Latest news with #B.B.
Euronews
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- Euronews
Why has Auschwitz Museum created a digital replica of the death camp?
Due to conservation protection, shooting films at the Auschwitz site is not possible. In order to meet the needs of filmmakers, the Auschwitz Museum has made a digital replica, which was created "out of the growing interest of directors in the history of the German camp," explains Bartosz Bartyzel, a spokesman for the museum, in an interview with Euronews Culture. Euronews Culture: Where did the idea to create a digital replica of Auschwitz come from? Bartosz Bartyzel: The Auschwitz Museum has been working with filmmakers for many years - both documentary filmmakers and feature film directors. However, due to the conservation protection of the authentic Memorial Site, it is not possible to shoot feature films at the site. The idea to create a digital replica was born out of the need to respond to the growing interest in the history of the Auschwitz German camp in cinema and the daily experience of dealing with the film industry. This tool offers an opportunity to develop this cooperation in a new, responsible and ethical formula. Why is a replica necessary? B.B.: The regulations in force at the Memorial preclude the possibility of shooting feature films on the authentic and protected site of the former camp. However, filmmakers - especially those who want to reach for more narrative forms - need a space that allows them to tell the story faithfully. With a digital replica, they can do this without compromising the integrity of the historic site. Were filmmakers consulted with before the implementation? B.B.: In fact, it was the day-to-day collaboration with filmmakers and the production needs and challenges they reported that inspired the project. The idea was not detached from reality - on the contrary, it was born out of specific conversations, experiences and questions that had been coming from the creative community for years. Who was involved in the creative process? How long did it last? B.B.: The Picture from Auschwitz project is a joint initiative of the Auschwitz Museum, the Auschwitz-Birkenau Foundation and a team of technology specialists led by Maciej Żemojcin. The very concept crystallised over several months in the course of joint work and discussions. The technical team used the most advanced spatial scanning technologies to create a digital replica of the Auschwitz I camp. At the moment, the Foundation is making efforts to raise the funds needed to continue the project - to create a digital replica of the grounds of Auschwitz II-Birkenau, as well as the interiors of some of the buildings. What reactions did you receive after the announcement of the creation of the replica? B.B.: The reactions were definitely positive - both from the film community, which sees this as a viable and professional working tool, and from the general public, for whom this is an opportunity to learn about history in a deeper and more authentic way through the medium of film. The project has also been recognised in international debate, including at the Marché du Film in Cannes. Are there already willing filmmakers who will benefit from the replica? B.B.: We have already started discussions with the first filmmakers who have expressed an interest in collaborating using the digital replica. The details of these projects remain at the agreement stage for the time being, but we hope to be able to provide more information on the first productions soon. How has this project been funded and what will it take to sustain it? B.B.: The creation of the replica is financed by the Auschwitz-Birkenau Foundation from earmarked donations made by private donors. The Foundation is seeking funds to continue the project. Its assumption is that ultimately the maintenance and development of the programme will be financed through licence fees paid by film producers who will use the materials within the Virtual Film Location. This way, the project will become a self-financing tool, simultaneously supporting the educational and commemorative mission of the Memorials. What difficulties have arisen in implementing the project? B.B.: Such large and innovative projects always face difficulties. One of the biggest was, of course, obtaining adequate funding to start and develop the project. A key challenge was also the need to reconcile high-tech solutions with the very special status of the space we were mapping. Although we are working in a digital environment, we must not forget that every step we take concerns an authentic Memorial, which is subject to unique protection. This must be a priority thought in every action.
Euronews
10-04-2025
- Euronews
Could the murderers of Turkish-Italian teenager Mattia Ahmet Minguzzi face adult sentences?
ADVERTISEMENT The murder of Mattia Ahmet Minguzzi, a 15-year-old boy who died in a knife attack in Kadıköy in January, shook Turkey deeply — and his killing has revived an intense debate on youth violence. The indictment in the case says Minguzzi was killed by two attackers: 15-year-old B.B., who allegedly stabbed Mattia five times, and 16-year-old U.B., whom prosecutors say kicked him when he fell to the ground after being stabbed. The authorities are demanding the two be sentenced to up to 24 years in prison for "intentional killing against a child". The first hearing in the trial began Thursday 10 April, and the verdict is expected later this month. Minguzzi's family and much of the public have demanded that the defendants receive the maximum penalty for their alleged crime, arguing that a strict sentence would serve as a deterrent. But many Turkish legal experts argue that under current law, a juvenile sentence is mandatory. This means that if convicted and jailed, the suspects may be released from custody in roughly 10 years if they meet certain conditions. The questions for the court are many: is it possible for the suspects to be given full adult sentences? What sentences have been handed down in similar cases, both in Turkey and around the world? And is the proportion of offenders under 18 really growing in Turkey? What does the Turkish Penal Code say? If the suspects were of legal age, they would be sentenced to aggravated life imprisonment for the offence they committed, but since they are under the age of 18, they are being tried in a different way. According to Article 31 of the Turkish Penal Code, persons under the age of 18 are considered children — and for those in the 15-18 age group, the penalty for the offence they commit is reduced by a certain degree, and life sentences must be reduced to defined terms. In some exceptional cases the court may minimise the reduction, but it cannot go beyond the penalty limits set for children. For a child to be charged as an adult, the Constitutional Court or parliament would need to change the law. A judge does have discretion to impose the maximum penalty, and pressure from the public and from the victim's family may influence their decision. According to the evidence, Minguzzi was first stabbed by 15-year-old B.B. and then kicked by 16-year-old U.B. in the attack that took place in a marketplace in Kadıköy. While the defendants claim that the incident occurred in a moment of anger, witnesses have suggested that the attack appeared planned, with some saying the attackers acted cold-bloodedly and showed no sign of remorse as they fled the scene. Forensic examination concluded that Minguzzi suffered three stab wounds on his body and a penetrating wound to his chest. The cause of death was determined as internal organ injury due to assault with a sharp instrument. Who is an adult? In some countries, child perpetrators can be tried directly in adult courts depending on the severity of the offence in question. In many US states, children aged 16-17 can be tried as adults under the "Trial as an Adult" programme, which allows juvenile defendants who commit serious offences to be tried under adult criminal law. Under this system, children are either tried directly in an adult court or transferred from a juvenile court to an adult court. In one infamous case in 1993, a court tried 13-year-old Eric Smith, who brutally murdered a four-year-old child, as an adult and did not reduce his sentence to reflect his age when he was found guilty. ADVERTISEMENT ABD'de görülen 1993 tarihli davada mahkeme, dört yaşındaki bir çocuğu vahşice öldüren 13 yaşındaki Eric Smith'e ceza indirimi uygulamadı. AP Photo In the UK, children over the age of 10 who commit serious offences can be tried in adult courts instead of special juvenile courts, as in the notorious case of Jon Venables and Robert Thompson, two 10-year-olds who kidnapped, tortured and killed two-year-old James Bulger in 1993. In Canada, defendants over the age of 14 can be referred to adult court for certain offences; in Germany, meanwhile, defendants between the ages of 18 and 21 can be tried as adults in some cases, but sentence reduction is mandatory for those under 18. In Turkey, on the other hand, defendants under the age of 18 are tried in juvenile courts or heavy criminal courts, with age-related sentence reduction mandatory in all circumstances. But every so often, a particularly shocking case revives public debate over the issue. ADVERTISEMENT Young offenders Ogün Samast was 17 years old when he murdered Hrant Dink, Editor-in-Chief of Agos Newspaper, on 19 January 2007. He received a sentence of 22 years and 10 months in prison — a juvenile commutation from the life sentence he would have received otherwise. After 16 years and 10 months' detention, he left prison on conditional release on 15 November 2023. Meanwhile, Cem Garipoğlu, the murderer of Münevver Karabulut, was 17 years old when he killed Münevver Karabulut on 3 March 2009. He was sentenced to 24 years in prison instead of aggravated life imprisonment because he was under the age of 18. He was likely to receive a conditional release after 10-15 years, but was found dead in Silivri Prison on 10 October 2014. ADVERTISEMENT His case met with a great public outcry, with anger at the sentence reduction and questions about the fairness of the judiciary's decisions. If the same pressure is kept up over the Minguzzi case, there may be political impetus for parliament to amend the law to allow for adult sentences. As things stand, there is increasing public alarm about a supposed rise in juvenile violent crime. Social media posts claim that the crime rate in Turkey is increasing day by day and that the share of criminals under the age of 18 is growing. But while the available data point to a certain upward trend in the rate of involvement of children under the age of 18 in any form of crime in Turkey, many of the figures are insufficiently detailed and too out-of-date to make clear exactly how many child perpetrators have been arrested and detained or whether a trend is at work. 'We want it to be a deterrent' Even if Minguzzi's alleged killers are sentenced to 24 years, which is the maximum limit, their prison stay may be reduced to 9-10 years given the law's conditional release and probation provisions. ADVERTISEMENT In addition, since the judge has discretionary power, the suspects may not be sentenced to the maximum limit, which could shorten their stay even further. "We want it to be a deterrent," said Yasemin Minguzzi, the murdered boy's mother. She has been sharing posts and speaking to various media outlets, and has repeatedly expressed her concerns about the potential for her son's killers to be granted early release. The Minguzzi family's campaign has found widespread support online and off, with a petition against a reduced sentence for the killers already garnering thousands of signatures. "No one can take away a child's right to life in any way, for any reason, and there was not even a reason for our dear Ahmet," the petition reads. "But unfortunately, the laws in our country are inadequate in terms of parental responsibility for criminals under the age of 18." ADVERTISEMENT "In addition to the maximum penalty for the murderers of our beloved Ahmet, we must add all the necessary regulations to our legal regime for this crucial event. The parents of under-18 offenders must also be held responsible for the legal consequences of their children's actions. This will not only help to eliminate the incentives for offending, but will also give our young people a better future." "With this precedent, we are urgently calling for the current inadequate laws to be carefully adjusted for irresponsible parents who have no idea what it takes to raise children."
