BBC News story: Russia to release massacre files, 16 December 2004 online
bbc.co.uk
See, e.g.,BBC Article for BBC by Prof. Richard Overy ("[T]hat the war crimes trials... were expressions of a legally dubious 'victors' justice' was [a point raised by]... senior [Allied] legal experts who doubted the legality of the whole process... There was no precedent. No other civilian government had ever been put on trial by the authorities of other states... What the Allied powers had in mind was a tribunal that would make the waging of aggressive war, the violation of sovereignty and the perpetration of what came to be known in 1945 as 'crimes against humanity' internationally recognized offences. Unfortunately, these had not previously been defined as crimes in international law, which left the Allies in the legally dubious position of having to execute retrospective justice – to punish actions that were not regarded as crimes at the time they were committed.")
'The Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial, 1963–1965: Genocide, History, and the Limits of the Law' por Devin O. Pendas, Boston College, Massachusetts. (ISBN978-0-521-12798-1)[1]
See, e.g., statement of Professor Nicholls of St. Antony's College, Oxford, that "[t]he Nuremberg trials have not had a very good press. They are often depicted as a form of victors' justice in which people were tried for crimes which did not exist in law when they committed them, such as conspiring to start a war."Prof. Anthony Nicholls, University of Oxford
«Motion adopted by all defense counsel». The Avalon Project: Nuremberg Trial Proceedings volume 1. Lillian Goldman Law Library. 19 de noviembre de 1945. Consultado el 23 de noviembre de 2011.
