You fail to understand that the appeal is besides the point. First of all the appeal fully upheld one of the findings against Kastner (his false defense for Kurt Becher). Secondly the other 3 points, the appeal split 3-2. Thirdly, the very fact a ZIONIST court admitted his collaboration with the Nazis speaks volumes. It was in their interest to deny it. If there was an iota of basis to deny it, they would. The appeal (on the 3-2 counts) was due to sympathy for his recent killing and to cover up the Zionists murderous sins. Its no chiddush. And even that was a split verdict.
I’ve browsed through it some time ago. It isn’t “3,000 pages”. BTW even Kastners defenders have admitted that he did fill the train mostly with family and friendly Zionists of his.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
The apeal is besides the point because you want it to be. But it is the crux of the issue. Why do you assume that the appellate court was more plotically motivated and corrupt than the lower court? It seems that when Zionists happen to do that with which you agree you accept the action as significant. but when they do something you don’t like, it’s due to something nefarious. That’s a great dialectic to adopt over chulent and kigel noch davenen, but it isn’t goind to get you far in serious inquiry. In the end he was exonerated. Moreover, he was not found to have collaborated. He was found to have assisted Becher AFTER THE WAR. That’s a far cry from collaboration at the time of the genocide. And I admit that Kasztner’s actions in this regard confound me. His wife felt it was because he had made a promise and kept his word. I ascribe it to a combination of PTSD, frustration and bitterness. That affidavit was his last chance to be a macher. Which defenders admit that he filled the train with his cronies? Provide me a source. I’ve based most of my writing on this subject on two sources: The AJC’s rejoinder to Perfidy and Anna Porter’s recently published book, Ksztner’s Train. What are your sources?