The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

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

Moderator: Bill Jurens

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 »

Hello everybody,

in a post in which almost ONLY personal opinions are listed instead of proven facts (e.g. "there never was a CMDS threat :negative: , Tovey exaggerated :negative: , and people have gleefully jumped on the bandwagon :lol: ....there was no actual cause for suspicion :shock: ....You have invented "intentional lies" out of a few minor irrelevant discrepancies :shock: .....You have generated meaningless maps :negative: .... ": all are Mr.Wadinga fantastic speculations and/or intentional lies),

Wadinga even wrote: "There was only ever a request for a B of I, which was instantly forgotten about"
No, it was forgotten (only because Bismarck had been sunk) when Churchill said "Leave it" in September after "very full discussions with Tovey and Leach" during summer (but possibly, in Mr.Wadinga fantasy, they just discussed the menus to be served on board PoW during the trip to Placentia Bay.... :lol: ).


How can this guy still write such enormities like "minor irrelevant discrepancies" ? 13 minutes PoW fight alone instead of 1 only ? 50% of main armament out of action before the decision to retreat instead of 10% ? 30.000 yards instead of 20.000 yards ? 15 sm instead of 9 sm, etc. ? These are neither minor nor irrelevant. They are intentional alterations, invented in reports/declarations released on purpose (NOT at the time of facts, but days/months later, in order to provide further justifications) .

Regarding the "meaningless maps", we all understand that, being unable to counter geometry, Mr.Wadinga (and all the deniers who refused to accept the bearings agreed as starting point) prefers to stick to Pinchin's Plot :shock: and... to Schmalenbach's first battlemap.... :kaput:, due to the (too easy) "fog of war", instead of relying on the best reconstruction of the battle ever: Antonio's one.


Bye, Alberto
Last edited by Alberto Virtuani on Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"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 »

RE: The plots/charts.


As a matter of interest were the navigation records of Sunderland Z/201 taken into account? A warship isn't going to sink if there are inconsistencies in the charts. An aircraft though has to be spot on with their navigation.If they don't then they end up in the either in the sea or looking for the nearest land. In which case wouldn't the Sunderlands charts be of significance? From their birds eye view wouldn't they have been in a great position to comment on potential ranges?

Do the air ministry still hold such records?


http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... 15-415.htm


Best wishes HMSVF
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 »

Alberto Virtuani wrote: Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:35 pm Hello everybody,

in a post in which almost ONLY personal opinions are listed instead of proven facts (e.g. "there never was a CMDS threat :negative: , Tovey exaggerated :negative: , and people have gleefully jumped on the bandwagon :lol: ....there was no actual cause for suspicion :shock: ....You have invented "intentional lies" out of a few minor irrelevant discrepancies :shock: .....You have generated meaningless maps :negative: .... ": all are Mr.Wadinga fantastic speculations and/or intentional lies),


It is incumbent upon those making the allegations to prove them. You've presented no proof of a CMDS threat except for Tovey's post war letters which clearly do have elements of exaggeration and in some cases make incorrect statements, which are hardly minor discrepancies.

It is typical troll behaviour to present a phony argument and then demand that those doubting it prove a negative; which in this case means proving that there was no CMDS threat. However, it also creates a false logical connection of the allegation to the contention, since even if there was a CMDS threat there is still absolutely no evidence that Tovey, or anyone else intentionally altered documents to thwart it.

Trolls: CMDS threat existed ->but no CMDS therefore-> Tovey thwarted threat by falsifying reports

The trap that the trolls layout for their victims is to then spring upon them "proof" of a CMDS threat, and hope that their victims don't challenge the lack of connection between a CMDS threat and alleged inconsistencies in the RN reports.

UFO sighting is claimed to be proof of space aliens -> a scientist states a possible explanation for UFO sighting-> explanation turns out to be wrong or inconsistent with facts-> UFO proponents then claim that scientist's incorrect explanation is proof of space aliens. However, we all know that there's no logical or causal connection between a scientist's mistake and the existence of space aliens visiting earth.
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 »

Hello everybody,
Dunmunro wrote: "It is incumbent upon those making the allegations to prove them. "
Unfortunately for Mr.Dunmunro, we have posted proofs supporting EVERY SINGLE statement we have presented as facts. Now it's up to the deniers at any cost to try to demonstrate that the proofs are unreliable, despite historians and sane people always accepted them. :negative:

It is incumbent upon someone inventing explanations, just to counter an annoying evidence, to prove them.


In the below Mr.Wadinga's list of personal speculations, there is nothing valid to support them, just his own huge fantasy.....

* "there never was a CMDS threat": Mr.Wadinga has NO evidence to counter Tovey's 1961 letter to Roskill.

* "Tovey exaggerated" as above, a pure speculation without any supporting evidence (except Paffard, rubbished by Roskill's letter to Kennedy)

* "people have gleefully jumped on the bandwagon" Mr:Wadinga invention: nothing has been presented to support this crazy view.

* "there was no actual cause for suspicion": The Articles of War are clear enough, as well as Churchill and Pound initial reactions.

* "You have invented "intentional lies" out of a few minor irrelevant discrepancies": (http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/posting. ... 28#pr78945)

* "You have generated meaningless maps": waiting for any denier's battlemap, Antonio reconstruction is the best available one, based on agreed bearings , known tracks and photographic evidences (a very annoying map for the fans of the fairy tale accounted up to now, but well accepted when first published in its 2005 version, as not yet linked to the CM.... :think: ). "Meaningless" is just a proof of the anger of the cornered loosers in this whole discussion.


Bye, Alberto
Last edited by Alberto Virtuani on Sat Jul 14, 2018 8:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
"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)
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,

the " hooligans / deniers " writing on this forums should remember that there are all sort of Official written and signed documents to explain what happened in between the 2 irrefutable milestones ( I am glad no one had the " courage " to try to say that those 2 are not FACTS and are just irrefutable evidences ).

Alberto Virtuani wrote :
How can this guy still write such enormities like " minor irrelevant discrepancies " ?
13 minutes PoW fight alone instead of 1 only. ( PoW ) ?
50% of PoW main armament out of action before the decision to retreat instead of 10% ( PoW + Y turret moved in ) ?
30.000 yards instead of 20.000 yards ( Norfolk ) ?
15 sm instead of 9 sm ( Suffolk ) ?
These are neither minor nor irrelevant. They are intentional alterations, invented in reports/declarations released on purpose (NOT at the time of facts, but days/months later, in order to provide further justifications) .
I fully agree with him on the above statement, but it is even worst.

All the above " Cover Up ", so the intentional alteration of the reports was done under Adm Tovey supervision finalized with his dispatches, after an initial report dated May 30th, 1941 were the truth is partially written by Adm Tovey, especially regarding the PoW retreat time as it was communicated by Capt Leach himself on radio messages when it was at sea sailing for home.

http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6799

This confirms the shame of Adm Tovey wrong doing in order to write justifications for the 2 Officers that have been subject of an inquiry request.

Adm Pound did not do any better than Tovey, by knowing the radio messages and having at hand Adm Tovey May 30th, 1941 initial report, ... he received Adm Tovey dispatches and did not challenge or refused them at all, ... not only, ... on September 1941 the Admiralty approved the dispatches content and enabled the King final recognition.

This is the shame of what happened and the truth about the " Denmark Strait Saga ".

Adm Tovey letter to Stephen Roskill explained all the wrong doing.

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 Antonio and Alberto,

You two have obviously got together and decided it is impossible to deny that Pound still had absolute faith in Wake-Walker and Leach because he left them in post. You always had a problem as to whether the Conspiracy only included Tovey and Wake-Walker or whether you would tar Pound with the brush as well. Now apparently you allege Barnes and the entire Board of Admiralty knew they were cowards and incompetents, were happy for them to stay in post with huge responsibilities, and wrote a letter to Tovey one paragraph of which heaps praise on these men.

Since it is unbelievably unlikely that Pound would demand Court Martials and yet leave alleged "cowards and incompetents" in post merely for publicity purposes, you have tactically diverted off to trying to justify your discovered "evidence" of Conspiracy, all of which has been shown many times to be gauzy and insubstantial.


Instead of presenting the Silver Bullet which you possess but refuse to share. Which is supposed to be unanswerable.


This thread is about CMDS. The only evidence is of Board of Inquiry, and we do not have the actual confirmation. All we know is Pound instantly abandoned it and left these men in post.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
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 »

Hello everybody,

of course Mr.Wadinga is unable to substantiate ANY of his fantasies above and he does not even try:
it would be time to admit his statements were just speculations or lies...

However, he is back to his repeated argument about two blatantly timid officers who were not removed: one shortly after was promoted and moved to a financial work (controller) where no aggressive spirit (nor ship handling skill) was needed anymore, while the other was never left alone on board his ship in action again.
I agree with him, however: it was an additional shame (in this already shameful story) that after the cover-up had been put in place and accepted, they were not dismissed quietly....


Wadinga wrote:"The only evidence is of Board of Inquiry"
FALSE ! The 1941 letter is an evidence of at least a BofI demanded in writing (he is right we don't have (yet... :wink: ) Pound May 28 letter to see whether a Court Martial is mentioned too.
However, the 1961 letter accounts for the explanatory phone call and is an evidence of a menaced Court Martial. Therefore, there are evidences for both.
The problem of Mr.Wadinga is that he has no way whatsoever to counter any of these letters, that demonstrate beyond and doubt that a serious investigation was required into the conduct of these officers, who had allowed Bismarck to be free in Atlantic for two days.


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)
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,

somebody intentionally likes to disregard what has been decided being the way to manage information and propaganda in the Royal Navy like for everything else in that period :
Guidelines received by Admiral John Godfrey ( Naval Intelligence Director ) from Sir Winston Churchill on September 1939.

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 at page 114.

David Reynolds is Professor of International History at Cambridge University and a Fellow of Christ's College. He is the author of two prize winning studies of Anglo-American relations in World War Two - The Creation of the Anglo-American Alliance, 1937-1941 and Rich Relations: the American Occupation of Britain, 1942-1945 - and One World Divisible: A Global History Since 1945.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0141019646/ref=rdr_ext_tmb


The fact that Adm Pound could not manage easily Adm Tovey reaction and that the politicians like Sir Alexander and mostly Sir W. Churchill decided to quit the punishment for the negligence and cowardice is well within what was the logical need on May 1941, that is why WSC decided : LEAVE IT !
Stephen Roskill explained this logic to everybody by providing the link to where those evidence can be found, to the ADM 205/10.
To be noticed that Sir Barnes letter ( Admiralty board summary ) and the references to Adm Tovey dispatches key statements ( intentionally incorrect ) contained on it, ... the ones that justified both Wake-Walker and Leach conduct, ... are attached to the ADM 205/10 key pages 331-332-333-334, ... explains the all things and the logic connection one to the other.

Regarding the fact that it was a Court Martial attempt thru the initial Board of Inquiry, somebody is better remember where he found the May 31th, 1941 letter in response from Adm Tovey to Adm Pound.
It is into the Court Martial/Board of Inquiry folder ADM 178/322, ... obviously, ... should we call it a fact ?
ADM 178 - Admiralty: Naval Courts Martial Cases, Boards of Inquiry Reports, and Other Papers (Supplementary Series)
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.u ... /r/C517469

If someone uses his logic it should not take much to realize that a Board of Inquiry is called to drive a potential Court Martial for failures or negligence ( in this case also cowardice ) and surely not to drive the King rewarding and the type of medal selection.
Apparently this very simple concept is very hard to be realized, ... mostly accepted being, ... a fact, ... in any military environment.

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 Alberto and Antonio,

of course Mr.Wadinga is unable to substantiate ANY of his fantasies above:
All of these matters are addressed elsewhere. Bizarrely the CMDS myth was originally used as a foundation for the Ziggurat of Supposition, now the flimsy structure is invoked to support its own foundations. :lol:

Of those things properly addressed here, (remember when you refused to show para one of Tovey's 1961 letter because it was not relevant?) we have
there never was a CMDS threat": Mr.Wadinga has NO evidence to counter Tovey's 1961 letter to Roskill.


Tovey's May 31st May 1941 letter refers only to B of I, so he himself is evidence that he invented the CMDS myth in the 1950s because it made a "good story". As soon as he starts worrying Roskill will publish it, he makes up reasons why he shouldn't, in case his exaggeration is unmasked.

It makes sense to a post-war filing person to put a letter with words Board of Inquiry in the .........….Board of Inquiry file. There are no other indications in 178/322 or the whole of 205/10 of any proposed disciplinary action. There is no corroboration of Tovey's allegation, even by one of the individuals he said he told about in 1941.


The Silver Bullet, to which you no longer refer, is supposed to corroborate it.

somebody intentionally likes to disregard what has been decided being the way to manage information and propaganda in the Royal Navy like for everything else in that period

Somerville's Board of Inquiry was not a secret, why spoil the "good news" story of the Italian Force being chased back to its base and the convoy safely delivered? This propaganda angle is irrelevant as is the medals business. There was no public monitoring of private Admiralty business in 1941, even Tovey's despatch was withheld until after the war. I notice now
and that the politicians like Sir Alexander and mostly Sir W. Churchill decided to quit the punishment for the negligence and cowardice
that Churchill too was in on the Conspiracy. Well we know he was consummate actor, hid his feelings, "never flew off the handle", enjoyed being thwarted, and had obviously subsumed his righteous anger, so as to be so personable to Leach on the trip to Placentia and to write his letter of thanks with signed photo. Do you mean THE Winston Churchill?

Can I point out
one shortly after was promoted and moved to a financial work (controller) where no aggressive spirit (nor ship handling skill) was needed anymore,
You left out the bit explaining "shortly after" means left in sole command of carrier task forces engaged in aggressive actions for four whole months. I think also you have confused the responsibilities of Controller of the Navy with a lowly book-keeper. His supervision of the design, development and construction of the landing craft fleets resulted in the successful opposed landings of 1943-45. I think you have confused the function of a flag officer with a Ship's Captain, the latter handles the ship, the former handles the squadron.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
HMSVF
Senior Member
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:15 am

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by HMSVF »

I found this in regard to Wake Walker whilst browsing on line...

http://www.unithistories.com/officers/RN_officersW.html


(Seem to have stumbled across a little gem of a site.)


So he was due to take over as C in C for the Mediterranean Fleet but died a few hours after acceptance...… The most prestigious appointment in the RN.
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,

to make a long story short, ...

A coward Captain retreated his battleship while fully engaged after only 1 minute fighting on alone after having received the first hit on board, with a still perfectly efficient warship he had previously been engaging the enemy and just only because he was afraid of what it might could have happened to her and her guns that on that moment were perfectly working.

A surely negligent/coward too RearAdmiral did not engage at first despite a similar unit was engaging on the enemy side, did not help opening fire his retiring warship when remained alone despite being at firing range and once the Admiralty asked him to do what was expected from him now in command, ... so to re-engage the enemy, ... he found all sort of excuses not to do it, ... especially explaining the need to do his shadowing job, with the final result to loose the enemy soon after.

Surely they were fully deserving a Board of Inquiry and most likely they were going to face a Court Martial after.

In reality after some " intentional report adjustments " blessed by their Admiralty and Politicians, those 2 " champions " received a medal from the King.

The ADM 205/10 tells the whole connections at high level driving those facts until the closure, just as Stephen Roskill explained us.

Nothing even close to this Officer conduct :
* For gallantry, enterprise and daring in command of the force engaged in the First Battle of Narvik, on 10th April, 1940. On being ordered to carry out an attack on Narvik, Captain Warburton-Lee learned that the enemy was holding the place in much greater force than had been thought. He signalled to the Admiralty that six German destroyers and one submarine were there, that the channel might be mined, and that he intended to attack at dawn. The Admiralty replied that he alone could judge whether to attack, and that whatever decision he made would have full support. Captain Warburton-Lee led his flotilla of five destroyers up the fjord in heavy snow-storms, arriving off Narvik just after daybreak. He took the enemy completely by surprise and made three successful attacks on warships and merchantmen in the harbour. As the flotilla withdrew, five enemy destroyers of superior gunpower were encountered and engaged. The Captain was mortally wounded by a shell which hit the bridge of H.M.S. Hardy. His last signal was "Continue to engage the enemy".
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 Antonio,


Carving away the irrelevancies, based as they are on unproven assertions in the first case and the fine story of heroics in entirely different circumstances.
Surely they were fully deserving a Board of Inquiry and most likely they were going to face a Court Martial after.

First Sea Lord Sir Dudley Pound evidently immediately abandoned his ideas for the former, showing clearly he did not think they were "fully deserved", and there is no evidence apart from some hazy recollections amongst several things that didn't happen, by one man only, many years after, that he ever considered the latter. What he did do was leave both officers in positions of enormous responsibility, from which he could have removed them at his slightest whim, at any time, with no requirement to justify his actions in any legal process.


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,

the evidence are all there to prove this shameful story to say the least, ... this " regrettable aftermath " (cit. Stephen Roskill ), ... this " Denmark Strait Saga " ( Cit. Sir Henry Leach ).

For war propaganada reasons it was decided to : LEAVE IT ! ( Cit. Sir W. Churchill )

Adm Pound, the Admiralty and Sir Alexander, ... nothing can do rather than follow the new changing directions of their war leader on that moment, ... after the Bismarck was sunk.

This is the real reason why 2 cowards escaped what they fully deserved given the Articles of War in place, ... and got the rewarding instead.

As simple as that, ... a shame that on the same war, ... into the Royal Navy many other Officers and sailors were honoring their uniforms with real heroic conducts, ... and did not even got a mention in despatches.

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 )
HMSVF
Senior Member
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:15 am

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by HMSVF »

This is the real reason why 2 cowards escaped what they fully deserved given the Articles of War in place


A coward Captain retreated his battleship while fully engaged after only 1 minute fighting on alone after having received the first hit on board

A surely negligent/coward too RearAdmiral did not engage at first despite a similar unit was engaging on the enemy side


I'm appalled and quite frankly disgusted at the use of language. This isn't historical, research this is assassination of character of those who have no ability to reply. I hope that when any eventual work is published these comments are also published.



Disgraceful language.
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 Antonio,

Run that by me again :?
For war propaganada reasons it was decided to : LEAVE IT ! ( Cit. Sir W. Churchill )

So if the decision was only made by Churchill on 26th September, why would Wake-Walker have been left in a position as effective C-in-C Home Fleet for four months?

Why would Churchill send Leach a signed photograph of thanks on the 12th September "This is a small memento of a memorable trip with my best thanks to yourself.. (recounted in Wills p108.)


Or maybe Churchill decided that his Navy should include cowards and incompetents just because Bismarck was sunk, on 27th May, after all, what further damage could they do being left in command of thousands of men? But, crucially, he forgot to tell Pound and co who went to all the bother of falsifying reports, lying under oath etc for no reason. But then why all that bureaucratic palaver when Churchill had already decided not to do anything?


Hello HMSVF, You see the sinister and vitriolic campaign being waged not only against these mens' reputation , but that of the RN in 1941, disguised as a heartfelt concern for those who did not get awards. You may draw your own conclusions about what motivates this and why it has been prosecuted for so long with so little evidence.


And why those who promote this smear campaign withhold evidence which could apparently settle the matter. They say. :D


All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
Locked