Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day022.03 Last-Modified: 2000/07/24 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Just read on, Mr Irving. Let me try and get some sort of sense into this. If you read that page, I do not think Professor Evans is criticising your use of the figure of 91. What I think he is saying is (and he is being critical here) that after you used that figure in 'The Warpath', you then reduced it when you came to publish your book on Goebbels. Now, I take that to be the gist of the criticism. It is probably not the most important criticism made, but that is the criticism. So let us address that rather than something that is not being criticised. MR IRVING: I will address it briefly because I do not think it is a just criticism. Are you suggesting that in the book . P-19 on Goebbels I left the final death roll at 35? A.Well, in the book on Goring published in '89, the book on Goebbels '96, you cite a figure of 35 or 36 basing it on an early incomplete report by Heydrich. Q.You are suggesting that I left it at that figure? A.And I cite Goring page 237, if you want to have a look at that? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, show him the passage where you bump the figure up again. MR IRVING: My Lord, you are one who has brought this matter up and I am not prepared to answer that at short notice, but I will look into it and I will bring the figure and the source material out. The point that I was making with that is that on several previous occasions he has criticised my figure of 91 in the Goebbels book, and here he says, "Well, lots of other historians have had the same figure"? A.And my point, Mr Irving, as his Lordship has quite correctly said, that reduce the figures to 35 or 36 in your later work. Q.On page 309? A.Going back? Q.Yes. Do you rely on the testimony of Schirmeister and Fritzsche and the fact that page numbers and dates are wrong as being one more instance of David Irving's poor scholarship? . P-20 A.Well, let me read that paragraph. You give a footnote on page 281 of Goebbels. Q.I summarise it for you? Are you suggesting that I got the dates wrong of the testimony and the pagination wrong which caused your researchers some difficulty? MR JUSTICE GRAY: This is one of the tiniest points I would have thought in the entire report that Professor Evans has ---- MR IRVING: My Lord, it is a barrage of tiny points. It is death by a thousand cuts. I am picking on some of them which I can with relative ease amend the damage. MR RAMPTON: Can I intervene because that reflects on something I raised yesterday. I am very concerned about this because it put me in a difficulty. We had passed through Reichskristallnacht yesterday, I would have thought. MR JUSTICE GRAY: So did I. MR RAMPTON: We have now come back to it for what I might call pinpricks. One huge section, major section, of Professor Evans' of Mr Irving's treatment of Reichskristallnacht was the Heydrich telex at 1.28 and we have not touched on it. MR JUSTICE GRAY: You have said just now -- I am trying to guide you, Mr Irving -- that you were concentrating on the mountain peaks. Absolutely right. That is what you must do. Professor Evans has taken some what I agree are pretty tiny points, but you must not forget about the mountain peaks altogether. I mean, the Heydrich telex is . P-21 a crucial part of the criticism that is made of your rendering of the accounts of Kristallnacht. I think Mr Rampton is right and I think I am right in saying that you have not really challenged that part of the report. MR IRVING: I can deal with the Heydrich telex in two lines, quite simply by pointing to the 2.56 telegram that came subsequently. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Sorry? MR IRVING: By pointing to the 2.56 document issued by the officer Rudolf Hess which came subsequent to that which clarifies that matter. MR JUSTICE GRAY: What do you mean, it clarifies? MR IRVING: I mean which renders the 1.20 telex, in my view, of much less significance. MR RAMPTON: No, it is not a question of history, my Lord. It is the question of how it is written by Mr Irving. I am looking at the bottom of page 276 of Goebbels and I see what Mr Irving wrote about it. Then if I look at the actual document, I think I am looking at two completely different things. That is the criticism made by ---- MR JUSTICE GRAY: This is the criticism Professor Evans makes. MR RAMPTON: Yes. Mr Irving has not even touched on it. Maybe he accepts it as being a fair criticism. That is what I need to know. MR IRVING: Maybe I find these ---- MR JUSTICE GRAY: I mean, there are two points here and they . P-22 are separate points. One is whether you have accurately reported what the telex or the message or the order or whatever it was said, and the second point is whether it matters one way or another. I quite understand you say you can forget about it because things moved on an hour and a half later. MR IRVING: Am I right in understanding that if I do not challenge or traverse something here in cross- examination, then it could be taken as accepted? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, the mountain peaks, yes. You cannot chase every single tiny point, and I would not dream of criticising you for not doing so. MR IRVING: To be accused of poor scholarship, my Lord, is not a tiny point. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I follow that, but what I would be critical of is if you did not pick up in cross-examination major criticisms. It is terribly easy to see what the major criticisms are -- at least I believe it is. MR IRVING: We will come to them, and I am not aided by the lengthy discourses which are caused by the very frequent interruptions by Mr Rampton. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think they are very frequent and if they are justified, then Mr Rampton cannot be criticised for making them. MR RAMPTON: Can I add, while I am on this subject, that is one major criticism which seemed to me to have, I do not know . P-23 what the word is, bypassed a mountain peak. Another one appear to have been bypassed yesterday, and again it puts me in a difficulty because I am bound to say at the end of the case, if these mountain peaks are not tackled, I shall say that Mr Irving has conceded them. Another one was the Himmler log entry for 1st December 1941. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. I think Mr Irving must take his own course. MR RAMPTON: I agree. MR JUSTICE GRAY: In the end, he must cross-examine on what he wants to. I am not going to take anything as conceded because it is not cross-examined to, but I ---- MR IRVING: Unless I expressly concede it. MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- I think it is right that I should take into account the fact that he has not challenged it. I have to make up my own mind in the end. I do not think I can say that the point goes by default. MR RAMPTON: I am using a shorthand; I would if he were a professional advocate, he is not, but I am bound to say that I will place considerable weight on the fact that he makes no challenge. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I can see why you would. MR IRVING: Of course, they have been extensively dealt with in my cross-examination of me. MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, I do not think that is a sufficient answer. I said yesterday (and I will say it again) you . P-24 must cross-examine to the mountain peaks if you want to challenge what Professor Evans says but you can do it briefly. MR IRVING: Yes, I shall certainly do so. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Just going back, let us use the Heydrich message of 1.20, or whatever it was ---- MR IRVING: As an example. MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- as an example; if you want to say that what you said about it in Goebbels is entirely accurate and no sensible person can criticise your account of it, you can put that very briefly. MR IRVING: My Lord, the submission that I intend to make on a number of those matters is, apply the following test: if that sentence or that error or that flaw or that misreading be taken out of that book, does it in the slightest alter the thrust or the weight of the arguments? MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is a very good point, but that is a point for final submissions ---- MR IRVING: Yes, and that is why ---- MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- not for cross-examination. MR IRVING: --- it may well be that I shall readily concede the points when the time comes. MR JUSTICE GRAY: So be it. That, in a way, rather tallies with what Mr Rampton just said. But you must make a judgment about that, but it is very important you . P-25 understand how I see the important points and what should do if you are going to challenge Professor Evans' criticisms. MR IRVING: My Lord, it is revealing no secrets if I say that in my final speech I shall not be addressing all the issues; I shall be strongly addressing to your Lordship that a number of the issues are of far less moment. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I quite agree. MR IRVING: And that the major issues like poor scholarship, distortion, manipulation, Holocaust denier and so on are the ones to which I shall attend in the final speech. That is why, with your Lordship's permission, I intend to dwell on matters like poor scholarship in a way that may appear infuriating to you, but I can only pick on the examples that are given in this report. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, but I am getting the impression -- I am Judge alone, I can say this and I do not have to worry about the Jury -- I get the slight impression that you are cherry picking your way through and alighting on some really rather minor points. I mean, the point about Schirmeister and Fritzsche, if I may say so, with respect to Professor Evans, it be could have been omitted from his report without doing any injustice to the Defendants' case. MR IRVING: Let me just ask two brief questions then, my Lord? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, of course. . P-26 MR IRVING: Professor Evans, you find criticism with the fact that the pagination of the references to the testimony did not tally? A.Let me read everything I say about this: "Another instance of Irving's poor scholarship is the footnote reference given on page 281 of Goebbels: 'Mastermind of the "Third Reich"' to back up his claim that 'Goebbels however would brag that he had proved that the Jews could be eliminated from the economy, whatever Funk said to the contrary'. When we turn to pages 190-1 and 235-7 of volume 17 of the Nuremberg Trials documents, cited by Irving as the location of the 'Testimony of Schirmeister and Fritzsche, June 28, 1946' in support of his statement, we find that the reference for pages 190-1 refers to June 27 not June 28, that Schirmeister is never mentioned on these pages, and that Fritzsche's testimony deals with a completely different subject". I am bound to say this is a very minor I point. I thought it, on balance, worth putting in. I was not advised that it should be taken out, but it really is not an important, not a desperately important, point. Q.Can I ask you just one brief question? Are you aware of the fact that there are two parallel editions, one German and one English? A.If you -- well, in order -- if you really want to go into this, Mr Irving, we will have to look up both editions and . P-27 have to have copies of both editions of the Nuremberg Trial documents here and a copy of your book, "Goebbels: Master mind of the Third Reich" which I have here. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well ---- A.Do we really want to go through this? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Speaking for myself, I do not think I would. I would forget it.This is not going to feature in any conclusions that I come to in this case. MR IRVING: The allegations of poor scholarship, my Lord, rest substantially on these trivial complaints. A.I do not accept that, Mr Irving. Q.Pages 321 to 322. We are now back in Riga at the shootings. Can I ask you just a brief, simple question to start with? Professor Evans, do you challenge my account of the shootings at Riga, the actual shootings on November 30th 1941, and if so, why? A.Tell me what your account is, where it is, what you are referring to exactly. Q.Have you read, in pursuance of your duties as an expert witness, the account I have given of that in various books including Hitler's War volume 2 -- the second edition, rather, and the Goebbels biography? A.Can you point me to one of these, please? MR JUSTICE GRAY: We can do that quite quickly.
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
Home · Site Map · What's New? · Search Nizkor