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.
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
Home · Site Map · What's New? · Search Nizkor