From a French contact, content edited and I have added the references:
I am familiar with the Henri Déricourt controversy. A double or triple Agent perhaps - he certainly betrayed agents and was really fortunate not to be sentenced after the war.
I suggest you look up two names whom he had come across before the War :
a) In 1937 in Paris Nicolas Bodington , working for Reuters, the future No. 2 in SOE F section. A lot of question marks have arisen about his role.
b) In 1938 also in Paris, Bodington introduced Déricourt to Karl Bomelburg or Boemelburg the future head of the Gestapo in France.
WW2 France would become rife with betrayals, due to jealousy or greed, or even idealism.
There is another Frenchman, in total contrast with Déricourt, called Robert “Bob” Maloubier ; he was recruited by the British into SOE F Section, was awarded the DSO during the war, and then the OBE in 2014 by the Queen. He had a varied career after the war; in the French external intelligence agency (SDECE), co-founder of the SDECE’s military frogman unit; working for Elf Petrol Plc., in Nigeria and the Emirates. In retirement, he authored books , one of his last was about Claude Dansey .
Thanks. Much appreciated. I am au fait with Boddington and Maloubier, and regret that the latter took the line that Déricourt and the fall of Prosper were the result of SIS double-dealing and deception.
Thanks Derek. It'll be a bit counter-cultural as neither Kate or I subscribe to the idea of a conspiracy theory in which the dastardly SIS did away with a whole SOE network for their own nefarious purposes. The SOE were quite capable of doing that themselves. The evidence points strongly in other, more prosaic directions.
Fascinating stuff. I greatly enjoyed reading Patrick Marnham's book, and would very much like to read your planned work. I recently read Halik Kochanski's book 'Resistance' and she too rather gently took the air out of Marnham's tyres but given the broad scope of her book I was frustrated not to have more than the couple of pages she gave to the Prosper downfall.
Thanks Hamish. I've been through the PROSPER story for years and still come back to Michael Foot's analysis (in his 2004 edition of SOE in France). Francis Sutthill comes to the same conclusion. It strikes me that anyone who doesn't want to believe that PROSPER collapsed as the result (largely) of its security failings has to blame someone else. The obvious culprit is Déricourt, as we know that he was handing (some) material over to the Germans at the time. The problem is that the conspiracy theories are actually all very outlandish, and involve various shades of British government malfeasance that is, despite the fine writing of Marnham's book, utterly fantastical.
From a French contact, content edited and I have added the references:
I am familiar with the Henri Déricourt controversy. A double or triple Agent perhaps - he certainly betrayed agents and was really fortunate not to be sentenced after the war.
I suggest you look up two names whom he had come across before the War :
a) In 1937 in Paris Nicolas Bodington , working for Reuters, the future No. 2 in SOE F section. A lot of question marks have arisen about his role.
b) In 1938 also in Paris, Bodington introduced Déricourt to Karl Bomelburg or Boemelburg the future head of the Gestapo in France.
WW2 France would become rife with betrayals, due to jealousy or greed, or even idealism.
There is another Frenchman, in total contrast with Déricourt, called Robert “Bob” Maloubier ; he was recruited by the British into SOE F Section, was awarded the DSO during the war, and then the OBE in 2014 by the Queen. He had a varied career after the war; in the French external intelligence agency (SDECE), co-founder of the SDECE’s military frogman unit; working for Elf Petrol Plc., in Nigeria and the Emirates. In retirement, he authored books , one of his last was about Claude Dansey .
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_D%C3%A9ricourt
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolas_Bodington
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_B%C3%B6melburg
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Maloubier
Listed on (mainly in French) https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=Bob+Maloubier&i=stripbooks&crid=29RNJOCELSZ51&sprefix=bob+maloubier%2Cstripbooks%2C102&ref=nb_sb_noss_1
See (in French only): https://www.amazon.co.uk/vie-secr%C3%A8te-sir-Dansey-ma%C3%AEtre-espion/dp/2226316493/ref=sr_1_5?crid=29RNJOCELSZ51&keywords=Bob+Maloubier&qid=1681580758&s=books&sprefix=bob+maloubier%2Cstripbooks%2C102&sr=1-5
Thanks. Much appreciated. I am au fait with Boddington and Maloubier, and regret that the latter took the line that Déricourt and the fall of Prosper were the result of SIS double-dealing and deception.
Very interesting Robert I shall be in the audience at CVHF and look forward to hearing you and kate explore this.
Thanks Derek. It'll be a bit counter-cultural as neither Kate or I subscribe to the idea of a conspiracy theory in which the dastardly SIS did away with a whole SOE network for their own nefarious purposes. The SOE were quite capable of doing that themselves. The evidence points strongly in other, more prosaic directions.
Fascinating stuff. I greatly enjoyed reading Patrick Marnham's book, and would very much like to read your planned work. I recently read Halik Kochanski's book 'Resistance' and she too rather gently took the air out of Marnham's tyres but given the broad scope of her book I was frustrated not to have more than the couple of pages she gave to the Prosper downfall.
Thanks Hamish. I've been through the PROSPER story for years and still come back to Michael Foot's analysis (in his 2004 edition of SOE in France). Francis Sutthill comes to the same conclusion. It strikes me that anyone who doesn't want to believe that PROSPER collapsed as the result (largely) of its security failings has to blame someone else. The obvious culprit is Déricourt, as we know that he was handing (some) material over to the Germans at the time. The problem is that the conspiracy theories are actually all very outlandish, and involve various shades of British government malfeasance that is, despite the fine writing of Marnham's book, utterly fantastical.