Who betrayed Anne Frank

Discussion in 'The Holocaust' started by Lindele, Jan 18, 2022.

  1. Lindele

    Lindele formerly HA96

    According to a local newspaper, a Cold- Case – Team with the Ex- FBI agent Vince Pankok claims that it was a Jewish notary trying to save his own family from deportation.

    Vince and his team based their claim on an anomalous letter Otto Frank received in 1946. “We are not 100% sure, but our theory with >85% is not bad at all.”

    The notary and his family survived the war.
    Even 77 years after WW2 ended,certainty is still missing.
    Stefan.
     
  2. Ramiles

    Ramiles Researching 9th Lancers, 24th L and SRY

    It was covered recently by the BBC....

    Anne Frank betrayal suspect identified after 77 years

    Including...

    In the files of a previous investigator, they found a copy of an anonymous note sent to Otto Frank identifying Arnold van den Bergh as his betrayer.
    Mr Pankoke told 60 Minutes that anti-Semitism may have been the reason it was never made public.
    "Perhaps he just felt that if I bring this up again… it'll only stoke the fires further," he said.

     
    4jonboy and Lindele like this.
  3. stolpi

    stolpi Well-Known Member

    I'm not an expert, but researchers in the Netherlands are extremely skeptical about the outcome of the study.

    According to them it is highly unlikely that Van den Bergh, as a board member of the Joodsche Raad even possessed a list of hiding places. The Joodsche Raad played a controversial role. It collaborated with the Germans, in the vain hope that it thus could protect the Jewish community and prevent worse. The board actually strongly discouraged going into hiding and therefore it was the last instance where you left the address of your hiding place.

    BTW the Joodsche Raad, founded in Feb 1941, by the end of September 1943 had already been disbanded: a year before the Frank family were betrayed.

    Since the war much research has been done in the case of the betrayal of the Frank family. Over the years 27 likely candidates have come into the picture, but it has never been fully established who the perpetrator was. Van den Bergh is one of them (actually no. 24 on the list).
    Some experts even question the 'betrayal' of the Frank family. It might have been a coincidence that led to the arrest of the family: a slip of the tongue or striking behavior that had triggered the attention of the wrong authorities.
     
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2022
    Wobbler and Lindele like this.
  4. ltdan

    ltdan Nietenzähler

    My non-essential opinion on this:
    Take one of the most prominent Holocaust victims by far and make a spectacular "who dunnit" story that will be published with the expected media hype:
    The real culprit will never again be identified with certainty. Nor could he be prosecuted anymore.
    And it won't change the fate of the family in the slightest anyway.

    You may think I'm terribly cynical, but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if an " revealing story" of some kind were to appear soon about this

    regards
    Olli
     
    stolpi, Wobbler, von Poop and 4 others like this.
  5. P-Squared

    P-Squared Active Member

    To be honest (and my humble view), I don’t see how this is helpful. The pressures on people living under German occupation were immense - something we will never be able to imagine. ‘Judging’ people for their behaviour under such circumstances proves what precisely? I wonder - if it were a choice between someone else and my own family - how I could just stand by and let my own kin perish?
    As has been said, it certainly grabbed the headlines in this sound bite society - sadly, most people will never bother to discover the context (or the facts) that surround it - even if it is true.
     
    Markyboy, Lindele, ltdan and 2 others like this.
  6. Dave55

    Dave55 Atlanta, USA

    CBS News is involved so it it pretty much guaranteed to be 100% Grade A BS!
     
    Wobbler, 17thDYRCH and P-Squared like this.
  7. P-Squared

    P-Squared Active Member

    I note as well that the report says ‘Arnold van den Bergh, a Jewish figure in Amsterdam, probably "gave up" the Franks to save his own family.’ Probably. Meanwhile, van den Bergh’s relatives will have to live with this ‘probability’.
     
    Dave55 likes this.
  8. stolpi

    stolpi Well-Known Member

    Again, I'm not an expert, but researchers in the Netherlands are extremely skeptical about the outcome of the study. The only circumstantial evidence is an anonymous note that surfaced after the war designating Van den Bergh as the perpetrator and the fact that he, unlike most other members of the Joodsche Raad of which he was a member, was not deported.

    According to the experts it is most unlikely that Van den Bergh, as a board member of the Joodsche Raad possessed a list of hiding places. The Joodsche Raad played a controversial role. It collaborated with the Germans, in the vain hope that it thus could protect the Jewish community and prevent worse. The board actually strongly discouraged going into hiding, so as not to provoke the occupier. It therefore was the last instance where you left the address of your hiding place.

    BTW the Joodsche Raad, founded in Feb 1941, was disbanded by the end of September 1943: a year before the Frank family were betrayed. Most board members had been deported by that time to the German Death Camps.

    Since the war much research has been done in the case of the betrayal of the Frank family. Over the years 27 likely candidates have come into the picture, among them Van den Bergh, but it has never been fully established who the perpetrator was. Van den Bergh was actually no. 24 on the list. Some experts even question the 'betrayal' theory. It might have been a coincidence that led to the arrest of the family: an unintentional slip of the tongue or striking behavior that had triggered the attention of the wrong authorities.

    So I dare say that any research in this matter remains a matter of speculation. A juicy subject that apparently is commercially interesting.
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2022
    Wobbler, Dave55, 17thDYRCH and 4 others like this.
  9. Ramiles

    Ramiles Researching 9th Lancers, 24th L and SRY

    I had a glance back at some of the references re. the (British) Channel Islands during WW2, and was also reading recently...

    Max Schmeling Dies

    Where there is the quote...

    "We don't want to generalise, said Max Schmeling. Many of the British behaved in a soldierly way and also treated our prisoners decently. Thus I saw a British medical officer whom we had captured helping in our forward casualty centre. This however, is exceptional, and does not alter the fact that the disregard of the Laws of War by the British commanders and troops, and above all by inciting the Cretan population to dastardly and underhanded guerilla warfare had cost many a German his life."

    The question - Who betrayed Anne Frank - * if it is solely about one person's culpability and was one man "trying to save his own family from deportation" seems a lot of focus, money and effort on one aspect, like a defence of "only obeying orders" vs. "disregard of the Laws" - whereby what were the laws at the time and what were civilians expected to do, where merely hiding the Franks was in "disregard of the Laws" ? ... the whole civilian population under the occupying force being told and expected etc. to "betray the Franks"... :-(

    Ref. on one of the individuals my Grandfather wrote about... "president of the courts trying the offenders against the state"...

    Sherwood Rangers Yeomanry (SRY) in North West Europe

    "You’d love this country and its people I’m sure, they’re so very kind and of course they love the English. Of course their children have insisted that I promise to bring you here after the war, you see they have an interest in the “Kline kinda” (little child). They are quite rich too, the brother is an Advocate in the law courts. At the moment he is president of the courts trying the offenders against the state." -
    presumably including offenders against the state - who had "only been obeying orders / commands" under the authority of the previous occupiers... not those breaking the laws on "not hiding individuals" that the prior occupiers had sought to enforce (and thereby "hiding individuals from the state" was offending against the - prior - occupiers of the state).

    *
    A name which - quote on the BBC article post #2 - above - "Otto Frank (had an anonymous note) identifying Arnold van den Bergh as his betrayer." & "Mr Pankoke told 60 Minutes that (stoking) anti-Semitism may have been the reason it was never made public."
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2022
    Wobbler and 17thDYRCH like this.
  10. davidbfpo

    davidbfpo Patron Patron

    P-Squared likes this.
  11. Ramiles

    Ramiles Researching 9th Lancers, 24th L and SRY

  12. smdarby

    smdarby Well-Known Member

    Headline in Dutch News: "Dutch publisher of new Anne Frank book apologises for any offence"

    "The Dutch publishers of a new book about the betrayal of Anne Frank have delayed a decision about a second print run pending ‘answers from the investigative team to questions that have arisen’ following the publication earlier this month."

    This part is revealing:

    "According to the Volkskrant, individual journalists who were given exclusive access to the book were asked to sign a secrecy agreement and told that they would be held personally liable for any leaks about it ahead of the agreed publication date. The deal prevented journalists from approaching other experts to check and verify facts about the book, which nevertheless generated headlines around the world, and was the subject of a CBS documentary."

    Full article here: Dutch publisher of new Anne Frank book apologises for any offence - DutchNews.nl
     
    P-Squared likes this.
  13. Dave55

    Dave55 Atlanta, USA

    Silence from CBS
     
    stolpi and CL1 like this.
  14. Marco

    Marco Senior Member

    The alleged apology was an internal e-mail to other authors using the same publishing company. This email was ‘leaked’ to the press. An official – public – apology has yet to be made.
     
  15. Marco

    Marco Senior Member

    Basically the book is a History Channel documentary. If THIS might have happened, then THIS might also have happened. No proof what so ever, just a transcript of a gossip note, which mentions a list that no one has ever seen.
     
  16. CL1

    CL1 116th LAA and 92nd (Loyals) LAA,Royal Artillery Patron

    I do not see the truth being found out after so many years.Headline grabbing as do most things when such a large story looms.
     
    Dave55 likes this.
  17. ltdan

    ltdan Nietenzähler

    sigh...as expected: some people really don't hold anything sacred anymore when it comes to quick money
     
  18. Charley Fortnum

    Charley Fortnum Dreaming of Red Eagles

    I found this attempt to point the finger on flimsy evidence highly distasteful.

    I'm pleased to say, the book has been withdrawn from sale as unreliable:

    Anne Frank betrayal book pulled after findings discredited
     
    Marco, stolpi and P-Squared like this.
  19. Marco

    Marco Senior Member

    Will that make my copy priceless or worthless? ;-)
     

Share This Page