Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day029.18 Last-Modified: 2000/07/25 MR RAMPTON: Perhaps we can bypass the good Dr Goebbels, my Lord, because this is Professor Irving writing his Goring book in 1989ish, I think, page 337. "It is probably only now that he", that is probably Hitler, might be Goring, "learned that the Japanese had attacked Pearl Harbour. At the Reichstag session on December 11th Hitler declared war on the United States". A. I found it at the same time, yes. Q. Well, who is right? You or you? A. This time you are right. Q. OK, the 11th. A. Luckily I am not a betting man. Q. Lucky you have not lost a million quid, yet. A. I would have phoned a friend if I had one. Q. Mr Irving, this was a very important speech, was it not? A. No. . P-159 Q. The day after the declaration of war on the United States? A. It was the usual Adolf Hitler pep talk. He did not often see the Gauleiters. He did not like the Gauleiters. He said to Martin Bormann after Rudolf Hess went, "Keep the Gauleiters off my back". Q. What he said was: "You Jews, I threatened you, I promised you, you have got it coming to you, and now it is here because the world war has begun". A. Do you want to see his actual speech? Q. No. I would like you to look at what Goebbels reports that he said. A. That is what I am asking. Q. That is at the bottom of page 50 of the Moscow microfiche. A. That is 22 pages beyond how far I got. Q. It is not. It is 12 pages. I must say -- I have to say, Mr Irving -- pretty weedy little pages too, narrow and short. Bezuglich der Judenfrager ist der Fuhrer. It is the last line on page 50. It goes through, probably the bit about the Jews, only as far as page 51, because he starts something new on the bottom of page 51. Yes, here we are. This is going to be the German India in the future in the East. So the little bit about the Jews is really mostly on page 51. If you read it to yourself ---- A. I have read it. Q. I repeat my question. This is a statement that the threat will now be fulfilled, is it not. . P-160 A. Yes. He had said it endless times before. It is exactly the same thing. Mr Rampton, I had the advantage of having read these Hitler speeches through and through for 35 years. Q. I am sure you have. A. After a time, you know what he is going to say next. He is that kind of person. Q. I am surprised you remain sane, Mr Irving. A. Thank you for the compliment. Q. However, the fact is that the world war, which was what Hitler was ranting about in the Reichstag on 30th January 1939, for example, is now here. The day before. A. He had had the entire British Empire around his neck already, so it was not exactly a localised conflict, and the Soviet Union. Q. It is highly significant to anybody, is it not, Mr Irving, who is in the least bit interested in an objective account of Hitler's responsibility for what happened to the Jews? A. Well, I can only repeat what I said earlier. There are two separate issues here: Whether I saw it and suppressed it and whether, if I saw it, I attached any importance to it, or would have attached any importance to it, and the answer to the second question is decisively no. I would not have attached any undue importance to that passage beyond what Hitler had said on countless occasions before. The answer to the first question I can say with . P-161 the utmost emphasis is that I never saw this passage, I did not read the passage, I did not get that far in the glass plate, I had other things on the shopping list. Q. I make it clear, Mr Irving -- I am going to sit down now -- that I do not accept either of those answers so that you shall not be surprised when I say it when I close this case. May I just take a moment to read my briefing, my Lord? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, of course. MR RAMPTON: (After a pause). Thank you, Mr Irving. A. Thank you. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes Mr Irving. A. Unless your Lordship has any questions on that? MR JUSTICE GRAY: You have somewhat theoretical possibility of re-examining yourself if you want to add anything by way of evidence to what you have told Mr Rampton. A. I re-examine myself every night in the small hours to see what I have done wrong, and that is as far as I can get, unfortunately. By way of submission, I will certainly make certain propositions which, whether permitted or not, is the only way that I can effectively do it on the basis of documents. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. I think I would find it quite helpful if you were able to perhaps fax the little clip of documents that I think you are probably going to produce in relation to the invention by the British, the PWE. . P-162 A. The broadcasting. I have made a note of that. The immediate question is when do we next come together? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Do you want to return to your usual place? A. Yes. (The witness withdrew). MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Rampton, there are a number of loose ends, I think. MR RAMPTON: Yes, I agree. MR IRVING: Can I ask a technical question? Is Mr Rampton continuing to rely on any other names in the bundle? MR RAMPTON: What names? MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am sorry, what names? MR IRVING: Hancock and names like that. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Who? MR IRVING: Mr Hancock. MR RAMPTON: No, I have the answer I need about Mr Hancock. He is some kind of unattached roving rightist who thinks that all immigrants should be sent home. He is in the diary entry for what he is worth. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am taking it that the Defendants are relying on ---- MR RAMPTON: The list. MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- all the names on the list. MR RAMPTON: Yes. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Although they may abandon some of those names in the light of your answer. I do not know whether they . P-163 will or they will not, but they are entitled to rely on them. MR IRVING: The question I am really asking, my Lord, is do I need to make submissions about any of the other names than those that I have been cross-examined on? MR JUSTICE GRAY: The ones that are not on the list you mean? MR IRVING: The ones that I have not been cross-examined on. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am not sure that there really in the end there were any. There may have been one. MR IRVING: There were several. I am not going to mention names. MR RAMPTON: I have no intention of cross-examining Mr Irving on any of the names on the list in so far as the cross-examination was done for me by Professor Funke over the last two proceeding days. There is no point in my cross-examining and repeating just on Professor Funke has said. I rely on the evidence of Professor Funke, so far as those names are concerned. But, as I have said before, principally do I rely on Mr Irving's own words and appearances. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am taking it that if the names on the list have not featured in the oral evidence at all, then they drop from the picture. MR RAMPTON: I would accept that. MR IRVING: Easily. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think you will find that only is one or . P-164 two. MR IRVING: I think there are rather more than that. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am open to correction on that. The first thing is, any evidence that you have not, as it were, formally tendered, Mr Rampton, now I think probably is the time it should be done. You have some more evidence? MR RAMPTON: I? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Not oral. MR RAMPTON: I see, the Civil Evidence Act witnesses, yes I think we probably have. MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is customary to inform the court what the evidence you rely on is. It is just that I do not actually really ---- MR RAMPTON: I really do not want to ask Miss Rogers to stand here and read them out. MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. I want to know what there is, because I was slightly alarmed to get a bundle that I am not sure I previously had which I have kept. MR RAMPTON: Can we not make a snap statement about that now. To say I have not read it would be false, but to say I have not read it recently would be true. I cannot even remember what is in it. I do not have it. Lipstadt your Lordship can forget, not as a person but as a witness. As to the rest, frankly your Lordship can forget the Russians, I have got what I need from Mr Irving. As to the rest, they are all Americans I think. . P-165 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not even have an index in this bundle. MR RAMPTON: Can we come back on that? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Are we meeting tomorrow? MR RAMPTON: I would rather not meet tomorrow if it is possible. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Then I need to know now, do I not? MR RAMPTON: Unless we are meeting on Monday or unless we send a written note to your Lordship's Clerk just saying which names we rely on. I certainly do not feel competent to make a decision about that now. I know I rely on Miss Gutmann, but beyond that I really cannot say. For example, it may be possible that some of these people make reference to people that I do not rely on as primary actors, in which case this Civil Evidence Act Notice can be ignored. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am not entirely happy, if I may say so, with it being left in quite that way, because I do not think it is reasonably to expect me to plough through whatever it may be you are relying on. I am just wondering whether we are not going to have to have a further session in court before everybody goes away to write final speeches to deal with, at any rate, that. MR RAMPTON: I do not mind coming back tomorrow morning, if that would help. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think it really is not, if I may say so, satisfactory just to be told, well, we rely on some of . P-166 them, but we cannot really say which or which parts. I think it has to be a bit more crystallised than that. MR RAMPTON: I was suggesting might be able to do it on paper, that is all. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, do you have any submissions to make about this. MR IRVING: I would be perfectly happy to receive a faxed list of the names on which they intend to rely, if it would prevent your Lordship from reading untoward material on which they are not intending to rely. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, quite. It is not just which witnesses but also I think some guidance as to which parts of the witness statements. I do not know how long they are. MR RAMPTON: Would your Lordship like us to take your C1 back and send you an edited version? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. MR RAMPTON: Would that help? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, it would. MR RAMPTON: We will send it to you tomorrow. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Absolutely. MR RAMPTON: That was not my idea, needless to say. MR IRVING: The next question is when can we appoint the time for me to make the submissions I have to make on various other documents and bundles? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. Mr Rampton, Mr Irving is asking when he can make the submissions he has, which are basically, as I . P-167 understand it, really objections to certain parts of the evidence. MR IRVING: Objections, but also I wish to put in bundle E if I possibly can. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Put in what? MR IRVING: Put in bundle E by way of submission. MR RAMPTON: Bundle E is in, without objection from me. The question of what anybody makes of bundle E is a matter for submission at the end of the case, final speeches. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think that is right, Mr Irving. MR IRVING: Yes. MR JUSTICE GRAY: We are really dispensing with the rules of evidence pretty much entirely in this case, which I think is actually right and inevitable, but that means that you have got into bundle E a whole lot of documents that in an ordinary case would not be evidence or admissible or even relevant some of them. So do not worry about that, but if you are objecting to any of the evidence that the Defendants have put in, then my own feeling is that that ought to be dealt with sooner rather than later, because if there are documents that are going to disappear from the case, well, then it is better we know they are going to disappear sooner rather later.
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
Home · Site Map · What's New? · Search Nizkor