Ms. de Gorter stated she had shared this data with the crew, however they ignored her, she stated. As a substitute, the guide claimed that the household was residing in Amsterdam, and that Mr. van den Bergh had received his freedom by giving up addresses to the Nazis.
“My grandfather, Arnold van den Bergh, has been portrayed worldwide as a world scapegoat,” she stated. “In the meantime, Anne Frank’s worldwide prominence is exploited in a very dishonest means.”
In February, the European Jewish Congress additionally known as on HarperCollins to rescind the guide, and to “distance itself from the guide’s controversial historic claims.”
Ambo Anthos had beforehand paused printing and distribution of the guide and apologized after historians raised the primary questions on its findings. “A extra essential stance might have been taken right here,” wrote Tanja Hendriks, writer and director of the corporate. Ms. Hendriks didn’t reply to requests for touch upon Wednesday.
The writer’s web site now states, “We’d as soon as once more like to supply our honest apologies to everybody who has been offended by the contents of this guide.”
Mr. van Twisk, Ms. Sullivan and the documentary filmmaker Thijs Bayens, who was a member of the crew that was assembled to establish Anne Franks’s betrayer, additionally didn’t reply to requests for remark. The cold-case crew’s lead investigator, the previous F.B.I. detective Vince Pankoke, has beforehand issued a defense of the work, nevertheless.
“Till now, we have now not been introduced with any piece of proof or any new data that had sufficient power to problem our conclusion,” he famous earlier than the refutation was launched. “The van den Bergh state of affairs is, in our opinion, nonetheless essentially the most viable concept concerning the betrayal of the Prinsengracht 263.”