Grasping at Straws to Try to Exonerate Ethel RosenbergRoundup
tags: Rosenberg case, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg
The trial of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg in 1951 for “conspiracy to commit espionage” has always been the subject of intense scrutiny, with many observers believing the couple should never have been sentenced to death. Among the testimony that convinced the jury to reach a verdict of guilty was that provided by Ethel Rosenberg’s brother, David Greenglass.
On July 15—in response to a lawsuit brought by the National Security Archive and historians and journalists—the federal court in New York City released the transcripts of David Greenglass’s appearance before the grand jury in 1950. In the transcript, Greenglass said nothing to implicate his sister in espionage, which he attributed only to Julius Rosenberg and others.
In the transcript, Greenglass is asked about a silver Omega watch that Julius Rosenberg had said was a gift from the Soviets. “My sister has never spoken to me about this subject,” Greenglass answered. Later, when queried whether Ethel, like her husband Julius, had asked him to stay in the Army after the war to spy for the Soviets, Greenglass replied: “I said before, and say it again, honestly, this is a fact: I never spoke to my sister about this at all.”
The media have rushed to the conclusion that this transcript proves the innocence of Ethel Rosenberg. The Guardian proclaimed that these words “could upend the notion that Ethel Rosenberg was guilty of espionage.” Politico explained that Greenglass’s statement “minimizes her role in the spying operations of her husband, Julius Rosenberg, furthering public incredulity about her actual guilt and subsequent execution.”
NPR told listeners that at the trial, Greenglass “put Ethel at the center of the conspiracy. The documents released today show it was [his wife] Ruth who played a far more pivotal role.” An AP story says that the transcript showed “Greenglass never implicated his sister.” Sam Roberts in the New York Times writes that the transcript “provides supporting evidence to Mrs. Rosenberg’s defenders, who believe that she was unfairly convicted.”
The transcript, taken by itself and out of context, could lead to this conclusion, but only if one lacks knowledge about the case. It never occurs to these reporters that at the early stage of his arrest David Greenglass was desperately trying to protect his sister and to convince the government to leave her out of the indictment. We also know that when he first went for legal advice, he even left Julius out of his confession. ...
comments powered by Disqus
- Inside Billy Graham's Powerful Relationship With U.S. Presidents
- Children have changed America before, braving fire hoses and police dogs for civil rights
- How the Activists Who Tore Down Durham's Confederate Statue Got Away With It
- Many Trump Voters Think We Need a White History Month
- How a team of sophisticated forgers at an Essex country house fooled the Nazis
- Historians fear ‘censorship’ under Poland’s Holocaust law
- How One Amateur Historian Brought Us the Stories of African-Americans Who Knew Abraham Lincoln
- History Coalition asks historians to "Urge Your Representative to Join the Congressional History Caucus"
- Dartmouth’s Randall Balmer: Under Trump, America's religious right is rewriting its code of ethics
- Was This Technology historian plagiarized? Sure seems like she was.