Let me know what you think about THIS: In 2002 Ukraine-born John Demjanjuk was stripped of his U.S. citizenship and was awaiting deportation to Germany. His crime? Not revealing he was a Nazi guard at a concentration camp where over 30,000 Jews were murdered. Demjanjuk denied the charge and said he was kidnapped by Germans from the Ukraine and made into a prisoner of war. 89 years old and deathly ill, Demjanjuk's claims did not hold up for the German government. They issued an arrest warrant and yesterday U.S. Immigration Agents pulled up to his home in Cleveland, Ohio, strapped him to a wheelchair, and took him to a federal building where he was supposed to await his deportation.
The story gets better: The Court of Appeals stepped in at the last minute and decided the gravely ill Demjanjuk should not be deported until further investigation. I know, that's a lot of info, but I wanted to make sure you were primed and ready for my simple question. Should there be a cut off age for punishing potential criminals? The pics of Demjanjuk suggest he can barely breath on his own. What satisfaction can come from punishing a man who's two hours from death? If Demjanjuk was a 60 years old or a somewhat healthy 70 years old, I could understand, but 89 and dying? I say leave the man alone. He hasn't even been proven guilty for crissakes. He's just a suspect. What are your thoughts?
Keith Josef Adkins is an award-winning playwright, screenwriter and social commentator.