THE SUBSEQUENT NUREMBERG PROCEEDINGS
“The mere punishment of the defendants, or even of thousands of others equally guilty, can never redress the terrible injuries which the Nazis visited on these unfortunate peoples. For them it is far more important that these incredible events be established by clear and public proof, so that no one can ever doubt that were fact and not fable."
Brigadier General Telford Taylor, December 9, 1946, opening statement of the prosecution
The high-level Nazi officials indicted by the International Military Tribunal (IMT) were not the only war criminals brought to justice in the Nuremberg courtroom. On December 20, 1945, the Allied Control Council for Germany, in its capacity as a provisional military government in occupied Germany, enacted Law No. 10 to establish a “uniform legal basis in Germany for the prosecution of war criminals and other similar offenders other than those dealt with by the International Military Tribunal”.
Immediately after the conclusion of the Nuremberg trial, the US attorney Telford Taylor was appointed chief prosecutor for a series of IMT trials at Nuremberg of second-tier Nazis, whose complicity was deemed serious enough to warrant consideration of the death penalty. In these cases, later known as the Subsequent Nuremberg Proceedings, defendants represented many segments of German state and society, from jurists and politicians to physicians, businessmen, and army officers. In 1947 and 1948, under the auspices of the IMT, the United States held 12 such trials at Nuremberg. There were 185 individuals indicted, of whom 177 were actually tried.
These later tribunals generally imposed lighter sentences than those passed down by the original IMT. Only 12 defendants were actually executed, 8 were sentenced to life in prison, and 77 were given shorter prison terms. As a result of postwar clemency and the realities of Cold War politics, many sentences were later commuted or reduced.
As the Subsequent Nuremberg Proceedings demonstrate, the range of Nazi crimes was vast and legal efforts to punish them often yielded only limited tangible results.
Case #1, The Medical Case
Case #2, The Milch Case
Case #3, The Justice Case
Case #4, The Pohl Case
Case #5, The Flick Case
Case #6, The I.G. Farben Case
Case #7, The Hostage Case
Case #8, The RuSHA Case
Case #9, The Einsatzgruppen Case
Case #10, The Krupp Case
Case #11, The Ministries Case
Case #12, The High Command Case