Penal Entries (that's penal not penile))

[Gary T]

Now here's a rare item...a thread initiated by me! Penal documenst aren't quite as rare as dealers would have you believe but they can be interesting.

I'm in the process of scanning all my documents to put on CD and thought these were interesting entries. These entries were spotted by 'Europe's leading document experts' - if they had been I've no doubt they would have wanted alot more for it.

The unit page has a large black square where previous entries have been blanked out. The entries contiune on the next page with him now with a replacement unti (2./ Inf. Ers. Btl. 63). A couple of months later he finds himself in Feldsonderabteilung 6, a penal unit. after four months here he returns to the replacement unit and eventually to a field unit.

I feel the entries inder the black square may give a clue as to why he was sent to the penal unit. However all is not lost! On page 35 in a medical the medical officer felt it apt to record that the scars (Code 7) were a result of a shot to the left breast. However he made sure that it was recorded that this was not a war wound. Neither is it recorded on page 34.

Did he shoot himslef accidently? Deliberately? Did the German Army have a negligent discharge procedure similar to what the British Army has? Has anyone else got something similar?



Cheers,
Gary.

[Matt L]

Hi Gary,

If I'm not mistaken, the doctor's notation states the non-war wound was suffered at Ingalstadt on 18.2.41- 11 days after this guy was released from the penal unit (on 7.2.41), so doesn't seem likely to have been the reason he was there (if that's what you're suggesting by your question about a self-inflicted wound).

Are you sure there's anything under that black square? Do you know what the Kompaniefuehrer's note at the bottom of the page reads? Perhaps it's an explanation of why the blacked-out portion is there.

You know, it seems possible that he was sent back for training and that's why he went to the Ersatz unit, and perhaps he was wounded during this training at Ingalstadt- are you sure that Feldsonderabteilung 6 was a penal unit at all? Shouldn't the word 'straf' be in the name if it was?

Just an interesting point- notice that the second 2./ Jnf. Ers. Batl. 63 entry is dated 8.2.40 instead of 41.


Matt

[Johannes Schoen]

Hello,

The Kompaniführer wrote: "Die Unkenntlichmachung bestätigt", or the cancelling is approved by the Kompanieführer.

To me it seems that a mistake was the reason for the black bar. At least there is no time-gap in his unit entries. And the first three entries on the following page are written in the same handwriting and with the same pen, and therefore probably at the same time, maybe to replace a mistake at the previous page.

Johannes

[Gary T]

The date 18.2.41 is the date of the medical examination not the date of the scars appearing.

According to Ian Hoggs reprint of the Allied Intelligence report of 1944 Feldsonderabteilung translates as Special Penal Battalion. The Straf batallions were I ebeleive for personnel convicted of criminal offences rather than military misdemeanours.

I understand the blacked out part may just be a clerical error but with the Feldsonderabteilung and the strange wound it may have been more especially it comes immediately after his transfer from a field unit to a replacement unit usually seen after wounds, serious illlness. That is why I think the wound recorded on page 35 happened at this time. Usually small errors in recording the unit unit or dates (such as the 40 instead of 41 on page 13 - missed here) are just scrubbed out by the clerk - I don't believe they would have to get permission from the company commander for a simple error.

We will never know unfortunately, as the black is completely opaque.