Aftermath

Abstract

The Leipzig verdict was assailed by the German media, and the Nazi party’s press bureau proclaimed that true justice “has its roots in the feelings of the people.” It decried “alien liberalistic reasoning,” which prevented the court from removing the “communist menace” from Germany. Judicial reform was therefore essential to establish “true law.”¹ For most outside observers, the opposite interpretation predominated—namely, that the German court had acted fairly and the innocent had been exonerated. In Britain, home of the countertrial, there was little disagreement over the end result, but the issue of foreign pressure on the court remained controversial. Leftists credited the Commission of Inquiry and public opinion with being major influences on the verdict, and were critical of the court’s attachment to the Communist conspiracy thesis. The Commission of Inquiry gladly took the credit, and claimed that it had forced the defendants to be tried in the “court of world opinion.” Conservatives stressed the court’s objectivity and condemned “busybodies” who affronted the German legal system by having called for the acquittal of defendants before the trial had taken place.² Quickly, however, the need for external leverage again became apparent as Germany shocked the world’s sensibilities. Acquittal did not turn out to mean freedom for the defendants! What countertrial chairman D. N. Pritt termed the “second stage” of public opinion was thus set in motion.³