Irving v. Lipstadt

Appeal

Holocaust Denial on Trial, Statement of Mark David Bateman: Electronic Edition, by Mark David Bateman

Table of Contents
<< EQ >>

F. Krema IV and V

  • Rudolf pages 31-35
  • Van Pelt pages 66-70
  • Judgment J7.63, 7.64, 7.68
  • Libson paragraphs 25-27
  • Bateman paragraphs 36-38
Rudolf's argument is that the term "gas chamber" was used solely in connection with delousing procedures before and during the war and that crematoria IV and V were gas chambers, but for delousing (not homicide). Van Pelt points out that gas chamber ("Gaskarnrner") was widely used in connection with homicidal purposes immediately after   the war (so far as official correspondence was concerned, there had been a general policy not to refer directly to homicidal gas chambers as Gaskammern).
Although Rudolf claims that light-fittings on building plans for crematoria IV and V are marked "ex gesch" (explosion proof), Van Pelt points out that there are no such markings on the Pressac plans, to which Rudolf refers; but that, on the contrary, the light-fittings in question are indicated as "Kavernischen" or 'set In" (which may be compared with the inventory of crematorium II, which lists the lights as "Kugellampen", or convex lights). (It is clear, in any event, that this argument was available to Irving at trial, since he cross examined van Pelt on this point: see, for example Day 8, pages 111-112. Irving had, he said, spent a great deal of time and money with architectural consultants on this case: see Day 2, page 113, 120-121, 252 and Day 8, pages 188-190).