Talk:Percy Charles Pickard

Gazette hits

 * By service number
 * Full name David Underdown (talk) 16:19, 5 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Interesting but is it a comment on the article? MilborneOne (talk) 16:59, 5 November 2008 (UTC)


 * It's saving the search details for further expansion/improving referencing. David Underdown (talk) 17:08, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

"The attack was carried out at the request of the French resistance in order to allow a considerable number of their imprisoned members, who were soon to be executed by the occupying Nazis, the chance to escape. The Resistance stated that the prisoners had said they would rather take the chance of being killed by RAF bombs than be shot by the Nazis." That is the offical version from Britisch Military in worldwar two. After the war, french sources had another opinion. Are there any real proofs (not only articels published in britisch newspaers during the worldwar, because there was a lot o propaganda during the war)?--87.155.59.142 (talk) 02:29, 9 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Well why would they risk and lose valuable aircrew lives unless it was for a good reason. What possible purpose would there be for bombing a prison in occupied France otherwise.


 * They did it because they were asked to by the French side. From the RAF POV there was no possible military justification in bombing the jail at Amiens - and risk losing valuable aircrew lives - unless it was requested by people on the French side of the Channel. And if they'd just wanted the jail destroyed and the inmates killed they'd have sent the whole of Bomber Command in at night and wiped out the whole of Amiens, like they later did to places such as Villers-Bocage.


 * As for 'french sources' there would have been but a handful of French Resistance personnel in France who would have been aware of the operation, and the reasons for it, and unless they survived the war then no-one on the French side is likely to know the reasons for the attack. One didn't go around telling everyone things like this, it was likely to get you arrested by the Gestapo and put up against a wall and shot - after having extremely unpleasant things done to you to encourage you to talk.


 * BTW, most people involved in the Resistance as well as ex-SOE personnel were very unwilling to talk about their wartime work, even as late as the 1970s, due to confidences they felt obliged to others to keep, so any 'information' on the French side about the raid is unlikely to be from anyone actually involved. As for the rest, post-1945 just about everyone who had lived in occupied France was claiming to have been in 'La Résistance'. SOE - who arranged all contact with London - usually tried to avoid recruiting such people who felt the urge to brag, as it tended to get people arrested and killed.


 * The reason that many French ex-SOE and Resistance people kept their mouths shut after the war was because they had to live there among people who if not proven to have been collaborators, were at least suspected of being such. Old enmities and mistrust die hard. Try living in a place where you might see on a street someone who you suspect may have had a hand in the deaths of your friends and colleagues years previously. So if you were involved with the SOE one didn't go round bragging of one's wartime efforts.


 * So for the reasons I've outlined above, the justification for Operation Jericho is likely to be the one originally stated.i.e., that there were executions of SOE and Resistance personnel planned and so the raid was urgent and needed carrying out quickly, whatever the weather. Otherwise, they wouldn't have bothered. Group Captain Pickard was a valuable highly-experienced RAF officer, and the fact that the RAF felt the operation justified risking him illustrates the importance the raid was felt to hold. They wouldn't have done that for a few 'common criminals' held in a French jail. And they certainly wouldn't have done it without having been specifically asked to by the French side. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.31.130.17 (talk) 11:22, 25 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Those are all good points, however we do not really know the reason for the raid. It appears the mission was done at the request of the SIS, but their purpose is not known. It does not appear to have been done at the request of the French Resistance, as no one came forward acknowledging the request when the RAF investigated the mission after the war. It does not appear to have been done at the request of the SOE, as there is no trail to the SOE and years later Buckmaster (head of the French section of SOE) denied any knowledge of who had ordered the raid (for what that may be worth - he was pretty crafty). If he did know he was not willing to say so. We do know that the RAF pilots who flew the raid did so under very poor conditions for the sake of trying to rescue French resistance fighters, and it is fitting they should be honored for their sacrifice, regardless of the ultimate reason for the mission. Gunbirddriver (talk) 03:09, 22 November 2017 (UTC)


 * We do know the reason for the raid, and the request did come from the French Resistance, specifically from Dominique Ponchardier, Admiral Edouard Riviere and Rene Chapelle of the Sosies network. Ponchardier reported up to his MI6 handler in London, whom he knew only as 'Captain Thomas' but was probably Lt Neil Whitelaw, deputy to Lt Cdr Kenneth Cohen, head of French Desk. Through January, Ponchardier sent 'Thomas' details of the prison without giving an explanation, then in early February he put in the request for an RAF attack. Ponchardier wrote about it in his book Les paves d'enfer in 1950 and his account was confirmed by Gilbert Renault of BCRA's London HQ in his own book L'operation Jericho in 1954. The object was simply to free as many resistants as possible, at a time when the Resistance was badly damaged by enemy informer networks. With the Overlord invasion approaching, the Resistance were important to Allied plans and this was a good time to give them a fillip. (The Resistance were also important, of course, to the RAF, because they helped shot-down airmen to evade capture.) Cohen took the idea to Lt Col Claude Dansey, Assistant Chief of MI6, and presumably C himself, Menzies, approved it, because it was then put to Air Cdre GWP 'Tubby' Grant at Air Ministry's Directorate of Intelligence (Research). Grant liked it and his colleague Air Cdre James Easton went to Coningham at 2nd TAF and then to Embry at 2 Group. Embry consulted his head of planning, Sqn Ldr Ted Sismore, and Pickard. They reported that the mission stood a reasonable chance of success, so DI(R) formally requested HQ AEAF on 10 February and AEAF sent the order to 2nd TAF on 11 February. At least 12 resistants were scheduled for execution on 19 February, so 18 February was the latest date on which Embry could carry out the attack. The weather then held things up for a few days. Embry's HQ issued the detailed order to Hunsdon by teletype in the early hours of 18 February for immediate action. Khamba Tendal (talk) 15:44, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Masthead photo up for deletion
File:Group Captain Percy Charles Pickard.jpg needs a FUR writing, should anyone have a moment to spare. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:52, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: (at least) https://web.archive.org/web/20131004223121/http://www.chrishobbs.com/pickardcharles.htm, https://britainatwar.keypublishing.com/2017/06/25/raid-on-amiens-prison-the-myth-of-the-mosquito/ (dated 25 June 2017), https://www.bognor.co.uk/lifestyle/nostalgia/brave-percy-was-the-wartime-pick-of-the-raf-bunch-1-7389381 (dated 19 May 2016) and the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:58, 31 December 2018 (UTC)