Following World War II, the worst Nazi butchers were brought to trial at Nuremberg, Germany.

One after another, those monsters pleaded "Nicht Sholdig" - Not guilty. Why?

Because, they said, they were "just following orders.."

The world did not buy that excuse back then. Why do we accept that same excuse from our own governments and our own courts? The parliamentarians make bad laws - often for political reasons - and the courts let the worst criminals walk free.

The police refuse to take reports, investigate reported crimes or help crime victims And they all say that they are "just following orders" - just obeying the laws made by the people we elect to protect us.

It is unacceptable, and we, the ordinary people, are responsible - because we accept that excuse instead of holding members of government, the police and the courts responsible for what they do.

I copy the following article for the edification of crime victims, their suffering families and concerned citizens across Canada, and not for personal gain.

SURREY – After a trial, an appeal, and yet another trial, it's case closed.

The Crown has decided not to appeal Katherine Quinn's acquittal of second-degree murder in the beating death of 16-year-old Matthew Martins.

"There's just no grounds for it," Crown spokesman Robin Baird told the Now on Wednesday. "There's not going to be an appeal."

The Surrey mother of three was accused of urging her boyfriend Robert Forslund to kill the boy at the Surrey Central SkyTrain station on July 2, 2005 but was found not guilty of the charge last month following an emotionally charged trial at B.C. Supreme Court in New Westminster.

Forslund is serving a life sentence for slashing the teen's throat with a beer bottle and stomping him to death. He hunted the boy down after Martins cut Quinn, 27, with a penknife to escape from her after she'd mugged him for his gold chain while he was walking by the couple's house in Whalley.

This was Quinn's second trial on the matter. She had been convicted of second-degree after the first trial, but the B.C. Court of Appeal overturned that verdict in 2007, finding no evidence to support the Crown's allegation she supplied Forslund with the beer bottle used to slash Martins' throat.

Justice Wendy Baker delivered the final verdict on May 31 after reading her 59-page reasons for judgment.

The Crown's case had centred on the testimony of witnesses who said they heard Quinn tell Forslund, "If you love me, you'll kill him," and other similar statements. But Baker said she had a reasonable doubt as to Quinn's guilt because she could not rely on the accuracy and reliability of the witnesses' recollections because of inconsistencies in their testimony.

Sandra Martins-Toner, Matthew's mom, said she is "a little discouraged" and "very, very sad" with the decision not to appeal Quinn's acquittal, but she seemed to be accepting it with grace.

"There was just no error in law," she conceded. "There's nothing we can do.

"We're trying to move forward with Mattie in our hearts," she said. "Nothing's every going to bring Mattie back – nothing's going to bring Matthew back to me."

Friday marks the fifth anniversary of his murder.

This is unacceptable. The Crown gives comfort to criminals, openly, with impunity. The individuals who make these decisions - lawyers, judges, politicians - must be held personally responsible. They hide behind "the system". We must show that they are human beings with their own prejudices and agendas. They should be exposed so that ordinary people can see the truth and start getting justice for crime victims.

Closing a case is not an act of God. It is a way for those who hold power to avoid responsibility to the people, the victims, We must hold those who make the decisions to account. Those who make the laws and those who use them for their own purposes are human beings who are responsible for their actions.

I have a solution that would cover more than this one shocking case of injustice. Everything would change if there were a law that required parole board members and judges and defence lawyers to serve the sentence due to the rapist, thief or molester they set free.

If a criminal is allowed to leave prison and he (or she) commits another crime, those who have set him free should have to pay the price, not instead of, but along with the monster they have set loose among innocent people. In fact, they should have to share their cell, so they can get to know the criminal they have sent out among us.

Oh! But that would be justice - and our system knows nothing about justice.

Phyllis Carter