Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day011.22 Last-Modified: 2000/07/20 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Why do you say that from the hinges? A. Because the hinges seem to come forward, the hinges on the right side seem to come forward which means that ---- Q. I must say I cannot really see that. A. Can I draw it? Q. I know what you are saying, but I just do not see it on the photograph. MR IRVING: It depends which side the hinges are, surely.. A. It is very clearly on the top, on the top hinge. There are two hinges, and the top hinge. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I cannot see the top hinge. A. It is right where the roof line is. The roof line. We are looking at document 11? You can see it. It is confirmed, it is confirmed by the next photo. MR RAMPTON: I think, my Lord, your problem is you have not got a good photograph. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Have I not the same as everybody else? MR RAMPTON: No, I have a much better one and so has the witness. Let the Judge see the original. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can I borrow? MR IRVING: My Lord, that door could be mounted either way. It . P-196 entirely depends whether it is mounted inside or outside. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Thank you very much. MR RAMPTON: Professor, taking that, if you like, with Mr Tauber's description, but, if you like, leave Mr Tauber out, to what side of the door does it seem to you that we are looking in this photograph on the left-hand side of the page? A. The photograph on the left hand is the outside of the door. MR JUSTICE GRAY: So if one were looking through the peephole, as it were from where the photographer is, you would see inside the gas chamber? A. That is the -- the peephole is there where people on the outside of the door would have stood. MR RAMPTON: And your view would be somewhat, but not much, of that focal length obstructed by this grille? A. Which is shown in the next picture, where the grille is. Q. Yes. It is in the next picture, not very clear, but it is. That is quite right. If Leichenkeller 1 in crematoria (ii) and (iii) had been intended for use as disinfestation rooms, do you see any reason why Dejaco should have changed the way in which the doors opened from inwards to outwards? A. No. Q. You spoke of the gas type shutters at bunkers 1 and 2, and this is in connection with what you were saying about K4 . P-197 and K5, and you mentioned Dragon's testimony. If you have that little bigger file, not very big file, K2, could you turn to tab 3 and look at one of David Olaire's drawings? A. From No. 3? Q. Yes, probably. You know them better than I. A. Yes. Q. Drawing No. 3, which is said to be a drawing from memory done in 1945 of bunker 2 which has the macabre sign over the door "Disinfektion", and do you see a window he has drawn? A. Yes. Q. What do you take that block on the window to be? A. This is one of these gas type shutters. Q. Does it correspond in size and appearance to what we can see if we go to Auschwitz now, those wooden gas type shutters? A. The wooden gas type shutters which are in the ---- Q. There are photographs in Pressac we need not look at? A. --- in crematorium (i). MR IRVING: My Lord, once again we are now introducing fresh pictures, fresh evidence. Had this been introduced originally, I would have brought photographs showing exactly the same gas type shutters with an entirely harmless use. MR RAMPTON: This drawing has been in Professor van Pelt's report since the very beginning of this case, ever since . P-198 he did it. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, but not perhaps specifically pointing out that window as being ---- MR RAMPTON: Oh, yes. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Oh, it is, is it? Good. MR RAMPTON: There is a whole section on Olaire's drawings and this window, this particular drawing of this window. In fact, there is another one on the next page, outside K5, right at the end of the building behind the shoulder of the SS person in the end of the building. (To the witness): Is that right, Professor? A. Yes. That one -- that is the reason I included that drawing inside the expert report. Q. I understand that. You remember I asked you to look, this morning, at the document which spoke of keeping a plan secret? A. Yes. Q. There should have been attached to that another three pages. A. Yes, I have this. Q. Yes, dated 16th December 1942; it is a report from somebody called Heinrich Kinner who is an SS Untersturmfuhrer. My Lord, before I turn to this document, I will explain the reason I introduce you to the re-examination. The whole of Mr Irving's thesis may or may not be a relevant thesis, but the whole thesis is that . P-199 there were no systematic homicidal gassings or killings, for that matter, at Auschwitz. If this be a genuine document, it is of direct relevance to everything he has put to the Professor in cross-examination. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Right. MR RAMPTON: You will see a translation. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I have not read it, Mr Rampton, so I cannot tell you about that, but that is the way it is put. MR RAMPTON: You will see a translation on the next two pages, Professor. Can we use the translation? MR IRVING: Before using translations, can I just once again object to the introduction of material like this which was supplied to me at 1 p.m. yesterday afternoon? It is now used in re-examination. This is not the way to deduce documents like this. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Where did it come from? MR RAMPTON: I cannot tell, your Lordship, the source; the source wishes to remain anonymous for personal reasons. However, it is not a document that I have ever seen before nor anyone on my side. It even surprised my scholars. I do not know whether Professor van Pelt has seen it, because I have not been talking to him. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, I think you will have to lay the foundation, given that you tell me the provenance of it. MR RAMPTON: Well, as an anonymous provenance. MR JUSTICE GRAY: It may be that he has seen it before, in . P-200 which case, no problem, but otherwise, I think there has to be a limit on what one can introduce. I have not actually got the German, so maybe I am doing it less than justice. MR RAMPTON: I think we have the original German. MR IRVING: If the court is to establish a direct between Himmler and the killings of Jews somewhere. MR RAMPTON: No, that is not why I want to use the document at all. I want to use the document because it demonstrates what was happening to Jews at Auschwitz. That is of direct relevance to the cross-examination. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Given what you tell me about where it comes from, I think one needs to establish that it is on the face of it to be taken to be an authentic document. MR RAMPTON: Mr Irving has had it since yesterday. If he tells me he disputes its authenticity, then I ---- MR JUSTICE GRAY: Are you saying that, Mr Irving? MR IRVING: My Lord, I do not know how long it takes the Defence experts to look at a document and establish its context and find out where it came from, and its pedigree and hybrid. In this particular case, given the importance of the document, I would have no objection at all to it being introduced in three or four weeks time after I have had time to chew it over. To have it sprung on me and to be sand bagged like this with a document of this importance -- unless they are going to rest their entire . P-201 case on this kind of tactic, I think it is very dubious and I think this is a very proper case for your Lordship to say, well, disregarding merits or otherwise of this document, this is not the way to do this; Mr Irving is appearing here in person. He does not have the resources. He does not have anonymous people ---- MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think it has anything to do with resources. I have some sympathy with the fact you really have not had very much time to consider this. MR IRVING: That is the main point. MR JUSTICE GRAY: What I am wondering, Mr Rampton, because obviously we are near the end of Professor van Pelt, do you actually have to put this document in through him? MR RAMPTON: No, I do not. I will use it cross-examination when I get back to Mr Irving. I have already told him that. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Then I think I would prefer you did that. I think there is some force in what Mr Irving says. MR RAMPTON: Our side takes absolutely no blame for this. We have been, as your Lordship may imagine with a case of this high profile, showered with material from all quarters of the world. This came yesterday, no, I am wrong, Wednesday evening out of the blue. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. In a case of this kind, as you say, that is bound to happen, but I do not think it means that anything can come in, you know, without any real . P-202 examination or opportunity for Mr Irving to examine. MR RAMPTON: No. If Mr Irving wants more time to think about it, that is fine. Meanwhile I am not going to say anything about the person we got this from, but what its original source is, which archive it was in. MR JUSTICE GRAY: It has obviously comes from something, as you can see from document 6. MR RAMPTON: Yes, I am told that is a collection of documents I think in Walsall. MR JUSTICE GRAY: There we are, Mr Irving. So far, as it were, I am with you. I am certainly going to give you time to think about it. MR IRVING: Thank you, my Lord. MR RAMPTON: I have finished my re-examination, my Lord. It is 25 to 4. MR JUSTICE GRAY: I have no questions myself, Professor van Pelt. You thank you very much indeed. MR RAMPTON: If it is necessary to release him, my Lord, could he be released? MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. Are you released. I am sure it will not happen, but if it were to happen we will let you know if we would like you to come back. I have no reason to suppose that is going to happen. I was going to possible ask Professor van Pelt about this, but I think it may be better done another way. Would it be possible for either of you, but I think . P-203 the Defendants really are in a better position to, to just give me on perhaps a single piece of paper a description of how Auschwitz divides up between Auschwitz 1 and Auschwitz 2, Birkenhau? I do not really have the basic geography in my mind. I have looked at Professor van Pelt's helpful report. It does not really tackle that, because perhaps because it is so elementary. So would you mind producing a document? MR RAMPTON: He is the expert. I could do a diagram now but it would be wrong. Before he goes, I do not know if he is going until the weekend or beyond. MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is why I think it is better not to do it in evidence. MR RAMPTON: No. Let him produce a plan and we can agree it and use it. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let Mr Irving see it obviously. MR RAMPTON: Of course. I will give him a copy. MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is all basic stuff. MR IRVING: It should very much be an agreed plan. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, ideally. MR RAMPTON: There is one in Leuchter but it is so hopeless that I think we ought not to use it. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Right. Well, I do not think there is any sense at all in recommencing your cross-examination. So we will adjourn now. Is there anything else that needs to be dealt with at this stage? . P-204 MR RAMPTON: I do not think there is. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Monday we are having Professor McDonald. MR IRVING: Professor McDonald, my Lord. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Straight off at 10.30? MR IRVING: Straight off at 10.30. MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is agreed between you both? MR RAMPTON: Yes, that fine. MR JUSTICE GRAY: After that cross-examination resumes. MR RAMPTON: If cross-examination is to continue, I will say it now so that Mr Irving can think about, I am going to go to the meeting between Hitler and Admiral Hurty at Klessheim in April 1943. I am then probably going to go Dresden. Then I am going to go back to Reichskrissallnacht. That is as far as I have got in my planning at the moment. MR JUSTICE GRAY: Good. 10.30 on Monday then. (The witness withdrew) (The Court adjourned until Monday, 31st January 2000). . P-205
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.