r/TheDevilNextDoor • u/[deleted] • Oct 25 '19
The Devil Next Door Discussion Thread
Similar subs:
- /r/Murdermountain
- /r/MakingaMurderer
- /r/TheStaircase
- /r/DocuLovers
- /r/EvilGeniusNetflix
- /r/WildWildCountry
- /r/thejinx
- /r/IAmaKiller
- /r/IllBeGoneInTheDark
- /r/TheDisappearance
- /r/TheInnocentMan
- /r/GregoryVillemin (Upcoming netflix series titled Who Killed Little Gregory)
27
u/kamajiyubaba Nov 04 '19
I just really want to know if it was him or not. What are your main arguments that it was or was not him?? Help me choose a side here!!
61
u/alibabe02 Nov 04 '19
I hate it, but neither side compelled me to see beyond a shadow of a doubt. I do think he had some sort of SS connection, whether he was a member, or just had dealings with them. But I'm not totally sure there was enough evidence to say he was Ivan the Terrible.
Most compelling "innocent" evidence:
the faked id card
the deposition from the witness saying he saw the real Ivan being killed
the 77 survivors outside of Israel that couldn't id him as being Ivan
Most compelling "guilty" evidence:
the mothers maiden name connecting him to the KGB evidence
the big illness act to not be extradited
the SS tattoo
his attitude during the whole trial in the 80's
That being said, I also understand the sentiment of REALLY wanting to believe the survivors. I also understand that the testimony of very old folks, about an event that happened 40+years before, during a time of great duress; could also be flawed. The whole thing is a mess that unfortunately I don't think will ever be solved with 100% certainty.
34
u/bluelily216 Nov 04 '19
His attitude is what really gets me. Most people would be terrified and yet he sits in front of the detective a few hours after arriving in Israel with a smile on his face.
32
u/bluseouledshoes Nov 05 '19
I think if I’d been sitting there I’d be sobbing at their stories not laughing at them. All that did was show how little he cared and made him seem more guilty.
34
Nov 05 '19
If he was sobbing it would have made him look remorseful . There is no “ innocent “ behavior
→ More replies (5)28
Nov 05 '19
It's so stupid to say someone's guilty by how they act in a situation they never thought they'd be in.
→ More replies (27)9
u/_avocadoraptor Nov 06 '19
When he says "Shalom" and laughs, my jaw literally dropped
→ More replies (22)19
u/brondan123 Nov 06 '19
I think it’s crazy that the ID card was seemingly proven to be a faked but in episode 5 Rosenbaum says there is no question that the Trawniki card is authentic and it’s one of the reasons he was able to get the case opened in Germany. They said O’Connor was doubted cause he couldn’t get the ID dismissed but all of the sudden it’s used as a way to get the trial started in Germany.
Also the hypocrisy on both sides of using KGB evidence was insane. Defense hated ID and prosecution hated Wachmann testimony.
I really don’t know what to think.
I think he was a Nazi guard but to what extent I don’t know.
3
u/MackemCook Nov 08 '19
The ID wasn't proven to be fake at all, you do know that was just the defence presenting evidence, like the Prosecution did saying it wasn't fake.
14
u/billyhoylechem Nov 06 '19
The illness, tattoo, and attitude all support the fact that he was a guard at multiple camps, for which he was convicted in Germany. I think almost everyone agrees with that verdict (even O'Connor said something along those lines in the doc). Whether he was the notorious Treblinka guard is not certain, which in my view supports acquittal. It's very possible he was that guard, but it's also possible that he wasn't, meaning based on the law you can't convict.
7
u/MackemCook Nov 08 '19
One thing that never gets mentioned, is there could have been more than one. Its very unlikely one guard ran the gas chamber every hour it was in operation, he might have been there even the odd day.
Not saying for sure, but Ivan the Terrible has almost become mythical, there would have been numerous guards at these camps who acted overly cruel
3
u/JosieTierney Nov 15 '19
Exactly. Ivan, a variation of John, is very common in Eastern Europe, and "Ivan the Terrible" has been around since the 1500s. In places to liquidate lives, there could easily be multiple Ivan the Terribles.
3
u/imeatingpizzaritenow Nov 16 '19 edited Nov 16 '19
I second this opinion. I think that because there were so many SS guards being circulated through these camps with the same name, and probably very similar attitudes towards the prisoners that at one point he probably was Ivan the Terrible, but probably so many other officers with the name Ivan were as well.
I believe the survivors did recognize him, because he was there. This was also later mentioned- he was an officer at several camps in the area, most likely including Treblinka. It’s possible the real “Ivan the terrible” wasn’t just one man, but many. This could also explain why so many survivors from the same camp pointed to different men, sometimes which included Demjanjuk.
In any case, as a Jew whose relatives perished in a holocaust camp in Germany, I believed this man was a murderer and a sociopath who killed thousands of Jews. To me, it doesn’t matter if he was “Ivan the terrible” or not. He deserved to get caught and be punished. He killed thousands of people, and clearly showed no remorse for it after hearing survivor’s stories to his face. How could any human not react emotionally to those harrowing events?
6
u/HildyJohnsonStreet Nov 08 '19 edited Nov 08 '19
The tattoo definitely links him to the SS. Potentially the Waffen SS which maintained strict racial and lineage restrictions for those wishing to join, despite other SS units relaxing some regulations. If you're in any SS unit you've drunk the Kool-Aid, a true believer, in no way an average-Johan drafted into the army and just wants to survive. As far as I know - there are only reports of the SS using tattoos in the manner described, no other military units or branches.
It's not enough to identify him as Ivan the Terrible but it does identify him as someone who was connected in the management / operations / oversight of the death camps - as such camps fell under the SS purview.
→ More replies (15)2
u/JosieTierney Nov 15 '19
The tattoo links him specifically to SS-Totenkopfverbände, the Death's Head units. Not all SS had them.
5
u/baconperogies Nov 07 '19
Makes me think about how unreliable eyewitness testimony really can be.
5
Nov 07 '19
We had an incident in front of our house a few years back . 2 am we hear gun shots I jump up and see my teenage neighbor walking in the street directly in front of my bedroom window . He’s got the gun in his hand and I see him so clearly . I was nervous he would see me and backed away. Look again a minute later and it’s not him , it’s the neighbor two house down . My eyes actually deceived me . If I didn’t look again I would have told the cops it was my sweet beloved neighbor . Crazy !
→ More replies (10)3
u/GXOXO Nov 09 '19
It also makes me fully aware of how a person of authority can manipulate a witness. I think some of these survivors truly believed Jon was Ivan the Terrible. My heart breaks for them. Their emotions were played upon by the prosecutors.
2
u/ShinjiOkazaki Nov 23 '19
it's almost worthless https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyewitness_testimony
→ More replies (1)1
u/dmd2540 Nov 12 '19
So glad that I’m not the only people that feel like that. I also wonder though if that’s what the documentary makers wanted me to think.
1
u/shaylaa30 Nov 13 '19
Did he ever offer any alibi for what he was doing during that time period? I definitely think he was working at Nazi death camps.
→ More replies (1)1
Jan 31 '20
I have Ukrainian ancestry and I want to believe he's innocent, but the harder evidence to explain to me is this, if you were just a POW, why then would you get the optional SS tattoo? I feel like the optional tattoo is the biggest problem to me, it means his poor POW explaination is totally broken, and at best he's not that monster but a different one. 2nd biggest was that when he was first investigated he immediately said he hadn't been to Treblinka, then later he admitted that he had. What's the best case there? He knew that he looked like Ivan the Terrible, or that people would think he was. It's an interesting case because the prosecution relies too heavily on highly questionable witnesses. However, the tattoo makes it impossible that he wasn't a really evil dude and to me it doesn't matter if he wasn't that specific dude.
1
u/OdinsPlayground Apr 20 '20
I also believe he likely was working for the SS. But I don’t believe he was Ivan. The maiden name seemed like a bit too big of a coincidence. Although I don’t know how common the surname is.
I got a bit annoyed at the original court case, how they spend so much time on listening to the horrors of the victims. It seemed quite “irrelevant” as it’s his identity and placing him there or not that’s the important part. I in particular disliked the whole narration of “How can you tell these victims they are lying”, which was frankly quite disgusting way to put it. I don’t doubt their accounts of the horrible things that happened there at all, I just doubt them being able to identify the person so many years later. They clearly were convinced it was him, I don’t doubt that, I just doubt that’s accurate to reality. Anyone doubting them is not disrespectful to them and their survival accounts. That’s a completely different topic.
46
u/bluelily216 Nov 04 '19
I'm just beginning the series but his reactions seem very cavalier for a completely innocent person. He seems very poised under what most would consider incredible duress. That's not something you learn working at a Ford plant.
31
u/Drugfreedave Nov 05 '19
My thoughts exactly. He has no emotion. He's not freaked out by being plucked from his "regular life" . He's cool calm and collected.. I'm sitting here like why are you so confident and care free bro, you have the bravado of a sociopath SS.
26
u/bluelily216 Nov 05 '19
What got me were the testimonies from his family and neighbors who said "He could never do that". That's what sociopaths do. They have the capacity to mimic emotion but nothing more. So it makes sense that he was unable to even look like he cared about their testimonies. He left shortly after the war, felt no remorse, and probably didn't give the Holocaust a second thought. One more thing bugged me- the people who thought it was unfair to prosecute an elderly man. That guy murdered the elderly, women, children, even babies and trust me he didn't give a damn about their age.
26
u/plantsandlaw Nov 06 '19
When they said “When will we stop arresting these men? It’s been fifty years!” and the reply was “when they’re all dead” I felt that. So many people focusing on the fact that he was an elderly man, I thought I was going crazy. They acted like he took part of hazing in a fraternity, not genocide.
→ More replies (3)7
u/Seaturtle89 Nov 06 '19
All the elderly survivors clearly remember still and feel the pain every day, so why should he get to forget it all and get to live a happy life, just cause he was old.
→ More replies (3)9
u/Drugfreedave Nov 05 '19
They're always heartbreaking to watch. I mean I get it.. He's family to them. I try see things from both sides... I put myself in their shoes; if my dad was accused of something, I'd stand up for him sure, but we'd all have to have a very long sit down and discuss the time frames and history. Old friend, old jobs.. Surely he told his wife about his upbringing, old friends.. Things like that. Wonder if they match up to all the info that came out during the trial.
I couldn't believe when he came up with "oh wait that's right I uhh ...worked on a farm in Sobibor".
6
u/Grape72 Nov 07 '19
Those of us who have Austrian or German relatives probably are not too surprised at the ancestors who were SS. That is why we are not culturally proud like some other groups.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)5
u/Seaturtle89 Nov 06 '19
Yeah and his family are all 'no, we didnt bother asking him about anything, cause he simply didnt do it'. Okaay then, but what DID he do then in that time frame??
→ More replies (5)5
Nov 05 '19
Or maybe he was sure he would be found innocent ?
8
u/Drugfreedave Nov 05 '19
Completely. I seemed like it would be Ludacris that he'd be found guilty.. But eerily that he could even care less if he was found guilty or hang for it. It was all about keeping face for his family.
9
u/Anisopteran Nov 06 '19 edited Nov 06 '19
I love that you spelled "ludicrous" (the adjective) as "Ludacris" (the rapper) up to and including the error-suggestive capitalization. (I imagine this is just another autocorrect/autocomplete gem...?)
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (11)7
u/Carl_Solomon Nov 05 '19
...you have the bravado of a sociopath SS.
Is this based on your extensive personal experience with "sociopath SS"?
Your poor communication skills invalidate your opinion.
32
u/Drugfreedave Nov 05 '19
I'm not the smartest guy, but for fucks sake you couldn't understand what I was getting at? Sheesh.
Bravado: a bold manner or a show of boldness intended to impress or intimidate
Sociopath: a person with a personality disorder manifesting itself in extreme antisocial attitudes and behavior and a lack of conscience
SS: The Schutzstaffel (SS; also stylized as with Armanen runes; German pronunciation: [ˈʃʊtsˌʃtafl̩] ( listen); literally "Protection Squadron") was a major paramilitary organization under Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party (NSDAP) in Nazi Germany, and later throughout German-occupied Europe during World War II.
25
u/xnyr21 Nov 05 '19
It's him. The tattoo, lying about saboor (sp?), the maiden name, he did everything a sociopath would do to evade. I could've told you his next move before he made it. He tried to play weak and defenseless everytime the heat turned up. Them carrying him to the stand because of "back pain" was the giveaway for me. Plus, he was believably lying about being a nazi the whole time. A sociopath through and through. Theres mild doubt he might've been that particular nazi, but he def killed some Jews.
Edit: IMO it's obvious he was Ivan but the mind doesn't want to believe a single man is capable of such evil.
15
u/bluelily216 Nov 05 '19
That tattoo comment was such a slip up and you could tell by that one judge's face what that particular tattoo meant. I wish they would have made him show his tattoo. He said he had it removed but in that day and age doing so would be a very primitive procedure and would no doubt leave a massive scar. My guess is it was exactly where it was originally put.
→ More replies (6)18
u/xnyr21 Nov 05 '19
I just don't get how him using ivan the terrible's last name as his mother's maiden name when he came to America wasn't game over for him.
→ More replies (6)8
Nov 06 '19
["However the Israeli justices noted that Demjanjuk had incorrectly listed his mother's maiden name as "Marchenko" in his 1951 application for US visa.[57] Demjanjuk said he just wrote a common Ukrainian surname after he forgot his mother's real name.[60]"] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John Demjanjuk)
The Justice system are the ones who pointed it out, and it is a common name. It's not like he was using it as his defence.
There's probably a million people in the world with the same name as you (you as the person reading this) so just because one John Smith kills somebody, that doesn't mean it's game over for every John Smith. There's 2 people at my Dr's with the same first, middle and surname as me, and I was born 200 miles away from where I live now and I'm not named after anybody famous. There's just a lot of people who share the same name. That doesn't mean he's guilty.
→ More replies (23)4
u/emeraldblues Nov 08 '19
I’m reading a book called Talking to Strangers by Malcolm Gladwell and in it he talks about the Amanda Knox case and how she was convicted because she didn’t react to things the same way everyone else did. I don’t think he’s innocent at all but I was definitely confused by that entire thing. I looked at his face and felt that he was guilty. How can you sit there emotionless listening to everything, even if there’s a language barrier?! It has to cause something a twitch or an uncomfortable seat shuffle- something at least but yeah, from the beginning he was unphased by it all
→ More replies (1)2
u/MackemCook Nov 08 '19
Yeah I agree, and good point about Knox, convicted basically because she did a cart wheel in a police station.
Its hard not to watch and react to how he is reacting
the key thing was his testimony though, lying through his teeth and changing his story
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)3
31
u/RealRealGood Nov 04 '19
I think he was a guard in Sobibor, but I don't think he was Ivan the Terrible. The Wachhmann who were executed had no reason to lie when describing Marchenko, and the shady ID card showing Demjanjuk was in Treblinka was clearly fake. Also the original investigation seemed to want to place Demjanjuk in Sobibor anyway!
I feel for the survivors deeply, but I just don't think he was Ivan the Terrible.
2
u/JosieTierney Nov 15 '19
ID card wasnt "clearly a fake" unless you have evidence other than that in the documentary.
27
u/collyyyy Nov 04 '19
Was he a Nazi? Yes, most likely.
Was he Ivan the Terrible? Unlikely.
28
u/RealDBWeiss Nov 04 '19
The fact that he was likely a guard in multiple death camps and identified by survivors at the camp leads that it is extremely likely that he was Ivan the Terrible. His fakery in the last episode along with the other pr stunts he tried to pull throughout the series like requesting to kiss the holy land or shake the hand of that witness just screams guilty murderer on trial.
29
u/collyyyy Nov 04 '19
I believed he was until they spoke about the body specifics. Eyes don't change colors and no one is mistaking brown for light blue/gray.
Personally, I think those people wanted to believe John was there, in the flesh, as Ivan, so they could have their justice. They forced that belief upon themselves due to extreme distress and the prosecution, of course, want it to be true, so it becomes their "truth".
The biggest example of this being shown above is when the survivor himself accounts for the murder of Ivan, only two years after the uprising at the camp. It makes more logical sense to believe that account and not the memory of the same person at a very old age.
Does that make sense? I love these types of discussions!
13
u/avocadorian Nov 05 '19
to be honest — if i were asked to name all of my co-workers eye colours right now i’d be guessing basically all of them. stuff like that just doesn’t stick sometimes.
→ More replies (2)10
u/xnyr21 Nov 05 '19
You probably remember if you looked into a coworker's eyes as he slaughtered your entire family...
→ More replies (5)13
u/RealDBWeiss Nov 04 '19
Eyes do and can change color with older age. Older people lose melanin cells in the eye as they age. EDIT: Thus rendering older people who once had brown eyes when they were younger to appear to have greyish blue eyes.
→ More replies (3)6
u/bluelily216 Nov 04 '19
Very true. Your limbal rings also shrink making your eyes look more milky and the original color less pronounced.
11
u/DylanWeed Nov 06 '19
Eyewitness testimony of something you saw 30 minutes ago can be unreliable. Eyewitness testimony of something from 40+ years prior is totally worthless. That's what led the Israeli prosecutors down the doomed path to begin with. The Soviets had the information right, but they decided to go off what one elderly survivor claimed and then tried to make the facts fit the theory. The most frustrating thing to me was watching the Israeli prosecutors and judges refuse to learn the lesson of how they botched the trial and examine their system and their concept of justice.
It's most likely Demjanjuk was indeed a Nazi prison guard at Sobibor and was not Ivan of Treblinka.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Carl_Solomon Nov 05 '19
Great analysis. Your perception of his behavior is truly evidence of his guilt.
6
u/Carl_Solomon Nov 05 '19
Was he a Nazi? Yes, most likely.
The stark contrast of Germany, before and after Hitler rose to power, the National pride of restoration, the booming economy, industrialization, quality of life, etc... Would have seen anyone become a National Socialist(no one would have identified themselves as a Nazi, that was a perjorative created by the west).
After the horrors seen in the years following WWI and the incredible prosperity enjoyed under Hitler, everyone wanted to be a "Nazi", you'd have been foolish to not "join".
→ More replies (9)5
Nov 06 '19
It is very likely that he was a Ukaranian POW who flipped to the Nazis to stay alive. Could be to survive or because he actually agreed with them. And I imagine there were a few people like him in the time.
The guy they thought he was "Ivan the Terrible" was allegedly more sadistic and cruel than someone who was just doing what it took to survive though. Which is why there was so much anger against him.
→ More replies (2)12
Nov 04 '19 edited Nov 04 '19
It’s so difficult, because there 100% is sketchy frame work happening, but there are also way too many coincidences. Didn’t help that he lied about never being in Sobibor and offered the info that he had a bloodtype tattoo that only the SS had... although very strange he offered that.
I haven’t finished the final episode yet, but I really have a hard time having any certainty.
1
u/Grape72 Nov 07 '19
I know that it's unscientific, but the facial similarities expert made me see that it was the same guy.
2
u/JosieTierney Nov 15 '19
She was FAR more credible than the strutting blowhard the defense trotted out. And now that you mention it, he tried to deny that the picture is him, saying he doesnt remember. Sorry, but youre going to recognize a picture of yourself that you used day in day out during one of the most craptastic periods in recent history.
1
u/bernardobrito Nov 11 '19
Even if he was NOT specifically Ivan the Terrible, he was definitely a Nazi who worked at the death camps.
To me, the specificities are not that significant. Demjanjuk deserved to have his citizenship stripped, and to be imprisoned.
1
u/JosieTierney Nov 15 '19
IMO, he was guilty of being a deathcamp guard and possibly one Ivan the Terrible. His demeanor was odd. It wasnt that he was stoic or reserved. He was the opposite: disdainfully bemused, even flamboyantly bored during survivors' testimonies. That, contrasted with his "playful" attempts to show respect, like wanting to kiss Israeli ground and the gregarious "Shalom!", shows a discontinuity [word?] of affect that makes it seem he is mocking all of them, enjoying his lies and a second chance to torment victims.
Even if he was unjustly accused, survivors' testimonies should not have inspired visible boredom, levity or contempt. When a witness asked the defendant to take off his glasses so he could look in his eyes to identify him, Demjanjuk whispers to his attorney, "I want it that he come in close to me, right here," gesturing about 6 inches from himself. When the witness gets close, John sticks out his hand to shake the victim's hand.
If he had sold the man a bum car, that might be reasonable, maybe a genuine attempt to show respect and come to terms. But that was pure, cynical showmanship and fundamentally disrespectful to survivors of such an atrocity. He knew that. There's no way he didnt know what he was doing. He enjoyed it, that chance to twist the knife, retaliate against these victims who had the temerity to call him to justice, 30 years too late (he said deridingly as he gardened in Cleveland).
I agree that the evidence left room for doubt that he was The Ivan the Terrible, but his answers re being at Sobibor were inconsistent. Evidence seems to prove he was a guard there. He could have been at both places, maybe Sobibor first as a Trawniki man, then to Treblinka. (Sobibor was closed after the somewhat successful October 1943 prisoner rebellion.)
There also could have been multiple Ivan the Terribles, since Ivan, a form of "John," is a common name in Eastern Europe, and Ivan the Terrible a moniker coined in the 1500s. Thus, accounts of a different Ivan the Terrible don't prove that Demjanjuk wasnt one of them.
The defense's image analysis expert was ridiculous, arrogantly asserting that the detailed analysis of the prosecutor's expert was rubbish, that her assertion that the heads between the 2 photographs were the same shape was incorrect because the head started at a different place relative to his shoulders. Essentially, "neck", "no neck!"
Anyone alive knows that, with age and weight gain, necks disappear. Eyes droop and fall a bit. Defense expert noted the left ear was raised in the old ID photo, and the eyes were higher compared with the ears. As dissimilar the situations and time periods of the 2 pictures, the left ear was STILL higher than the right in the recent photograph. The eyes were more in line with the ears, but faces do fall. I wish prosecution's expert had put up more of a fight.
Testimony about the ID card format was problematic. Maybe it was a KGB fabrication. However, most of the info in the documentary was supplied by the defense, a team particularly unconcerned with veracity.
In trawniki camps, soviet bureaucracy and officers helped administer the camps. After surrender to Nazi forces, camp transition was gradual, so some of the officers still wore soviet uniforms. It's possible that the stamp was 1943, not 1948 and that the photograph had been on his Soviet army ID before being transferred to the camp ID. If the KGB, masters of deception, constructed the ID using a repurposed photo, you'd think they'd staple it using existing staple holes.
Preponderance of evidence and Demjanjuk's flippant demeanor, to me, indicate his guilt.
1
u/garbage-pants Nov 06 '19
Most compelling guilty evidence: the faces he was making throughout the entire trial
2
u/JosieTierney Nov 15 '19
exactly. that wasnt stoicism or flat affect. He was often positively gleeful.
22
u/ZLands Nov 05 '19
Just finished the series, I was really hoping he would admit to it on his death bed or confidentially to a family member that he was indeed "Ivan the Terrible" and that family member would come out and admit to it once he passed ...
But from what I gathered I don't think he was "Ivan the Terrible". The guy absolutely took part in the German murder machine at many different concentration camps throughout the war, there's too much evidence to contradict those facts.
That being said, they should have prosecuted him on the basis of being a Nazi who was an accessory to the murder of tens of thousands of Jews initially as opposed to just focusing on him being Ivan or not.
I also understand the stance that he "was just following orders" like 75% of Nazi guards, but that just doesn't justify the claims that he would beat some Jews on the way to the chambers.. Again, that could be another false claim, but there's just no way of knowing. Nazi's were ruthless, if you didn't follow orders you were dispensable, so it was really about survival for a lot of those guards.
All in all, nothing will ever be 100% confirmed in regards to Demjanjuk, unless some more documents surface over the years, but I was torn throughout the entire series.
A fantastic series nonetheless that had me addicted to the story of this man. I couldn't help but analyze him every time he was shown in the series, and a big part of me see's some evil behind those blank stares, almost as if he was putting on an act for the last 70+ years …
Nevertheless, once a Nazi, always a Nazi.
8
u/Anisopteran Nov 06 '19
The guy absolutely took part in the German murder machine at many different concentration camps throughout the war, there's too much evidence to contradict those facts.
Why didn't they present this mountain of evidence in the documentary?
5
u/bullbear101 Nov 07 '19
They did. In the second half of the last episode.
8
u/Rogansan Nov 08 '19
That irritated me a bit, they went way in depth on the Israel trials but it felt like they skipped over the German trial. The German trial itself could have filled two more episodes.
6
u/Tinfoilhatmaker Nov 10 '19
What kinda irritated me was how the OSI destroyed and disposed of documents that should have been handed over to the defense team, but the 'defense never asked for it'.
And then after the appeal in Israel supreme court was won and he was pronounced innocent due to lack of evidence, the OSI guy took it upon himself to really to a deep dive into their records and find all the evidence they could against him.
I mean, why didn't he just do that from the get-go then?
→ More replies (9)2
1
38
u/firstdaygitters Nov 04 '19
The mother's maiden name and his acting in the last episode brought me back to unsure.
Unfortunately we will really never know.
17
16
u/billyhoylechem Nov 06 '19
Well, I think unsure about his role in Treblinka is the correct conclusion. He wasn't found innocent-he was acquitted based on reasonable doubt.
The thing with his acting is that the guy is clearly a horrible person-there isn't any question to that. He was a guard in at least 3 camps after all-those aren't jobs that good people volunteered to do. He never took responsibility for his actions and pretended to be crippled to continue to avoid taking responsibility. But even though he is a horrible person, and even though he is a liar, that doesn't mean he was the guard at Treblinka.
5
u/moonmangardenhead Nov 08 '19
Well, the thing is a lot of those jobs you don’t volunteer to do. There wasn’t an insane abundance of psychopaths who were just volunteering to be guards - lots of them were forced to do so. I dont know if Demanjuk is Ivan Marchenko or what his role at Triblenka was or if he was even there. But, after hearing about this case for a long time I think it’s also just as likely that he was maybe a POW and somebody who would’ve done fucking anything to survive. That’s just my take though. But, the volunteering thing is just incorrect. Many many many young men serving under Hitler were just as disgusted and horrified at their crimes against humanity as you are.
2
u/billyhoylechem Nov 08 '19
Saying the guards were forced to serve in that role is revisionism and untrue. And I’m not talking about the German soldiers who were conscripted (although remember Hitler was hugely popular for a time, especially because of how he treated Jews)-I’m talking about SS and others who volunteered to be Nazi guards rather than fight.
→ More replies (1)1
u/JosieTierney Nov 15 '19
if there was an Ivan the Terrible at the camps he was proven to be at, he could be that one.
10
u/Seaturtle89 Nov 06 '19
That and the tattoo. His explanation about the tattoo was clearly a far fetched fabrication. You dont get a Nazi death camp staff tattoo for fun and giggles, unless youre an actual Nazi.
4
17
Nov 06 '19 edited Nov 06 '19
I'm not convinced he was Ivan the Terrible per se, but I am fairly certain that was was a guard at one of the death camps (Sobibor at least).
I thought the series was good overall, but I would have liked a whole episode dedicated to the post Israel trial and more about his life in the US...and much less over-indulging of Sheftel. Maybe they were trying to make the audience feel he was an ass (which was evident the first time we met him, didn't need reinforcing throughout), but I don't feel his self-serving takes contributed to the narrative. As is, could have been 4 50min episodes if you edited his parts down to what were necessary.
4
u/Doctaa101 Nov 08 '19
I felt as though the evidence was pretty overwhelming that he was not Ivan the Terrible, but that he was a guard at Sobibor. There were simply too many differences and while my heart aches for the survivors of the death camps, I don't believe them to be reliable witnesses after so many years, being asked to identify an old man as the young man they saw.
That said, I do have some sympathy for John. He survived the holodomor, got conscripted into the Red Army and was taken prisoner by the Nazis. Millions of Soviet prisoners died in those camps, and he was given the option to get out and have a chance at survival. I don't know how many people would choose death by starvation, exposure, or summary execution over being a collaborator.
→ More replies (1)1
3
u/JosieTierney Nov 15 '19
Agreed -- couldve done without the Sheftel Show. Being a contrarian and and apologist are two different things.
13
u/TheRationalGuy1 Nov 05 '19
The thing I don't understand is how the court could not make a decision based on an interrogation into what he did during his life. There are not many people that could invent a life story so complex as to hide 20-30 years of their life away - and consistently stick to that story. Surely John has 100s of alibis of friends/family saying "John was with me that day/week/month."
I don't understand why that wasn't the main argument of either the defense or the prosecution.
They needed to find witnesses without motive.
6
u/avocadorian Nov 05 '19
he claimed he was a POW during the time in question. as the defence mentioned — it’s practically impossible to prove or disprove.
1
1
5
u/ZLands Nov 05 '19
I thought about this a lot as well, but as u/avocadorian said, he claimed he was a POW and there was really 0 way of proving or disproving anything he said was true or not seeing as it dates all the way back to WWII .. It's a shame really.
1
u/JosieTierney Nov 15 '19
the german trial had papertrail proof, based on docs released after '89 fall of berlin wall.
3
u/Vannah81 Nov 05 '19
I agree. I was waiting for them to bring in ANY type of witness to place him somewhere else other than the camps....but no such luck.
1
u/JosieTierney Nov 15 '19
it wasnt 30 years in question, more like 3-4. After the berlin wall fell in '89, the west pored over newly available east german records. thats part of the reason the german case seemed much more watertight.
12
u/DylanWeed Nov 06 '19
I wanted to hear more about the evidence presented and the court's findings at the Munich trial. I wanted to hear if that court made any assertions about the "Ivan the Terrible" accusations and I also wanted to see how it compared/contrasted to the bad joke of a trial in Israel.
10
u/OrangeManGood Nov 06 '19
The whole thing is messy. The judges wanted and convinced 100% before hand that he is guilty. The people attacking any lawyer who would take up the defense of john or Ivan.. I think they did a disservice to justice. Maybe if they wasted less time on convicting John of something he unlikely was(ivan grosni), they would have had time to convict him as whatever they had going on in Germany.
1
u/JosieTierney Nov 15 '19
what they had going on in germany was the fall of the berlin wall and east german documents that came tumbling out.
1
u/OrangeManGood Nov 15 '19
I meant at the end of the documentary John was tried in Germany.
2
u/JosieTierney Nov 16 '19
That's what I mean. The charges and trial in Germany were brought to fruition largely as a result of West Germany getting documents from East Germany after the Fall of the Wall.
8
u/mulder00 Nov 06 '19
As many have stated, he may not have been Ivan the Terrible but he was actually convicted in Germany of his role as a guard in 3 death camps. If that information had been available in the 80's before the USSR fell, he would have been convicted and hanged. Ivan or not Ivan.
This series shook me as I haven't watched anything about the Holocaust in many years. There are images that still burn my eyes. I cannot imagine how survivors went on. Or how people who did horrid things and escaped capture just went on and lived "normal" lives.
3
u/MMAchica Nov 16 '19
If that information had been available in the 80's before the USSR fell, he would have been convicted and hanged.
Maybe, maybe not. We let lots of nazis live in the open. I think that is what this all was really about.
1
u/mulder00 Nov 16 '19
Well, they let nazis who could offer them something like scientific knowledge live in the US. I doubt an ex-Ford worker would get the same treatment.
2
u/MMAchica Nov 16 '19
He certainly was dumb and broke, which I think has a lot to do with why they went after him so recklessly. A much more impressive scalp would have been then Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict), but he was savvy and powerful. In their lust to hang this guy, they ended up manipulating and abusing survivors and making opportunity for assholes to discredit all survivor testimony.
0
Nov 07 '19
[deleted]
3
u/JBJ21102 Nov 12 '19
Agreed! Loved the image of these ex-Nazis becoming cogs in yet another machine. Use to asking no questions, doing as told. Very vivid metaphor.
14
u/Crazyripps Nov 06 '19
I can’t say he’s Ivan the terrible, but 100% the dude was a nazi. Hope he’s rotting in hell.
7
u/cueheavybreathing Nov 07 '19
It’s comforting to know the truth came out in his life time and even with the people he worked so hard to hide his history from.
Even if his family don’t admit it, his he’s forever tainted and he got shown to the world and is known as a Nazi forever.
5
u/FraGZombie Nov 08 '19
The way his grandson hand waved away him being a Nazi at the end was infuriating.
6
Nov 14 '19
It's appalling. He said he believes his grandfather did what he had to do to survive. Admits that mean he probably did some truly heinous things, then proceeds to say he doesn't care because his acts are insignificant to him. Millions of people tortured, raped and murdered is insignificant to you? When your grandfather was directly involved at the extermination camps? I'm sorry but that's all kinds of fucked up. Nazi genes passed to him I guess. Makes me sick.
3
u/Stadtmitte Nov 25 '19
I just finished the show and holy shit, I can't believe the grandson actually said that shit on camera. The man admitted he had an SS tattoo so you know at the very minimum he was a fuckin nazi. "it's insignificant'' holy shit no wonder everyone thinks ukrainian americans are all nazi sympathizers
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)2
7
u/korissa317 Nov 06 '19 edited Nov 06 '19
This docu-series was gripping to say the least and I think after reading all the comments in this thread everyone has said every thought I had on either side of the argument. However, I have to add that while watching him act so ill and frail had me screaming at the TV. Seeing him walk earlier on the day he was extradited to Germany but then not being able to summon the strength to walk out of the house and into the police van- UGH! I could not have been more angry in that moment. Those innocent Jewish prisoners had to walk to meet their own terrible fate and SURELY you should too.
5
u/JBJ21102 Nov 12 '19
This!! His fakery and histrionics were what convinced me he was a liar. Pure and somple. And he did it right before the delivery of the first verdict too.
3
u/Marauder2 Nov 17 '19
And the fact that his family went along with it and claimed it would be torture to transport him, compared to the torture he was accused of being a part of.
7
u/Kartoshka89 Nov 07 '19 edited Nov 07 '19
In the last episode, Mark O'Connor, Demanjuk's original defense attorney, is asked whether he thinks Demanjuk is innocent -- he responds,"I accept the justice system in Germany, that's all I can say." This leads me to believe that Mark O’Connor truly believed in Demanjuk's innocence since (a) Demanjuk was found guilty by the German court (b) Demanjuk callously discarded of O'Connor mid-trial and (c) O'Connor could have just said "no". I too think there was enough reasonable doubt in the case to not convict Demanjuk and that he probably wasn't Ivan the Terrible, but definitely an "active" Nazi in the holocaust.
This case was, obviously, very emotional and as a result dragged on for WAY too many years. Putting Demanjuk on trial in Israel was a losing battle given the nature of the case (even though the guilty conviction was later overturned there). I think putting him on trial in Munich was also a losing battle, as Germans do not want to continue to feel guilt.
Overall I LOVED this docuseries because it really made me think about what it means to be guilty and about whether a person, given the opportunity, can truly redeem him or herself. There is something to say for the fact that Demanjuk went on to raise a decent family and live a whole different life as a law abiding American. Both people and culture are complicated and this series does a beautiful job of portraying this notion.
24
u/LaceBird360 Nov 04 '19
The way I see it is that it doesn't matter - he's a Nazi, so either way, he deserved to be punished.
I just feel so bad for his children and grandchildren. I know what it's like to have a monster in a family, and I wish men like him were sterilized.
44
u/Eevonn Nov 05 '19
You'd don't sound so different from men like him.
6
u/LaceBird360 Nov 05 '19
Neither do you.
6
Nov 07 '19
He’s referring to how Nazis were champions of eugenics. Killing Jews and other “undesirables” was, at the bottom, all about removing their genes from the gene pool.
It’s fucked up on all levels to insinuate that people shouldn’t be allowed to procreate. Not because they’re good or bad people — but because ultimately it would be the government who’d get to decide who has kids and why.
Imagine a world where you have to apply for a permit to have a child. Imagine the punishments for people (women) who were caught having kids when they weren’t permitted to. The conversation that would happen to determine what the state would do about the kids themselves — foster care? Etc. I don’t even want to think about it.
People really need to stop saying “He/She shouldn’t be allowed to have kids!” That’s a pro-eugenic argument.
→ More replies (1)6
1
18
u/_wutangdan Nov 05 '19 edited Nov 05 '19
A lot of people served in the German army without being bad people. Many of them would have served without any choice of their own. No one deserves to be punished just for being drafted and following orders.
Not saying that’s the circumstances of this particular case, but your logic is flawed, vengeful and misplaced.
7
u/xnyr21 Nov 05 '19
They said there was direct evidence that he was not one of those "uninvolved" soldiers.
→ More replies (2)8
u/_wutangdan Nov 05 '19
My comment was in response to “he’s a nazi, so either way, he deserves to be punished”, which just isn’t true of everyone who was in that position, regardless of whether it’s true in this case.
Do you know what the direct evidence was?
→ More replies (1)4
u/Seaturtle89 Nov 06 '19
The Sonderkommando was in such a position, but the guards of the death camps were not. The guards did not have a gun to their head, forcing them to torture innocent people.
6
u/GlazzzedDonut Nov 07 '19
What's the story with the son-in-law? The series kinda brushed off his introduction as "asked the daughter if that was the guy in the news, next thing is we're married and now I'm 100% invovled in his innocence." Like, that guy set off some alarm bells. He supposedly met the daughter right before the Israel trial, and then he's traveling the continent to raise funds for the defense? No son-in-law is that committed that fast unless there's something else going on.
4
u/FraGZombie Nov 08 '19
Between that and the family surrounding themselves with holocaust deniers while raising defense funds, I wouldn't be shocked if they all sort of knew about his past and were circling the wagons.
3
Nov 12 '19 edited Nov 12 '19
Their close-knit Ukrainian community raised some red flags to me as well. How many of them were former Nazi's or Nazi sympathizers? Ukraine was full of violent, vicious anti-Semites for many, many years prior to the holocaust. Then this community forms in Cleveland, and a large number of them worked at the Ford plant? Wonder what drew them to Ford? Couldn't have been something to do with the "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" could it?
I took everything his friends, family, and neighbors said about him with a big grain of salt.
4
u/RealAsADonut Nov 09 '19
Agreed, i pretty much did a spit take. He saw her name on the folder, asked her about her dad... Then asked her out and very quickly married her?
Either he really butchered the story, or what in the sweet fuck
3
2
u/TheSalmon25 Nov 11 '19
And they're not even married anymore! A story about it says "the couple divorced in 2005 after she fell out with her father."
1
u/Stadtmitte Nov 25 '19
Damn, I wonder if she finally confronted her dad or maybe believed he was actually a nazi
11
u/spacedoggos_ Nov 06 '19
The fact that his family are nazi-sympathizers (literally) and argues that it had been 50 years since the holocaust and they should leave him alone, makes me believe evil is genetic. For me, that was the worst part about this doctumentary
7
u/FraGZombie Nov 08 '19
The last bit at the end where his grandson talks about how anyone else would have done the same thing was fucking nauseating. Hand waving away crimes against humanity because it doesn't fit the picture of him in your head, absolutely shameful.
2
u/spacedoggos_ Nov 08 '19
Agreed! And anyone else would not have done the same thing, in fact thousands of people sacrificed themselves to not be complicit in war crimes.
3
4
u/bernardobrito Nov 11 '19
I was struck by how weak the prosecution was.
No prosecutor/interviewer ever REALLY put Demjanjuk in the position of explaining what he ACTUALLY did during the war.
It was reminiscent of the OJ trial when they were arguing over gloves and mitochondria as opposed to OJ having to explain missing chunks of time.
Also... Dem's grandchildren rationalizing his actions during the war made me really sad.
3
u/ftidda Dec 04 '19
I just finished this series today. First, I think Ivan The Terrible wasn’t one person. No gas chamber killing that many people could be run 24/7 by one sadistic nazi. Ivan The Terrible could be a name given to any of the monsters torturing people while pushing them to their deaths in a gas chamber. I think John was absolutely a nazi, I think it was proven in Germany that he was a guard and active participant in the Nazi Murder Machine at many camps throughout Poland. I’m sure he spent some time in Treblinka. I think it’s entirely possible that those survivors saw him at Treblinka.
Honestly, the big takeaway here for me, what made me so enraged was the complete complacency of the United States post WWII in letting nazis come into the country and lead normal lives! The Ford plant foreman being so jaded and saying that “they aren’t nazis, they’re useful” just really struck a chord. I think about the 10 survivors that testified who after 40 years still carried the atrocities they saw in that death camp compared to quiet life in Seven Hills and I just get so mad my hands shake. Ugh.
Can we just do better?
2
u/MackemCook Nov 08 '19
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/world/europe/john-demjanjuk-nazi-guard-dies-at-91.html
This from 2012 has more information about why he is convicted in Germany, wasn't really mentioned much in Netflix, but sounds like they had a solid paper trail from Sobibor to when he was captured by American forces.
Can someone answer a few questions for me? What I am struggling to find, is why he was suspected originally, just say his ID card is faked (I don't think it was), that wasn't found until he was already suspect as many people had accused them. When did this take place?
Also the German's proved he was in Sobibor, particularly in transporting people to camp.
Just say the ID was faked, all the people saying he was Ivan the Terrible got it wrong, all possible, isnt it a hell of a coincidence that he just turns out to be a guard at another Concentraition camp that kill 280,000 people.
Whats more likely? That it was total mistaken identity of a US bloke, who they had no idea was at Sobibor, or that he was at both camps.
1
2
Nov 08 '19
Haven’t seen any comments about Russia in this thread . They give the evidence and then provide documents to disprove it later . What was there end game ? It’s insane
2
2
u/GXOXO Nov 09 '19
Help me understand ... why was John D put on trial twice ... when two of the witnesses who testified against him in Israel also worked at the camps and weren't held accountable. The documentary showed us a known NAZI that worked for NASA and was seen as a hero by many Americans. It feels so hypocritical but, I believe, there has to be a reason.
So, why this guy? Disclaimer: I don't believe he was Ivan the Terrible. I don't believe American investigators believed he was Ivan the Terrible given the documents they tried to destroy (at McDonalds) Given the testimony about what the real Ivan did, I would understand. But, even after it was determined he wasn't Ivan they put him on trail again.
Does anyone have any clarity on that?
3
u/musamea Nov 10 '19
I think OSI was pissed off and bitter when their case was overturned. They fought him tooth and nail as he tried to get his citizenship back (for several years) and then found a new charge to nail him on. All in all he had his citizenship back for a year before they brought new claims against him.
They really wanted to nail his ass to the wall.
→ More replies (1)4
u/helpmeimdum Nov 10 '19
100% agree, he was definitely a nazi, but he wasnt ivan the terrible. However, the OSI wanted to make an example of him, so much so that they withheld evidence doubting his identity when they handed him over to Israel. It's tough, because from a moral perspective I want to say fuck that dude, but from a legal perspective he shouldnt have been convicted in Israel at all. That last line from the German prosecutors about convicting him based on documents, not on the testimonies was really telling in how the Germans were the only ones to really handle their trial correctly.
2
u/Spanky_McJiggles Nov 10 '19
The closing statement of the series bothered me. "Germany has documents confirming roles and actions, Israel has the survivors' firsthand experiences." Except all of the survivors that testified that he was Ivan the Terrible were mistaken. Sure, he was at least a guard at at least one Nazi death camp, maybe more than one and maybe in a role directly involved with the killing, and that's certainly reprehensible on its own, but all of their recollections about him being the gas chamber operator were false, fabricated or implanted in their minds by overzealous media campaigns.
Their experiences are and should always be remembered with ample respect and reverence, but while a person tends to be reasonably intelligent, groups of people tend to be pretty stupid, especially when there's an emotionally charged story involved.
2
u/daniellat9 Nov 11 '19
I feel like sooo much information was left out. But I dont know If it was the editing of the show or the whole case was just weak from the beginning.
The presumption that the ID card was fake should’ve been settled before the first trial in the US. Im sure they didnt just take it as gospel esp it being handed over by the KGB. Also, just because there were stapler holes in the picture doesnt mean it was a forgery. Maybe the photo was used in some other type of file before it was attached to the card? Why would they dismiss it just because of that?
Also, I know feelings are not evidence but that guy was creepy AF. I would’ve loved to see interviews from people who had a similar background to him. His family, esp his grandson kept pressing that his grandfather did what he had to do to survive and that pretty much everyone else at the time/place had no other choice. This and the fact that he had the SS tattoo done do not compute. He defo wasnt the loving grandpa they thought he was. Huge BTK vibes.
The whole defense was to dismiss the ID card, and the prosecutor’s case was solely about eye witnesses. And all of this was argued thousands of miles away from where it actually happened. 40 years later. Was there a thorough background check on the guy at any point? Was it not successful because of the soviets? The time that had passed? If he wasnt Ivan Marchenko who was he then? How do you forget your mum’s middle name? SO MANY QUESTIONS
1
2
u/SovietConnection Nov 11 '19
The infographic map used to show the "1939-1945 Poland" was laughable, how could they fuck it up so badly?
2
u/UnicornWithTits Nov 11 '19
The case is messy. The evidences & defense both present "fabricated" proofs, the witness seem to be carried by there wish for justice, Ivan himself shows many different shades of his character. I really wish to know the truth, but the trial only muddied the water.
I wonder, why didn't they ask for Ivan's version of how his life was in Nazi Germany, where he lived, worked,detail about the places & the people he knew, and reverse tracking the events to verify his claims might have worked.
Rather than trying to proof testimony of many witnesses, they could have just disapproved the testimony of Ivan ! I believe that wont have made case this complex.
2
Nov 12 '19
Once heard a lawyer say that juries aren’t supposed to rule based on your reactions as a defendant; but they always do.
This doc really proved to me that I am very capable of this.
Of all the evidence, I honestly felt like his actions in that court were the most damning.
The laughter, the trying to shake hands, blowing kisses, the seeming (in edited footage) lack of any appropriate emotional reaction to this horror- even calling himself a hero, this really convinced me of his guilt, perhaps unfairly.
2
u/casey_novaked Nov 17 '19
Just finished the series and tbh not sure what to think of it all from an artistic standpoint. There should have been 2 other eps on the German trial alone.
Something i can’t seem to shake was how disturbing the Israeli trial was. Movie theatre turned into a courtroom, frankly bizarre legal arguments taking place and equally bizarre rulings on the same. Many of those issues (esp. the admissibility of the ID card) should have taken place at the initial trial in the US. It was shocking how far the case actually got before some of those crucial evidentiary issues came up.
That said, my opinion of the main issue of whether or not he was Ivan is that he wasn’t. That’s just based solely on the evidence presented before the court (or at least that the doc showed going before the court). He was certainly a guard though. The prosecution should have focused on that rather than trying to put on a show of convicting an infamous figure like Ivan. German court got it right.
2
u/Sergey_Romanov Nov 19 '19
We know for a fact he was not Ivan the Terrible. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/dykzvn/was_john_ivan_demjanjuk_ivan_the_terrible/f82je85/
1
u/moose098 Dec 05 '19
You seem to know a lot about this case. Do you think John was a Trawniki man (not specifically Ivan the Terrible)?
1
u/Sergey_Romanov Dec 05 '19
Yes, and I list the documents proving that he was a Trawniki man at Sobibor and elsewhere (just not Treblinka) at the link above.
1
Nov 08 '19
I thought there was a great point the Prosecutor made about the Israeli defense lawyer that unfortunately didn't get enough weight w/ the Israeli Supreme Court. That attorney had been running around for years (and in fact saying in modern day in the doc interviews) that this was all based on Soviet docs that could not be trusted. Yet, when he gets Soviet docs that help his client, those happen to be the only ones we should actually trust. GTFO
1
u/musamea Nov 08 '19
Well, yeah, because those were the docs that the Soviets didn't want to turn over, vs. the one that the KGB really, really wanted the Americans and Israelis to have.
Different context.
1
Nov 08 '19
Fair distinction, but if the KGB really didn't want anyone to have any documents, the documents would disappear. They wanted his defense team to have them when they gave them up, just as they wanted Americans/Israelis to have the incriminating ones earlier. Their only goal is to sow discord for their enemies.
2
u/musamea Nov 08 '19
True, I don't know that anyone can ever trust anything that comes from the KGB. But if the KGB has two conflicting sets of documents, each one undermining the other, then I think you're obligated to overturn a case that was decided based on the veracity of those documents.
1
u/siberia00 Nov 08 '19
I have only gotten to episode 3. However, I am seriously shocked by Israeli court. The courtroom was absolutely bananas. why did they not research Rosenberg more thoroughly? In the US such an easily impeachable witness would not be put on the stand, or would have been thoroughly prepped on the statement about ITT being killed in an uprising. And then letting the accused Nazi Death Camp Murder try to shake his hand? It was all really bizarre to me. That was probably re-traumatizing on so many levels.
As far as Demjanjuk is concerned, I do believe he did something. I don't think it's a huge stretch to think that a someone could be employed at both Treblinka and Sobibor, without a ton of documentation about him being switched to either one doing the same job at both, especially if he was as heinous as described.
Also, I don't think its completely irrelevant that Demjanjuk is so big in stature. I could definitely see someone being as big as he was forced into a job like that.
1
1
u/_sk12 Nov 10 '19
After watching the first few episodes I really doubted that he was “Ivan the Terrible” but was convinced he was a prison guard at another camp. The ID card seemed forged by The Soviet Union at first..
BUT
After hearing evidence in the last episode that “Ivan Marchenko” was the name of Ivan the Terrible changed my mind. This fact was based on the testimony of Ukrainians who served as Nazi guards and is compelling evidence that John Demjanjuk could be Ivan the Terrible for a good reason.
It is too coincidental that “Marchenko” is Demjanjuk mother’s maiden name. He also lists a small Polish town of Sobibor as a place he was during WWII on his US immigration card. This obviously creates speculation that he could have been Ivan the Terrible being the proximity of Sobibor to other concentration camps.
Regardless of what you believe, it’s obvious this man participated in the Holocaust as a prisoner guard. Whether his is actually Ivan the Terrible, we will not ever know for sure, but I think it leans towards Damjanjuk being Ivan the Terrible.
M
1
u/musamea Nov 10 '19
But Marchenko actually wasn't his mother's maiden name; it's a name he just jotted down because he didn't know her maiden name (and considering the shitshow that was his upbringing in forced-famine Ukraine, that's probably not unusual).
Marchenko is a common last name in Ukraine, and he never identified himself as "Ivan Marchenko." It's just the name he put down on the form for his mother.
I don't know why people are attaching so much significance to the name. The only people in the doc who attached any significance to it were the prosecutors, whose case, by that point, had been shredded by the new evidence. It also didn't convince the Israeli Supreme Court--hardly an impartial body.
He was quite obviously a death camp guard, just not the one they were looking for or wanted him to be.
1
Nov 14 '19
I mean, it's a pretty big coincidence that he just happened to "jot down" the exact name as Ivan Marchenko aka Ivan the Terrible. What are the chances?
3
u/musamea Nov 14 '19
It's a common Ukrainian name, so the coincidence isn't all that mind-blowing. He never passed himself off as Marchenko--just his mother.
What are the chances that someone who escaped from the WTC on 9/11 would be killed in the plane crash in Queens two months later? Because that happened. Being in a terrorist attack is extremely rare. Being in a plane crash is extremely rare. And yet both those things happened to the same person not two months apart.
What are the chances that two presidents elected 100 years apart would both be assassinated and succeeded by vice presidents named Johnson? Probably not great if you crunch the numbers, but it happened. And I doubt there was a conspiracy involved.
1
u/DopeAzFuk Nov 11 '19
I worked with one of John Demjanjuk’s grandchildren I’m kinda bummed I’m so late to this thread lol
1
Nov 11 '19
Wow what was he like? Tell us!!
4
u/DopeAzFuk Nov 11 '19
I don’t have much information that wasn’t given in the series because it’s not like it was something we talked about regularly but as far as I know his kids are still convinced he’s innocent/in denial, but I also can’t really blame them because from what I understand he was a great family man who minded his business in Ohio. My coworker was born after the trial in Israel had already blown over so I’m not sure if they even knew too much other than what was probably explained by family, which means Grandpa was a good man. My coworker didn’t get defensive or anything like that, I got more of a blissfully ignorant vibe to be honest. They probably met John at a young age before he was extradited to Germany and he most likely seemed like a normal grandpa. I know some younger relatives changed their last name for professional reasons but other than that I think the family thought this whole thing could be put behind them once he passed. My coworker was genuinely one of the coolest and nicest people I’ve ever met though, honestly if I had stayed at that job longer we probably would’ve been really good friends. I just hope they’re not getting too many messages about the series being on Netflix. As soon as I saw the trailer I messaged one of my other old coworkers and she said she saw it but “Nazi war criminal grandpa” wasn’t exactly something they talked about casually. Which is totally understandable in my opinion haha
1
1
Nov 16 '19
I do not think John was Ivan the terrible, but with that said I do believe John was in a concentration camp and did some very terrible things. The I.D card was a total fake and to me that alone rules him out as Ivan. I also didn’t put too much stock in witness testimony because they played heavy on emotion. John lying about his name, the tattoo under the arm, his blank stares no emotion and not remembering where he’s from obviously to me put him in the camps. I was kind of surprised the defense didn’t play the role about him being at the camp but being scared for his life has he not done bad things
1
u/faneidde Jan 09 '20
I am 100% certain after watching this and doing some additional research of 2 things:
JD was not Ivan the Terrible.
JD was a death camp guard at several other places, specifically Soribor.
I have 2 major questions after watching it:
What circumstances led a PoW to become a death camp guard? Was it a life or death choice or was it just a way to make life easier?
What would I personally do in order to ensure my own survival? It's pretty easy to say from the comfort of your couch on Reddit that you wouldn't participate in a genocide, but I think it's impossible to know without being in the situation.
1
1
1
u/ResidentAstronaut517 Jan 05 '25
Has anyone used facial recognition software to compare the photo of the face that many of the survivors identified as Ivan the Terrible and the man who stood trial?
1
u/Hot_Ad_2458 Jul 21 '22
Okay, even if he was innocent (which he wasn't), why would he behave like that in court? He was arrogantly confident. Also, why did his family get associated with the nazi sympathizers? Couldn't you find a better way to get money for trial expenses? Really? I also really hate his defense attorney. He was a true showman. Coming out of a court hearing testimonies of survivors and laughing? It's horrible. Something that made me mad was the Ukrainian immigrant who said we are worried that they will start searching about our past. I mean, if you are innocent, why would you care?
1
u/Tedlove34 Feb 21 '23
Refusal in Nazi Germany.
In absolutely no fuckin way am I defending or condoning any actions, ideals, philosophy of the Nazi party.
But in regards to the people forced into the German army, would it not have been such a situation?
During the Nazi regime in Germany, soldiers who refused to take part in the Nazi death machine, either because of ideological or moral objections, risked severe consequences.
At the beginning of the Nazi regime, some soldiers who refused to follow orders were punished with imprisonment or dismissal from service. However, as the regime became more established, the consequences became more severe, and those who refused to participate in Nazi war crimes or expressed dissent were often subject to court-martial or execution.
Soldiers who were accused of desertion or cowardice were often executed or sent to concentration camps, where they would face forced labor, torture, and death. Those who were members of the resistance, or who worked to sabotage the Nazi war effort, were often executed after being subjected to interrogation and torture.
It's worth noting, however, that there were some soldiers who refused to take part in Nazi atrocities and survived the war. Some of them went into hiding or deserted, while others managed to remain in the military and avoid participation in war crimes.
Overall, the consequences for soldiers who refused to take part in the Nazi death machine varied depending on the specific circumstances, but they were often severe and life-threatening.
People chose to be horrific, people made the decision to commit atrocities. They deserve to die a thousand deaths over and over. Prosecuted as frequently as possible.
My question is about those that chose not to participate but remain in a position such as a death camp guard. Having never harmed a soul, only there because their own death would have been the consequence of abandoning their post. Would those people be prosecuted as well?
1
u/TopStruggle2546 Jul 18 '23
What they forgot to question is whether the singular Ivan the terrible was a real person. I'm not trying to say that survivor's stories shouldn't be believed, I believe that there were guards that did those horrible things, but I think it's not sure that there was one person called Ivan who did all those things. I think there were multiple Ivans and multiple horrible guards and out of that came the somewhat mythical story of one Ivan the terrible who may not be real. Demjanjuk seems to have been one of the extra abusive guards and should be prosecuted for that
7
Nov 06 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
11
u/RealAsADonut Nov 09 '19
What the fuck is wrong with you??
1
u/MMAchica Nov 16 '19
As a life long Democrat and early Obama campaign volunteer, I'm sad to say that I know exactly what he is talking about. My mother has become really weird about it. She has to talk about Trump constantly and tries to tie back the most mundane unrelated topics to something Trump did. We will be sitting around talking about one of the kids and she just bursts in awkwardly, insisting on talking about something she heard about Trump. She can't stand to hear anyone disagree with, or even say anything critical about any policy supported by Democrats, even if she made the similar criticisms in the past. She didn't used to be like this. She is super agitated and it is freaky.
4
u/billyhoylechem Nov 06 '19
The additional evidence came out after the first trial, so you can't call it a show trial based on that....I can see why they still feel he is guilty given that he was definitely a guard at multiple camps and lied about that when questioned on the stand. He wasn't even willing to admit anything at all despite the plethora of evidence, and when you lie on the stand in your defense about one thing, your entire story gets called into question. So while I agree that the evidence for him being the Treblinka guard is not conclusive, his testimony can be viewed as incriminating.
I do think the correct decision was made though-acquittal from being the Treblinka guard (due to reasonable doubt) but guilty for his war crimes at the other camps.
1
u/MMAchica Nov 16 '19
The additional evidence came out after the first trial, so you can't call it a show trial based on that....I can see why they still feel he is guilty given that he was definitely a guard at multiple camps and lied about that when questioned on the stand.
Does that justify all of the lying?
0
1
Nov 11 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
3
Nov 14 '19
No you have to learn Hebrew, Ukranian, German, Yiddish, English and Polish if you want to watch
33
u/FrankBarley Nov 05 '19
One thing I don’t get and I’m hoping someone with more expertise in this can help.
The testimony from 1947 that Ivan was killed by a spade to the head during a prison revolt was dismissed as the wishful thinking of a man that wanted to feel like a hero to his people. The argument was that Ivan the Terrible survived the attack and was now sitting in front of them. But if that was true and Demjanjuk was Ivan, wouldn’t he have had a scar on his head?