Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day019.04
Last-Modified: 2000/07/24

   MR IRVING:  To use one of Mr Rampton's favourite phrases,
        I would say "so what"?  Quite clearly, if these Adjutants
        have sat for many hours talking to me, I have used all the
        information they have given me, and some of it has been in
        favour and some of it has not.  What I have not done, and
        this is my question now to the witness, did I make
        appropriate use of the information that I obtained from
        these various witnesses, in your opinion?
   A.   It depends what you mean by "appropriate".
   Q.   Did I make appropriate use? In other words, did I rely on
        them solely, shall we say, for important episodes of
        history when I could not find any documentary
        substantiation?

.          P-29

   A.   Well, they form an important part of your case that Hitler
        did not know about the extermination of the Jews, at least
        before the autumn of 1943, because what you argue about
        the Adjutants is that they all say that Hitler never
        actually discussed the extermination of the Jews with
        them, and in the sense that, if you look at their
        statements carefully, and I detail some of these later on
        in the report, you will see that they do not infer from
        the fact that this was not discussed as they claim, the
        fact that Hitler did not know about it.  That is your
        inference.  Indeed, a number of them explicitly stated
        that they were pretty sure that Hitler did know.
   Q.   There is a typical example of that, Albert Speer.  Did
        Albert Speer say to me it was never discussed in front of
        him, but did he then go on to say that in his opinion
        Hitler must have known, roughly?
   A.   As I recall, yes.
   Q.   Is that not an illogical kind of position for an
        intelligent man like Speer to adopt, that it was never
        discussed but somebody must have known?  If it was never
        discussed, how could he guess?
   A.   As I recall, Speer argued at some length, and there is a
        degree of self-exculpation here, I think, in Speer, that
        Hitler simply did not want this to be talked about in his
        inner circle.
   Q.   My final question on this particular angle is this.
When

.          P-30



        you have read, as you or your researchers have, my
        interview notes on all these ladies and gentleman on
        Hitler's private staff, did I conceal anything
detrimental
        that they told me?  In other words, the Walter Frentz
        episode, the shootings at Minsk, Hitler's remark to
Krista
        Schroeder, "now I have had a shower and I feel as
clean as
        a new born babe", did I conceal that or did I properly
use
        it in my books?
   A.   You did not conceal either of those two things, no.
   Q.   So what I found I used?
   A.   Not in every case.  There is an example in detail
later on
        which we can discuss.
   Q.   Can you tell us what that example is from memory?
   A.   Not from memory, I am afraid.
   Q.   Yes.  Perhaps we can wait until we get to it.  There
is
        one further question.  Has any other writer apart from
me
        got as close to these members of Hitler's private
staff?
   A.   No, I think that is quite right.
   Q.   So, if I had not done it, then a body of information
would
        have been lost for the world of academics and
scholars?
   A.   We have discussed this before.  I do not dispute the
fact
        that you have obtained a great deal of material, not
just
        interview material but also documentary material,
which
        other historians have not obtained.
   Q.   Were any of these Adjutants interrogated at Nuremberg?
   A.   There is an awful lot of them, there is about 25 of
them.

.          P-31



        I am sure you know more than I do about their
        interrogations at Nuremberg.  Some of them of course
were
        put on trial or were witnesses in subsequent trials.
   Q.   Very few of them.
   A.   Karl Wolff is the obvious one.
   Q.   Is it not right that Karl Wolff was not put on trial
until
        the 60s because a secret deal had been reached between
him
        and the Americans?
   A.   I do not know about the secret deal but he was not put
on
        trial until 1964, I think.
   Q.   Have you not heard of Operation Crossword in which
Karl
        Wolff was engaged in Italy at the end of the war, his
        negotiations with the OSS?
   A.   You would have to provide me with documentary evidence
for
        a deal, I think.
   Q.   I am going to go on to page 38, my Lord.  Now we are
        dealing with the Hitler's diaries forgeries, paragraph
        246.
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Do you accept that once again I came into early
possession
        of unusual materials?  In this case they turned out to
be
        fake.
   A.   Yes.  Were these the materials which you purchased in
        October 1982 and were intending to sell to McMillans?
   Q.   What is your evidence for the word "purchased"?
   A.   This is in audio cassette 75, where you said you
bought

.          P-32



        them from the forger and then you recognized them as
        forgeries after examining them.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Mr Irving, can I interrupt and make this
        enquiry of you, really? .  I realize that Professor
Evans
        refers to the Hitler diaries in his report.  I am just
        wondering what relevance they have to the issues in
this
        action.  Can you help me?  I am sorry to interrupt you
but
        are obviously starting on a fresh point.
   MR IRVING:  If I am familiar with Professor Evans'
arguments of
        having flipflopped, changed my position on them, and
ipso
        facto being unserious, is that right, Professor Evans?
   A.   I do not use the word "unserious", but I derive from
        Robert Harris's book, which seems to me to be a
reliable
        book, written I think partly in co-operation with you,
        certainly with use of materials you supplied to him,
the
        fact that having declared that the diaries, quite
rightly,
        were forgeries, you then subsequently declared that
they
        were genuine.  If you tell me that that is not true,
of
        course I would have to accept it.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Let us see where we are going with this.
        This is not, I do not think, any part of the pleaded
        case.  Mr Rampton, that is right, is it not?
   MR RAMPTON:  That is right, my Lord.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  You are in the difficult position, Mr
Irving,
        because here is the principal expert witness for the
        Defendants making this criticism of you and it is a

.          P-33



        serious criticism, but it is not one that in the end
plays
        any part in the Defendants case.
   MR IRVING:  I read your Lordship's mind as being that you
will
        pay no attention to this.  In that case I will move
on.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I will not.
   MR IRVING:  In the next paragraph 247 you mention Gerhardt
        Weinberg.
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Is he one of the historians whose views you accept?
   A.   On what?
   Q.   Is he an eminent historian?  He is not a Holocaust
denier,
        is he?
   A.   He is an eminent historian.
   Q.   In fact, he is now retired and his chair is occupied
by
        Christopher Browning, is it not?
   A.   That is the case, yes.
   Q.   I am going to be looking at Professor Jackeln, my
Lord,
        Professor Aberhard Jackeln, who is a historian whose
name
        will come up I think more than once over the next few
        days.  He played a part in the Hitler diaries.  I am
not
        going to look at the Hitler diaries as such but I am
going
        to ask questions which I think have relevance to
        establishing the reliability of Professor Jackeln.  Is
it
        right that Professor Aberhard Jackeln very early on
came
        into possession of one of the diaries, the 1935 Hitler
        diary?

.          P-34



   A.   From what I remember of Mr Harris's book, which is the
        source of my information, yes.  That is to say, I do
not
        rely on Professor Jackeln in my report.
   Q.   Really I am trying through you to find out what we
know
        about Professor Jackeln as far as reliability goes, as
far
        as his credentials go.
   A.   Yes.  It does not really play a role in my report.
That
        is to say, I am not writing about Professor Jackeln's
        reliability.
   Q.   Did you write that Jackeln authenticated some of the
        Hitler materials?
   A.   I did not, no.  It is my understanding from Mr
Harris's
        book that he had doubts about him.  Of course I am
aware
        of the fact that Professor Jackeln did include some
forged
        material in a book that he edited of Hitler's
writings.
   Q.   You are not familiar with the fact that he
authenticated
        the 1935 Hitler diary on behalf of a Stuttgart
        millionaire?
   A.   I am not, but if that is in Mr Harris's book ----
   Q.   You mentioned the other materials.  He believed that a
        very large number of poems and handwritings apparently
by
        Hitler were genuine, is that correct?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  We seem to be back on the Hitler diaries.
I
        thought we had agreed ----
   MR IRVING:  No we are now off that.  We are now on Jackeln,
        very firmly on Jackeln, my Lord.

.          P-35



   A.   That is correct.
   Q.   Did he publish these in a semi-official volume called
        Hitler's Entire Manuscripts?
   A.   Indeed he did.
   Q.   Did it take him a substantial length of time to
confess
        that these were from the same source, the forger
Konrad
        Kujau?
   A.   If you tell me it did, then yes.  He certainly in the
end
        I think recognized that they were forgeries.
   Q.   In fact he wrote a report, did he not, in the Journal
of
        Contemporary History in which he admitted that 4 per
cent
        of that volume was fake, only 4 per cent?  Is that
        correct?
   A.   Well, I do not recall it but I will accept your word
for
        it.
   Q.   In your little bundle of documents which I gave you
this
        morning, would you just turn rapidly to page 41, which
is
        a photograph of a train?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   The large endless train of wagons with people stuffed
in
        like cattle, is it not?
   A.   They do not appear to be ----
   Q.   Several hundred people to each coal wagon?
   A.   I would not say like cattle.  They do not appear to be
        grossly overcrowded.  They are full.
   Q.   Are you aware Professor Jackeln used this photograph
as an

.          P-36



        illustration for Rumanian Jews being shipped to the
gas
        chambers at Auschwitz?
   A.   I am not.
   Q.   On a television programme.  Can you confirm that that
is
        fact Hamburg railway Station after the war?
   A.   Very difficult to say.
   Q.   If I tell that the rubber stamp on the back of the
        original photograph says Hamburg -- it is in the
Hamburg
        Railway Station archives now, in their picture
archives.
   A.   Right.
   Q.   What would your opinion be of a historian who uses
        photographs in that manner, photographs of a postwar
        scene, and says that it is a photograph of Jews being
        shipped off to Auschwitz?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am a bit bewildered by this, Mr Irving.
        You said "so what?" to me not very long, "so what?" to
        you.  Why does whether Professor Jackeln mistook
Hamburg
        Railway Station for a convoy taking Romanian Jews to a
        concentration camp matter?  It is your reliability,
not
        Professor Jackeln's that is in question.
   MR IRVING:  If Jackeln's words are going to be used against
me,
        as they will be, in expert reports, then I am
entitled, in
        my view, to put to the court the qualifications that
        Professor Jackeln has.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Again, you are in the difficulty that
        Professor Evans has relied on other historians in his

.          P-37



        report, but in the end it must be Professor Evans'
view,
        whether I accept it or not, that counts.
   MR IRVING:  Yes.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am not actually going to stop you, but
        I really do not think at the moment, until we get to a
        point where Professor Evans says, "Jackeln says this, ergo
        it must be right", that this is really helpful.  There is
        an awful lot of material to be covered in Professor Evans'
        report, but we have not really begun to grapple with it yet.
   A.   Let me answer the question.  Of course, what I think of
        him depends in this instance on whether he knew that that
        was a picture of Germans in Hamburg on a shopping trip to
        the Ruhr in 1946 and then deliberately presented it, and
        falsely presented it, as Rumanian Jews being shipped off
        to Auschwitz, or whether it was a genuine mistake.  You
        yourself have said in the course of this trial that
        historians make many errors, and that one wants to correct
        them, and one attempts to do so.  You pointed out an error
        in your own 1991 edition of Hitler's War, the absence of
        your name on the title page, so we all make mistakes.
        There is a distinction which I drew on Thursday, which I
        would hold to, between, as it were, genuine mistakes and
        errors, which unfortunately historians are all prone to,
        on the one hand, and deliberate falsification on the other.

.          P-38

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor