The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Discussions about the history of the ship, technical details, etc.

Moderator: Bill Jurens

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by dunmunro »

W-W's appeal to the Privy Council.

The reason for the appeal to the PC was the narrow 3-2 decision on the SC of Canada upon appeal from a lower court. The SCofC minority opinion:
Two Judges (Crocket J. and Rinfret J.) were for allowing
the appeal. Referring to the orders given to the " Dragon "
to stop and reverse, these Judges say:

" The undoubted fact is that when these orders were given the
'Dragon ' was face to face with an imminent peril and that, unless
she herself had then been guilty of some negligence which contri-
buted to bring that peril about, the Warship's Commanding and
Navigating Officers, being then in the agony of an imminent collision
with the ' Saguenay Trader ', could not properly be held to be
accountable for any failure to exercise even ordinary care or nautical
skill. Unless, therefore, there was some prior negligence upon their
part which contributed to bring about the emergency she must
be held blameless."
http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKPC/1937/1937_49.pdf
W-W was correct to pursue the case and, IMHO, he was the victim of circumstances. OTOH in liability cases the courts are extremely reluctant to issue a blameless ruling since it deprives the innocent party (in this case the owners of the Maplebranch) of compensation for their losses.
Byron Angel
Senior Member
Posts: 1656
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:06 am

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Byron Angel »

It's dangerous drawing conclusions from "the headlines" alone of a maritime law case. Having had some peripheral personal experience many years ago with a navigation case tried under commercial maritime law, I can only say that the terrain of legal interpretation and precedent can be convoluted indeed - even couinter-intuitive to the unanointed layperson. Maritime law is a quite arcane specialty within the legal profession. I would imagine that its application to cases involved naval vessels is probably no less so.

FWIW.

B
Byron Angel
Senior Member
Posts: 1656
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:06 am

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Byron Angel »

Reubs64 wrote: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:27 pm Can't believe the childishness shown on such an intelligent forum, when a theory is obviously being depth charged the proponent of said theory has to resort to the usual petulant and disgraceful comments about a coward etc. I once took great pleasure in reading some of Antinios work but this thread has shown a level of immaturity and indecency that is a real discredit to the guy.
Ditto.

B
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

try to ask yourself who started and is continuing with sarcastic insults in order to avoid to properly manage and analyze in the only possible way the available documents about this shameful bad smelling event ( time ago somebody described it being a can of worm ).

You, all " hooligan/deniers " of what cannot be refuted any longer, just mud the water on the useless intent to leave everything as it was and never to admit the shame that occurred on summer 1941 while the Admiralty/Tovey managed to go from a Board of Inquiry request for those 2 Officers to their final rewarding.

I have never read 1 single comment by you Royal Navy " hooligan/deniers " that was admitting that this situation was clearly not normal and not ideal to reward some Officers, ... starting from an Admiralty Board of Inquiry request for their conduct while in action.

You just would like not to mention anything anymore, ... just leave it and forget about it, ... but unfortunately for you the documents do exist and sooner or later this shameful story will be published for everybody to know about it in details.

You can continue to write pages and pages of useless comments trying to hide what is properly stated here in, ... or attack personally me and Alberto in any way you like, ... that will not change the facts.

Those facts :
poor " hooligan/denier " on a desperate attempt to try to explain in any possible different way why Adm Pound wanted a Board of Inquiry ( and after the obvious subsequent Court Martial see art.703 ) on 2 coward Officers and wrote it to Adm Tovey which refused to do it ( ADM 178/322 ).

Poor persons trying to avoid to comment on why all the actions related to those 2 Officers showing their very " timid conduct " ( cowardice ) has been immediately intentionally altered by Adm Tovey and why the Royal Navy Admiralty approved this shame (ADM 205/10 ).

I can imagine the inventions needed to explain why after such a series of " Cover Up " events, those 2 cowards has been rewarded by the King.

Not an easy explanation, given the evidence at hand well available and the explanation of what happened thanking to Stephen Roskill, ... the Official Royal Navy historian for World War 2 ( on 2 published books ).

Poor " hooligan/ deniers " desperately hanging on " the guy " now, ... after having desperately tried to involve into this Bill Jurens, ... and loosing anyhow this debate and their relative small dignity left, ... more and more every day.
You can keep on joking yourself by thinking and writing that is is mine and Alberto conspiracy theory only, ... and avoid to take a defined written position on those documents and what has been done to go from an Admiralty Board of Inquiry request for the conduct while in action of those 2 Officers ... to a final rewarding by the King for the same 2 Officers, ... :shock:

At least Stephen Roskill called it " the regrettable aftermath " and Sir Henry Leach " the Denmark Strait Saga ", ... what about your definition ?

I am sure that for you all was a normal way to act, ... the state of the art, ... :shock:

Bye Antonio
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2471
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by wadinga »

Hello All,

As Dunmunro has pointed out (good work in presenting the detailed verdict wording :clap: :clap: :clap: ) over this latest episode of desperate mud-slinging:
OTOH in liability cases the courts are extremely reluctant to issue a blameless ruling since it deprives the innocent party (in this case the owners of the Maplebranch) of compensation for their losses.
Especially when in this case, it is the Government of another country (ie faceless taxpayers) who will pick up the tab and not a company or individual. There is no evidence that the ruling actually harmed Wake-Walker's career (cue more pictures of princesses and vague accusations of regal intervention ) as the Admiralty obviously considered it was just an unfortunate accident.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

another useless post written just to keep on changing subject and mud the waters, ... we are keep on reading a mix of sarcastic and personal offenses, ... useless subjects, ... no value add, ... written with the only intent to show presence and patrolling and never to allow readers that would like to understand what really happened, ... when and how, ... to have a logic flow to follow.

That is the only reason why those Royal Navy " Hooligan/deniers " are in this forum and now concentrated on this set of threads.

The funny part of this approach is that once in a while they even have a courage to declare that they are looking for the truth, ... :shock:

In reality having well understood since time where the truth is, ..that is the only thing they do not want at all.

Bye Antonio
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )
pgollin
Senior Member
Posts: 382
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:01 pm

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by pgollin »

.

A & A,

Have you thought what effect your posts on this thread will have on any competent editor when they start looking at your book ?


(Ditto other threads ?)

.
User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Hi Antonio,
you wrote: "another useless post written just to keep on changing subject and mud the waters, ... we are keep on reading a mix of sarcastic and personal offenses, ... useless subjects, ... no value add...."
as everybody can see from the above posts, the "deniers" were not even able to admit their blatant defeat when trying to "parrot" the insulting guy who was so ignorant to speak about the "King's Regs" instead of about he the relevant "Articles of War" (contained in the Naval Discipline Act).

Not a single one among them has fairly admitted how this poor "insulting guy" was ridiculed by clearly posting the difference between NDA (with the Articles of War) and "King's Regs" (with the details), despite Mr.Wadinga "own goal" when he posted the CM charges against Troubridge, of course from the "Articles of War" (NDA, 1866 version).

Not a single one !

Shameful, and demonstrating that they are not here anymore to discuss, just to deny anything "a priori", even when a proven totally nonsense.

Don't hope to have any of them willing to open his eyes and give up his "fairy tale".


Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

"There's always a danger running in the enemy at close range" (Adm.W.F.Wake-Walker)
HMSVF
Senior Member
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:15 am

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by HMSVF »

pgollin wrote: Sun Aug 05, 2018 1:06 pm .

A & A,

Have you thought what effect your posts on this thread will have on any competent editor when they start looking at your book ?


(Ditto other threads ?)

.
Or potential customers/readers.

Not pretty.

Which is a shame as they are undoubtably extremely knowledgeable in regards to the Kriegsmarine.
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

I understood since 2013, ... when I first wrote about it, … that the fact that this shameful story will be published in full details is creating a lot of problems to many persons here in and also outside this forum.

There are many persons different categories that would not like it at all, … and I realized all the reasons about it since a lot of time.

I cannot care less, … and you all better be prepared to it.


Bye Antonio
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by dunmunro »

Antonio Bonomi wrote: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:16 pm Hello everybody,

I understood since 2013, ... when I first wrote about it, … that the fact that this shameful story will be published in full details is creating a lot of problems to many persons here in and also outside this forum.

There are many persons different categories that would not like it at all, … and I realized all the reasons about it since a lot of time.

I cannot care less, … and you all better be prepared to it.


Bye Antonio
So someone is writing about your "shameful story" of transforming from a respected author into a conspiracy theorist troll? I can't wait to read it.
HMSVF
Senior Member
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:15 am

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by HMSVF »

dunmunro wrote: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:31 pm
Antonio Bonomi wrote: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:16 pm Hello everybody,

I understood since 2013, ... when I first wrote about it, … that the fact that this shameful story will be published in full details is creating a lot of problems to many persons here in and also outside this forum.

There are many persons different categories that would not like it at all, … and I realized all the reasons about it since a lot of time.

I cannot care less, … and you all better be prepared to it.


Bye Antonio
So someone is writing about your "shameful story" of transforming from a respected author into a conspiracy theorist troll? I can't wait to read it.
It's a car crash and actually it's really sad.

To quote a film title, this whole story is "A Bridge To Far". There just isn't the evidence, its down to interpretation and if you start from the POV then the baseline is set. Now whether Dudley Pounds correspondence would support it ....Who knows. The problem wth what has been presented is that it relies on one source(Tovey) 20 years after the event and it also relies on forgetting that Churchill was a hotheaded meddler (which has been well documented).There have been many times when I have read the evidence presented and thought "actually you have go something" but the counter evidence has been presented and makes you think again. The massive (and I mean massive) persuader is that that rather than answer the question there has been an ad hominem or several.When you words like coward are used then its game, set and match


If you are that sure of your POV ,you don't need them. Simple as. Calling posters sheep ,deniers, hooligans etc hardly bolsters a POV. There has been much made abut producing maps. Whats the point if the variances could be counted in their 1000's? Its very clever but ultimately pointless. To us "ignoramus's, no we may not know X,Y,Z but we have common sense. To have a cover up you have to close every single avenue of potential enquiry . There is always the "squarker" (to quote Bill Jurens) or the loose end. Somebody along that chain would have said something. took at the HMS Glorious event - 50 years later a member of the communications crew coughed to the fact that not only was the log destroyed but that the Admiral in charge disclosed that it was a "rum"event.


Tragic really.


However (again) the "silver bullet" could throw the whole thing open again.

It just needs to be fired.

Best wishes


HMSVF
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

and here we go again with this " new " defender of the PoW , ... and that alone reminds me of somebody else leaving the forum time ago, ... but you cannot tell who the " hooligan/deniers " are because they do not like to put their real names on the forum, ... and this alone tells the whole story about their fairness.

Still the same useless refrain on and on again, ... your A & A conspiracy theory instead of the analysis and comments of the facts, ... those facts :
poor " hooligan/denier " on a desperate attempt to try to explain in any possible different way why Adm Pound wanted a Board of Inquiry ( and after the obvious subsequent Court Martial see art.703 ) on 2 coward Officers and wrote it to Adm Tovey which refused to do it ( ADM 178/322 ).

Poor persons trying to avoid to comment on why all the actions related to those 2 Officers showing their very " timid conduct " ( cowardice ) has been immediately intentionally altered by Adm Tovey and why the Royal Navy Admiralty approved this shame (ADM 205/10 ).

I can imagine the inventions needed to explain why after such a series of " Cover Up " events, those 2 cowards has been rewarded by the King.

Not an easy explanation, given the evidence at hand well available and the explanation of what happened thanking to Stephen Roskill, ... the Official Royal Navy historian for World War 2 ( on 2 published books ).

Poor " hooligan/ deniers " desperately hanging on " the guy " now, ... after having desperately tried to involve into this Bill Jurens, ... and loosing anyhow this debate and their relative small dignity left, ... more and more every day.
This is a story started ( May 28th, 1941 ) by the Royal Navy Admiralty Sea Lord Adm Sir D. Pound ( prodded by the Prime Minister Sir W. Churchill ) with his request of a Board of Inquiry ( ADM 178/322 ) on 2 Royal Navy Officers conduct while in action ( according to the Articles of War in place ).

This is a shameful story of " Cover Up " altering documents ( on his dispatches ) by the Commander in Chief Home Fleet Adm J. Tovey as a reaction to the above request.

This is a story of the Admiralty board later accepting an intentional falsified version of the facts ( the Adm Tovey dispatches ) and approving it, with his cowards and lairs content well known to them all ( ADM 205/10 )

This is a story of the final rewarding of the 2 directly involved Officers by the KIng thru the London Gazette on October 1941.

This is a story of the Royal Navy Official Historian for World War 2 Stephen Roskill correspondence with Adm J. Tovey knowing and already publishing a good part of it on his 2 books.

This is a story already partially explained and published by the majority of the British historians on their books.

But still the Royal Navy " hooligan/deniers " like to think ( joking themselves ) that it is story ( calling it a conspiracy theory ) invented by A & A recently, ... and like to avoid to discuss the above irrefutable evidence, ... and what they demonstrate.

The only credit we have is to have connected the whole occurred and well documented events in a logical way, ... and I have realized and perfectly understood why Stephen Roskill and the other historians did not do it, ... looking at your reactions here too.

Those " sacred cows " are still a problem to be managed and the majority of the British readers are not ready to realize the real, complete and fully detailed truth, ... even if recently produced movies like " Darkest Hour " should open a bit their minds on what was needed to be done to manage that period successfully.
Sir Winston Churchill on September 1939 to Adm Godfrey : " Good news was made to seem better; bad news was toned down, delayed or sometimes suppressed ". From : David Reynolds - In Command of History - London - Penguin 2005
Lies on that " darkest " period were necessary, ... the truth was a problem to be managed and a luxury no one can afford on 1940/1941 in UK, ... neither Sir W. Churchill.

It will take time to have the British readers to digest the cold hard truth, ... but there is no other way out now.

Bye Antonio
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )
pgollin
Senior Member
Posts: 382
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:01 pm

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by pgollin »

.

You really do not understand either the practicalities of naval life, the practicalities of life in the UK (both inside and outside the Admiralty) in the 1940's to 60's, and more especially you do not understand the historiography of WW2 naval history.

Your ideas all seem to ignore Stephen Roskill himself (with his magical letter from Tovey). Try reading "Historical Dreadnoughts" by Harry Gough. This covers Marder and Roskill and their continuing cooperation and rivalry over writing up the history of the RN. It covers not only their major books, but also their newspaper articles (some of which I remember reading in the 60's and 70's). These covered areas not touched in their books, or newly identified, or unclassified. It explains reasons for things being included, or excluded.

And, guess what, the Roskill coverage (i.e. his papers, conversations and letters) doesn't mention the Tovey letter. In the coverage of the Denmark Straits/Bismarck no such issue arises - the "standard" (i.e. true) story is what Roskill believed and expounded.

It seems that you two are just cleverer than Roskill.

Again, any competent editor will know of this.

.
User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3799
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi »

Hello everybody,

at least I am able to read from Stephen Roskill published books on 1976 and 1977 :


Roskill_books_1976_1977.jpg
Roskill_books_1976_1977.jpg (82.09 KiB) Viewed 685 times

Roskill_Churchill_Admirals_pages_125_126_313_note_38.jpg
Roskill_Churchill_Admirals_pages_125_126_313_note_38.jpg (110.85 KiB) Viewed 685 times

continue …
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )
Locked