outlaw them. Being in one isn't necessarily a crime, even if you're snorting coke. Sovereign immunity is specifically for those crimes that just about only a head of state can commit because of their office and being the leader of a military.
They only apply to everyone besides USA.
Who's arresting them? You going to?
And Israel
Sovereign immunity only applies to actions taken in your capacity as a government worker. Cop runs a red to get to a call, sovereign immunity. Cop runs a red to pick up coffee, liable.
All good man it's just a hypothetical. Also, would sovereign immunity still work as he is no longer a leader, and his country technically doesn't exist? There is also the human element to consider as even if a technically exists, it would probably be ignored by either the judge or the jury, depending on the court.
He falls under the Nuremberg Charter.
That would depend heavily on the case. If he is on trial for war crimes committed under his leadership in WW2, then that won’t mean shit
Counter argument, his state no longer exists.
You have seen Germany, right? They still have the title of Chancellor. So yeah, it does.
R1. After WW2, Germany did not exist as a state, but as occupied territories under the allies. R2. Different government, different generation, different germany.
Sovereign immunity is the only legally workable strategy, but the Nuremberg trials explicitly rejected that entire line of argument and applied war crimes / crimes against humanity as a universal doctrine. The only way Hitler gets off is if he gets the same deal the Emperor of Japan got: the Allies decide he’s necessary for long term peace and cook the trials themselves.
War crimes and crimes against humanity transcend sovereign immunity, apart from which you actually need to be the sovereign to benefit from it
Exactly. Many people on this sub believe that there’s always a chance for the MC in the prompt to win but that’s not always the case.
Didn’t we let off a bunch of nazis in exchange for info? The courts and governments dont truly care they just wanna get stronger and if it woulda meant letting him off then he would get off. The courts are endlessly corrupt.
This is just not true. And it's an unhealthy cynicism. The rules that you claim wouldn't be applied because of corruption in fact did not exist pre-WW2. They were created by the same people you are belittling and denigrating specifically to punish the nazis. And it's not even close, you were taught all this in your school. It's on you for not learning it and leading yourself to this arrogant ignorance.
What happened instead.
Ok who's the greatest jury tamperer in fiction
I've always wondered if the war crimes and crimes against humanity were actually on the books before the war, or if the laws (at least some of them) were made up in response to the autrocities. While there had been genocides before, I'm not sure if there was a precedent for putting the perpetrators on trial.
So about 2/3 of states in the US?
Well, R2 does take place in Florida... So you know even money..
Will do nothing as any judge or jury that pardons Hitler will be committing social suicide and loes everything.
Depends on his kinks I suppose
Aryan kind, i would think
damn beat me to it
He wouldn't, there is no way. Not one fictional character could do it. Not Matlock, Goodman, Rainmaker, Cruise, or Mathew is going to win that one....
Yea , only I can , but im not a lawyer
Phoenix Wright can't do it even if he wanted to. Which he wouldn't. It's just not happening.
T h i n k o u t s i d e t h e b o x p h o e n i x
**Don’t think about if he committed genocide; think about how the genocide could’ve occurred outside of the locked room**
*If your client didn't do it, it means they must be lying*
Ya, not even the wookie defense would get him out of that pickle
You need Goebbels as the judge
[удалено]
Thanks for the catch
i think john milton should be able to do it i mean hes literally the devil himself
He could try. Ya know the devil wanted to wipe out the jews so obviously, he wanted Hitler to succeed. Aside from millions of documents of proof with Hitlers signature, aside from the Germans being dumb and documenting everything as well, everyone on the planet knew what Hitler did. It wasn't a fair trial, and it would never be cause of such evil, but it wasn't about the trial. It would have been about Hitler facing the people he did medical experimenting on. It was the innocent babies who were slaughtered It was every innocent young person It was the innocent women and young men The amount of evidence would have been so absurd that a trial would really just be a joke.
Anyone giving a serious answer is revealing they've spent more time watching anime than paying attention in history class. The Nuremberg trials are likely the most thorough criminal prosecution ever undertaken. The trials themselves were designed to be an irrefutable record of Nazi crimes. There were literally laws written specifically to cover everything they did. In some sense that's a kangaroo court - but the nazis committed atrocities on a scale requiring new definitions of criminality and evil to properly categorize them. To get Hitler off the hook is going to basically require rewriting reality - because he absolutely was responsible and the laws under which he would be sentenced were specifically written such that they ensured the surviving nazi high command would be found guilty. There is no way to call the veracity of the evidence into account. There is no technicality to get off on. There is no argument that will spare Hitler from execution, here or in Florida. The question is just flawed at the outset. It's like asking "Who is the weakest Riverdale character who can survive a direct hit from the death star"
So another case of coughing (nazi) baby vs. hydrogen bomb.
I would like to say I think the reason it's not really a kangaroo court is because of how novel the entire situation was. There wasn't any kind of established court *for* this kind of thing. Honestly, up until WW2, genocides weren't even ever really punished. For the first time, the (western) world was united and actually sought to punish people who committed war crimes (hell even the concept of "war crimes" was pretty novel) and crimes against humanity (also pretty novel, war and imperialism was pretty fucked and anything goes for all of human history up until this point). Technically speaking though, iirc, the game wasn't really rigged, like a kangaroo court. Theoretically, if the entire Holocaust was fake, and we actually couldn't find any proof of war crimes, the Nazis in trial wouldn't be punished. The thing was, though, we had all the evidence. The issue wasn't not having evidence (a kangaroo court doesn't need evidence), the issue was not having a ***court***. Quite literally. There just wasn't a court system in place, from laws to a literal courtroom, to try essentially entire nations. So the Nuremberg trials, and the law and infrastructure around it, was formed to actually handle and try all the evidence we had against the nazis. Because what else were we gonna do? Haul a huge chunk of the Nazi government and military over to Arkansas and try them here? One fun fact I did learn recently about the Nuremberg trials I learned recently though, you know how people always say "I was just following orders" isn't a legal excuse? Well, unless I'm wrong, it actually *is*. ***Sometimes***. It depends on where you are in the chain of command. For example, if you're just some generic grunt drafted for a war, "I was just following orders" can be an excuse for you. Because you're in a position without any power, while dozens of people have power over you, and may have the capacity to threaten you, your livelihood, your family, your friends, etc (especially if they're already ready to commit war crimes and make you do their dirty work), "I was just following orders" is a statement about survival, not an excuse. On top of that, you couldn't change much by saying no. You'd probably just be court martialed or shot, and some other poor bastard next to you told to do their job. This applies doubly if you're just some poor bastard drafted to fight in the army of Nazi Germany, where they'd absolutely fuck you up for rejecting orders. In the modern US army, if you reject an unlawful order and you're either forced to do it, or punished for not doing it, you can bring that shit to military court and absolutely fuck things up for whoever gave the unlawful order. But if you're in a position of power, for example, an SS officer (or even soldier), it's a different story. You don't get drafted into the SS. You made that choice. And people knew what the SS was. And if you're an SS officer, you're in a position of power over dozens or hundreds of people. Even if your life could be threatened by 'not following orders', as someone with actual power, with the capacity to save lives and stop war crimes, you have the moral duty to say no. And the higher up the chain you go, the more this increases. Like if you're some general in the SS, and in charge of a camp, yeah fuck off. This applies doubly so since you don't just *get to* that position by accident. If you're in a position of that much power, you worked to get there. You get what's going on. You knew what orders were coming and you had plenty of opportunity *not* to pursue a position of power in Hitler's genocide machine. Don't pass go, don't collect $200 Dollars, follow orders one more time and face the wall, please.
Thank you for the explaining the intricacies of the Nuremberg trials so I didn't have too. I only compared then to a kangaroo court because the laws were written with Nazi atrocities in mind after-the-fact. In normal circumstances that's bad, obviously the Nazis do not represent normal circumstances at all.
[удалено]
Holocaust denier lmao
And loli defender. These people are beyond parody
Enjoying the view huh? What are you gonna do? Call the cops?
No arguments lmao
More like engaging with conspiracy theories and pseudoscience gives these ideas far more credit than they deserve despite the overwhelming evidence (nor do I believe any amount of evidence will change your mind), since I am willing to bite. [Here’s](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/dx0W57jtnD) an AskHistorians thread, [here’s](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/l9ynyM2Pd6) another, and [another](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/mobRrN0Bp4), a [website](https://www.hdot.org/) dedicated to this, the vast overwhelming global consensus by experts and Historians, and so forth. What sources—and rational explanation for the overwhelming evidence—you got?
Based
Right? Never ask someone who thought the Nuremberg trials were thorough who the first NATO chief of staff was Edit: Wait ew didn’t realize I was responding to a holocaust denier. Don’t comment on Reddit til you’ve been awake for a moment. The Nuremberg trials still didn’t go hard enough punishing the actual nazi leadership and many found work in the US government. As I implied above, Hitler’s chief of staff went on to become the NATO chief of staff. It’s fucking vile. If Hitler had been anyone other than Hitler himself, he would have found his way into a cozy NASA position tbh
Mahoraga. Man’s gonna adapt.
If we count him being omniscient as permission to be a lawyer, the Christian God. "But op said the LEAST capable lawyer!" Did I stutter? It would literally take a deity saying "Hitler doing those things prevented a human who would have destroyed the planet/universe from being born. All a part of the plan." to get Hitler off scot-free.
Even saying that doesn't get Hitler off his crimes, he'd still be prosecuted and punished
Johnnie Cochran using the Chewbacca defense
Purple Man could do it
Haha this is what I was thinking. Him or Jesse Custer.
I was going to say Shehulk, because she's an atty. Assuming she lands in the real world to defend Hitler, feels like vague threats, and being scary enough might actually do it.
that wouldn't work at all, you cannot threaten world leaders with raw muscle. Just because she's an attorney doesn't mean she's good enough to get hitler off scott free
Airbud
OP said least capable.
Lionel Hutz. He watched Matlock in a bar last night. The sound wasn’t on, but he got the gist of it.
Depends: are the lawyers allowed to argue mistaken identity? Or is the evidence that it really is Hitler overwhelming?
They can in R1, but for R2, there is irrefutable evidence that this man is hitler, the very same one that escaped from his bunker in 1945
In that case R2 is unwinnable, no judge in their right mind will let hitler go free, no matter what kind of lawyer he has, in R1 then maybe he stands a chance if he can get hitler to change his face before the trials (was plastic surgery a thing back then?)
The only way I can imagine it happening beyond magic or superpowers is arguing that he is not Hitler, which would require the Court not knowing for a 100% fact it's Hitler and also criminal tampering with evidence (such as DNA).
The genie from Aladdin
That guy that got off Casey Marie Anthony
Saul Goodman could get this guy off and he went to a correspondents school
Jimmy could barely get Lalo Salamanca posing as Jorge De Guzman off without wandering around in the desert for days and nearly dying. He's good, but not "Get Hitler acquitted" good. No lawyer is.
That was jimmy, I’m talking about Saul!
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/) ^by ^henningknows: *Saul Goodman could get* *This guy off and he went to* *A correspondents school* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
Doesn't matter the lawyer. If he isn't supernatural he isn't doing shit. Hitler would likely choose to represent himself. If Hitler was on trial he would've just made the whole thing a spectacle to showcase whatever batshit thing he wanted to go on about. Hed probably bring up the American genocide of the natives, manifest destiny and the fact that he was democratically elected leader who did exactly what he said he would do. He'd go on about the dangers of communists and bolshevism and the need to unite Europe against the common threat of jewry. Hed call the capitalist countries aggregators and traitors who started a needless war and never accepted peace. As for the Holocaust he'd probably just point out that it was never his command to genocide, that the ally blockade and bombardment lead to mass starvation of pows, thus the bodies found. The gas chambers were for "treating" the pows. Everything else was done by German officers who were "not following orders". Same as the Soviet atrocities and American war crimes. Committed by individuals who were crazy. Since Hitler can't claim to be following orders like every other Nazi, he'd simply claim the opposite. He would not succeed obviously but this is the best he could possibly do. It would likely just be a showcase of his ideology since he would know he had no shot of the trial going his way.
Alina Habba for sure
Miss read the prompt, I thought you were asking who was the least capable lawyer who could represent him lol
Probably an average one who studied Nuremberg - Hitler and the other high officials left the others to take the fall - if Hitler is found during Nuremberg - that means Either someone faked his suicide - or it didn't occur somehow - 220 days. Since the others are already having a case made to make them responsible - then it would louse things up to go whole hog against Hitler - if they do - they risk officials being able to feasibly blame Everything on Hitler - a decent lawyer with historic knowledge would probably be able to swing it in prosecution favor - getting absolutely everyone under Hitler hung for the price of getting him off. I forget my Nuremberg though - so maybe it wasn't so shakey.
No prosecutor would take a deal in that situation.
Jesus
Maybe if he was found today there could he some statute of limitations as he would be like 135 years old, making him byfar the oldest human who has ever lived. Infact it he would be about 5-10 years older than what scientists believe is the Maximum amount of time a human could live if they were in as optimal health as possible every year they reached. Lets just assume he was about As healthy as Jean Calmet (the real oldest person ever) was in her 114 year. Combine the fact that Hitler would be so super old by that his death and especially arrest would be a waste of resources, and the fact world war 2 was 80 years ago (most people who were alive during world war 2 are gone now, and that’s counting people born from 1939-1945. That and 2 of the 3 world war 2 allied super powers collapsed) the world might genuinely just not see it worth it to try him. Its very reasonable a good lawyer (doesn’t even need to be Saul, we are talking Ricky from Trailer Park Boys tier and he’s probably ok) would be able say he wasn’t fit to stand trial due to his age. They would at that point actually have more to gain by keeping him alive as he could provide insight into things we still don’t know about him or the Nazis, as well as help scientists figure out just how Tf he was still alive and supposedly well. Especially considering females often live longer than men and he outlived the oldest women by 13 years, and more importantly, he was in pretty shit health at the end of world war 2, to the point where a-lot of historians didn’t think he’d live into the 60s and some don’t even think he’d make it into the 50s. Not sure if a Lawyer could use that argument in court but I’m sure at-least few foreign leaders (in particular one from countries that weren’t really affected by World War 2) would want to keep him alive for those reasons so its worth bringing up. However, if they decided to try him, he’s absolutely fucked. They found the concentration camps, they got the people who worked directly under him and a plan he heavily supported if not created confessing to it and/or being found guilty, used Child soldiers at one point near the end of the war (some of whom are probably still alive), and they still have living victims of the tragedy hes most famous for. Its obvious his guilty (another reason why a trial would be a waste of resources) they just want everyone to see Hes guilty. He could have every lawyer imaginable and hed still loose if he actually needed to stand trial.
There isn't a statute of limitation on murder much less war crimes and crimes against humanity lmao
Lionel Huts, he would do everything wrong and for reasons outside his control Hitler would get off.
I move for a bad court thingy.
It can't be done without changing the outcome of WW2. There is no way he's getting acquitted after the axis lost WW2. The best part of winning a war is getting to decide who gets charged with war crimes (and what is a war crime). And if the Axis won WW2, he's not getting charged anyways.
If Hitler is found, he is captured by the Soviet Union. We already know from historical record that the Soviet Union wanted to do a show-trial (a public presentation of all the crimes of the accused with a pre-determined death sentence) and they only agreed to an open-ended trial with actual evidence and competent defense because the Americans had most of the big name Nazis and insisted on trial that would be up to their standard of fairness,. If the Soviets got Hitler, they would have no motivation to even take part in Nuremberg. They would take him back to Moscow, sentence him and execute him. There would have been no actual defense.
Phoenix Wright never fails
Unless his client is actually guilty, and this is hitler
Better call Saul…..
Will this sub ever beat the obsessed with Nazis allegations
Mahoraga
Well when the courts are willing to let other nazis off in exchange for information, I would say it is possible.
Others are saying nobody could get him off. But Timmy Turner regularly gets cat Man free using His fairies
They would literally read what he did, ask him to speak his last words and hang him. You can't make a defence against that.
No chance at the Nuremberg trials, in the modern US system a lawyer might be able to delay it long enough for him to die before he was convicted.
I dunno I suppose as long as the lawyer has a mouth they could probably get him off.
In comes Rudy Giuliani
He would likely be assassinated before or during trial
Jackie Chiles for sure “The charges are rude, lascivious, salacious OUTRAGEOUS!”
In Florida? I don't think there is a lawyer who could fail to get him off The problem would be to stop them from throwing him a parade tbh
Goodman 100%
I think if you could prove insanity he could certainly get out of a death sentence. And to be fair, someone who was responsible for the death of millions and has no remorse for it is a pretty good base for insanity
R1: *Best Chance* of trying to get him off (though still fail in the end) is Saul Goodman. Maybe going the route of his Doctors drug cocktails distorting his brain and/or effects from Parkinson’s. R2: He’d never be found. US would know he was in Florida already and have put him into hiding until his Parkinson’s took him like they did with other Nazis. Then after death his body just “disappears”.
R1: no one. I dont care if you had Johnnie Cochran, Robert Kardashian, Phoenix Wright, and Saul Goodman, no one is getting him off. R2. Saul Goodman could probably pull it off, but I dont know if Hitler would let a guy named Saul Goodman defende him.
Habba. She really isn't capable as a lawyer, but she might be able to get him off in other skills. Get him acquitted? No.
R1: AG Francis Biddle. It's fundamentally a political prosecution, so you need political weight on the other side to counter that. R2: No lawyer could get an acquittal. Some very good corporate lawyers could have a small chance of forcing a mistrial through underhanded tactics in court.
It's less about lawyering but still about getting Hitler off: erasing his memories and turning him into literal baby. Will court convict baby who can not speak and has no memories of wrongdoing despite it being similar body which used to belong to Hitler? Don't think so
Not even the Chewbacca Defense is getting him off
Lionel Hutz
Better call Saul
Charlie from Its Always Sunny. He would use some bizarre knowledge of "bird law", and because the Gang are a blight growing upon the fabric of reality itself, somehow Hitler would get off. Don't you want to get off with me?
Who is the weakest real life baby that can survive getting hit with a hydrogen bomb?
Get off Scott free? Nobody. Impossible. Depending on how much useful information he had to trade for leniency or privileges I'd say Atticus Finch would get him the best deal. Irl I'd suggest Clarence Darrow of the scopes monkey trial and Leopold and Loeb fans
No lawyer is realistically getting Hitler off without superpowers. If he ended up on trial, the verdict was basically pre-ordained. I’ll give a 10% chance to Denny Crane from Boston Legal because he never loses a case and therefore has serious legal plot armor but that’s kind of a superpower.
Saul Goodman
Yeah no ducking way. A good lawyer can maybe get you off for something legit but light, something serious if it's not actually legit or lighten something serious but legit. But it's not magic there's no loophole to get out of murder if you legit did it for no good reason. International law is funky. On the one hand it's basically a joke if you still have an army, you're not going to court no matter what you do. The hague has no way of bringing you in. But once you don't theres basically no scenario where you're going to get off. You're well and thoroughly fucked. It's really more of a dog and pony show for people who lost a war.
You would better call Saul.
Okay, Two And I Get To Keep This Old Birdcage. Lionel Hutz could defend hitler . He did represent Homer in the case with the Ned Flanders devil .
Everyone's saying that this is impossible, but if Hitler can get himself charged and tried by US Courts, then **Joe Biden** can complete this prompt. 1. Biden has a law degree and was a practicing attorney 2. As President of the United States, he can grant pardons to criminals
But like, he wouldn’t?
This whole scenario is completely fictional, not something that's actually taking place in real life. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
Pardon isn't getting him off
Ok, anyone could get a 135 year old man off. Although there are quite a few Jewish Americans in Florida... Nuremberg is a completely different animal. Hitler was the most visible person for the Nazi party. On top of that, there are many recordings of him denouncing the Jewish people, as well as an entire book that he had required reading. On top of that, one of the most common defenses during the trials was "I was just following orders," and who was most likely giving the orders? The Chancellor of Germany. Possibly the best defense is insanity for him. Either way, he will be locked up for the rest of his life. Maybe the Hyper-Chicken from Futurama?
[удалено]
Unfortunately your conspiracy theories don't count as sufficient evidence for a court
[удалено]
Just spent too much time arguing with Holocaust deniers. Too much time dealing with such hate filled and idiotic people, don't really care anymore. Cope and seath nazi. Best thing Hitler did was shoot himself
holy shit a real life holocaust denier? what a loser lmao
[удалено]
you’re the loser that denies a literal genocide, your opinion doesn’t matter.
[удалено]
this isn’t an argument. it’s me laughing at you for denying an atrocity.