Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidence?

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
Post Reply
User avatar
Harro
Member
Posts: 3233
Joined: 19 May 2005, 19:10
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidenc

#106

Post by Harro » 11 Jul 2014, 20:25

j keenan wrote:Where was Peiper ?
He seems to disappear around 20.12.43 then reappears 7.1.44 -16.1.44 leading Kampfgruppe Peiper which resulted in him been awarded the OL for his valiant and prudent leadership !
Westemeier wrote: On December 10, 1943, Peiper's style of command hit rock bottom, directly under the eyes of his patron and Leibstandarte commander Teddy Wisch. In the Radomyschl region, advancing in the general direction of the south, after crossing a ridge, Peiper's armoured group faced a Soviet defensive position. Without taking care of the tactical situation and the strength of the defensive fire Peiper pushed his forces forward. Observing the "turkey shooting" of his own troops, the Division commander stopped the attack. Several hours later the headstrong Peiper attempted a frontal attack again. Moving forward, at once his troopers were under heavy fire. Burning and exploding armored vehicles and tanks lay crippled on the plain. Again, a furious division commander had to stop the attack and ordered Peiper back. Deeply disappointed about the qualities of his friend Peiper, he left the scene. Arriving at the divisional command post, Wisch issued an order on the correct tactical use of armed forces!

On December 14, 1943, the Leibstandarte reached the Federovka - Verin line. There, Peiper received the order to assemble with his last remnants in the Sabolot-Lyakhovaya area. While not even a dozen Panzer were operational. Peiper was ordered back to the divisional staff. A silent dismissal from his command? By December 22, SS-Sturmbannführer Herbert Kuhlmann took over."

User avatar
seaburn
Member
Posts: 969
Joined: 11 Apr 2013, 12:03
Location: Europe

Re: Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidenc

#107

Post by seaburn » 11 Jul 2014, 21:11

I wish I'd known that sooner ! Its been like 'where's wally' looking through Lehmann for Peiper in that period with so many 'panzer' units mentioned! Thanks 'J.K./Harro', yes it seems that Panzer's were in short supply at that time and they were up against waves of continuous Soviet attacks. It was obvious to me that Peiper's name was conspicuous with his absence until the 7th, but I thought he might have been lurking in there somewhere. Well at least its good to know now that this time frame is not relevant to the search for evidence against him.

However, now that I've started looking at this village, I'm determined to get to the bottom or as near to the bottom of who was most likely responsible and at the moment it looks like 'Kampfgruppe Scheler' are in the frame....but of course it will never be conclusive due to the confusion of war. I'd still like to know what elements of Panzerregiment 1 would have been with him as I'm still sticking to my initial hunch that the description of what happened there has the M.O. of the 'blowtorch btln' written all over it.... I realise that a lot of what happened in that time has not been researched to any depth, but any info on this set up would be gratefully received !
Last edited by seaburn on 11 Jul 2014, 23:41, edited 1 time in total.


j keenan
Financial supporter
Posts: 1575
Joined: 04 Jun 2007, 12:22
Location: North

Re: Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidenc

#108

Post by j keenan » 11 Jul 2014, 22:42

Scheler Kampfgruppe 29/12/43
2+3 Kp.SS-Pz.Pi.Btl.1 LAH
14(Pi.)Kp.SS-Pz.Rgt.1 LAH
LAH Div.Sicherungs-Kp.
were in Ssolotion

User avatar
seaburn
Member
Posts: 969
Joined: 11 Apr 2013, 12:03
Location: Europe

Re: Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidenc

#109

Post by seaburn » 12 Jul 2014, 19:22

Harro wrote: Peiper was ordered back to the divisional staff. A silent dismissal from his command? By December 22, SS-Sturmbannführer Herbert Kuhlmann took over."[/i]
On December 22nd Lehmann records " ..The stab of the Panzerregiment 1 was pulled out, and the command of the remaining Panzers was given to the commander of the 1./1, Sturmbannfuhrer Kuhlmann"

On the 5th of January Lehmann states: "Battle commander now Sturmbannfuhrer Kuhlmann , commander of the 1./SS Panzerregiment 1." This notation followed a report that Kraas had been wounded during an engagement.

The following day at 20.00 hrs Peiper is mentioned by rank "The regimental commander of Panzerregiment 1 opened up Osadowka from the south with his own Panzers and kept the Division's retreat road open until 24.00 hrs"


He was mentioned by name on at 00.00hrs on the 7th. Lehmann offered no explanation for his previous absence, which appears to fit the inference of his superiors displeasure in his command, unless there is another explanation, medically unfit for duty etc ??. What would be the exact meaning of 'The stab of the Panzerregiment 1 was pulled out', who or how many men would this have been ?

With regard to Zhurbentsy, there are actually a few more names in the mix...will hopefully post fully on this soon.

User avatar
seaburn
Member
Posts: 969
Joined: 11 Apr 2013, 12:03
Location: Europe

Re: Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidenc

#110

Post by seaburn » 14 Jul 2014, 18:08

28-29dec.jpg
(28th Dec – Soviet forces = Red pegs/purple writing. LSAH=Yellow pegs/green writing)
(29th Dec – LSAH =green pegs/yellow writing / New line - Large brown pegs/blue writing)
(Village of Zhurbentsy = Black peg/black writing)

Just to recap, this is the testimony of the village of Zhurbentsy who were targeted by Panzer fire during the German retreat in December 1943:

Fond 236, Opis 2675, Delo 134, page 20: Statement of 4 April 1944 on crimes in
Zhurbentsy, Berdichevskiy rayon, Zhitomir oblast: retreating German tanks fired
incendiary shells at houses, shot those escaping from flames; 15 persons burned to
death, others wounded; 170 of 270 houses destroyed.

Source: USHMM

I have had a look at R. Lehmann’s divisional records for that time to see if it can be established who carried out this atrocity. There is no definitive reason to believe that the LSAH were responsible for this, I was just following a hunch due to the description of the event. On closer inspection however, I found that the LSAH were very much in this area at that time.

This is the account of the fighting relevant to that area near between the 28th and 29th of December 1943 when the line moved past it from East to West per Lehmann’s records.

28.12.1943
“The LAH is to prevent the enemy from advancing to the west and southwest across the line Kryliwa-Bol.Moschkowzy-Starosselje-Borak………...The 1. Panzerdivision(Heer) is to be moved up via Zhitomir and Berditschew onto the Korps right wing behind. Panzer- Aufklärungsabteilung I.

At 15.30 hours, the Division was holding the following line:


Panzer Aufklärungsabteilung I. and Kavellerie-Regiment Süd on the southern and eastern edges of Tscherwonoje with an armoured reconnaissance force stationed in Gadomzy. (Gadomzy south of Berditschew out of picture)

Kampfgruppe Scheler on the eastern and northern edges of Mal.Moschkowzy.

Flakabteilung 1 on the eastern edge of Bol. Moschkowzy.

Panzergrenadier-Regiment 1 t the road out of Antopol-Bojarka to the southeast of Hill 238.9 with the regimental headquarters in Leonowswkij.

Panzergrenadier-Regiment 2 on the eastern edge of Starja Kotelnja as far as the march route near hill 228.7.

The Divisions-Sicherungskompanie providing all-around defence in Iwankowo.
(To the North-east of Kodnja out of picture)

Elements of the Fernsprechkompanie on the northern edge of Leschtschin; (north of Kodnja out of picture)

Elements of the Quartiermeisterstaffel in Golubjatin

Divisional HQ in Raskopana Mogila.”

(p. 377)

29.12.43

“At 17.00 hours the Korps issued the following orders:
The LAH was to move back at nightfall to the line Polowezkoje–Solotwin-Kodnja and to hold that line. Contact was to be established to the unit adjacent to the right (1 Panzerdivision) near Hill 271.8 (just northeast of Berditschew)"….

(The plan was for the armoured force to engage with the enemy and move north towards Zhytomyr to close the gap between the XIII. Armeekorps and the XXXXVIII. Panzerkorps.)

18.15hours. …Because we expected the enemy’s main attack to come from the northeast toward Berditschew, Solotwin was a correspondingly strong force. Flakabteilung 1 and Kampfgruppe Scheler (the 2. And 3./Panzer-Pionier-Batallion 1, and 14.(Panzer-Pionier)/Panzerregiment 1, and later the Division-Sicherungskompanie under Hauptsturmführer Linden, were deployed there”. (p.379)

By the 30.12 at 05.30 the line of defence was :
"Panzer-Aufklärungsabteilung I from the northern edge of Berditschew up to and including point 271.8" Scheler was still In Solotwin with additional help as reported by Lehmann “Flakabteilung 1 and a panzer group under the command of Untersturmführer Sternebeck around Solotwin”(p.382)



Analysis – who was most likely to have destroyed Zhurbentsy will have to remain a matter of speculation on this evidence. There of course can be good educated guesses made but every factor/movement will not be covered here. Certainly the units to the north of Solotwin were unlikely to have travelled south. But I don’t know what route Sternebeck took to get to Solotwin nor do I have a location for point 271.8 which was the boundary of the Panzer Aufklärungsabteilung I area. This was also given as the general area of 1.Panzerdivision (Heer), it probably extended north-wards towards Polowezkoje but I can’t be sure. The plan was for forces to move north and there were more than the LSAH in the general area at the time.

It’s also worth noting that Berditschew would have been much smaller back in 1943/44, I have placed the Panzer Aufklärungsabteilung I. at the current north-east sector, but in reality would probably have been further south. Kavellerie-Regiment Süd were not mentioned on the 30th, so again I can’t be sure where they were.

I do think that Zhurbentsy was more than likely attacked between the 28th and 29th when these units were moving the line back, as you can hopefully see, the line passed over the village from east to west between these date. Zhurbentsy was a mid-point direct road-link between Tscherownoje/Chervone and Solotwin, if it was known whether the LSAH forces of Scheler travelled by road to get to Solotwin it may prove to be the vital clue in this case.

As it stands and as previously posted, Peiper was not present in this area at that time having disappeared from view in mid-December and only being reported back in the action late on the 6th of January 1944.

User avatar
seaburn
Member
Posts: 969
Joined: 11 Apr 2013, 12:03
Location: Europe

Re: Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidenc

#111

Post by seaburn » 19 Jul 2014, 15:47

The search for evidence to back up Paul Zwigart’s very serious and detailed allegation against Peiper and the ‘Blowtorch Btln’ has been ongoing. I have now concluded this search as detailed below, but firstly it is worth revisiting what Zwigart claimed to his interrogators in 1946.

....“On various occasions we burned down whole villages with our blow-torches. Especially I remember two cases. One in the spring of 1943 when we expressly received the order near Kharkov to set a village afire and to ‘bump off’ all inhabitants ‘including women and children’. When I say ‘we’ I mean the third battalion which at that time was led by Hauptsturmfuhrer PEIPER. As far as I know he originated the order personally. Our battalion was at that time, cut off from the main unit, and operated on its own, sometimes here and sometimes there. I myself did not see Hauptsturmfuhrer PEIPER, who was with us at the time, shooting at civilians. However, it was generally known in the unit that he actively participated in this action.

I saw in this village which was of medium size (approx. 500-800 inhabitants) how our battalion set the houses afire with our blowtorch. I was the tank driver and on that occasion, I did not leave my tank. I stood with my SPW at the entrance of the village and watched our infantrymen running around with blowtorches and saw at least one who set a house afire. The infantrymen of our battalion ran around in between the burning houses with machine guns and rifles shooting into the houses.

Another case which I recall exactly during which an entire village was ‘wiped out’ took place in the summer of 1943 during the feint attack on Kursk in the BELGOROD sector. At that time the infantrymen of our battalion received the order ‘Blowtorches ready’! I myself heard when the commander of the 9th company Hauptsturmfuhrer GUHL issued this order, and know that the same order was given to all companies of the battalion. I don’t know any more on this occasion if it was emphasised if women and children had to be ‘bumped off’; however, in accordance with previous practice, it was apparent what was meant. I saw clearly in this case when women and children among them, came running out of the burning houses and how they were mowed down by our men. The names of those who were shooting I don’t know any longer, but the whole battalion participated. I myself, however, did not shoot but sat at the controls of my tank, watching.

On no occasion did I notice any resistance on the part of the population, nor did I see any resistance from anybody, and also never did I see from any house on which we fired, that the fire was returned.This village was a bit bigger than the one described before. While wiping out the first village, it was announced that an inhabitant had shot into a truck in with several German wounded. In the second described case, no reasons were given. After wiping out the second village described here our battalion was ‘rewarded’ with the name ‘Blowtorch Battalion’ and from there on our tactical symbol was the blowtorch and remains so up to to-day”


File Reference: 11th February 1946- MMD # 4 (1stG MF) Affidavit of SS-Unterschraführer Paul Zwigart, III./2. (document ordered from : http://stengerhistorica.com.)

The lack of detail for the first allegation in the Kharkov area makes it impossible to investigate his claim and without corroborating evidence from elsewhere, it will have to be labelled as ‘inadmissible’. It would be interesting to know if the prosecuting team ever followed up this interview to determine the location and time of the alleged atrocity. If they did, I haven’t found a record of it.

The details for the ‘Belgorod action’ looked more promising, he gave some good clues here about the location and time frame. My first line of enquiry was to check out the ‘Feint at Kursk’ by putting the question to the Forum. Had anyone any details on a ‘Feint’? From the replies received, it seems that there was no one who had heard of this and there were others who also expressed doubt as to the authenticity of the claim. http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 5&t=208451. This line of enquiry proved fruitless.

My next strand of investigation was to search for allegations from this time and location on the net. Whereby I had found numerous allegations of crimes against civilians in the Kharkov Oblast from Feb/March 43, there was nothing for this particular area and time, even though an action of this size should have stood out like a beacon. Obviously just looking on the net could not provide the definite evidence, I needed to find an expert on this time period at local level. My contact in Ukraine who has helped with searches in the Kharkov area was given the details and he has now come back to me as follows:

In Belgorod nobody knows about death of such big settlement, asked specialists in war, regional specialists, priests, historians. In general in those places the village even number in 500 inhabitants before war was considered as the large settlement. But from the war beginning in them hardly there were 200 people.
There were also large settlements, but then in them on 3-4 thousand people lived. And that nobody knew about such event - it would be impossible
Yours faithfully, A.P.


I don’t know why Zwigart would have made such a detailed description of this action in the Belgorod area if it didn’t happen. From his testimony, he alleged that all Companies were given the order and that they all participated, yet to my knowledge there is no other specific allegation from anyone else about this one.

With no corroborating evidence from others or from local sources to substantiate his claim, this particular allegation will have to be discounted. But it is true that to prove something did not happen is far harder than proving that it did as there could have been evidence missed. This leaves open the possibility that some new evidence may emerge in the future to substantiate Zwigart’s testimony.

User avatar
seaburn
Member
Posts: 969
Joined: 11 Apr 2013, 12:03
Location: Europe

Re: Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidenc

#112

Post by seaburn » 22 Aug 2014, 16:42

Unfortunately I have run out of time on this project and am now forced to move on to pastures new. The search for cited evidence against the ‘Blowtorch Btln’ has been an interesting ride with twists and turns that have sometimes led in unexpected directions. The following is a very personal interpretation on what I have uncovered during this investigation and my conclusions as to which allegations I feel had foundation and which didn’t. I suspect my findings will not sit comfortably with some and I do confess my conclusions are based only on the evidence so far found, I can of course always be persuaded by new evidence uncovered.

Initially, the biggest surprise for me was that Peiper’s actions on the Eastern Front had not been researched and published to any great extent as opposed to his actions on the Western Front. This Btln’s sinister ‘reputation’ however, has long been set in the public’s perception and with good reason as there had been damning testimonies given against them and Peiper personally during the Malmedy trials. The specific allegation was that they were responsible for a large scale atrocity in a ‘village in the East’. These accusations it’s claimed were never rebutted by Peiper at his trial. But.....could there be evidence that he did deny these claims in later life, and that there is corroborating evidence that substantiates his plea of innocence for ‘the big one’? Before I answer that question, we need to peel back the layers that have settled over these claims since 1945.

The ‘Blowtorch Btln’

The men of the III (armoured)/2. Btln of the LSAH were bonded together while traversing the snowy vastness of the Kharkov Oblast in their SPW’s as they engaged in combat with Soviet forces during the months of February and March of 1943. This was the place where they culled their ‘reputation’, one that became infamous throughout the whole Division of the LSAH. This ‘reputation’ was one that was talked about freely by captured POW’s during their interrogations and also in the privacy (as they thought) of their cells. The allegations concerned the Btln’s propensity for burning villages by means of a blowtorch, this usage garnering them the tag of the ‘Blowtorch Btln’. But what was the significance of this seemingly innocuous item, one that the Btln saw fit to proudly paint on their armour?

According to Jakob Hanreich, Peiper’s Btln ‘were particularly eager to execute the order to burn villages’ further adding that ‘they accomplished this by means of a soldering lamp’. Walter Fransee corroborated this by testifying that they had burned down a ‘village in the east’ and subsequently they were known as the ‘Lotlampenbattalion’. Otto Sierk claimed that it was at Krasna Poljana when Peiper returned with the rescued remnants of the 320th Div. to cross the river Udy that his Btln ‘distinguished themselves by using their soldering lamps’, this being in reprisal for the slaughter of the men he had left to guard the bridge. Chillingly an LSAH member captured in Italy in November 1943 went further, he stated that ‘they went out with the Blowlamps and machine guns, they shot the civilians and set fire to the houses with their blowlamps. A large Blowlamp is painted on their vehicles. It has become a sort of badge and has become associated with bloody war crimes’. (All Post 43).

What can we take from these testimonies? Tellingly, they were given by different men at different times, not as a group, one is an overheard conversation recorded in February 1944. Hanreich (Post 73) and Sierk’s (Post 28) interrogations were both elicited before Peiper became a ‘person of interest’ to the Allies. This rules out any accusation that these men were put under pressure to implicate Peiper or his Batallion personally. Each one of the testimonies have a corresponding central theme leaving little doubt that the ’III (armoured)/2. Btln’ were certainly burning villages with the aid of their ‘mascot’ and probably killing civilians too.

But one thing all the testimonies lack is an actual village name or date. Without either I found it impossible to pinpoint a location and validate their claims. Far too many villages were burnt at that time, far too many in the ‘normal’ engagements between Soviet and German forces. Couple this with the distance this Btln were covering, sometimes up to 60Kms in a night and the task of finding where they passed through and definitively nailing them becomes impossible. None of these accusers claim to have been witness to these dark deeds, but there was one who also told of the ‘Blowtorch’ method and claimed to have been there too. Paul Zwigart was a co-defendant of Peiper’s at the Malmedy trials, but his evidence is not included here, the reason for that will be discussed in another section. Having checked through the testimonies of countless villages from this time frame and the archives of the Holocaust Museum in Washington, I have been unable to uncover testimonies which match the ‘modus operandi’ so mentioned. I do not conclude that this negates this evidence however, I suspect that their actions were probably covered by the ‘confusion of war’. There are just too many different sources telling the same story, too many to ignore and each one of them mentioning the ‘blowtorch’ as the preferred method of destruction.

This use of a blowtorch as a weapon has been disputed over the years by members of the Btln, some claim its use was innocently to warm their frozen armour in winter, others said that the burning of the houses was caused by sparks hitting the thatch of the roofs from the rounds of their fire, this confusion of explanations have left some doubt that it was used deliberately as a ‘weapon of destruction’. But there was evidence that supports its place of honour from the start in the wording of Peiper’s recommendation for the R.K. for Guhl during the battle for Peckartshina in Dec. ’43 when he claimed that Guhl ‘set fire to large parts of the village with flamethrowers’. T. Wisch in his recommendation for the ‘Oakleaves’ for Peiper from the same encounter vouched that ‘Peiper took personal command of the APC Btln....the enemy in the trenches and the village were ….wiped out with gunnery and flamethrower fire from the APC’s’. (Post 72). Oswald Siegmund of the LSAH also confirmed its use by the Btln during the Kharkov offensive in March 43. (Post 4) So why have so many denied its use as a weapon over the years? My assumption is that the allegation about the ‘Blowtorch’ method was too much intertwined with the suspicion that civilians and not Soviet forces were targeted and to acknowledge its use could have led to the uncovering of evidence to substantiate accusations of war crimes.


Suspected Villages

The start of this search was prompted by a document I had uncovered during my quest for evidence against Kurt Meyer for the destruction of the village of Jefremowka in February 1943. As part of this investigation, a Ukrainian document was sent to me which had distressing accounts of what had happened there that day. When the document was translated, I found that it actually Jochen Peiper and not Kurt Meyer who was accused of being in command during the atrocity. This accusation sat uncomfortably with the evidence that was mounting up against Kurt Meyer, in fact it was the only piece of evidence that challenged my findings of his suspected guilt. The two forum members who translated it for me were both of the opinion that the accusations were wild and confused and both had grave doubts about relying on it as historical fact. But I had to be sure as there were some details in the document that had a ring of truth to them. It was imperative that I investigated Peiper’s location at the time of that atrocity to be sure it couldn’t have been him. By crosschecking his known location of the 17th of February, I was satisfied he was not in the village on that day. But to rule out that he wasn’t there at any other time as described in the document, I put the question to the forum (post 1). The answer back further confirmed my findings that Peiper was not the culprit that day or any other day. By then I was curious to find out how Peiper had come to be named for Jefremowka in the first place and if there were other suspected war crimes he had been accused of on the Eastern Front.

(Post 2) lays out the names of three members of the LSAH who had made accusations against Peiper and his Btln, Jakob Hanreich, Erich Rumpf and Paul Zwigart. The villages specifically named against him were Staroverowka, Stanitschnoje and Jefremowka. It was also mentioned that he had been implicated for these at Nuremburg. Straight away these three villages raised a red flag, I had come across these same three names during my Kurt Meyer investigation. They had been given to the Allies by Jakob Hanreich in his testimony describing the war crimes of the LSAH in 1944. But I knew that he had never mentioned Peiper in relation to these villages, what he had mentioned was Peiper’s ‘eagerness’ to enact the burn order and he had also specifically named Kurt Meyer as the men responsible for Jefremowka . (Post 73). So from the off, I could rule out both Jefremowka and Hanreich as a witness to a charge of the murder of civilians against Peiper as this had not been explicitly mentioned in his testimony.

I subsequently found that Peiper was not mentioned nor accused at Nuremberg (Post 58). Nor was there any evidence to support his Btln’s guilt for the murders of civilians in the villages of Staroverowka and Stanitschnoje. What was known was that they arrived in Staroverowka the day after it was taken which was the day after civilians had been shot for ‘aiding the Soviets’. The Btln did capture Stanitschnoje after engaging with Soviet forces, but there was no accusation made at local level about civilians being targeted here nor is there a local record that was this village destroyed when they left. It’s also worth noting that Jakob Hanreich did not accuse Peiper for either of these villages either. Any accusations made in relation to these named villages had no basis in any cited accusation. (Posts 30, 31, 73, 87).

More accusations of specific villages emerged which led me to suspect his culpability for atrocities in: Ziglerowka (Posts 38, 47) – Walter Fransee saw the bodies of civilians lying in the street here but he given no indication how or when they met their death, Peiper did pass through the village but so did Kurt Meyer 24 hours later and two weeks previously Francee was following Meyer’s unit, not Peiper’s. The village was also occupied by other units of the LSAH for some time after it was taken. Krasna Poljana (Posts 27, 28, 29, 82) - The evidence that something happened here has been alluded to in many books, mostly due to Peiper’s own admission that they had to fight ‘house to house’ when they returned with the rescued 320th, but the local accounts stubbornly refuse to admit that anything more than Soviet V German actions happened here at that particular time. (Post 27, 28, 29, 82). Peckartshina (Posts 67, 68, 70). there was no evidence that testimony were ever given to support the accusation that Peiper’s Btln had murdered the civilians in this village, nor any local accusations, this village seems to have been only singled out as it was mentioned for Peiper’s Oakleaves and for the fact the ‘flamethrowers’ were used in the taking of the village. The evidence only points to this having been a military engagement.

The ‘Big one in the East’

What was left to investigate was the testimony given against Peiper at the Malmedy trial. Two main pieces of evidence were found which in my opinion have cemented the perception of Peiper’s culpability for a major atrocity on the Eastern Front. Firstly there was the damning evidence of Paul Zwigart whose handwritten testimony specifically accused his Btln of carrying out two major atrocities. The first one was in the Spring of 1943 when he stated ‘we expressly received the order near Kharkov to set a village afire and to ‘bump off’ all inhabitants including women and children’ he confirmed that that order was carried out as he further testified that the ‘Infantrymen of our Battalion ran around between the burning houses with machine guns and rifles shooting into houses’. He further alleged that during the summer of ‘43 his Btln had entirely ‘wiped out’ an even bigger village, this time in the Belgorod Sector. Again he gave witness to seeing women and children ‘running out of the burning houses and how they were mown down by our men’ (Post 85). No-one could fail to read this evidence and not be shocked by its revelations. But how true was this testimony and was there any reason that Zwigart would have either entirely lied about it or embellished it? For what has to be kept in mind is that Paul Zwigart had been implicated for war crimes himself on the Western front, this meant that his testimony could have been fabricated to ensure he got a leaner sentence but of course alternatively it could have been the honest confession of a man who just wanted to cleanse his soul. Either way the first part of his allegation is practically inadmissible due to the lack of location and actual date. This meant that I had no way of confirming its veracity. The second allegation about the Belgorod sector was much more specific and there was enough detail there to investigate that particular claim. But having devoted countless hours and exhausting all avenues, I had to concede that there was no record anywhere of such an action taking place either in the testimonies of other LSAH members or at local level. (Post 111). It would seem that his testimony for Belgorod at least was not an honest account.

This left one last serious allegation against Peiper, one made by Erich Rumpf (9th Pionier-Kompanie, 1. SS-Panzer-Regiment LSAH) who was also a co-defendant at the Malmedy trial. Rumpf had been in the Kharkov area in the spring of 1943 and he too gave a very long hand written statement in which he included an allegation of an atrocity in the East. He stated….

Peiper, in his military talks, often used the phrase "Auch ein Schlechter Ruf Verplichtet" (A bad reputation has its commitments). Rumpf then continued straight into the next sentence "In what way the other officers understood 'a bad reputation' isn't known to me but me personally I remember one case in Russia in which we lighted up a complete village of about 2000 inhabitants and had to execute all on orders. This crime surely is one of the reasons/grounds for those who understand the bad reputation of the SS’. (William Perl Papers, Gelman University, Affidavit of Erich Rumpf box 5/folder 24).

On the face of it, this statement can be interpreted as further damning evidence against Peiper and an accusation that his Btln took part in an atrocity in which 2000 inhabitants were murdered ………… except that this statement is actually about two different units of the LSAH. The first is obviously about Peiper, but the following sentence is recounting Rumpf’s experience in the village of Jefremowka. How am I so sure of this? For two reasons, firstly following many hours and hours of research, I have been convinced that there was only one major atrocity in the areas that the LSAH were in at the time and that was in Jefremowka. No other allegation has surfaced in any local accounts of the villages in the Kharkov Oblast or any other Oblast at that time. The ‘chatter’ is all about Jefremowka, nowhere else. Secondly and more crucially, there was a another statement made by Rumpf which was found in NARA by author Danny Parker in which Rumpf reveals that he was in Jefremowka on the day that the atrocity happened and he specifically stated that Kurt Meyer had intoned his men that they were ‘to act like wild men’ in reprisal for ‘Partisan’ activity in the area. (Testimony of Erich Rumpf - NA RG 338 record 143 box 33). This allegation against Kurt Meyer was backed up by Walter Francee who stated the he arrived in the village of Jefremowka after the atrocity had taken place and had been told that it was carried out ‘on the orders of Panzermeyer’ (Post 38). So therefore we can conclude that Rumpf’s testimony was never actually an allegation against Peiper at all.

Now for the source of the mystery as to why Peiper was personally mentioned in the Ukrainian document as the man responsible for the massacre at Jefremowka. It transpires that a survivor of the atrocity was determined to find the culprit, he spent many years searching for the man in question. He sought help from a politician in Italy and then finally he was shown the testimony given against Peiper at the Malmedy trial for the ‘Atrocity in the East’ and he was sure he recognised him and he was sure that this indeed was the man who ordered the destruction of his village – except it wasn't. This sequence of error has copper fastened Peiper’s name with this atrocity in the Ukrainian mind on no other basis than the flawed testimonies of Zwigart and Rumpf and because of a case of mistaken identity by one man who cannot be right as the evidence shows that Peiper was never there that day. (Post24)

At the beginning of this piece I stated that it has been reported that Peiper never defended himself against this serious accusation at his trial. But during this research I did see that both Danny Parker and Jens Westemeier had quoted in their footnotes author James Weingartner who had also researched Peiper. It was in Danny Parkers unpublished manuscript that I saw a very interesting statement made by Peiper to Weingartner shortly before his death. The contents of this conversation prompted me to contact James Weingartner directly to ask permission to use it here – which he kindly consented to. They had corresponded in 1976 and Peiper made reference to the testimony of Erich Rumpf at the Malmedy trials as follows:

….. ‘I remember during the trial a ‘testimony’ of the commanding officer of the 9th Panzer Pionier Kompanie was read, according to which we had reduced a village to ashes after we had herded people into a church à la Oradour. That referred to the Panzer regiment to which he belonged at the time. I cannot say anything about that, because at that time I did not belong to the Panzer Regiment but to the 2nd Panzer Grenadier Regiment’…

This account clearly matches the details of what happened in Jefremowka in February 1943, which has been proved to be the work of Kurt Meyers reinforced Aufklärungsabteilung. Meyers group also included elements of the Panzer Regiment that day but not the 2nd Panzer Grenadier Regiment.

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... &start=105

The reasons why Peiper never defended himself at the trial will have to remain a mystery. Certainly his protestations would probably not have been believed and also to plead innocence would have meant that he may have had to have given up the names of the real culprits. It’s interesting that he recalls that the testimony was ‘read out’, this points to a likely scenario that there was no opportunity to put Rumpf on the stand and question him or object to its contents by the defence. I presume when Peiper did finally make this statement, very few realised or picked up on its significance, but I’ll wager that any of the men who had taken part in the atrocity that day and who read it sat up and took notice.

Conclusion:

As already mentioned, this analysis is a very personal one, gleaned and honed by countless hours trawling for evidence that might corroborate the known allegations against Peiper or uncover new insights into the actions of the III (armoured)/2 Btln. I am satisfied that there is hard evidence that this Btln were burning villages with the aid of their blowtorches, I heavily suspect that they were also shooting off rounds at civilians indiscriminately. Their victim count may not have been high on each occasion, but it may have amounted to a sizable sum in total. The fact that so many POW’s were making allegations against the Blowtorch Btln cannot be underestimated and has to be significant when you consider all the units that were in that area in 1943, many who also had a dubious reputation in other atrocities. Why does Peiper’s Btln get specifically mentioned by so many even before he was a ‘person of interest’ to the Allies? Therein lies the root of suspicion.

However, I am convinced that there is no evidence that they targeted any village in a ‘Jefremowka/Oradour’ style, that is, that they specifically sealed off a village and killed every man woman and child there. I feel strongly that both Zwigart and Rumpf’s testimonies are flawed as per the evidence posted above. Interestingly there was a pattern uncovered that pre-recruits to the Soviet Army were targeted by units of the LSAH when villages were retaken (Post 48) certainly this happened in two of the villages that Peiper’s men were present in at the time, these executions could also account for their ‘bloody reputation’. I’m sure that authors who have researched Peiper and had access to Vets may have been told specific allegations that they forbidden from reporting due to the bond of loyalty that gelled these men during and after the war, but as it stands, the main allegations published against Peiper have all been scrutinised and we are yet to find a specific incident that can be definitively pinned on his Battalion. I hope that someone else will research this and that they will find information posted on this thread of use. I look forward to the upcoming books by Danny Parker and hope that someday he will publish his manuscript which covers Peiper’s time on the Eastern Front. I would ask that anyone who comes across any information on this topic would continue to post it here.


(With special thanks to the authors on Peiper who answered the call especially D. Parker for supplying a chapter of his manuscript. To A. Paramonov and Prof. Kruglov in Ukraine especially the former who worked tirelessly on this too. To all the forum members who contributed valuable information on the thread and those in the background who supplied documents, translations and advice. And lastly to all the forum members who offered support both on the thread and in the background. My appreciation to you all)

rossmcpharter
Member
Posts: 104
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 16:44

Re: Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidenc

#113

Post by rossmcpharter » 22 Aug 2014, 21:40

Quality. This and the Meyer thread should be stickied for future reference. Threads like these are a great credit to the AHF.

User avatar
seaburn
Member
Posts: 969
Joined: 11 Apr 2013, 12:03
Location: Europe

Re: Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidenc

#114

Post by seaburn » 24 Aug 2014, 19:12

Thank you for your positive feedback - most appreciated ! I would also like to highlight that Peiper's assertion that Rumpf was in Jefremowka is also corroboration of Rumpfs own statement. Rumpfs admission to being there that day had caused some surprise when I first mentioned it as it was not thought elements of his unit were attached to the Reinforced Recon Btln. But we can deduce from Peiper's statement that Rumpf was attached to the Panzer Regiment who of course were also with Meyer that day.

User avatar
seaburn
Member
Posts: 969
Joined: 11 Apr 2013, 12:03
Location: Europe

Re: Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidenc

#115

Post by seaburn » 07 Sep 2014, 23:34

There remains a little 'niggle' in relation to Rumpf's testimony which was 'read out' at the Malmedy trial according to Peiper's conversation with J. Weingartner in 1976. Peiper stated that the accusation was that his btln had 'reduced a village to ashes after we had herded people into a church à la Oradour'.

There were two statements of Rumpfs found during this research. One was headed 'Jefremowka' and in it, Rumpf admitted to being in the village on the day the atrocity happened as per previous posts. The other was Rumpf's assertion that 'I remember one case in Russia in which we lighted up a complete village of about 2000 inhabitants and had to execute all on orders'.

As I do not have the first statement in my possession , there is a possibility that these details were included in it, however I know that Kurt Meyer was named in that document and if a portion of it was the one 'read out', his name would have to have been omitted .The second one is in my possession but it makes no reference to 'people being herded into a church' . Therefore it seems that neither of these could have been the damning evidence that Peiper spoke about, leaving the possibility that a third statement was read out.

It should be noted that I have latterly learnt that evidence for atrocities on the Eastern Front were deemed inadmissible at the Malmedy trial and struck out before the verdicts were considered. This is in line with a similar sentiment expressed in the prosecution file against the HJ in Normandy, in that file it was stated that any crimes committed outside the jurisdiction of the Western Allies should be investigated by the authorities where the crimes happened (TS26/856).

However, this is moot point in my opinion as it's clear that the accusations of Rumpf and Zwigart have entered into the public domain since that trial as per the first posts on this thread . If anyone has come across another statement of Rumpfs, I would be grateful if they would post it here.

User avatar
seaburn
Member
Posts: 969
Joined: 11 Apr 2013, 12:03
Location: Europe

Re: Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidenc

#116

Post by seaburn » 11 Sep 2014, 17:37

Interesting Photograph - thank you for sharing it. However, even though Peiper has been linked to the massacre in this village by some who are unfamiliar with the evidence found, I'm not sure if by posting it here on this thread instead of the 'Kurt Meyer' one, that you suspect his Btln may have been there on the day of the atrocity. That scenario was already investigated by me due to his name being on the 'local document' and his presence was ruled out.

On the 16th of February1943 Lehmann Noted his location as follows:

"At about noon, the III (armoured)/2. Panzer-Grenadier Regiment (under Sturmbannführer Peiper) reported that it had assumed billets in Komarowka"

As all the evidence points to Kurt Meyer (including 3 documents which personally name him) as the man who gave the order that day, it would seem that this picture somehow contradicts that evidence. As such, it deserves to be investigated. You appear happy to stand behind the publication as being trustworthy with regard to dates and locations it seems. I would ask that forum members who are more au fait with the break down of the LSAH's units and who may recognise clues as to who these men were would comment on your assertion.

In the meantime, it should be noted that there were many different units in and around Jefremowka that week, particularly elements of Max Wünsches 1./Panzerregiment who had arrived some days prior to the 16th. When Wünsche set out to rescue Meyer in Alexejewka, he departed from Jefremowka and both he and Meyer returned back there on the 16th of February.

Lehmann confirms their presence on the 15th of February as follows:

"The Bataillon maintained contact with the support point of the 1./Panzerregiment LAH in Jefremowka by means of shuttling reconnaissance forces"

Perhaps these men were part of the 1./Panzerregiment.
Last edited by seaburn on 11 Sep 2014, 21:09, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Harro
Member
Posts: 3233
Joined: 19 May 2005, 19:10
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidenc

#117

Post by Harro » 11 Sep 2014, 18:10

"Die gepanzerte Gruppe" refers to the Kampfgruppe led by Meyer, consisting of AA LAH (Meyer), 6./Pz.Rgt.LAH (Ostuf. Astheger), 3./AR.LAH (Ostuf. Haack), I./Pz.Rgt.LAH (Stubaf. Wünsche) and formed on February 10, together with KG Witt and Schwerpunktgruppe Führer (led by Kumm).

User avatar
eindhoven
Member
Posts: 593
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 18:54

Re: Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidenc

#118

Post by eindhoven » 12 Sep 2014, 04:49

Seaburn, I clicked the wrong link yes when quick searching where this should've actually gone to the Meyer war crimes thread instead. Can a MOD split it off please?

As Harro has deduced I was hoping the image and the notation to a unit would help you. I was also looking at the BA photographs for dates which would help, photographically as well, with where Meyer's AA LAH were billeted.

Der Freiwillige, pre Neo-Nazi Agte taking over, is a good source for material and as a detached historian I am capable of reading it for it's merits recognizing at the same time the faults within. They are a source for information just as Hubert Meyer's 12th SS-HJ reference is a source or the Die Leibstandarte series or Weidingers references, etc.

Hopefully researching the dates on the BA images will provide another avenue of research coupled with tactical documentation.

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23722
Joined: 20 Jul 2002, 20:52
Location: USA

Re: Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidenc

#119

Post by David Thompson » 12 Sep 2014, 06:48

Eindhoven -- You asked:
Can a MOD split it off please?
Done.

User avatar
seaburn
Member
Posts: 969
Joined: 11 Apr 2013, 12:03
Location: Europe

Re: Peiper – War crimes on the Eastern Front – Cited Evidence?

#120

Post by seaburn » 06 Dec 2014, 02:43

Although my search for locating a named village that Peiper's btln can be accused of destroying has been officially wound up, I still have an interest in checking through books that come my way which cover Peiper's activities on the Eastern Front, especially when specific instances or villages are named. This account from 'Hitler's last General' (Sayer and Botting) p-243 caught my eye.

'Thus in a night attack on a village in the Zhitomir
sector of the Russian Front in December 1943, his (Peiper's) battle group not only totally destroyed the village but annihilated all its occupants, and in the following two days killed no less than 2,500 Russian troops while taking no more than three prisoners'


This account does not explicitly say who was anniliated, but the word 'occupants' would infer that it was the civilian population. The village is not named but the details seem to match the village of Peckartchina, which was already covered earlier in the thread. Regretfully this allegation was published un-cited.

It remains a mystery as to the origin of this persistent allegation, 'Hitler's Gladiator' pre-dates Jens W. Peiper bio which also carried a similar allegation by 18 years. Still further back in 1979, James Weingartner's 'Crossroads of death' related:

”In command of a battle group in the Zhitomir sector, he (Peiper) played a significant role in the successful efforts of the army’s forty eighth Panzer corps to disrupt the defensive plans of the Russian 16th Army during December 1943. Faithful to the Waffen SS doctrine concerning the employment of armoured infantry, Peiper personally led a night attack on the village of Peckartshina roaring into the area with guns and flame-throwers blazing from his SPWs. The village was totally destroyed and as an after-action report laconically put it, the enemy “annihilated”…. (James Weingartner – Crossroads of death, the Malmedy massacre and trial, page 24/25)

Weingartner does not say that the occupants were annihilated, he does however state that the 'village was totally destroyed', his source was Peipers recommendation for his 'oakleaves' ..

....." Peiper took personal command of the APC battalion and carried out a night attack on the village with unprecedented verve, such that the enemy in the trenches and the village were taken completely by surprise, and wiped out by gunnery and flamethrower fire from the APCs….”
(Citation: Wisch’s recommendation for the oak-leaves to Peiper’s RK, 27th Dec 1943)

So it would seem that the origin of this accusation was the statement 'the enemy in the trenches and the village' and the claim that there were no prisoners taken. Could there be an interpretation here that civilians were present during this engagement? Posted earlier was also an account from an LSSAH member who stated that the enemy were entrenched here, this would indicate that civilians would have had time to flee if they could have. I have not been able to uncover any accusation from captured POWs or local sources to verify that civilians were murdered wholesale here nor do these books cite such allegations. If anyone comes across this village in another book with perhaps a different source, please post the details here.

Post Reply

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”