soc.history.war.world-war-ii

aspqrz@pacific.net.au (Phil McGregor) wrote:
>
> "Scott M. Kozel" wrote:
>
> >The facts revealed in the last few days seems to provide major support
> >for the reports of the Kormoran survivors and captain. The facts that
> >the ships were found about 12 miles apart, would overrule the conspiracy
> >theories that the Sydney crew was massacred by the Kormoran crew, or
> >that Sydney was captured by the Japanese and its crew massacred.
>
> But not that the Kormoran had, allegedly, a Dutch flag (or, worse
> still, a *white* flag, as has been alleged by some) for still raised
> when she fired her torpedoes ... making Detmers and his crew pirates
> and subject to being hung as such.

Allegations, indeed, because nobody has ever testified that Kormoran was
not flying the German flag when she opened fire.

> Which would explain why those of the deck officers and crew who may
> have actually known what actually happened kept their mouths shut
> and/or agreed to a falsified version of events.

Again, no actual proof exists that that took place.

> Which might be a clew as to the possibility that they weren't telling
> the truth or that, simply, strange things happen and on-the-ground
> "eyewitness" observers can (ask any cop or trial lawyer) *notoriously*
> unreliable.

The ships sunk 12 miles apart. That would indicate that one or both
ships still had a considerably amount of power after the battle, that
both ships stayed afloat for hours, and that it wasn't possible for the
Kormoran crew to massacre the Sydney crew.

That would indicate that the accounts of the Kormoran crew are looking
pretty truthful at this point.

> > Many of the Kormoran crew did survive.
>
> Indeed.
>
> So the only story we have is theirs, which makes it immediately
> suspect all other things being equal.

No, all it means is that the Sydney crew didn't survive. There is no
actual evidence that the Kormoran crew lied or massacred the crew of
Sydney, given that the ships wound up 12 miles apart.