[Asdfbla]

I have nothing to say really about your first point where you do nothing but speculate about police motives, but the second one doesn't prove anything either.

The second case is not a slippery slope because it does precisely what's codified in German law, nothing more and nothing less. The lawyer herself denied the holocaust and that's punishable in Germany. So the law was correctly applied. That has absolutely nothing to do with the slippery slope discussion.

[bloobloobloo]

> you do nothing but speculate about police motives

80 cops "failed to notice" over 1000 violent crimes taking place in a space about the size of a football field, over the course of several hours.

My "speculation" is, by far, the very kindest interpretation.

> So the law was correctly applied.

Let's hope so. Defending her is a crime so we'll never really know.

[Asdfbla]

You can defend her if you can resist your urge to praise Hitler and deny the Holocaust yourself in court. Again, that's all transparent and clearly defined in German law, so it literally had nothing to do with the original slippery slope discussion.

[bloobloobloo]

And you can defend a black girl who won't move to the back of the bus if you can resist the urge to claim blacks are people.

Fair trials without all that pesky social change! What could possibly go wrong?