The military tribunal and Royal Court case went on to have huge ramifications for the men involved and their families.

In April, 18 former police officers appeared before a German military tribunal. It was overseen by Kriegsgerichtsrat (judge marshal) Dr Biel, with Rittmeister Furst Oettingen-Wallerstein and Uffz Kraft. The charges related to stealing from stores under the direct control of the occupying forces, such as the grain stores in Hospital Lane and the army timber yard at St Paul’s Church.

The extensive media coverage described it as large-scale plundering of foodstuffs. Every seat in the court was full, with wives and relatives of the accused.

The case went on for three days, with evidence given translated into German.

Items taken included tins of meat and butter, sausages, a sack of oats and butcher’s bones, as well as wood to burn on the fires. The crimes were alleged to have taken place between autumn 1941 and spring 1942.

The men were defended by Ambrose Sherwill, who tried to show why the men might have taken the goods.

One defendant said he had only taken one piece of wood home. Another told how he had been left hungry after the Germans took his land. One former officer said he took the oats to feed his rabbits.

When it was questioned why one officer, who had not been involved in a theft, had been given a share of the stolen food, the response was that the officer had been hungry.

One man, Edward Pill, was acquitted, after his workmates said he was not involved.

But the other 17 faced a mixture of imprisonment and hard labour, and were later deported to serve their sentences on the continent.

Then in June 1942, nine of the officers were again before the court, this time the Royal Court of Guernsey, in relation to accusations of stealing from seven civilian stores. This time it was overseen by Bailiff Sir Victor Carey.

The officers were joined by a hotelier, who was accused of receiving 86 bottles of port wine, which had been stolen from R. W. Randall.

The charges against the former officers related to food, including butter and tins of beans and tomatoes, as well as alcohol.

An officer told the court how the police had never stolen before the war. But since the start of the Occupation they had been working without holidays and time off, and sometimes without meals.

Rations and pay were low and officer described it as having been ‘in the position of a hungry dog placed on guard over a bone’.

Another officer said it was impossible for him to work on the rations he got, but the twice he had asked for an increased bread ration, it had been refused.

At the end of the case, one man was acquitted, but the rest faced punishments of between three and 16 months in jail.

The men were sent to the continent, to either serve their imprisonment or undergo hard labour. One did not survive. After months of hard labour and torture, he died in Augsburg Prison in April 1943.

While the other officers did return, many faced stigma for the charges and ongoing illness from their punishments. They were also unable to become police officers again or clear their names.

The Guernsey Press understands there is still sensitivities around this case and has chosen not to name the men involved, unless they were involved in the appeal or there is permission from the descendants.

The details reported are from the local media, which at the time was under the control of the occupying forces.

This will have affected what was reported and how it was portrayed.