Meh; 17 and 18 year old men were fighting and dying in that same war. Lest we forget.
Glad they found her guilty; a smidgen of justice was done.
She wasn't hiding.
She did not flee to South America.
She did not go to the USA to work on the Space Programme.
In the 1950's she testified in court and helped convict the camp leader.
That would have been the time for her to claim immunity in return for her testimony ~ not unheard of.
Did not happen, no one told her that immunity might come in handy over 70 years.
No one considered it necessary, and no one thought of prosecuting the secretary at that time when so many were prosecuted for war crimes.
Then somewhere down the line, a judge decides that the helpers should also be prosecuted. Unfortunately, these people are all dead or very old. That does not stop a band of mainly young prosecutors because Nazi is Bad
and they go after the grannies. As we speak there is a man of 103 appealing his conviction.
I followed the case, it was really hard to find that the typist had indeed a defence counsel - she did but he was hardly mentioned. There were prosecutors for every angle. They kept on insisting that she should say how sorry she was: SAY you ARE SORRY! Say you are SORRY!
They claimed that this trial was necessary because the Holocaust should never be forgotten.
Really? Is there any danger that the Holocaust will be forgotten? And if so, would this trial of a typist change the course of history? The claim is ludicrous.
My personal opinion about these trials is that we all should worry about our legal safety. It used to be that you could not be tried and convicted for something that wasn't a crime at the time when it happened. That is no longer the case. Opinions may change - and there you go, even if you were a typist among many, and testified in court. They may even use your own testimony against you if they change their mind after 70 years.
Be very, very careful what you are happy about.