Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day028.11 Last-Modified: 2000/07/25 MR IRVING: Let me start off, before answering this question, would you consider it to be very tasteless for a German to offer a toast to Adolf Hitler in the presence of two English people? Yes or no? Would you offer a toast to Adolf Hitler in the presence of two English people? A. I would not do it anyway. Q. Would you consider it to be a matter of dubious taste? A. You know I would say ---- Q. Can you answer? A. I answer, just now I am answering. MR JUSTICE GRAY: He did answer. He said he would not think it was very -- he thought it would be rather tasteless in any event, whether there were English people present or not. MR IRVING: In other words, the word "tasteless" was appropriate. Thank you, my Lord. A. And if ---- MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, no, let us move on. A. If I regard these two, no, excuse me, my Lord. If I regard the two persons who were there, and I would have been Althans if I can, then I would not have the problem to do this toast. MR IRVING: Right, now will you answer? A. This tasteless toast. Q. Will you now answer my previous question? Is it evident from the diary that I did not join in the toast? . P-99 A. It is not evident. "All rose, toasted. I had no glass as I do not drink". I do not know. Q. If one has no glass and one does not drink, how can one toast someone? Will you now answer my question? Is it evident from the diary that I did not join in the toast? A. I really cannot say. Q. OK. You cannot say or you will not say? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, that is unnecessary. MR IRVING: Will you accept that it is likely that by virtue of the fact that I recorded this incident in my diary I found it distasteful? A. You did not say, you did not write it, and you are an admirer, to a degree, of Adolf Hitler and Tony Hancock, the same. We saw the video where he had this accruals(?) of Adolf Hitler, so why not for you? Q. The video of the accruals of Adolf Hitler, what is this? A. In the video we saw Tony Hancock distributing or showing accruals of Adolf Hitler, and we know of his record that he is somehow dealing with National Socialism. He was there, you both English persons were there, and I can allude to the others there, Ingrid Weckert, a very anti-Semitic, you know, person. By the way, Ingrid Weckert should have been on this list because she was very active in the Gesinnungsgemeinschaft, just to mention that. Q. Is it evident from this list that I have written down that . P-100 most of the name are unknown to me and that I wrote it down as a curiosity to know who was present at this dinner? A. You know Ingrid Weckert, it was shown by the ---- Q. Was that the question that I asked? A. --- cross-examinations -- yes. It is part of the answer that you know a lot of these people. Q. Do I know all of the people? A. That I do not know. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let us go through them. MR IRVING: Yes. A. Through them. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Staglich. MR IRVING: Are you suggesting that the fact that I wrote down this name on the list is evidence that I knew Mr Staglich? A. I think you may have known Staglich at that period. You know Althans. You know Philipp. You know Huffgoes very much. This we viewed of your cassette. You know Ingrid Weckert. You alluded to this during the cross- examination of Professor Evans. You know Professor Schracker. Schracker, I have to say did ---- Q. On what basis do you think I know Professor Schracker? Have you seen any ---- A. Because he did a brilliant book on him, on David Irving, the later days, and he was there in the audience where you were there the next day. . P-101 Q. When did Professor Schracker write this book on me? A. Oh, you do not know? Q. No, when was this? A. A praising book to you -- in the last years. Oh, wonderful! I give it to you. Q. I am flattered to know this, but are you suggesting that at this time or at any time I have had any correspondence or dealings with Professor Schracker at all? A. You met in the same Congress. He did a piece, he did a statement so far all the sources shows me at this very meeting the other day and Franco Griesch is the ---- Q. Let us stay with Schracker for a moment. Have you seen any correspondence between me and Schracker? A. No, no, not correspondence. Q. Is he mentioned in my diary apart from this list? A. No. Q. Arnold Freulich, have you seen any correspondence between me and him? A. I do not know. Q. Daniel Konekt, have you seen any correspondence between me and him? A. Yes, he is the buddy of, if I may say so, of Althans. Q. Yes, but have you seen any correspondence between me and him? A. No. Q. The fact ---- . P-102 A. You mentioned Daniel Konekt a lot of times in your diary. Q. Leota Fontiss -- in what connection have I mentioned him, having contact with him or ---- A. Yes, with Daniel, you did the same tour to Strasbourg. That was before. Q. What is Daniel Konekt? Is he a chauffeur or what? I do not know. A. Look at your diaries. Q. You are the expert. You are telling us these people are ---- A. Yes, I say look at your diaries, you know. Q. Do you remember at the beginning of this cross-examination I showed you a list of 6,500 names? A. Yes, I figured out three of them as noted in this, with respect to these whole endeavour. We can go to this list. Q. Loeta Fontiss, do you ---- A. I do not know. Q. H Forster? A. I do not know. Q. In other words, most of the people on this list I have no idea who they are, do you agree? A. No. Q. You do agree? A. I cannot, so how many are on this list, it is 18 and half of them you know, Staglich, Althans, Philipp, Huffgoes ---- . P-103 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Don't let us go through them all over again. MR IRVING: No, no. A. --- Weckert, Schracker, Franco Grietsch, Hancock, that is eight, nine, and Daniel Konekt, so ---- Q. Will you turn to page 46 and you see the diary entry for April 22: "Headache all day, aspirin at breakfast. I had fixed at his request an interview over breakfast with Judge Staglich". Does this imply to you that I do not know who Judge Staglich is, and this is probably my first ever meeting with him, my only ever meeting with him? And I say, "I can fit you in at breakfast"? MR RAMPTON: I do not understand that because if they had dinner on the 20th, it was not the first time they had met two days later at breakfast. I do not follow it. MR IRVING: Professor Funke, do you appreciate (which Mr Rampton apparently does not) the difference between meeting somebody at a dinner when somebody is 24 seats away down the table and shaking hands with them and having an earnest discussion with them? Is there a difference, in your opinion? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving ----- MR IRVING: I am trying to get answers from this witness but with ---- MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- the picture of 24 people at dinner sitting in a line seems to me to be rather illustrative of the way in which you are approaching this. . P-104 MR RAMPTON: Particularly since it is only 19 and not 24. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think it says 24 actually. MR RAMPTON: Does it? Oh. MR IRVING: Professor Funke, have you attended large dinner parties where you have not the faintest notion who the rest of the guests are, yes or no? A. Yes, of course. Q. This breakfast invitation with Staglich, who is one of the people on the list, on April 22, is that an indication that I have fitted him in at breakfast and said, "Well, come and see me at breakfast" and that I never saw him again? A. I did not get your point. Q. Judge or not. I mean, we are trying to establish how intense, to use the word, my connections with this judge or ex judge were. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, again this is a good example. Put your case. Are you really saying that you only encountered Staglich ---- MR IRVING: On this one occasion. MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- once at a dinner party when you did not know he was there and on a second occasion when you fitted him in for an interview over breakfast? MR IRVING: Let me put it like this to the witness. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Is that your case? If it is your case, fine. MR IRVING: Professor Funke, will you agree that the evidence . P-105 is that I had only one meaningful encounter with Dr Staglich or Judge Staglich when I fitted him in for a breakfast appointment on this day, on April 22nd, and that you have not seen any evidence to the contrary? MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. It is not a question of whether he has seen any evidence; it is a question of what you say the position is, Mr Irving. There is a difference. Are you saying that there were just those two occasions when you even spoke to the man? MR IRVING: Yes, of course. That is precisely what I am putting to the witness. I appreciate the witness is very tired, but I would like answers. MR JUSTICE GRAY: What is the answer Professor Funke? Only saw him twice? A. I see what I see, and these are the references. MR IRVING: A meaningful encounter? A. And I saw the videos and there was Staglich in Hagenau and this was way before and, of course, there were 80 people in Hagenau or 100, and the literature shows that all the late 80s, Staglich was one of the prominent along with Uda Valendi, so there is a high probability that you know him. Q. From this same consensus of opinion of the social scientists, is that where this probability comes from or is it from any documents that you have seen? A. I do not answer this question. Q. I am sorry? . P-106 MR JUSTICE GRAY: He is not answering the question and I am not going to say he must. MR IRVING: In other words, there is no evidence. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving ---- MR RAMPTON: No, I am sorry. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, Mr Rampton? MR RAMPTON: I am sorry, it just will not do. There is a long entry, for example, for December '89 -- this is not from the red RWE files but from the diary files -- of a letter from Mr Irving to Staglich dated, the diary entry, I am sorry, I do not know the date, it must be the last day of November, in fact, or something like that. MR JUSTICE GRAY: It had better wait re-examination so that we know what the date is. MR RAMPTON: It is villainous, in my submission -- I use that word deliberately -- for Mr Irving to propose that he has had no meaningful contact with Staglich in order to mislead the witness and, perhaps, indirectly the court when I see from his diary a long German letter to Dr Staglich a whole year earlier. MR IRVING: Saying precisely what? MR JUSTICE GRAY: It may be, Mr Rampton, if I may suggest it, that Staglich might be an example of somebody who it would be, in the light of the way Mr Irving puts his case, who might be added as another of the sections in one of these RWE files. . P-107 MR RAMPTON: He might be, it might be that it is difficult. To trawl a haystack like that is quite hard. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, you must be appreciating that I must have you put your case in relation to these witnesses ---- MR IRVING: I thought I had put it more clearly than I did, that I had had no meaningful contacts with Mr Staglich. MR JUSTICE GRAY: You did eventually, yes, and I would like you to do that with the others and not take time, I think, on individual paragraphs of the report, although there may be some important ones. MR IRVING: I guarantee we will finish within 30 minutes from 2 o'clock, I will have finished with all the other numbers, all the other names, and this is the way to do it. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Very well. 2 o'clock. (Luncheon adjournment until 2.00 p.m.)
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.