Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day003.01
Last-Modified: 2000/07/29

   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE            1996 I. No. 113
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice
                                           Strand, London
                                      Thursday, 13th January
2000

                                Before:
                            MR JUSTICE GRAY

        B E T W E E N:
DAVID JOHN CAWDELL IRVING
                                                Claimant
-and-

(1) PENGUIN BOOKS LIMITED
                  (2) DEBORAH E. LIPSTADT
                                                Defendants
   The Claimant appeared in person
   MR RICHARD RAMPTON Q.C. (instructed by Messrs Davenport
Lyons
and Mishcon de Reya) appeared on behalf of the First and
        Second Defendants
   MISS HEATHER ROGERS (instructed by Davenport Lyons)
appeared on
behalf of the First Defendant Penguin Books Limited

MR ANTHONY JULIUS (of Mishcon de Reya) appeared on behalf of
        the Second Defendant Deborah Lipstadt

        (Transcribed from the stenographic notes of Harry
Counsell
& Company, Clifford's Inn, Fetter Lane, London EC4
                       Telephone: 020-7242-9346)

PROCEEDINGS - DAY THREE




.          P-1



        < DAY 3                       Thursday, 13th January
2000
                      MR DAVID IRVING, Recalled.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes, Mr Irving?
   MR IRVING:  May it please the court, with your Lordship's
        permission, I have brought the bundle of the documents
        that we were referring to last night.  Unless your
        Lordship would see any reason against, I propose
rapidly
        stepping through these documents, pausing at the ones
        which are significant as far as we can determine so
far
        from the direction and thrust of the cross-
examination.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes.  You are in the middle of your
        cross-examination.  So, in the ordinary way, we will
wait
        and see when the documents became relevant to Mr
Rampton's
        questions.
   MR IRVING:  They have been in discovery throughout, my
Lord.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I follow that.  But I suspect most of
them
        are going to become relevant to the answers you are
going
        to be giving to some of the questions Mr Rampton
        is asking.
   MR IRVING:   I do apprehend it will be useful to the court,
I
        appreciate that it is your Lordship's court, but I
believe
        it will be useful.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  You may well be right.  I cannot really
tell,
        I have only glanced at it. Shall I ask Mr Rampton --
        because he is cross-examining, so, on the face of it,
he
        has the right to continue to cross-examine.

.          P-2



   MR RAMPTON:  I have no objection.  In a sense, it is either
        evidence-in-chief in anticipation of cross-
examination, or
        it is what one might call "premature re-examination".
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes.
   MR RAMPTON:  One way or the other it is going to make no
        difference.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  If you are happy I will not stand in the
way.
                  Before that happens I wonder if I could
mention
        one or two administrative points?  The first is, I
think
        we are all agreed through nobody's fault, this is not
a
        very suitable court and I am very concerned that there
are
        members of the public who, I think, are not able to
get in
        and listen and want to.  Having made enquiries, as I
said
        I would, I think there are two possible courts to
which we
        could move which were not available or were not
thought to
        be available when we started.  One is court 73, which
        I have looked at and looks to me to be much better
than
        this in almost every respect.  There is, apparently,
        another one, which is in Chichester Rents in Chancery
        Lane, which is even bigger.  I think I would have some
        slight personal preference for 73, but what I wanted
to
        ask you is that I think we should move anyway, because
        this is not satisfactory and it seems to me, unless
you
        are going to tell me there are insuperable problems,
        tomorrow is the day to do the move.  Are you in
agreement
        that that is the right thing to do?

.          P-3



   MR IRVING:  I would have suggested doing it over the
weekend
        although I have no logistical problems myself --
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Well, I think they have a lot of problems
        ahead of them, but I think it is better to do it now
than
        to struggle on and regret it every day from hereon.
   MR RAMPTON:  That would suit us awfully well, if we could
make
        a fresh start in what I call a "proper big court" on
        Monday morning.
   MR IRVING:  Not a fresh start.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  We will decide -- not a fresh start.
   MR RAMPTON:  No, thank you.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  We will decide during the course of today
        which it is going to be and, obviously, let you know.
We
        will take it that on Monday we will be in a different
        court.
   MR RAMPTON:  May I ask where exactly 73 is?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  It is where all those new Court of
Appeals
        are.
   MR RAMPTON:  In the East Building.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes.
   MR RAMPTON:   In the end I would have to say, my Lord, it
is a
        matter for you.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I think it is, if you have strong
feelings.
   MR RAMPTON:  No, I do not know Chancery Lane much at all
        anyway.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That is point one.

.          P-4



                  The next relates to the TA Law Transcripts
which
        are being done.  Really, I think I am saying this on
        behalf of the lady who is doing the transcribing.  She
is
        having the most appalling task.  She is here all day,
and
        she is by herself, as it were. It would help her if we
        could slightly slow down.  Mr Irving, you speak fairly
        rapidly anyway.  That is not a criticism at all.
   MR IRVING:  I thought I was speaking slowly.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  If you can bear in mind there is somebody
        trying to take down what you say, if we can try to
        remember to spell out the German names when they crop
up
        for the first time.  That is going to make everybody's
        life much easier.
                  There is one other point on the transcripts.
        The Day 2 transcript starts at page 104.  My own
feeling
        (and I do not know whether you share it, Mr Rampton)
is
        that it would be better if every day started at 1, so
you
        have Day 2, page 1, rather than page 104.  I am told
that
        is physically possible.  So that is what I think we
will
        have in the future.
                  That is all that I wanted to raise except
that,
        Mr Irving, I have seen (and I do not know whether
        Mr Rampton has) your letter about the letter to me
about
        the article in the Stuttgart press.  Do you know about
        it?
   MR RAMPTON:  No.

.          P-5



   MR IRVING:  I was going to ask, my Lord, I might, having
given
        the Defendants time to consider it, if I might address
the
        court briefly on the matter after the lunch
adjournment?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  If you would like to do that, that is
fine.
        Mr Rampton?
   MR RAMPTON:  I have no comment until I have seen it.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I do not suppose you will, even when you
        have.
   MR RAMPTON:  I see.  My Lord, the only thing I would
mention
        about the transcript, I do not know what the cure is.
Is
        that, normally speaking, of course, one can deduce
what it
        was, but here and there -- this is not a criticism of
the
        transcriber, far from it -- one sees in square
brackets
        the word "German" which represents something that has
been
        said in German.  That is going to repeat itself
        indefinitely in that case.  I do not know what cure
is.
        Whether the word should be spelt out each time.  It is
a
        terribly laborious way of dealing it, or whether we
supply
        at some stage when it is important a list of what we
        suppose was the word used.  As I say, most of the time
one
        can deduce it.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Is it actually going to be all that much
of a
        burden to spell it out or, at any rate, spell out the
key
        words in the document?  I am thinking yesterday
        "liquidierung".  One can spell that out.
   MR RAMPTON:  There is going to be more of that today.

.          P-6



   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I follow.
   MR RAMPTON:  Perhaps spell it out?
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am inclined to think so.  I think that
is
        the best way.  It is going to slow things down. Would
you
        prefer it, both of you?
   MR RAMPTON:  Yes.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  It is going to slow things down, but it
needs
        to be done that way.  So, Mr Irving, would you like to
        take me through the...
   MR IRVING:  Page 1, my Lord, this is a letter -- the sole
        purpose of this letter is that it indicates the date
when
        I really made use of the Himmler telephone notes,
being
        1974; some 25 years ago, 26 years ago.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Can I just ask you this?  You there
        transcribe judentransport, J-U-D-E-N-T-R-A-N-S-P-O-R-
T, in
        the singular, and that is in 1974.
   MR IRVING:  We have check the original in the German.  You
are
        absolutely right, my Lord.  You are absolutely right.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Right.
   MR IRVING:  In a very vague, and, of course, I am still
        considering myself to be under oath as I make these
        remarks, in a very vague way my recollection is that
time
        I regarded the word "transport" as not just meaning
like a
        transport train or one consignment, or a transport
ship in
        the way that you would talk about a convoy of 26
        transports but also in the sense that transportation.

.          P-7



        I consider that the words judenstransport meant
        "transportation of Jews".
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes, I note that you make that point.
   MR IRVING:  This is an alternative inference but now I am
quite
        happy to accept that this particular discussion from
        external evidence only referred to one particular
        transport of Jews, and I am indebted to your Lordship
for
        having reminded, or took me back into the mind set of
26
        years ago.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes.
   MR IRVING:  As you know, my presumption is, I will just
read
        the middle paragraph that Hitler had become an active
        knowledge bearer or accomplice in the destruction of
the
        Jews only in 1943.  This is of course a translation of
the
        following page, my Lord.  From the attached page,
which is
        a facsimile, which we will see in a minute, it is
evident
        that Himmler, arriving at midday on November 30th,
1941,
        in the Wolf's Lair, which I explain was Hitler's
        headquarters in East Prussia, after a brief
conversation
        with Hitler immediately had to telephone Heydrich in
        Prague, and then comes the phrase, "judentransportest
aust
        Berlin keine liquidierung", which I believe the
shorthand
        writer already had from us.
                  If you take this in conjunction with various
        other entries, e.g. that of 17th November 1941, in
which
        Heydrich informs the Reich Fuhrer, that is Himmler, on

.          P-8



        conditions in the general Uberman, Poland.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That is SS Reich Fuhrer.
   MR IRVING:  Well, Reich Fuhrer SS would be the full title.
        There was only one Reich Fuhrer in German --
conditions in
        the general government Poland-geting rid of the Jews,
        Beseitigung, this can only indicate that Himmler has
been
        rapped across the knuckles by Hitler.  This
conversation
        note has until now evidently slipped through the
fingers
        of the historical research community, as you might
call
        it.
                  Then the other two lines at the bottom are
not
        without interest in the chain of documents I refer to,
my
        Lord.  Himmler had to issue a similar "holt" order in
        April 1942 on account of the liquidation of the
gypsies,
        again after a brief visit to Hitler.  "I thought this
        might be of interest to you." You will see that
document
        too, my Lord, in this bundle.  Because it is false to
try
        and draw inferences from one document without looking
at
        other documents in the series.  I appreciate in court
it
        is difficult to do this.
                  My Lord, the next document I am going to
draw
        your Lordship's attention to is 03 at the foot of the
        page.  This is another document that was in discovery.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I have read that. That is you asking
        Professor Hinsley whether he has any more information.

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