Quote:
Originally Posted by Broncazonk
I'm still trying to understand the nature of the allegation.
"...Oberst Joseph Priller (ex Kommodore JG 26) was imprisoned by Allied justice and accused that on the ground he shot an Allied pilot who was shot down in aerial combat and was captured unharmed."
Is the allegation: (1) a Luftwaffe pilot landed his aircraft, located a downed, captured Allied pilot, and shot at said pilot with a sidearm, or (2) a Luftwaffe pilot strafed a downed Allied pilot who survived the strafing and was later captured?
|
1. The RAF pilot bailed out with parachute and waited somewhere along a road on his fate while he looked at the pictures of his family.
2. It was alleged that Priller (after he had landed) should be driven over an hour with an vehicle to find this pilot.
3. Priller was arrested under the accusation he would have murdered traitorously a by him self downed fighter pilot of the RAF.
So - what´s the problem to understand ?
A simple suggestive game of the judges:
1. The poor RAF-pilot, just he could save his life - then he was shoot treacherously
2. Priller the bloodthirsty Nazi - so bloody that he moves an hour by car just to kill an enemy pilot
3. Sure - Priller MUST be a murderer. And if it isn`t so - then we threaten him to hang him up so long he admits to say what he hasn`t done
Typical procedure of the allied courts during the denazification
But - during the war, the Nazis spoken guilty lots of prisoners in this way - although they have only committed one "crime" - to be an enemy soldier.
So there`s no difference. No court-martial has distinguished itself by fairness to prisoners. Neither the allies nor the germans
nfc.....