The Betrayal of Anne Frank: A Cold Case Investigation

Written by Rosemary Sullivan

Narrated by Julia Whelan

Less a mystery unsolved than a secret well kept...

Using new technology, recently discovered documents and sophisticated investigative techniques, an international team—led by an obsessed retired FBI agent—has finally solved the mystery that has haunted generations since World War II: Who betrayed Anne Frank and her family? And why?

Over thirty million people have read The Diary of a Young Girl, the journal teen-aged Anne Frank kept while living in an attic with her family and four other people in Amsterdam during World War II, until the Nazis arrested them and sent them to a concentration camp. But despite the many works—journalism, books, plays and novels—devoted to Anne’s story, none has ever conclusively explained how these eight people managed to live in hiding undetected for over two years—and who or what finally brought the Nazis to their door.

With painstaking care, retired FBI agent Vincent Pankoke and a team of indefatigable investigators pored over tens of thousands of pages of documents—some never before seen—and interviewed scores of descendants of people familiar with the Franks. Utilizing methods developed by the FBI, the Cold Case Team painstakingly pieced together the months leading to the infamous arrest—and came to a shocking conclusion. 

The Betrayal of Anne Frank: A Cold Case Investigation is the riveting story of their mission. Rosemary Sullivan introduces us to the investigators, explains the behavior of both the captives and their captors and profiles a group of suspects. All the while, she vividly brings to life wartime Amsterdam: a place where no matter how wealthy, educated, or careful you were, you never knew whom you could trust. 

Supplemental enhancement PDF accompanies the audiobook.

• Language: English
• Publisher: HarperAudio
• Release date: Jan 18, 2022
• ISBN: 9780063067066

Rosemary Sullivan

ROSEMARY SULLIVAN, the author of fifteen books, is best known for her recent biography Stalin’s Daughter.  Published in twenty-three countries, it won the Biographers International Organization Plutarch Award and was a finalist for the PEN /Bograd Weld Award for Biography and the National Books Critics Circle Award. Her book Villa Air-Bel was awarded the Canadian Society for Yad Vashem Award in Holocaust History. She is a professor emeritus at the university of Toronto and has lectured in Canada, the U.S., Europe, India, and Latin America.  

Reviews for The Betrayal of Anne Frank

[Nadia Kash · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

I did not need the history lesson again, wordy and dull

[Cyndi · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Good book. Drug out.
Spoiler- the nazis are responsible for Anne Franks death

[Tarnia Wilke · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

New information on who betrayed the Franks has recently come to light. It also reveals the fact that Otto Frank always knew about the betrayer and went on to investigate it himself. Instead, he chose not to expose the betrayer and his family members from the same Jewish community. The team of experts and volunteers gathered and assessed historical archives, interview accounts together with AI technology to answer the question that might have long puzzled the readers who have read the Diary of Anne Frank and other related books. I highly recommend it and look forward to visiting those historical sites in the shadow city, Amsterdam, suggested at the end of the book.

[Elya · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

AMAZING, Learned alot ...definitely recommend. Will add this to my library

[jo daniels · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

This book was explosive in terms of its impact and insight into one of the world’s best kept secrets. I literally was sitting on the edge of my seat in the final chapters.

[Lhia Athaliah Brittany White · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Great piece of history and so well researched and proven. Amazing job discovering who betrayed the Frank Family. A very sad time in history. Even more sad when you find out the betrayers name.

[rockhead515-580421 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Very interesting book.
Some history, some biography, and alot of detective work.
Great flow to the chapters and well written.

[lamour_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Vince Pankoke, a FBI investigator was surprised to learn on a visit to Anne Frank House, that the betrayer of the Franks was never discovered. He became part of a team to treat that issue as a cold case investigation. After five years of work, the team came to the conclusion that a factory worker at Otto Frank's spice and pectin business had been the culprit. However, after seventy years when many of the witnesses are dead and some did not wish to assist, could the team be sure of their conclusion? That is up to the reader to decide. It is fascinating to follow the dogged research by the team into the background of each suspect and how they reach their conclusions of innocence or guilt. As the author follows the investigation, she gives the reader mountains of information on the war in the Netherlands, the actions of the Nazis in the Netherlands and how the Dutch reacted to the invasion. Many fought in secret ways hiding Jews and especially Jewish children for the entire war period while others supported the Germans for financial gain or because they were believers in the Nazi doctrine.

[micareads · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Anne Frank will forever be known as the young Dutch girl who survived being in hiding for over 700 days with her family and three other people. Her diary, given to her father upon his return from the concentration camps, allowed the world to see a small part of her everyday life from the most mundane to the most terrifying. Her diary stops two days before the raid that would change everything.

A group of investigators and a retired FBI agent are hoping to answer the eternal question of who betrayed the Franks? Using archived documents, photos, videos, maps, and good old-fashioned research they hope to find the answer. They begin with several theories including that a new warehouse worker who they believe was aware that people were being hidden in the building and were a known thief, a woman known to turn in hiding Jews in return for money or favors, a family member of one of the helpers who have a known history with the Nazis, and a member of the Jewish Council whose job it was to make decisions on behalf of the Jews in the Netherlands.

The team breaks down each scenario, looks for evidence to back up the scenario, and attempts to come up with a motive for the possible betrayal. Each theory is explained, the evidence is broken down for the reader, and then when a theory is eliminated the author goes into detail as to why. The effort and reverence that is given to the investigation is inspiring and shows just how serious these investigators took this case.

As someone who has read multiple books on Anne Frank, her history, and her helpers I was very interested in this new book. I found myself drawn into the investigation and following along with the investigators' train of thought. I will keep the final theory a secret, but I can agree with why they believe this person is the best option although we will never be 100% sure of who betrayed those who hid in the Annex and what their motive was. This is a book I would suggest reading and coming to your own conclusion.

[chrisethier · Rating: 1 out of 5 stars]

I started reading this book just prior to all the recent news coverage and suspension of the Dutch publishing of the book.Even before that news broke by the time I hit page 30 I had a serious question about the team behind this book.But first, I feel it needs to be pointed out that Rosemary Sullivan who wrote this book was hired by the team to write the book. Much, if not all, of the book is research the team did. The conclusion therefore is the team’s not Sullivan’s. This doesn’t let Sullivan completely off the hook for the hot mess this book is, but the team aspect should be noted. The main members of the team that are most often mentioned are Thijis Bayens, Luc Gerrits, Pieter van Twisk, Vince Pankoke, and Monique Koemans. Additionally, I will not be using the name of the notary who was a member of the Jewish Council during WII because the support for the conclusion that he is guilty is so weak. Also spoilers.And the team aspect is important. By page 30, Sullivan has introduced the major players of the Cold Case Team and not one single member is a historian whose area of focus is the Holocaust. There are historians but Sullivan describes them as public historians or “young historians” (and if you look up the young historians, they are described as public historians). Now public historians are important because of their training and knowledge of archives and research. But a specialist in the Holocaust would also be important. It should be noted that Sullivan includes not only a list of the team but also a list a consultants, and at least two of the consultants do seem to specialize in history of the second World War. One in art, and another in the Dutch police. However, a Dutch news source is reporting that one of the historian is claiming he only spoke with a member of the team twice and doesn’t know why he was listed as being associated with the project on a grant application (see here.A historian who works in the field of Holocaust studies would have given more depth to the knowledge of the Jewish Councils as well as the use of Jewish informers by the Germans and Dutch police to catch other Jews. When dealing with both these issues the book lack depth and makes very board statements without nuance or even context. The chapter about Jewish Councils, for instance, lacks depth, is too general, and seems to be designed to steer the reader into accepting a claim put forward without proof.But it is not just the lack of a historian that raises questions. There are a few strange pieces, like how the team leaders seem to be surprised at the friction between the two Anne Frank Trusts -the one that runs the house (Anne Frank House) and the one that owns the copyright (Anne Frank Fonds). There was a lawsuit between the two in 2015, and if the team started research six years, it seems really surprising that the men seem clueless about the issues, which is strange considering. Also, while the Fonds is usually portrayed as the more strictly correct and controlling of the two foundations (it does really protect copyright), they raise a good point about the proposed title “A Cold Case Diary: Anne Frank” - it wasn’t just Anne and Otto Frank who were betrayed – though at times the book seems to put forward that view. There is also a line about how an investigator looking at outside of the house and knowing that there was secret place inside as he stand outside of the house a few years ago. While he has a point, it also is strange because he is standing there with the knowledge of what it was. There also is a line that basically says it is impossible to find someone in the Netherlands who doesn’t have a connection to WWII, which seems like a slap to immigrants.But the real issue is with the accusation. The Cold Case Team contends that the Jewish Council had a list of Jews in hiding and that the notary had access to this list and basically traded it (or a location on the list) for the lives of himself and his family.The first problem is that the story of Jewish Council having a list comes from a German who also contends that the list was made because Jews in hiding put the hiding address return address. So the source of the story is a bit suspect.Second problem is that no historian of the Holocaust has ever seen such a list connected to any Jewish Council. The Cold Case Team has no proof, no document that proves such a list existed.Thirdly, the Cold Case Team cannot prove that even if such a list exist (and there is no proof of such list existing in regards to any Jewish Council) that the Annex address was on it. The team presumes that such list existed and assumes that the Annex was on it because an informer said something. And why the informer went to the Council and not to the Dutch police or Germans instead is confusing.Fourthly, the Cold Case Team presumes because there the notary was not deported and wasn’t in one of two hiding places, he and his wife were not in hiding even though his children were. (After reading the book, I found historians who stated there is proof that the notary and his wife were in fact in hiding. One is : hereFinally, there is how the book and what seems to be the team deals with granddaughter of the notary. Sullivan notes that the name of the woman was changed at her request, and then name of the man who hide her mother was also not mentioned out of respect for privacy. The granddaughter is described as being her fifties and having being born after the death of her grandfather (the notary who died in 1950). We are told that the notary’s wife (the grandmother) died in 1968 and that the grand daughter had the task of going though “their Amsterdam home”. Later, we are told that the granddaughter had no memory of her grandparents speaking about being hiding. The thing is how would she have a memory of her grandfather saying anything if she was born after he died. Not to mention, if the interviews occurred in 2018 and 2019 and she was in her fifties, how old was she when her grandmother died? For instance, if the granddaughter was 60 in 2017, she would have been born in 1957, which meant she was, according to the book, responsible for cleaning out her grandmother’s house when she was 11.I’m confused. There is either fudging of dates, translation issues, or just bad writing here.Also the Dutch news is reporting that the granddaughter is saying her grandfather was in hiding at the time.Also, the book moves from using words such as “likely” to describe the suscept to words that indicate and imply iron clad conviction of guilt on behalf of the team.Finally, even before reading the book, I had an issue with the title and I wonder if it is a Dutch to English translation issue. Betrayal implies something personal. For me (and maybe it is just me), if someone betrayed you to the Nazis it was someone you trusted with the knowledge, not someone who came across the knowledge (who would be an informer). So betrayal is a strange word to use, and it does seem the Dutch is different because at points Sullivan talks about Dutch people being charged with betrayal. This is confusing because she also at times uses betrayal and collaborating interchangeably or than as two different things. But more importantly, if giving up a family you had never meet was something you had to do to save your family, is it a betrayal? And aren’t the Nazis still to blame?The book does not seem to consider this point or the pressure put on people to inform (or how unusual the Annex people in terms of numbers or even the risks those who hide Jews took).What is most surprising about this is that no editor on the HarperCollins team said, “hey, wait a sec maybe we should have some historian fact checking this shit”. Because this shit is dangerous. You already have jerks saying that the Dutch publisher is in the pocket of the Jewish conspiracy controlling world bs. No, the book is not peer reviewed or fact checked. It is a bad book. Christ, why the hell didn’t any review pick up on these problems?

[susan0316 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I was 12 or 13 when I read Diary of a Young Girl. It was my first look at the horrors of the Holocaust and it was very difficult to process the book in my mind - especially since I was about the same age as Anne when she wrote in her diary.One of the main questions that people ask at the Anne Frank museum in Amsterdam is 'who betrayed Anne Frank'? There has been a lot of investigation and several books on this subject over the years because Anne became a symbol of the cruelties of war. In 2017, a group of scientists and detectives got together to do a cold case study on the betrayal. They believed that with all of the computer resources at hand, they could finally find out who turned in the names of the Frank family. They poured through tens of thousands of pages of documents and talked to people who knew Anne and her family before the war started. They talked to descendants whose parents had told them stories about the Frank family and they found documents that had never been seen before and came up the name of the person that they thought MIGHT have been the person they were looking for.I really enjoyed the first part of the book that talked about the family before the war, about their life in hiding and what happened on that last day before they were captured. Once the book turned to the work of the cold case team, it got pretty bogged down. I was impressed with their dedication of the cold case team and how computers helped them find more documents plus helped them compare their findingsIt's been over 60 years since the Frank family was discovered in the Annex and finding out the person who betrayed them can't change anything. In a way the cold case team violated one of Otto Frank's principals to not make money off of the death of his daughter and his family. In my mind, this group did just that. Overall, the results of this team weren't very credible despite all of the hard work that they put into it.