Irving v. Lipstadt


Holocaust Denial on Trial, Trial Transcripts, Day 11: Electronic Edition

Pages 71 - 75 of 205

<< 1-5201-205 >>
    The portholes together are obviously the kind of gas tight
 1have a kind of gas tight design that there is a number of
 2different, I do not want really know, my English starts to
 3reach its limit.
 4 Q. [Mr Irving]     Fasteners?
 5 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     Jambs have a kind of seal in it in the way it is designed
 6so it is very difficult. They are very thick. They are
 7like 20 centimetres thick.
 8 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     Have they been tested for cyanide?
 9 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     They have not been tested for cyanide.
10 MR IRVING:     Would you agree that those shutters that have been
11found in the Auschwitz camp are in fact standard German
12air raid shutters supplied by manufacturers to a standard
14 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     First of all, I do not know but it was very clear. What
15we do know is that these are 30 by 40 centimetres and that
16the things ordered were gas tight things of 30 by 40
17centimetres. The only plan I have where they have twelve
18of these holes of 30 by 40 centimetres is actually the
19plans for these rooms at the end of crematoria (iv) and 5,
20which obviously were not air raid shelters because the
21roof construction is too flimsy.
22 Q. [Mr Irving]     Am I right in suggesting that the inference you are
23drawing is that through these apertures the top six
24substances were thrown?
25 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     Yes. We go back in the vestibule. We are now moving to
26room No. 2. The door is open and we see now the stove,

.   P-71

 1and again in the room one of these little openings. Now
 2we are in the room, just entered. Here is the stove. We
 3look now to the outside door, two other 30 by 40
 4centimetres little windows, and we turn around now. We
 5look back at the stove and the door towards the second
 6vestibule, so to speak.
 7 Q. [Mr Irving]     Professor, why would they not have adopted the method they
 8allegedly adopted here and just drilled holes in the roof
 9to drop the substances through?
10 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     The problem, first of all, is you would have to go on the
11roof and this building was all above ground.
12 Q. [Mr Irving]     Yes.
13 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     This method was used already in bunker No. 2 and bunker
14No. 1, where they used basically holes or little windows
15in the side of the building to introduce the Zyklon-B. So
16it was a proven method.
17 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     What is the evidence for that?
18 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     For what?
19 Q. [Mr Justice Gray]     That they injected Zyklon-B through the windows of bunker
20No. 2 and No. 1?
21 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     Eyewitness testimony.
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     That is what I thought.
23 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     I think in my report I quote Dragon on that, for example.
24 MR IRVING:     You quote who?
25 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     Dragon. Now we go out. I just want to ----
26 Q. [Mr Irving]     Am I right in saying that Dragon is one of the principal

.   P-72

 1witnesses for the Soviets when they produced their
 2commission report?
 3 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     I think Dragon came in in April. Dragon was not in the
 4original Soviet report, I think. The Soviets produced a
 5report in February or March and Dragon only appears in
 7 Q. [Mr Irving]     I am referring to USSR 008, the exhibit.
 8 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     Yes. I do not think Dragon was mentioned there, also that
 9he testified for them when that report came out, in that
10report. I could be wrong on that but I do not remember
11Dragon in that context.
12     Now we are back in the vestibule. Go into the
13next room, again, and look at the incineration room. In
14this case we have back-to-back incinerators with the
15firing pit between them, instead of in crematorium 2 the
16firing pits are behind the incinerators.
17     Now I would like to go back to the blueprint.
18In your bundle you have a great magnifications of this one
19showing, for example, the 30 by 40 size of these openings,
20which is very important. There is a problem that 12 of
21these things were ordered, 12 of these gas tight shutters
22were ordered of 30 by 40 centimetres, in early 1943.
23Which were the 12? If you start counting, we have one,
24two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, which means by
25implication that, according to the design, there should
26have been 16 ordered. So how do we explain the difference

.   P-73

 1between 16 and 12? It is very obvious that this room, it
 2was a modification, that is what I call the vestibule,
 3that this was not going to be to be used as gas chamber.
 4It is also actually described that only two of these rooms
 5in the eyewitness reports were actually used as gas
 6chambers and is not. So then we enter with one, two,
 7three, four, five, six and the same arrangement in
 8crematorium 5, which then ends up as 12 gas tight 30 by 40
 9centimetre shutters. That is very important.
10     The second important thing, and Mr Irving has
11already pointed at that, are the drains. This particular
12blueprint is one which exactly shows the drains. That is
13why it was created. So we see that on the existing copy
14we have here a drain, we have a drain there, and these
15drains are connected right there. There is a drain right
16there, and they are connected to a pipe.
17 Q. [Mr Irving]     Can you tell the court what they are connected to on the
18outside? To the main sewage?
19 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     They are connected. This continues. This is not a main
20sewage system there. But this obviously connects back to
22 Q. [Mr Irving]     It does not just go into a hole in the ground, though,
23does it? They do something with it at the other end?
24 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     No. This probably goes on right there all the way, yes.
25 Q. [Mr Irving]     What would environmentalists have to say about kilograms
26of cyanide being dumped in the sewage system, do you

.   P-74

 2 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     I think that virtually all the cyanide would have been
 3cleared out of the building.
 4 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     I think we had this debate before.
 5 MR IRVING:     It is very useful, my Lord, actually to see the
 6drainage system. We only have Professor van Pelt's word
 7for it that all the cyanide would have gone out of the
 8building, none of it would have been washed off down into
 9the sewage system, which is clearly wrong. Neither of us
10is an architect. We agree on that point. But the
11evidence of our eyes on that plan is that they had the
12drainage going into the public sewage system, and 8
13kilograms or however many of cyanide being pumped into
14those rooms to kill people on a lethal scale, and the
15bodies being washed down, the room being washed down
16afterwards, and you are telling us that none of that
17cyanide would have gone into the environment?
18 A. [Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]     I certainly think that you are a little over estimated on
19the eight kilograms, to start with. The gas thing in this
20building could have been very well done in these rooms
21with 200 gramme tins, maybe two 500 grammes, maybe a kilo
22was used, a kilo of cyanide and most of it would have
23evaporated into the air.
24 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     I am sorry, Professor I am going to interrupt
25you. We must stick to the drawings. We are going down a
26side track. Of course you can come back to it, Mr Irving,

.   P-75

<< 1-5201-205 >>