German Court hands down 2 year suspended sentence to 97 yr old former typist 80 years after the fact

Irmgard Furchner sits well-covered in the courtroom in Itzehoe, Germany  appearing to be 'holstered' to her seat, apparently to keep the 97 year-old from collapsing forward?

By Carolyn Yeager

IRMGARD FURCHNER IS THE LATEST VICTIM of the Jewish-controlled so-called German “justice” system's pursuit of  nonagenarians (persons aged 90-99) they can convict for the crime of “accessory to murder” based entirely on being employed in a concentration or labor camp during the last years of the National Socialist regime. The whole purpose of this costly, taxpayer-funded endeavor is to further blacken the reputation of Adolf Hitler's government, and to bolster belief in Jewish suffering and losses during World War II, that Jews were pivotal in bringing about. That's really what it comes down to, but it's doctored up with contrived language and vivid 'survivor testimony' to make it appear the sacrificial goat being convicted “knew” or “had to know” that detainees at whatever camp they were at were being murdered on a mass scale.

In the case of Irmgard Furchner, who was 18 at the time in question, her attorneys argued that she did not know that the later-claimed murders were taking place. She was one of three stenographer/typists working in the office of the Stutthof camp commandant. Her job was to take dictation in shorthand and then to type up the results in full in the form of reports, correspondence, etc. She was NOT “the secretary” in charge of the commandant's office, as she is sometimes casually portrayed by media. She has also been dubbed "the secretary of evil" by others in the press. They love to coin nicknames like that; they think it feeds the readership.

Prosecutors countered that  the muster point for new arrivals to Stutthof was visible from her office window. They also claimed that the crematoriums at the camp [there were only two ovens, not two crematoriums, if you can believe this photograph at Wikipedia] were running constantly during her time there. How do they know that? They don't. I would like to see a transcript of the testimony but all I have to go on are news reports. Even so, these two claims (seeing new arrivals and seeing-smelling smoke) do not add up to evidence that she was aware of killing in a “gas chamber” and by various other methods, but only adds up to imagination and/or speculation. But in German courts, in “Holocaust”-related trials, this is deemed good enough.

The testimony of so-called survivors is taken as honest and truthful. The lawyers for the defense know this and know not to fight it, so the best that can be done for their client is to claim ignorance and “I was just a cog in the wheel” form of denial of responsibility. Irmgard, to her credit, did not admit anything, but only said:

“I'm sorry about everything that happened".

"I regret that I was in Stutthof at the time - that's all I can say,"

Who wouldn't regret it later on, considering developments in Germany? But I don't think she regretted it in the beginning for the simple fact that she had witnessed none of the things they now claim were taking place.

Media coverage

I can compare four Internet news outlets' stories appearing on Tuesday, Dec. 20: Associated Press, the BBC, CNN and Fox News. They have some interesting differences in spite of appearing on the surface as similar. Associated Press (AP) is usually where most news outlets get their information, although a large organizaiton like BBC credits only themselves. In my opinion, the BBC was the least truthful but the longest. It is very selective compared to the AP story, and more noticeably anti-'Nazi.'

The AP was the most complete account, and included quoted statements by the judges and from court reports. It wrote:

The verdict and sentence were in line with prosecutors’ demands. Defense lawyers had asked for their client to be acquitted, arguing that the evidence hadn’t shown beyond doubt that Furchner knew about the systematic killings at the camp, meaning there was no proof of intent as required for criminal liability.

Furchner appeared to follow the verdict attentively but didn’t show any obvious emotion. It wasn’t immediately clear whether she would appeal, though lawyer Wolf Molkentin said the defense team thinks the case presents 'insurmountable doubts' as to her guilt.

But presiding Judge Dominik Gross said it was “simply beyond all imagination” that Furchner didn’t notice the killings at Stutthof, German news agency dpa reported. He said she could see from her office the collection point where new prisoners had to wait after arrival, and the crematorium was in constant use in the fall of 1944, with smoke spreading across the camp.

Here we go again. It is known and been repeated many times that crematoriums do not produce smoke, yet it is a favorite feature in the stories by survivors – who are mostly taking their testimony from what they've heard and read by other 'survivors.' Since the survivors are believed no matter what they say, there's no motivation to put an end to the “smoke from the crematoriums” narrative (lie).So it persists, as we see here, even in courts of law and by prosecutors and judges. In a previous AP story on the trial, this sentence was found: "She [Furchner] also must have been able to see and smell smoke from the burning of bodies at the crematorium, the prosecutor added."

It's buffoonish. Who can take it seriously? But the media does, so we're forced to also.

Of the four news stories I mentioned, only Fox mentioned that “Irmgard Furchner argues she did not know about the murders at the Stutthof concentration camp.” The others skirted around putting it that plainly.

Another questionable part of the story is that Furchner was “on the run” from her court date. BBC said: “When the trial began in September 2021, Irmgard Furchner went on the run from her retirement home and was eventually found by police on a street in Hamburg.”

And CNN: “Furchner went on the run weeks before her trial was due to begin, but was found by authorities after several hours. Proceedings eventually began late last year.” [This is wrong. It was only the morning of her trial, not 'weeks before.']

To their credit Fox did not use the words “on the run” but simply said, “Furchner reportedly attempted to skip her first hearing related to the trial, leading authorities to detain her.”

AP wrote:

”The 96-year-old woman left her home near Hamburg in a taxi on Thursday morning, a few hours before proceedings were due to start at the state court in Itzehoe, court spokeswoman Frederike Milhoffer said. […] The accused woman previously had “announced that she didn’t want to come” to court, but that did not provide sufficient grounds for detaining her ahead of the trial, Milhoffer said. Given the woman’s age and condition, she had not been expected “actively to evade the trial,” Milhoffer added.

Police found the defendant and she was brought to the court on Thursday afternoon.

LOL. This makes more sense to me than any 'official' part of this trial-farce. Ms Irmgard is a  better, more spirited former National-Socialist than most of the other nonagenarians who've been brought to trial in Germany, including her SS husband (who wasn't that old at the time), from reports of his trial comments. Although reports are just that, and could be misleading, so I shan't judge him.

All in all, this is just another black eye for the Federal Republic of Germany, and it's complete submissiveness to the Jewish Holocaust Industry. I think the JHI will find some grounds to keep trials going even after there are no more 'survivors' they can pull out of the woodwork. My guess is they will go for antisemitism as a hate crime in a bigger way. We need to drive them off at the pass on that one. Starting NOW, for those who haven't started already. This is no time for complacency.