Pieter Menten

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
May 16, 1977: Pieter Menten is waiting for the trial against him to continue.

Pieter Nicolaas Menten (born May 26, 1899 in Rotterdam ; † November 14, 1987 in Loosdrecht ) was a Dutch merchant, art collector and war criminal . He moved to Poland in the 1920s and became wealthy there. During the German occupation of Poland and the German-Soviet war , he enriched himself to victims of Nazism and participated during the Holocaust in shootings of Jews. In 1943 he returned to the Netherlands with his belongings.

After World War II , Menten was charged as a collaborator in the Netherlands and received a brief prison term. In the following years he succeeded in receiving compensation from the Dutch state and the Federal Republic of Germany for alleged material losses. It was not until 1976 that war crimes were charged in Amsterdam . After a lengthy process, the multimillionaire - in 1977 his fortune was estimated at the equivalent of 300 million DM - was sentenced to a long prison term.

The Menten affair is linked to his name . It led to the fact that the collaboration with the German occupiers and participation in the Holocaust were again controversial in the Netherlands and the Dutch government under Joop den Uyl fell into a crisis at the end of 1976.

Life

origin

Pieter Menten was the son of butcher Jan Hubert Menten, who later made his living in a waste paper business , and Elizabeth Johanna van Duivenbode. He had a brother who was two years his junior, named Dirk Menten. Pieter grew up in simple middle-class circumstances and attended elementary school in Rotterdam, a secondary school in Amsterdam and a commercial school in Hilversum . He later described himself as a business graduate. On December 22, 1920 he married Elisabeth Allegonda Maria van As, from whom he was divorced on April 8, 1949 and whom he remarried on February 6, 1952. After her death (June 25, 1953), Menten married Meta Pauw on December 17, 1955. The marriages were childless.

Doing business in inter-war Poland

Shortly after the end of the First World War , Menten moved to the Free City of Danzig to work as a sales representative for Menten & Stark NV , a waste paper trade in which his father was involved. At the beginning of the 1930s he moved to Lviv , Poland , apparently also because he had considerable legal problems. In Gdansk, he faced criminal prosecution for a bankruptcy offense . An extradition request from Gdańsk had already led to Menten being imprisoned in Lemberg for several months in 1924. A Danish trading partner accused Menten of serious fraud in this matter. In Warsaw , too, there were doubts about Menten's business practices. According to its own information, Menten not only traded in waste paper, but was also involved in the sugar, matches and leather goods industries. At the same time he bought and sold art , especially paintings .

In 1934 he acquired a large piece of forest and a stately home in the eastern Galician village of Sopot near Stryj , around 150 km south of Lviv. With his Jewish neighbor Isaak Pistyner, from whom he had bought land and house, he soon got caught up in a protracted dispute over the rights to certain sections of the country. One of Pistyner's nephews was Lieber Krumholz, with whom Menten got on well and who emigrated to Palestine in 1935 . There Krumholz took the name Haviv Kanaan, worked as a journalist and later as co-editor of the Israeli daily Haaretz .

Aryanizations

According to the agreements made by the Nazi German Reich and the Soviet Union in the German-Soviet nonaggression pact on August 24, 1939 , western Poland came under German rule after the attack on Poland , while eastern Poland, including Galicia , was occupied by the Soviet Union . Menten was interned in Stryj prison as a suspected foreigner and as an alleged spy for the Germans. After his release he lived in Lviv until the end of 1939. Because Menten and his wife had not given up their Dutch citizenship , they were able to travel to Krakow , the seat of government of the Generalgouvernement , and settle there. After the German invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941, Menten repossessed his house and property in Sopot.

In Krakow, Menten quickly developed excellent contacts with the German occupiers, whom he served as an “economic advisor” and as a sworn expert . In March 1940 he was appointed trustee of an important Jewish art dealer. The trusteeship for four more Jewish art dealerships followed by the end of June. Mental's work was not restricted by the invasion of the Netherlands by the German Reich , which began on May 10, 1940. Since then, his assets have been regarded as "hostile" - but Menten managed to get himself used as trustee of his own assets. He benefited from the Aryanization of Jewish property in Poland, because in the coming months he directed the liquidation of 27 Jewish companies and 20 Jewish second-hand bookshops , bookshops and libraries . In discovering valuable art objects, Menten turned to Joseph Stieglitz - the Jewish art dealer had owned galleries in Kraków and Lviv . Shortly before the attack on the Soviet Union, Menten helped Stieglitz to flee to Hungary .

Through his unpaid work in the security service of the Reichsführer SS (SD), Menten established close contacts with the German security apparatus, which promoted his economic activities. Menten knew the commander of the security police and the SD (BdS) Karl Eberhard Schöngarth . The latter supported the Dutchman's request to become a member of the Einsatzkommando for special use when it was set up in Krakow in advance of the attack on the Soviet Union.

Menten worked in this SS troop as an interpreter and country expert . He wore the uniform of an SS-Hauptscharführer . Menten developed a close relationship with a number of leading SS officers from Schöngarth's circle, for example with Schöngarth's deputy Heinrich Heim or with SS Sturmbannführer Wilhelm Berkau and Otto Kipka . Inside the SS, Menten is said to have expressed enthusiasm about the shooting of Jews. Menten himself was not a member of the SS.

Shortly after the start of the German-Soviet War, Menten took part in the Lviv professor murder in early July 1941 . There is evidence that he was present at the arrest and interrogation of professors. In the aftermath of these murders, in early 1942 he succeeded in acquiring the apartment of the murdered Professor Tadeusz Ostrowski, including the inventory, for 25,000 Reichsmarks , a price that was considered far too low even in SS circles. The Dutchman used four furniture vans and an SS vehicle to bring parts of the furnishings - including paintings, furniture, carpets - to Krakow, which were considered very valuable. Menten also had works of art and jewelry removed that had previously been stored by third parties in Ostrowski's apartment because the apartment of this apolitical and highly respected surgeon was considered safe from Ukrainian- nationalist, Soviet or German attacks. Some of the valuables that were transported away seemed to have been destined for the Kraków Wawel Castle , at that time the seat of government of Governor General Hans Frank . Menten also appropriated the apartment of Jan Grek , professor of internal medicine and also a victim of the professorial murders. Like Ostrowski, Grek was considered an art collector.

Participation in the Holocaust and SS investigation against Menten

After the professors' murder and the Lemberg massacre , sub-commands of the Einsatzkommando were sent out to the surrounding villages and small towns for special use . In the Galician village of Podhorodce, south of Boryslaw and not far from Sopot, Pieter Menten shot and killed around 20 to 30 Jews on July 7, 1941, together with other men from such a sub-command. It is uncertain whether he took part in a comparable mass shooting with 175 victims in Urycz, also in Galicia, in August 1941. According to Soviet sources based on interviews with witnesses and forensic examinations of mass graves, Menten is said to have been involved in the shooting of around 1,000 Jews, not only in Podhorodce and Urycz, but also in Dovge and Kropivnik. In this context, witnesses reported that the Dutchman wanted to take revenge on Isaak Pistyner and his family in eastern Galicia.

The General Government was soon seen as a haven for corruption . Menten was also suspected of being guilty of corruption and personal enrichment at the expense of the Reich. On July 21, 1942, he was arrested in Krakow and imprisoned in the building of the SS and Police Court VI. However, he was considered an "honorary prisoner" - he had to stay in a guarded, but not locked room. Menten disappeared on August 21, 1942. Schöngarth initiated a manhunt throughout the Reich and in all occupied areas. At the end of August 1942, Menten was placed in the mountains south of Krakow.

Heinrich Himmler commissioned a special commission of the Reich Main Security Office to investigate the case further, because the allegations against Menten were closely related to disputes within the security apparatus between Hans Frank and Karl Eberhard Schöngarth on the one hand and the Higher SS and Police Leader East, Friedrich-Wilhelm Krüger , on the other hand passed. It was about bribery , corruptibility and nepotism . The results of the dilatory investigations were poor, because a number of leading SS men would have been affected by further investigations. The allegations of bribery and unlawful confiscation of someone else's property have been dropped. Menten received back all goods that had been confiscated in the meantime.

Return to the Netherlands

JFA Tischbein : Portrait of an Officer (1793)

Although Himmler apparently considered the Dutchman to be an ardent supporter of National Socialism and an admirer of the SS, on October 5, 1942, he ordered Menten to leave the Generalgouvernement and take up his permanent residence in the Netherlands. Menten, his wife and his secretary therefore left Krakow on January 31, 1943. Menten chose Aerdenhout not far from Haarlem as his new place of residence . He was allowed to take all of his possessions with him. For this purpose, two larger and three smaller moving vehicles were loaded onto railway wagons. Another wagon carried a car and 16 loose pieces of cargo. Eleven suitcases with particularly valuable contents were also carried in Menten's personal luggage. In addition, he received permission to foreign exchange in the amount of 575,000 zloty to transfer (the equivalent of 287,500 Reichsmarks) in the Netherlands. Menten did not have to fear disputes with customs authorities , because he cited that his move was carried out on behalf of the Reichsführer SS .

This restitution file documents Menten's participation in the construction of the Führermuseum, which largely consisted of Nazi-looted art .

Members of the Dutch resistance against the German occupiers noticed the wealth of the new inhabitant of Aerdenhout. Nor did they miss the fact that he occasionally received a visit from Schöngarth, who from June 1, 1944 had held the post of commander of the Security Police and SD at the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Dutch Territories, Arthur Seyß-Inquart .

Menten was involved in the compilation of works of art for the Führermuseum Linz . For example, Johann Friedrich August Tischbein's “Portrait of a Young Officer” was added to this project through Hans Posse . The names "Menten" and "Posse" can be found in the corresponding restitution files of the Central Collecting Point in Munich . According to these documents, Menten received 3,000 guilders for the sale of the picture.

post war period

After the end of the Second World War, Menten was considered a millionaire in the Netherlands. Because he was also known as a collaborator, Menten was arrested on May 16, 1945. However, there was insufficient evidence against him and he was released from custody in October of the same year. In his absence, booty was stolen from his confiscated but unattended house. Menten also claimed that gross mismanagement of his assets, which had also been confiscated in the meantime, caused him great damage. After years of disputes in which Menten gave the total amount of damage at 4 million guilders , Menten obtained compensation of 320,000 guilders from the Dutch state in 1953.

A British military court sentenced Schöngarth to death in Germany on February 11, 1946. Before the judgment was carried out (May 16, 1946), he was transferred to the Netherlands for questioning for a few days. On April 4, 1946, a public prosecutor in the Interior Ministry questioned him about allegations against Pieter Menten, against whom the investigation continued despite his release. Schöngarth stated that Menten was a member of the special use task force . However, he did not comment on participating in executions. Menten himself went into hiding. After his arrest, he was tried in the Amsterdam Special Court in February and March 1949. Rad Kortenhorst was one of his defenders . The CIP politician and chairman of the second chamber of parliament represented a number of Dutch people who were accused of collaboration in court in the post-war years. The mass executions in eastern Galicia were not discussed during the trial. On April 14, 1949, Menten was sentenced to one year in prison for “collaborating with the enemy”. Because the times he had been in pre-trial detention since the end of the war counted, he was immediately released from custody. The testimony of Joseph Stieglitz, who testified in favor of Menten during the trial, contributed to this mild judgment.

On October 12, 1950, the People's Republic of Poland applied for Menten's extradition to no avail. In 1952 the Dutch authorities had evidence against Menten from Israel. It contained information from Haviv Canaan, among other things. He had known from a witness since 1944 that Menten was responsible for the murder of his family members. However, the Dutch judiciary did not take action against Menten again. For his part, Menten presented himself to the German authorities as a victim of National Socialism; He had helped persecuted Jews in Poland, and in retaliation , the National Socialists had confiscated furniture and art objects from his Lviv apartment . In 1965 he got the Federal Republic of Germany to pay him 550,000 DM as compensation for alleged losses.

Suspicion and escape

On May 22, 1976, the daily De Telegraaf published an interview with Menten, who meanwhile lived in a villa in Blaricum . Menten announced that he will attend the June 21, 1976 by Sotheby's mAb van Waay to auction 425 works of art. The newspaper article portrayed Menten as a humanist , a lover of art and good taste and a victim of National Socialism.

Hans Knoop (left) in conversation with Haviv Kanaan (photo taken on May 9, 1977).

Haviv Kanaan found out about this process from the Dutch journalist Henriette Boas. He then wrote a revelatory article about Menten for Haaretz. Hans Knoop , editor-in-chief of the Telegraaf group's weekly Accent , received news of Kanaan's article and began intensive research into the rich art dealer in the Netherlands . From June 19, 1976, he reported in a series of articles about the mass executions of 1941 and the role Menten had played in them. From June 21, 1976, journalists from the radio and television company Televisie en Radio Omroep Stichting (TROS) also broadcast television programs on Menten's Nazi past, in which Polish and Israeli witnesses had their say. Menten emphatically denied these testimonies. In the following period there were disputes in the Dutch public and in the Second Chamber of the States General about the previous actions of the judicial authorities against Menten.

In September the Dutch judiciary decided to conduct an official investigation in the Soviet Union. A Dutch investigation team applied for visas . Hans Knoop also asked for such a visa for himself and a photographer. Both received their papers in October 1976, while the official investigation team's request initially went unanswered. Knoop and his companion observed and photographed the examinations of Soviet forensic scientists in Podhorodce. They also recorded a number of testimonies on tape. Back in the Netherlands, Hans Knoop presented the material to the judiciary. The investigating officers and the journalist expected Mentens to flee immediately as soon as the research results were published. On November 2, 1976, Knoop and the officials agreed that Menten should be arrested on November 15, because November 20 was planned as the publication date for the research results in both Accent and the German weekly magazine stern . Immediately before the planned arrest, on the night of November 14-15, Menten and his wife fled to Switzerland . This flight led to a domestic political crisis in the Netherlands.

Arrest and conviction

The Swiss journalist Martin A. Walser, who was part of the expanded journalist network of stern , discovered Menten in Uster near Zurich and informed Knoop on December 6, 1976. Menten and his wife stayed at the Illuster , a local hotel. Knoop was on site with Dutch police officers when the Swiss police arrested Menten. At first it seemed uncertain whether the wanted person would be extradited to the Netherlands, as the extradition agreement between the Netherlands and Switzerland did not contain any regulations on how to deal with alleged war criminals. Their actions were statute barred in Switzerland. Mentens' lawyers suggested that the Swiss authorities allow their client to travel to Ireland. The Swiss authorities, who regarded Menten as an “undesirable person”, finally deported him to the Netherlands on the condition that he would be tried there and that a new Polish extradition request would not be granted.

The trial against Menten began on May 9, 1977 in the Amsterdam Special Court. The defendant denied the allegations that he was involved in the murder of Jews. His defense lawyers presented their clients as victims of the Soviet secret service KGB and a Jewish conspiracy. Haviv Kanaan and five eyewitnesses to the Podhorodce shootings testified against him. In view of the course of the process, Menten changed his defense strategy. He claimed that in 1952 the Dutch authorities granted him impunity in return for his silence in a political corruption affair. The court sentenced him on December 14, 1977 to 15 years in prison for the mass shootings in Podhorodce. He was acquitted of the suspicion of taking part in the Urycz massacre for lack of evidence.

Menten's lawyers requested an appeal . The High Council of the Netherlands thereupon reversed the judgment against Menten on May 29, 1978, because Mentens' statement that he had been promised impunity in 1952 had not been adequately examined by the Amsterdam Special Court. The Supreme Court referred the case back to the Amsterdam court, which overturned the judgment against the art dealer, citing the 1952 pledge in question. On December 4, 1978, Mentens was released from Scheveningen prison .

The surprising acquittal was again declared invalid on May 22, 1979 by the High Council. The Supreme Court referred the case to a court in Rotterdam for decision . During this trial, the accused repeatedly put forward the thesis that witnesses would mistake him for his brother Dirk. He then testified against Pieter Menten and emphasized that Pieter had already confessed to him in 1943 that he had participated in the shootings. Ten years later, in the presence of relatives, he wrote down his brother's confession. On July 9, 1980, the court in Rotterdam finally sentenced Menten to ten years in prison for his involvement in the Podhorodce murders and to a fine of 100,000 guilders for failing to report a crime.

Menten received back parts of his art collection that had been confiscated in the meantime after the verdict was announced. It has not been proven that they were acquired through theft and extortion. The Supreme Council confirmed the Rotterdam judgment on January 13, 1981, thereby rejecting Menten's appeal for a review.

Imprisonment and last years of life

Menten was serving his sentence in Scheveningen prison. In 1985 he was released early after two-thirds of his sentence had expired. His attempt to move to County Waterford, Ireland , to live in his villa there, failed because of the veto of Irish Prime Minister Garret FitzGerald . Because an arson attack had been carried out on his Irish property in 1979, the perpetrators of which could not be identified, in early 1986 Menten succeeded in obliging the Irish state to pay compensation of £ 37,000 (equivalent to DM 125,000).

In 1985, the Federal Republic of Germany was granted the right to auction around 400 paintings and pieces of furniture from Menten's collection in Amsterdam in order to use the proceeds to satisfy its claims for repayment against the Dutchman, which amounted to DM 550,000 and DM 880,000 in interest paid 20 years earlier. The auction house Sotheby's-Mak van Waay also collected unpaid outstanding debts from this compulsory auction of Menten.

At the age of 88, Menten died in 1987 in a Loosdrecht old people's home , into which he had moved in July 1986.

Menten affair

Debate on Menten in the Dutch Parliament: Aad Kosto from the Partij van de Arbeid (PvdA) at the lectern (photo taken on December 14, 1978).

The revelations by Hans Knoop and the broadcasts by TROS started an intense public discussion about the procedures of the Dutch judiciary. It worsened after November 15, 1976 after an attempt to arrest the alleged war criminal had failed. On November 18, 1976, Parliament questioned the responsible Minister of Justice, Dries van Agt . This questioning, in which the minister came under great pressure, was broadcast live on Dutch television . A survey from the end of 1976 showed that the treatment of the allegations against Menten not only interested the judiciary and politics, but also many citizens. 84 percent of respondents said they followed the news about the Menten case; 70 percent thought the process was an important problem for the Netherlands.

In the course of the political and media controversy, it was assumed that the Justice Minister's opponents wanted to expose him with the help of the events surrounding Menten, because van Agt was the top candidate on a Christian Democratic electoral list for the parliamentary elections of 1977. The result of this election was generally viewed as an invitation to continue politics the cooperation between Christian Democrats and Social Democrats ( PvdA ). However, this did not materialize due to the previous violent disputes. Instead, van Agt became Prime Minister of a Christian Democratic-Liberal coalition .

References to the three of Breda were repeatedly mixed up in the debate . For decades the Dutch public had been concerned with the question of whether these war criminals sentenced to life imprisonment should be pardoned . Van Agt had advocated this in 1972, among other things. His critics now combined this position on the pardon question with what they believed to be the faulty behavior of van Agt in the Menten affair.

In the end, the argument was often expressed - by Hans Knoop among others - that Menten had been “covered” by the authorities. On November 18, 1976, the Minister of Justice promised that a commission of independent experts would investigate the allegations. This commission, consisting of the historian Ivo Schöffer , the historian Johannes Cornelis Hendrik (Hans) Blom and the legal scholar August Cornelis (Joest) 't Hart, submitted a total of four interim reports in the course of its work and a comprehensive final report in September 1979. After evaluating 50 archives of public corporations and interviews with 150 people, they considered the suspicion of manipulation to be unfounded.

The Menten affair was also noticed internationally, as was shown in the reports of many foreign newspapers. For example, after the surprise release on December 4, 1978, the Israeli parliament dealt with the case. Prime Minister Menachem Begin called for Menten's extradition.

attachment

literature

  • Reuben Ainsztein : The Collector , in: New Statesman ,
    • February 13, 1981, pp. 6-8 (part 1),
    • February 20, 1981, pp. 8-10 (part 2),
    • February 27, 1981, pp. 10-11 (part 3).
  • JCH Blom, AC 't Hart, Ivo Schöffer, JM de Maar-Willink: De affaire-Menten 1945–1976. Report from the Commissie van Onderzoek concerning the opsporings- en vervolgingsbeleid inzake Menten vanaf de bevrijding tot de zomer van 1976 en de invloeden waaraan dat insult al dan niet heeft blootgestaan. 's-Gravenhage, Staatsuitgeverij, 1979.
  • Hans Knoop: De zaak Menten. Met nieuwe onthullingen over de Velser-affaire , voorwoord Simon Wiesenthal. Vertaling voorwoord Max de Metz, Becht, Amsterdam 1977, ISBN 90-230-0270-9 (English as The Menten affair , London 1979, ISBN 0-86051-071-9 ).
  • Harald Fühner: Follow-up. Dutch politics and the persecution of collaborators and Nazi criminals, 1945–1989 , Waxmann, Münster [u. a.] 2005, ISBN 3-8309-1464-4 .
  • Nikolaas Egbert Algra: Enkele juridische aspectsen van de strafzaak Menten , Wolters-Noordhoff, Groningen 1978, ISBN 90-01-03104-8 .
  • C. Brink: Millioenendans van Menten , Redactie en Administratie VVN (Nationale Federatieve Raad van het Voormalig Verzet Nederland (NFR / VVN)), Amsterdam 1952.
  • Malcolm MacPherson: The last victim. One man's search for Pieter Menten, his family's friend and executioner , Weidenfeld and Nicholson, London 1984, ISBN 978-0-297-78298-8 . Also under the title: The blood of his servants .

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Expulsion with Trick , Hamburger Abendblatt dated December 23, 1976 (accessed on November 24, 2011).
  2. ↑ a b c d e f g h i j I. Schöffer: Menten, Pieter Nicolaas (1899–1987) , in: Biografisch Woordenboek van Nederland . (Version of March 13, 2008, accessed November 17, 2011)
  3. ↑ a b c d Pieter Menten. The "Looting Dutchman" , information about Menten on the website HolocaustResearchProject.org . (Accessed November 15, 2011)
  4. ↑ a b c d e f g h i Dieter Schenk , Der Lemberger Professorenmord , 2007, pp. 135–141.
  5. ^ William E. Farrell: A Jew's 32-year Search For Justice Nears Its End , in: St. Petersburg Times , December 23, 1976. (Accessed November 16, 2011)
  6. ^ A b c d e William E. Farrell: War criminal suspect is traced , in: Wisconsin State Journal , December 26, 1976. (Accessed August 25, 2015)
  7. ↑ Hans Knoop, The Menten affair , 1979, p. 32.
  8. ^ A b Reuben Ainsztein, The Collector , in: New Statesman, February 13, 1981, pp. 6-8 (part 1).
  9. ↑ See Dieter Pohl : National Socialist Persecution of Jews in East Galicia 1941-1944: Organization and Implementation of a State Mass Crime , Series: Studies on Contemporary History, 50. Oldenbourg, Munich 1996, p. 69 f, ISBN 3-486-56233-9 .
  10. ^ Report on the judgment against Menten , in: Der Spiegel , December 19, 1977.
  11. ↑ Hans Knoop, The Menten affair , 1979, p. 66 and p. 70.
  12. ^ Frank Bajohr : Parvenus and Profiteurs. Corruption in the Nazi era , Fischer, Frankfurt am Main 2001, pp. 75 ff, ISBN 3-10-004812-1 .
  13. ↑ a b c d Dieter Schenk, Der Lemberger Professorenmord , 2007, pp. 165–167.
  14. ↑ data sets for Linz no. 3544 of the database for the “Central Collecting Point Munich” (accessed November 26, 2011) on the website of the German Historical Museum . This database contains more hits for Menten.
  15. ↑ a b c Dieter Schenk, Der Lemberger Professorenmord , 2007, p. 253 f.
  16. ↑ Harald Fühner, Nachspiel , 2005, p. 115 f, footnote 99.
  17. ^ A b c Reuben Ainsztein, The Collector , in: New Statesman, February 20, 1981, pp. 8-10 (part 2).
  18. ↑ On this Harald Fühner, Nachspiel , 2005, p. 347 f.
  19. ↑ Harald Fühner: Nachspiel , 2005, p. 348.
  20. ↑ American Jewish Year Book , 1982, 9, pp. 214 f. (Accessed on November 22, 2011) (PDF; 392 kB). See also: Does Pieter Menten have to repay more than half a million marks? , Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung , September 21, 1979.
  21. ↑ Article on H. Boas in the Jewish Virtual Library .
  22. ↑ Hans Knoop, The Menten affair , 1979, p. 77.
  23. ^ Website by Martin A. Walser.
  24. ^ Hotel website.
  25. ^ A b c Reuben Ainsztein, The Collector , in: New Statesman, February 27, 1981, pp. 10-11 (part 3).
  26. ↑ a b Pieter Menten Dies; Nazi War Criminal Was Collector of Art , in: New York Times , November 16, 1987. (Accessed November 20, 2011).
  27. ↑ Menten Trial: Confused with the Brother? , Die Welt , May 29, 1980.
  28. ^ Pieter Menten has to be behind bars for 10 years , Die Welt , July 10, 1980.
  29. ^ War criminal Menten finally convicted , Neues Deutschland , January 14, 1981.
  30. ^ Information on the BBC website about the documentary Pieter Menten's War
  31. ↑ Ireland pays compensation to Pieter Menten , Die Welt , February 12, 1986.
  32. ↑ Reclaiming with a hammer , Süddeutsche Zeitung , June 26, 1985.
  33. ↑ Harald Fühner, Nachspiel , 2005, p. 349 f.
  34. ↑ Harald Fühner, Nachspiel , 2005, pp. 350–354.
  35. ↑ Harald Fühner, Nachspiel , 2005, p. 354 f.
  36. ↑ Harald Fühner, Nachspiel , 2005, p. 356 f.
  37. ↑ Nationaal Archief, Den Haag, Ministerie van Justitie: Archief van de Commissie van Onderzoek inzake Menten, met gedeponeerd archief van de Velser-affaire en documentatie concerning de zaak Schallenberg, (1934) 1942–1979 (1985), number toegang 2.09.63 (PDF; 565 kB), Centrale Archiefselectiedienst, Winschoten, Nationaal Archief, Den Haag 2003, p. 9. (accessed on November 23, 2011).
  38. ^ Case Menten before the Knesseth , Hamburger Abendblatt, December 6, 1978. (Accessed November 24, 2011)
  39. ↑ Menachem Begin calls for extradition of Pieter Menten Information on an archived recording on the website of the British Universities Film & Video Council . (Accessed August 25, 2015).
  40. ^ Hans Knoop, The Menten affair , 1979, p. 160.
This article was added to the list of excellent articles on February 2, 2012 in this version .
personal data
SURNAME Menten, Pieter
ALTERNATIVE NAMES Menten, Pieter Nicolaas
BRIEF DESCRIPTION Dutch merchant, art dealer and war criminal
DATE OF BIRTH May 26, 1899
PLACE OF BIRTH Rotterdam
DATE OF DEATH November 14, 1987
Place of death Loosdrecht