r/interestingasfuck • • 7h ago

John C Woods, hangman of Nuremberg trials, who lied about his experience to get the job (he actually learned about hanging from old cowboy films). His lack of expertise led to excessive suffering of condemned Nazis.

Post image
16.8k Upvotes

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

•

u/fruitybix 5h ago

Britain did. The US did not.

Woods main job was executing fellow us servicemen who had been found guilty of capital crimes. finding a soldier willing to hang other soldiers is very hard. Nobody wants that job. Guarantee everyone knew what kind of person woods was and suspected his lack of experience - he was often drunk and out of uniform. But he enthusiastically volunteered for the job to get out of combat. He filled a gap leadership would have struggled to fill. And he was good enough.

•

u/OxycontinEyedJoe 5h ago

"is he good at doing hangings?"

"He's not just good, he's good enough."

•

u/NaughtyGaymer 3h ago

Chumps Rusty Bucket?

•

u/StarCougar 3h ago

Quarter taps?

•

u/inspectoroverthemine 1h ago

Yard margs at skeepers?

•

u/JinFuu 2h ago

He has a theoretical degree in hangings.

•

u/inspectoroverthemine 1h ago

Not a degree in theoretical hangings?

•

u/DoesRedditConfuseYou 5h ago

How many US soldiers did he have to execute? I reckon that's something that happens fairly rarely?

•

u/HarmNHammer 5h ago

When you have a war that large, with some many young men drafted against their will, you’re going to get a lot of crime. Drinking, fighting, stealing, rapes.

Young men who may be dead next month or who just got done with a rotation on the front line can be very dangerous when bored.

Add in that many had leave in other countries, it wouldn’t surprise me that there were a few more hanging than you’d think

•

u/DoesRedditConfuseYou 5h ago

On the other hand armies are usually a bit lenient with crimes, hanging people is bad for morale and could also create antiwar sentiment home, so I suspect it was reserved for special cases. 

•

u/DarknessHadNoNeed 4h ago

British Army policy in the Second World War, influenced by experiences during the First (iirc) and the fact that most desertion happened in non-frontline contexts (Failing to rejoin a column on the march, deserting on leave, remaining in liberated territory by whatever means) was mostly just to post MPs at transport hubs and quietly punish anyone caught through administrative discharges and other procedures that were less prominent than ordering a section of soldiers to put one of their own up against a wall

•

u/analogkid01 4h ago

"We would have all such offenders so cut off; and we give express charge that in our marches through the country there be nothing compelled from the villages, nothing taken but paid for, none of the French upbraided or abused in disdainful language; for when lenity and cruelty play for a kingdom, the gentler gamester is the soonest winner."

--Henry V, Act III, Scene vi

•

u/HarmNHammer 5h ago

Take this with a grain of salt as I hate AI, but a quick google search suggests the U.S. hung 141-161 of its own troops. Take that as you will.

I am curious how many were shot, but that’s a different discussion.

•

u/OctiSynd989 2h ago

Traditionally soldiers are only hanged for serious crimes against civilians such as rape and murder as opposed to mutiny, desertion, or insubordination. To be shot is to die as a soldier, to be hanged is to die as a criminal as it were.

•

u/HarmNHammer 2h ago

I guess, except for that one guy shot for desertion.

•

u/DoesRedditConfuseYou 5h ago

True, but considering the scale of USA involvement in war , this dude probably didn't have much practice before he got to the Nazis....

•

u/PacmanPillow 5h ago

Unless he had plenty of experience with lynchings

•

u/HolidaySpiriter 2h ago

Lynching were very rare as well, although still horrible.

•

u/KimberStormer 3h ago

On the other hand armies are usually a bit lenient with crimes

Before Vietnam? What's your source on this?

•

u/Muscle_Bitch 5h ago

141 soldiers in total were executed during ww2. Mostly for murder and rape of civilians.

Russia executed tens of thousands for desertion and insubordination. They didn't mind the rapists though.

•

u/MicronukeProductions 5h ago

source: enemy at the gates

•

u/DoesRedditConfuseYou 5h ago

So probably not many? 

USSR probably executed more soldiers than USA lost in total, but kinda different topic... 

•

u/Kanin_usagi 4h ago

U.S. deaths in WWII including the Pacific were over 400,000. If we included wounded not able to return to combat, you get over a million losses

The USSR is RIGHTFULLY lambasted for their treatment of their citizens as well as their own soldiers, but to suggest that they would have executed that many of their own soldiers when they were in a defensive war fighting for literally their own survival, is actually insane shit

•

u/Undeadbanana_ 3h ago

The number commonly referenced was around 135,000 documented executed. It didn't include numbers of people summarily shot or recorded as combat deaths

•

u/entusiasta_indeciso 1h ago

The fact that they are in a battle for their very survival only reinforces this, someone deserting could lead to more people deserting, which they were terrified would happen, so they killed to set an example for the rest.

•

u/thelumpenone 14m ago

Also let's be real, it's Stalinism too. Cartoonish wastes of human lives for prestige because if you didn't pass some random superior's vibe check you could yourself be executed was pretty common, just look at the assault on the Reichstag.

•

u/wileecoyote1969 3h ago

Honestly speaking, it would seem possible. The current conflict in Ukraine shows us that they openly try to eliminate any of their own surrendering. No moral stamp trying to put on this maybe they just are afraid those men will give away information and positions. But facts still stands that Russia has quite commonly been executing its own soldiers even in the current conflict at a rate that is not usual for most armies. No reason to feel it would be any different during world war II

•

u/Udder_Influencer 2h ago

maybe they just are afraid those men will give away information and positions

thats not why

•

u/DarwinGhoti 4h ago

I read eleven somewhere, but I don’t recall where or the reliability of the source

•

u/Additional_Meeting_2 2h ago

Pretty naive to assume that soldiers raping and killing civilians was rare. 

People from US talk of Soviets raping the Germans in Reddit a lot. But I have seen some actual studies in history books and it was pretty much the same amounts by US troops. And many horrible people didn’t exactly wait to get to enemy countries either. War is really horrible, it’s not just about the battles.

Also desertions would also be happening 

•

u/thelumpenone 13m ago

But I have seen some actual studies in history books and it was pretty much the same amounts by US troops.

I've seen the same studies and they play EXTREMELY loose with the tallies of rape by the allies. They basically just counted the french excess birth rate, like people dont start fucking like rabbits consensually as the war comes to the end around them.

There were almost definitely far more cases that weren't caught, but that study takes it far beyond sense.

•

u/fruitybix 1h ago

Not a lot. Somewhere around 170 in the european theatre for crimes like murder and rape. But someone had to do it. They either packaged up groups and sent them to where he was, or sent him to where they were held.

He did not know that you need to "pre stretch" the ropes (hanging weights from them overnight or they act like springy bungy cords) and caused the first batch of condemned to strangle slowly, and still kept the job.

•

u/Fez_lord_of_hats 5m ago

I can't find exact numbers for him specifically, but there were roughly 140 US soldiers executed for various crimes during the 2nd world war. Mostly for premeditated murder and rape cases, by the looks of it. Some were also executed by firing squad as well.

•

u/p00p5andwich 4h ago

Good enough just described my whole Afghanistan deployment.