Former Nazi concentration camp guard from Sharon dies
A former Nazi concentration camp guard died over the weekend in Hermitage while awaiting a decision on his appeal of a 2010 deportation order, the man's attorney said Wednesday.
Anton Geiser, 88, of Sharon was buried on Monday, Adrian Roe said. He died of complications from injuries suffered in a fall, Roe said.
U.S. District Judge David Cercone stripped Geiser of his citizenship in 2006 after he admitted to being a guard at the Sachsenhausen Concentration Camp near Berlin for most of 1943.
He also served as a guard at Buchenwald Concentration Camp and its Arolsen subcamp from mid-November 1943 until April 11, 1945.
U.S. Immigration Judge Charles M. Honeyman in Philadelphia ordered in 2010 that Geiser be returned to Austria. Geiser appealed that ruling to the Board of Immigration Appeals, the highest court for immigration matters, which heard his case earlier this month.
Geiser claimed he was forced into the service and never killed anyone.
Roe said Geiser's appeal was based on a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court decision that found the appeals board erred in a similar case when it ordered a former guard at an Eritrean prison camp to be deported without considering whether he had been coerced into serving as a guard.
“That's the issue we were struggling with before the Board of Immigration Appeals when Mr. Geiser died,” he said.
Brian Bowling is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-325-4301 or email@example.com.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.