Notes11-11 - 1 International Law US v Calley P 1295 Compare...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
International Law US v. Calley P. 1295 Compare the Calley case to the Llandovery Castle case, how are they alike/different. - Llandovery Castle case is one of the most important cases. - Calley Case: o Medina ordered his officers to assassinate many defenseless old men, women, and children on the bottom of a pit. o The test used was an Objective Test : o It does not matter if Calley (subjectively) knew the order was illegal. o . P. 1299 o He claims he was told by Medina who was in a helicopter, to waste the people in the village. o o Similar to the area of Negligence: Jury has an objective test: Would a Reasonable man have done that. If he would not have then you have negligent. US v. Staff Sergeant (E-6) Walter Griffen P. 1304 - He was in a company of soldiers in the field in Vietnam. - They have taken a prisoner & he shoots the prisoner because it is easier to kill them than to guard them. - Because prisoners might escape & attack in the rear. - They did not want to bring the helicopter to pick up the prisoner. - The Question: Should he have known that it was an illegal order. Re Yamashita P. 1313 - Japanese General on trial, post WWII. - He has allowed his troops to engage in atrocities toward prisoners (British & Australian) - Japanese commanders did not go out into the field, grill their subordinates, look to see what conditions their prisoners of war were being kept in. - He is prosecuted. It is undisputed that he never gave an order to kill the prisoners but he knew or should have known what was happening. - Prosecuted for sins of omission, things he didn’t do. He let these things occur under him & did not do the kind of things he should have done to see what was happening. - He was found guilty. Remember: - The Nürnberg Charter created the International Military Tribunal, one prosecution of 20-23 high-ranking Germans. - But there were hundreds of trials after WWII & in all the lesson has been learned because in WWI the allies let the Germans put on trial their own officers but in this case the military convened military courts to place officers on trial. - The Russians, US, & British had army courts. - The military is empowered by statute to create these tribunals (courts) just like it did in WWII. - The military is creating tribunals to try these prisoners. The prisoners do not have the civil procedural due process protections. Nürnberg aftermath – an appraisal P. 1321 - The great concept the Nürnberg Charter created was the concept of Crimes against peace . - As the Nürnberg principal developed of a crimes against peace being a punishable offense, has that truly deterred war. -
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 8

Notes11-11 - 1 International Law US v Calley P 1295 Compare...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online