A Swiss newspaper reported that the pinnacle of a basis based by Anne Frank’s father criticized the investigation into her betrayal to the Nazis, which named a Jewish notary as a chief suspect, saying it was “full of errors”. and didn’t present any proof, as reported by a Swiss newspaper.
Anne and 7 different Jews have been found by the Nazis on August 4, 1944, after hiding for almost two years in a secret annex above a canalside warehouse in Amsterdam. All have been exiled and Anne died on the age of 15 within the Bergen Belsen camp. His now well-known diary was later printed by his father, Otto Frank.
A crew together with retired US FBI agent Vincent Pankoke and about 20 historians, criminals and information specialists Last week recognized a comparatively unknown particular person, Jewish notary Arnold van den Bergh.as a chief suspect in revealing the whereabouts.
A guide detailing the findings was printed Tuesday. “It contributes not to revealing the truth but to confusion and moreover it is full of errors,” John Goldsmith, president of the Basel-based Anne Frank Fund based by Otto Frank, informed Swiss newspaper Blick am Sonntag in an interview.
Some specialists have insisted that the proof in opposition to van den Berg was not conclusive.
Goldsmith mentioned the crew of researchers, which they referred to as a business reasonably than a tutorial enterprise, supplied no proof to assist their declare.
This proof has not but been introduced.
Just to unfold a declare {that a} type of reality borders on a conspiracy principle in public dialogue turns into a matter of reality,” Goldsmith mentioned.
“Now the main statement is: A Jew betrayed the Jews. It lives on in memory and it is disturbing.”
,
With inputs from TheIndianEXPRESS
