Judgement at Nuremberg analysi essays

Judgement at Nuremberg analysi essays Nuremberg Trials were trials conducted to put the surviving prominent German leaders on trial for various "war crimes". These trials were conducted by the govenments of United States, Soviet Union, Britain and France. The movie Judgement at Nuremberg depicts one of these trials. It seems the movie makers intention was to show that the people in the Justice Department should also be put on trial for aiding the killings of millions of people. It seems it the movie makers were playing devils advocate. They were trying to convey that these killings were wrong and unjustful and that everybody involved with it should be found guilt ( as seen at the end of the movie that all Judges are found guilty). But also the arguments presented by the defense are strong that could show that the Justices on trial were innocent as they abidded to the law that the time in their country. The prosecution's opening statement states that the individuals on the trial are guilty. They reason that these people were educated, before Nazis came to power. They cannot claim innocence like the young people who were coopted into Nazism. They had power to prevent this. But the defense argues that though the judges were educated they do not make law, but intrepret it and carry it out. That's what these individuals did and now they were on trial. It doesn't matter if they think that it is wrong or right. It seems here the director is trying to send a message saying that the judges that followed the laws of their country it was ok to kill somebody due to their race. So saying that each country's or culture has their own code of conduct. Also the defense lawyer mentions that if these Justices are on trial then all the German people should also be on trial. The director also shows that judge sent to Nuremberg for this case was probably not the best of the available. As he had just lost the elections, and not much liked. The director seems to be questioning this. ...