Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day031.02
Last-Modified: 2000/07/25
MR RAMPTON: There are plenty of those.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: And also Mr Irving, I think, said that he had
been told by the German Federal archives that the document
is not to be found in the file from which it purports to come.
MR RAMPTON: Well, the explanation for that, I know not. As
I said, my speculation is that it is just a reference to
the wrong file. What I do now know, and Mr Irving knows
and your Lordship knows, is that the original document,
the original Abschrift, is held in Moscow. A copy of that
has been sent to us from Moscow, sent to Dr Longerich.
There is another copy at the prosecution centre at
Ludwigburg, that we also have. There is another copy in
the archive in Munich, that we also have.
MR IRVING: My Lord, the problem I have with the document is it
is very analogous to the Schlegelberger document. The
Defendants were able, in my view, unsuccessfully to attack
the Schlegelberger document on the basis of the other
documents in the same file. We have been shown just this
one document. I am not able to attack it on the basis of
other documents in the same file because, firstly, I was
given the wrong file number and the Bundesarchiv told me,
"This is the wrong file number".
Secondly, we have once again only been shown
exactly the same copy which appears to be a copy which has
been recopied for various other archives inside Germany.
. 10
We have not been told what else is in that file which may
give it a completely innocent meaning. I submit that the
content of the document is relatively innocent anyway,
but, in view of the fact that the Defendants have had two
months to provide me with sufficient identifying material
which would enable me to identify the file so that I could
rummage around in the rest of the file, in the same way as
the Defendants were able to do with the Schlegelberger
document, I submit that your Lordship should say this is
one document that should not be added to Mr Irving's burden.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, there was a stage in the trial when
I think it was proposed that the Defendants should write
to I think the archive in Munich to try to find out what
documents, therefore, in whichever archive this did come
from. I do not know whether that happened.
MR RAMPTON: I do not know whether it happened or not.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am right in thinking that was proposed?
MR RAMPTON: I cannot even remember that, but I am sure your
Lordship is. I really have no recollection of it. The
short point surely is this, I would submit. This is on
its face an original document. It does on its face say
what we say it says.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am sorry to interrupt, but it is not
actually an original document is it, because it is an Abschrift?
. 11
MR IRVING: My Lord, it does actually have SS runes in the last line.
MR RAMPTON: It is an original Abschrift, that is the point.
It was an Abschrift made by some SS person at this time,
August 1941. There cannot be any doubting that. If
Mr Irving wanted, as it were, to skew or displace the
document's obvious significance, then it was up to him to
do so. The document has been in the file since goodness
knows when. It is no part of our burden to stand up a
document which is on its face quite evidently authentic.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is not to prevent Mr Irving saying
"I challenge the authenticity of the document".
MR RAMPTON: That is right.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I will then have to decide whether that is a
historically valid challenge to mount to a document of
this kind or whether it is not.
MR RAMPTON: Of course, as he does with the document of June 43
about incineration. Of course he can.
MR IRVING: My Lord, the problem is I have not been able to go
behind that document, if I can put it like that, because
the wrong file was given to me. They have not provided me
with the correct file number. They have provided me just
repeatedly with the same Abschrift or copy, and all this
has been done literally after the close of business on
Friday, including sending me a document which they had
received on January 28th, 42 days earlier, and they had
. 12
only just forwarded to me, namely the copy they got from
Munich, and this has made it impossible for me to go
behind that particular document.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: We are launching into the detail of this one
document, and there is a lot of other ground to cover, but
are you saying to me that you would like to be told and
have disclosed to you by the Defendants such
correspondence as has taken place between them and the
Munich archive?
MR IRVING: That would be a very useful order for your Lordship
to make. If it turns out that they did not make the
enquiries that your Lordship directed, then I would submit
your Lordship should properly say in that case, "I will
not admit this document in evidence".
MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is stage two as it were. Mr Rampton,
why should I not make an order that Mr Irving sees
whatever correspondence there has been?
MR RAMPTON: Because there is not any correspondence. It was
done orally by Dr Longerich so far as I am aware. If
there is a letter back from the Munich archive which I do
not know about, which Mr Irving ought to see, then of
course I will disclose it, or if your Lordship would like
to see it.
MR IRVING: Then of course we can see if there is any reference
to the ----
MR RAMPTON: So far as I know, there is no correspondence. Can
. 13
I ask your Lordship to look at the fax cover? There are
two fax covers.
MR IRVING: The analogy, my Lord, would be if I produced only
the Schlegelberger document without the surrounding
documents in that file.
MR RAMPTON: That is as may be. I rather doubt it myself.
I have no idea of the size of the file to which this
document may belong. For all I know, it may contain
thousands of documents. It is not as though Mr Irving is
confined to Munich. There are two other archives in which
this document resides. You will see this is not Munich,
this is Ludwigsburg who has written to Dr Longerich.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: What I think should happen, since we are on
the authenticity of this document, and what I order shall
happen, is that by close of business today, by .30 [sic] today,
Mr Irving should have disclosed to him such correspondence
as has come into existence as a result of the Defendants'
efforts to track down either the original of this
document, or the contents of any file in which the
document may reside at whichever archive it is in.
MR RAMPTON: Of course. I have no problem with that at all.
My worry is that there will not be any documents of that
nature because there were not any letters written by anybody.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Then Mr Irving may be able to make some
submissions based on the failure to chase up.
. 14
MR RAMPTON: Unless, on the contrary, what I do do, or what
somebody does, it will not be me, is actually produce to
Mr Irving and your Lordship what one might call a file
note or memorandum about what Dr Longerich, if it is he
who did it, what he actually did.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes.
MR RAMPTON: He probably will not any longer remember the dates
or the times of his telephone calls, but he will certainly
have a recollection of the people he spoke to and of the
efforts that were made, and I know somebody went to the
archive in Moscow on his behalf, to find this document
and, if it be the case, any surrounding documents of any relevance.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: If you would do that, either disclose the
documents or in the form of a memorandum from Dr Longerich
or those instructing you, let Mr Irving know and me what
attempts have been made to locate anything that will help
on the authenticity of the Muller document.
Mr Irving, it is for you to take your own course
as regards any submissions you want to make, based on your
written closing statement. Take your own course.
MR RAMPTON: My Lord, before one leaves the question of this
document, Mr Irving has, I fear not for the first time and
I say that advisedly, actually not well represented what
was said in court about this document. What he actually
said, and this is on page 126 of Monday 28th February
. 15
which is day , and we are talking about this Muller
document: "I would like to see either a facsimile or to
know reliably where the document is". Both those requests
have been complied with. I will still do what your
Lordship asked.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Do not let us spend too long on this but what
I have noted for myself -- I may have got it wrong, I do
not know -- during the course of the trial Mr Irving
sought to enlist the assistance to verify the authenticity
of the Muller document by obtaining copies of the other
documents contained in the file of the Munich Institute of
History where the Muller document was found. That is what
I believe happened at some stage but I have no idea on
which day.
MR IRVING: My Lord, it is not only the authenticity, it is
also the purport of the document, if I can put it like that.
MR RAMPTON: I believe your Lordship's note may not be
precisely accurate.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can somebody track it down?
MR RAMPTON: I am told, I have not done it of course, that
those around me, including Miss Rogers and my instructing
solicitors, have searched transcripts for this last week.
The bit I just read was the relevant bit, and Mr Irving
said on page 128 of the same day: "I need to know the
actual file number of course. I need to know the correct
. 16
file number". Your Lordship said: "That is fair enough,
Mr Rampton. When you have found out which file number or
numbers it is in, will you pass that on to Mr Irving?" In
fact, we did a good deal more than that, because we
discovered the document, as I say, in three different
archives, and he has had all three copies.
MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think the passage you just read out pretty
much bears out what I had in my note, if I may say so, but
I think we are getting a little bit bogged down in the
Muller document. Yes, Mr Irving.
MR IRVING: My Lord, I have no further submissions to make,
I do not think, unless your Lordship wishes to remind me
of one which I ought to have made. I think that
everything is contained in my closing statement, which
I intended to submit in that way. I was going to submit
to you the contents of bundle E, but I have now done that
in my closing statement, and I shall now take out of that
closing statement what your Lordship avers is of less
relevance.
Home ·
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
Search
Nizkor
© 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.