Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day030.04 Last-Modified: 2000/07/25 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Taking all that in reverse order, and subject to Mr Irving and then you can comment if you wish, I see your point about letting more people in. This court I think in the end probably accommodates as many members of the public as any court does, but it is never enough in a case of this kind. But, yes, I think, subject to agreement with all those concerned, particularly the Usher who has done a rather excellent job of keeping things under control ---- MR RAMPTON: Mr Irving has been sycophantic towards my solicitors, for which I genuinely and sincerely thank him, I do wish to say what a fantastic job the Usher has done. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think she has done a jolly good job because it is not all that easy. But, yes, within reason I think we will try to accommodate that. I am just wondering about the desirability of you and, if Mr Irving wishes to, Mr Irving, making what you might call the sort of public . P-25 comments that you wish to make, as it were, before we get on to the nitty-gritty of the closing speeches. MR RAMPTON: Your Lordship may well have rather, if I may say so without impertinence, a good point, because it does seem to me that when your Lordship has had a chance to look at the nitty-gritty, I am going to write the nitty-gritty first, and then what one might call the summary. I would suggest that it may be advantageous if your Lordship's mental process is the same, because when you have read the nitty-gritty, then you look at the summary and you say, oh, he cannot say that, it is not in the evidence or it is an exaggeration or whatever. One could get the long version to your Lordship, we will try to do it by Friday, but at any rate by Monday morning, take a day, because it will not take long to read as your Lordship is so familiar with the material, I can practically do it from memory now, and then look at the summary and then maybe read the summary on Tuesday, 14th. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, at all events whenever it happens, and it does not really matter whether it happens before or after the detailed submissions, my idea is that we might have the two final public speeches, if you follow what I mean, along side one another. MR RAMPTON: Absolutely, on the same day. MR JUSTICE GRAY: And probably on Tuesday. MR IRVING: Not along side each other. . P-26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Not simultaneously. MR RAMPTON: I do not think that would be music to anybody's ears I have to say, but certainly on the same day. It would have to be, I say "have to be", that is excessive, but it would be desirable to have a fixed day because there will be people coming from all over the world to attend. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Shall we say Wednesday, because I suspect that will get us most of the way through the detailed submissions. MR IRVING: My Lord, your Lordship expressed the desire I think to have the opportunity to ask questions on the basis ---- MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. MR RAMPTON: Yes, absolutely. MR IRVING: When do you wish to do this, after the verbal part? MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, what I am getting at is if we have two full days, Monday 13th and Tuesday 14th, I think we will be most of the way through closing speeches, I suspect, if you let me do a bit of reading beforehand. Then on Wednesday, there may be a little left over, but Wednesday would be a good opportunity I think to make these statements for public consumption, which in the context of this case is legitimate. I think in other cases it might not be. MR IRVING: So, if I understood it correctly because there was . P-27 some confusion on Thursday evening, by the weekend I and Mr Rampton would have submitted to your Lordship a paper version of what we intend to say? MR JUSTICE GRAY: If you can do that it would be helpful, that I think is what I said on Thursday. MR IRVING: On the basis of which on Monday and Tuesday you will ask us questions, and on Wednesday we read out either in Mr Rampton's case his summary or in my case whatever I consider necessary of my speech in public. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. When you say I will ask questions, do not put the ball wholly in my court. I am hoping you will submit something in writing, but will also make the points that you regard as most significant and then I can pick you up on them if needs be. MR IRVING: My Lord, I am making further submissions, as your Lordship is aware, of which of course the Defence have not had a chance to answer, and it is only fair they should have a chance to answer and say, "This be struck out, that is not admissible, yes, this one is very powerful indeed". MR RAMPTON: I would propose this, that we, with Mr Irving, it does not need to involve the court, we make a date and a time for exchange of the long versions, and also the summaries if they are ready by then, then we see whether there is any water between us, and it may well be that there is, either side may be something the other side does not think they ought to be allowed to say, and your . P-28 Lordship may also have some queries or questions of your own. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. As to timing, if you could do it by close of business on Thursday, even if it is not the final -- you could not? MR IRVING: No, not by Thursday. MR RAMPTON: I could not possibly do it by then. I will try to do by close of business on Friday. It will not take very long to read. One reads quite quickly when one knows a case well. I am told Friday logistically is optimistic. We will do the best we can. We will fix that with Mr Irving. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I will not say anything about it, except that I think we ought to have speeches on Monday 13th. I do not want a slip on that. MR RAMPTON: A discussion about speeches? MR JUSTICE GRAY: The detail of speeches will start on Monday 13th. MR IRVING: But they will not be public at that time? MR RAMPTON: The public can be in court during the discussion. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of course they can, but there is extra accommodation being laid on, as it were, for Wednesday. MR RAMPTON: The only other question is, and normally speaking in a case like this when one has written a long speech which the Judge has read, even if one is not going to read it in court, it will of course be accessible to anybody . P-29 who wants a copy of it, whether they pay for it or whether they do not, and there ought to be perhaps an embargo on the release of the long version until the discussion about the long version has concluded. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, without any doubt. MR RAMPTON: That leads me to mention one other thing. I am a bit of ahead of myself. It is this. When your Lordship comes to give judgment in the normal way the solicitors and counsel get a copy of the judgment a day before. Mr Irving does not have solicitors or counsel. (A) it is not fair if we get it a day before and he does not. (B) it is not fair if he gets a copy himself and my clients do not. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Oddly enough I did not think I have ever had it. MR RAMPTON: I have. MR JUSTICE GRAY: One has had cases with litigants in person, but I have never had this particular problem about how you deal with -- my instinct would be that Mr Irving does get it at the same time as your legal team get it, but that he is, as it were, strictly embargoed as to the use that he can make of it. That seem to me to be the fair-handed way of doing it. MR RAMPTON: That is all I am concerned about. What I do not want is him getting it into the public forum before we do, if I can put it crudely. . P-30 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can I mention some things that perhaps should be done before speeches. One is the Muller document. MR RAMPTON: Yes, it is in hand. It is being dealt with by Dr Longerich who is dealing directly with Munich and I think also with Ludwigsburg where it is thought there is another copy. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Bearing in mind how quick Munich was to respond on the other document, I would be hopeful that you would be able to let me have something this week. MR RAMPTON: Yes. This is more problematical because they have been given the wrong file reference. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I thought they had tracked down the right file? MR RAMPTON: No, they know that it is the wrong one. They think they have the document but they have got to find it. MR IRVING: The problem with Munich is all that all that they have is a duplicated copy. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I know and that is why enquiries are being made of other archives, as I understand it. That is fine. Mr Rampton, the other thing, and it is the only thing that I think I need to ask you about is, I think you were going to give me a little bit help on what you might call the American Civil Evidence Act statements. MR RAMPTON: Yes. That is in charge of Miss Rogers. We are just down to the one now. The only one of the factual . P-31 Civil Evidence Act witnesses we want to use is Rebecca Guttmann about the National Alliance which I have already cross-examined on. Your Lordship can have this. It has file C, Rebecca Guttmann, and the rest can be chucked away. MR JUSTICE GRAY: When you say the rest, can I be absolutely clear about what can be chucked away? MR RAMPTON: Everybody else in file C. MR JUSTICE GRAY: File C or C1? MR RAMPTON: I call mine C. It has 425 pages. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Right. MR RAMPTON: And it is called Defendants Witness statements I should think. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I now seem to have back the file I swore blind I never had. MR RAMPTON: That is the one with the National Alliance material behind it. MR IRVING: When you say you are using Rebecca Guttmann's statement, does that mean to say you are also using all the appendices to it, or relying on them? MR RAMPTON: Yes. MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is what I was going to ask. MR RAMPTON: Yes, I rely on the material that she picked up at a National Alliance meeting in 1998 at which Mr Irving gave a speech. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Thank you. . P-32 MR RAMPTON: To put it as neutrally as possible. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Right. Is there anything else? MR RAMPTON: No. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Thank you. I think it was necessary to have this fairly short session. MR RAMPTON: Yes, it was. MR JUSTICE GRAY: So 10.30 on Monday 13th. (The court adjourned until Monday, 13th March 2000). . P-33
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and
to combat hatred.
Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.
As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may
include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and
provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist
and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.
Home · Site Map · What's New? · Search Nizkor
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012