Women of the White Rose: Traute Lafrenz (part 2D - 2/26/1943-4/18/1943)
Traute Lafrenz faced off against two of the worst agents the Gestapo could throw at her. Eduard Geith, convicted in Nuremberg for violating the Geneva Convention. Oswald Schaefer, Gestapo chief...
As Traute Lafrenz left for her initial interrogation with the Gestapo early on February 26, 1943, she encountered Käthe Schüddekopf. Traute advised her friend that she was going to Wittelsbacher Palace, that she had received a summons the day before. She had to hurry because she wanted to be on time. But someone needed to know her whereabouts, in case…
Traute would not have known just how bad her luck of the draw was when she found herself across the table from Eduard Geith. Of all the Gestapo agents connected to White Rose interrogations, Geith was the only one to be convicted by the Nuremberg trials postwar.
Agent Geith started off with the preprinted questionnaire, common at the beginning of every interrogation. Traute’s response to the citizenship question would have raised a red flag for Geith. Everyone else answered with the proper “citizen of the German Reich.” Traute merely said she was German. However, she did not disclose her (illegal) anthroposophist leanings when he asked about her religion. She said she was Lutheran.
While most of her friends declared their memberships in the various Hitler Youth and BDM organizations, Traute did not. It could have benefited her to do so. But the preprinted form is blank for that data point. She also did not declare her membership during the interrogation that followed, nor in any other interrogation.
Since Hans and Sophie Scholl and Gisela Schertling had already been interrogated, Agent Geith knew more for Traute’s initial interview than Agents Mohr, Mahler, and Schmauβ had known eight days earlier. Geith immediately pummeled Traute with names. Time and again, she asserted that sure, she knew who the person was. But that they had been involved with the Scholls’ leaflet operation? Ludicrous.
Geith would not give up easily. You have been seen with Willi Graf and Alexander Schmorell (both already arrested, both keeping mum). You have to have been involved.
When the Gestapo agent could not make Traute budge, he had the interrogation typed up for her signature, with a twist not seen in White Rose interrogations to that point. He made Traute sign a confidentiality agreement, affirming that she would tell no one about her interview.
Traute signed as requested. And ignored it practically before she was out the door. First person she looked up was Käthe, of course. She warned her that if she too received a summons, she should be mentally prepared. Her interrogation had lasted almost all morning. Käthe should expect the same.
She advised Käthe that she had figured out it was best to make Agent Geith ask the questions. Traute had volunteered nothing. She had met every question with the tersest response possible. Käthe should do the same. Also, be prepared for questions about Hans Scholl, Prof. Huber, and Carl Muth. Traute said she suspected that Gisela had named the latter two. Käthe should say it was merely social. Say you barely know Prof. Huber.
When Traute bumped into Gisela, she had to know if her suspicions were correct. Over her better judgment, she asked Gisela whom she (Gisela) had named on February 18. When Prof. Huber was on the short list Gisela admitted to denouncing, Traute was beside herself. She threw caution to the wind and gave Gisela an earful. How could she!
Further, Traute continued, if Gisela were to be interviewed again, she should be silent unless asked specific questions. Traute told Gisela she had used that tactic during her own interrogation.
Gisela was baffled by Traute’s outrage. She acted like she really cared what had become of the people in their circle of friends. After the way Hans had treated Traute, why should she endanger herself on “his” behalf?
Despite the strong face Traute put on for the rest of the world, when a hometown friend visited her, Traute appeared upset over the Scholls’ death. That friend told Karl Lafrenz about the matter once she returned to Hamburg. Traute’s father understood that the letter he had recently received from his headstrong daughter masked fear. He may have disagreed with his dissident daughter’s political views, but he knew her well.
Traute’s inner fear was heightened by additional grief. Her friend, the blind artist Hermann Tröltsch, died on March 2. Traute saw his obituary the next day. Too much.
She left on the 4th for Ulm, this time to be with Werner Scholl, not the parents or Inge. Traute had long pegged Werner as the only independent thinker among the Scholl siblings. Their shared experience at the trial and after the executions had drawn them closer. Werner was still on leave from the Russian front.
True to form, the citizens of Ulm read something sinister and salacious into Traute’s friendship with Hans’ brother. Susanne Hirzel remembered that for a long time, even after the war, people said awful things about Traute and Werner, just because she offered him the friendship he badly needed, alone in the great apartment on Münsterplatz.
With Traute back in Munich, Robert Mohr – the agent who had interrogated Sophie Scholl and who had earned a nice promotion for his handling of the case – traveled to Ulm to interrogate the Scholl parents. Mohr tried to get Robert and Magdalena Scholl to implicate Traute in their children’s treason. Initial focus: In what order did Otl Aicher, Traute Lafrenz, and Wilhelm Geyer inform you of the arrests? The Scholl parents disagreed. Mohr noted the discrepancy and his attempts to get a straight answer. Back in Munich, Mohr placed both transcripts in Traute’s file. He had enough.
Eduard Geith was all too happy to act on the new information. He appeared at Traute’s door at 7 am the morning of March 15. He was there to search her room. After an exhaustive investigation, Geith was flummoxed. He knew Traute was part of the inner circle. How was it possible that there were no leaflets, no letters, not one scrap of paper that tied her to Hans or Sophie Scholl?
In Adolf Hitler’s Germany, that was no impediment. Geith took Traute back to Wittelsbacher Palace and began to interrogate her in earnest. No easy questions this time. No waiting for her. Hardball.
And yet. The young woman before him was more than ready. No matter how hard he hit, she had an alibi ready. He accused her of having talked politics at parties, and she had denied that before. But now he knew that was a lie, because… Traute: I never talked politics. We talked about current events. Is that the same thing? What about the farewell party? Yes, of course we talked politics then, because we were all drunk. No one who’s sober talks politics! But Hans Scholl said this about passive resistance… Who listened to Hans Scholl when we were all drunk? But didn’t Kurt Huber say… And with that, Traute drew herself up in righteous anger, defending her professor, even defending Heinrich Ellermann. She quickly learned to blame everything on the very dead Hans Scholl.
Both Willi Graf and Alexander Schmorell adopted the same tactic. When their interrogators attempted to get them to denounce Traute, or Käthe, or one another, they put everything back on Hans. Traute likewise protected her friends.
Agent Geith was by now totally disgusted. He knew this young woman sitting at his table was as guilty as the Scholls. But he could not prove it. He ordered her to be taken into custody, booked into the Gestapo prison. He was determined to break her. When Traute signed the typed transcript, no witnesses were present.
With Traute safely behind bars, Geith asked the Gestapo in Hamburg for a political evaluation of his prisoner. And of her family. Meanwhile, Traute’s real friends worried about her, as did Mrs. Gmeling, her landlady. Karl Lafrenz knew he would have to act soon.
March 19, Geith tried a different tack. He reinterviewed Kurt Huber, specifically to get additional information about Traute, specifically regarding the June 1942 soiree at the Schmorells’ home. Initially, Huber could not remember Traute’s name, but he laid out the complete conversation with Hans and Traute on the streetcar. When Geith asked if the woman he described could have been Traute Lafrenz, Huber said it was.
Armed with Huber’s statement, Geith re-called Traute. Back and forth they went, cat and mouse, Traute leading him down her primrose path. No matter what gotcha Geith placed in front of her, she was ready. He expected her to come unraveled when he confronted her with Huber’s statement. She did not. To every “why” posed by Geith, Traute responded, Wouldn’t anyone have done the same thing?
Four days later, Geith interrogated Käthe. The Gestapo agent tried to trip her up by misquoting Traute. Käthe was clearly confident in their friendship, because she dismissed as absurd the notion that Traute had been involved in Hans Scholl’s intrigue. As Traute had done, Käthe pinned everything on Hans. She and Traute were innocent victims of that man.
Unlike Traute, when Geith showed Käthe Prof. Huber’s statement about Traute, Käthe recognized that her mentor had betrayed them. While Traute continued to defend Huber, Käthe no longer did. Now it was Hans Scholl and Kurt Huber, although Käthe insisted she had not known they were behind the leaflets.
Käthe’s only misstep: She admitted that she had kept one single leaflet, Leaflet 3, and that she had given that copy to Traute. That was all Agent Geith needed to hear. Interview over, but not before Geith advised Käthe that she was a criminal for not having reported the leaflet, and for having “distributed it” – by handing it to Traute.
March 25, Geith had his long-anticipated showdown with Traute. He knew things! And indeed, the very first question seemed to have caught Traute off-guard. ‘What about the time the leaflets were discussed at Schmorell’s house?’ A question Traute had not anticipated. Who had betrayed them? She stumbled a little, drawing on Nazi perception of women as stupid. Oh, you know how it is, I confuse things so easily.
Then: In June, you had told “Schüddekopf” that a new edition of the leaflet had appeared. How would you know something like that? Well, you see, said Traute, there’s this blind artist named Hermann Tröltsch… And one can almost envision Eduard Geith rolling his eyes. I used to read to this blind artist – and by the way, he died on March 2 – and he enjoyed getting copies of the Leaflets of the White Rose. He kept me up-to-date on their content. So I merely told Schüddekopf what Hermann told me.
Was Tröltsch an accomplice of Scholl? If so, not through me, asserted Traute. Why would you pass along his gossip about the new edition of the leaflet if you did not have a political reason for doing so? There was no reason, and there is no further explanation.
Now for the point of this entire interview, because Geith was a patient man. “You asked Schüddekopf for a copy of the White Rose. Which edition was that, and why did you ask for the leaflet, and what did you do with it?”
When she got back from semester break, Traute explained, Hermann Tröltsch mentioned to her that he had not received any copies of those White Rose leaflets he so admired. Traute told Käthe about his comment, and Käthe said she still had a copy of the one she’d gotten from Hans. Traute therefore asked for it, so she could see if Hermann was familiar with that particular leaflet. ‘Which edition,’ Geith reminded her. Either one or two, like I told you before, Traute replied. [Oops. Käthe had correctly identified it as Leaflet 3.]
‘What did you and Schüddekopf talk about when she gave you the leaflet’ (and Geith already knew the answer he was after)? Again, this was unfamiliar territory for Traute, because this query was not supposed to have come up. She tried to think what Käthe could have said that would have brought about this line of questioning.
Käthe’s tragic slip-up bothered Traute for a long while. For three weeks, she had carefully cultivated the notion that she had seen only one – at most two – of the White Rose leaflets. Geith had been completely unsuccessful in his attempts to get her to deviate from that initial admission.
As late as 1946, Traute viewed Käthe’s blunder as “foolish.” But she was not able to stay angry at her very dear friend for long. Though Käthe was always very ill (and would die young), and though Traute had emigrated to the United States, the two women made a point of staying in close contact as long as they could. Friendship meant too much to both of them to waste it on a “what if.”
It’s almost as if that slip-up gave Traute a second wind. Geith gained no advantage from Käthe’s statement. He could threaten the two women all he wanted with prison for failure to report. But he wanted to convict both of them for the same level of treason that had gotten the Scholl siblings executed. No matter what he did, he could not break either of them.
Even when he brought up the touchy subject of Ulla Claudias, Traute appeared unfazed. If anything, the question backfired on Geith. Instead of Traute’s dissolving into tears, she spoke firmly about the hurt and alienation and what that had meant to her association with the circle.
From that day through April 11, 1943, Agent Eduard Geith focused his attention on breaking Traute Lafrenz. Multiple interviews with Gisela Schertling yielded incriminating statements. He would call Traute in, present her with Gisela’s words, and Traute would have a ready answer. Geith would misquote Käthe, but Traute remained steadfast in her faith in that friendship. On one particular occasion, she had to have been deeply moved. Käthe, fragile Käthe, had assumed blame for something Traute had done.
No matter how badly Gisela denounced her, Traute kept her feet on the ground, eyes clear. Gisela of course told the Gestapo how Traute had gone to the Scholls’ funeral, had visited her afterwards. When Geith asked Traute about that heinous act, Traute responded unabashedly that she had done so “out of love for their family.”
Astonishingly, neither Traute nor Käthe retaliated against Gisela Schertling. They knew she was the source of the harsh interrogations. Geith had made no secret of that. But both women insisted that Gisela was innocent, that at most she associated with the Scholls, nothing else. It’s clear from the transcripts that Geith pushed both Traute and Käthe to say something negative about Gisela. Neither would.
By April 8, a tentative trial date of April 19 had been set for “Alexander Schmorell and ten others.” Ten? What about Traute, Käthe, and Gisela? Where Agent Geith’s memoranda had been replete with the frustration he faced as he attempted to build a case against Traute Lafrenz, the top dog of the Munich Gestapo had no such qualms. Oberregierungsrat and SS Commander Oswald Schaefer, head of the Secret State Police [Gestapo] in Munich, not Agent Geith, would pen the document requesting indictment.
Naturally, Schaefer followed the outline of Agent Geith’s more comprehensive memorandum. However, Schaefer ensured that his name went on the arraignment and arrest orders for this most dangerous young woman.
Both Geith and Schaefer were impressed by Traute’s cunning, by her ability to avoid their questions and lie, lie, lie. They knew she was implicated in the production and distribution of leaflets as early as June 1942, but they could not prove it. Their instincts told them she was part and parcel of the conspiracy, but they lacked evidence, testimony from others, and (worse yet) Traute’s own admission of guilt to convict her of felonious crimes.
Schaefer had been unmoved by the technicality of innocence, motivated more to consider Traute’s overall and obvious guilt. He too admitted that the Gestapo was unable to substantiate the observable culpability of this female student. Instead of focusing on what they could not prove or the far lesser charge of violating a confidentiality agreement, he creatively defined “production and distribution” of seditious materials to include the November-December leaflet “transaction” between Käthe and Traute.
After Judge Dietz issued a warrant for Traute’s arrest on April 12, a clerk followed orders and opened a brand new file for Traute, Käthe, and Gisela. The three women were no longer part of Case 6J 24/43, Alexander Schmorell and ten others, which had been split off from Case 8J 35/43, Hans Scholl and two others. The three women were now part of Case 8J 37/43, Schertling et al. Or was it 8J 84/43? Or 6J 42/43? Or No. II 191/43? Or No. 1H 101/43? Wait a minute, Case 8J 37/43 was already in use and included Otl Aicher, Theodor Haecker, and Anneliese Graf. Did they want to use a new case number?
Eventually the prosecutors were able to settle on Case 8J 35/43 for Hans Scholl and two others, Case 6J 24/43 [alt. Case 8J 84/43] for Alexander Schmorell and ten others [alt. Schmorell et al], and Case 8J 37/43 for Lafrenz-Schüddekopf-Schertling.
Why so much ink for silly case numbers? Because Case 8J 37/43 in its entirety was sent to Berlin, with instructions to plan another trial for Traute, Käthe, and Gisela. Schaefer and Geith wished to build a stronger case, especially against Traute. All the interrogations, all the memoranda, all the statements, all the search documents, all the aha! moments from Gisela Schertling’s interviews, all the photos, all the letters. By the morning of April 13, everything was headed to the Chief Prosecutor’s Office in Berlin. The files bore multiple stamps, including: Confidential! Arrest!
Indeed, the prosecutor’s office received Case 8J 37/43 on April 17, 1943. Prosecutor Bischoff saw the file before he headed to Munich for the April 19 trial. He quickly added a note to Schaefer’s letter: “Very urgent! Additional participant!” Bischoff also gave specific instructions to the court clerks on procedure to combine Cases 8J 84/43 and 6J 24/43. But: No instructions on combining Case 8J 37/43 with the Schmorell case.
Even as the other eleven defendants were visited by defense counsel (mostly court-appointed), Traute, Käthe, and Gisela were left alone. They had been indicted, yes. But their trial date was unknown. Postwar, Traute said that was fine by her. She had seen that Geith accepted her “improbable” statements without questioning her further.
Schaefer conducted an off-the-record interrogation of Traute on April 13. It was not typed up, not witnessed, not signed. He personally signed the transfer order to Neudeck prison.
Traute therefore was shocked to be rounded up along with “Alexander Schmorell and ten others” on April 19, 1943. How could this be? She did not have an attorney! Had her nonchalance a couple of days prior been overconfidence?
Next post: Traute Lafrenz, part 2E — April 19, 1943 (the trial).
If you are curious about supporting documents for any of these Substack posts, check out our White Rose Histories (Volume I, 1/1933-4/30/1942, and Volume 2, 5/1/1942-10/12/1943), along with primary source materials.