【摘要】 东京审判期间，远东国际军事法庭庭长威廉·韦伯对南京大屠杀案相关证据，以及松井石根、武藤章、广田弘毅等人的责任进行了个性化思考，提出了其个人关于判决的阶段性意见，这些意见与法庭正式的判决并不完全一致，这恰恰显示了最终判决是多方意见碰撞的产物。韦伯在思考中提出了很多问题，如日军所谓“事变”的阴险含义、民事官员的责任、谁应对南京大屠杀负责、法庭的定罪策略等等，促使我们更加深入地研究南京大屠杀史。更多还原

【Abstract】 William Webb,the President of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East during the Tokyo Trials,made individualized considerations on the evidence related to the Nanjing Massacre and the responsibilities of Iwane Matsui,Akira Muto and Hirota Kōki etc,and put forward his own phased opinions on the verdicts.These opinions were not entirely consistent with the official judgments of the court,which precisely demonstrated that the final verdict was the result of the collision of multiple opinions.Webb raised many questions in his thinking such as the insidious meaning of the so-called "incident" by the Japanese army,and the responsibilities of civil officials,who should be responsible for the Nanjing Massacre etc.,which prompts us to conduct a more in-depth study on the history of the Nanjing Massacre.更多还原