Irving v. Lipstadt


Holocaust Denial on Trial, Trial Transcripts, Day 22: Electronic Edition

Pages 101 - 105 of 207

<< 1-5206-207 >>
    We are going to use common sense here where it says that
 1events and we have back out in the fields, so to speak,
 2Bruns hearing then down the grapevine, as he says a few
 3days later - that is the word he uses. He goes to see
 4Altemeyer, the one who set the mass executions rolling at
 5the lower level, and he says that we have got this order
 6now from on top. The top brass has said that these mass
 7shootings have got to stop. But they are going to carry
 8on anyway, right? Is that the way it was done?
 9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans]     No, I am sorry, let us look at this decode. "The
10guidelines laid down by myself and/or the
11Reichssicherheitshauptamt" could easily say something
12about doing it cautiously or discreetly.
13 MR IRVING:     They could, indeed.
14 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     I really think, Mr Irving, that we have he
15batted this one backwards and forwards enough.
16 MR IRVING:     Indeed, and we have, I think, discovered what the
17harder of the evidence is, and why there are reasons why
18one is entitled to discount, if I may put it this way, my
19Lord, in the mildest possible way, the second part of that
20sentence for we have no supporting evidence.
21 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     No, you say that the first half of it is
22reliable because of the circumstances under which was
23provided then it was eavesdropped upon.
24 MR IRVING:     And the consequences that flowed from it.
25 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     That is reliable but second half is

.   P-101

 1 MR IRVING:     The second part is less reliable, if I may put it
 2like that. Professor Evans, are you suggesting that the
 3letter of de Bois was in front of me at any time when
 4I wrote any of my books?
 5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans]     Let me come back and say that the point I am making is
 6that you have misrepresented even the first part of the
 7order on which you rely.
 8 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     We have moved on.
 9 MR IRVING:     I am looking at paragraph 6 of page 359.
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans]     Yes, on your website.
11 Q. [Mr Irving]     Yes. Are you suggesting that at any time that the actual
12letter has been in front of me?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans]     Yes. Presumably that is why you mention it in the
15 Q. [Mr Irving]     I refer to it on the website ----
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans]     Yes.
17 Q. [Mr Irving]     --- to draw people's attention to it?
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans]     Yes.
19 Q. [Mr Irving]     Do you know where the letter is now?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans]     I would imagine ----
21 Q. [Mr Irving]     Is it in the Institute of History in Munich?
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     The question is whether you had it in your
23possession, is it not, Mr Irving, really?
24 MR IRVING:     Yes.
25 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     Well, did you or did you not?
26 MR IRVING:     The answer is not, but I cannot lead evidence as a

.   P-102

 2 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     Of course you can. You can say: Were you
 3aware, Professor Evans, that I never actually had this
 4letter from Mrs de Bois?
 5 MR IRVING:     Yes. Can I put it this way? Professor Evans, in
 6writing in line 4, "However, he makes no mention of the
 7letter's contents", were you aware at the time you wrote
 8this in your report that I have never had the letter in my
 9hands in my life?
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans]     On this report I quote you as saying that there was this
11letter and you say it was on your website, and I assumed
12because you were referring to it and that it is about
13killings in Riga that you must have known what was in,
14otherwise why would you refer to it?
15 Q. [Mr Irving]     Is it not just stated on the website that in fact there
16are some interesting documents if people who want to
17follow it up may wish to go and have a look at, and one of
18them is the de Bois letter?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans]     How would you know it was interesting if you have not seen
21 Q. [Mr Irving]     Because I am told by this correspondence. Could that be
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     Is your case, Mr Irving, because you must put
24it clearly and straightforwardly, that you were unaware of
25what Mrs Schultz de Bois said in this letter?
26 MR IRVING:     Yes, and your Lordship will have heard from the

.   P-103

 1cross-examination over the previous ten minutes that I do
 2not attach very great importance to the remarks by
 4 MR JUSTICE GRAY:     That is a different matter.
 5 MR IRVING:     But that the letter was not in front of me at any
 6material time anyway.
 7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans]     If you think it was an important piece of evidence,
 8Mr Irving, and you did not have it, why did you not make
 9attempts to obtain it?
10 Q. [Mr Irving]     So, winding up this chapter on page 362, once again you
11have allowed yourself to dip into the dictionary of
12insult. You say that I am totally discredited a few
13months earlier; the document proved to be too useful to be
14discard altogether; a more egregious institute,
15manufactured manipulated, doctored, untenable, all the
16words come out?
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans]     Yes.
18 Q. [Mr Irving]     Are you prepared to withdraw any of those on the basis of
19what you have been saying this morning?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans]     Absolutely not, Mr Irving. The point is you acknowledge,
21as I say on pages 360 to 361, concerning the -- what it is
22about is your persistent claim that Hitler told Himmler to
23make the phone call to Heydrich attempting to stop the
24killing of the transport of Jews from Berlin to Riga, and
25you produced on your website on 17th May 1998 a document
26which is now in the Himmler appointments diary edition,

.   P-104

 1showing that Himmler only met Hitler after he phoned
 2Heydrich; and therefore that what you then call your
 3original theory, which in fact was presented as a matter
 4of incontrovertible fact that Hitler had told Himmler to
 5tell Heydrich to get the shootings stopped, was wrong.
 6Yet, even though you have done that in May 1998, it is too
 7nice a document for you really to let go of, so you post
 8another document on the website on 31st August 1998 in
 9which you argue that on 30th November Hitler
10had, "demonstrably ordered that the Berlin Jews were not
11to be killed", whereas you knew that to be wrong. That,
12to my mind, is an egregious instance of a completely
13unscrupulous use of a manipulated source.
14 Q. [Mr Irving]     Are you prepared to accept that historians or scholars or
15writers sometimes have differing opinions on the
16interpretation of the identical sets of documents, and
17that one scholar or historian will have one interpretation
18because of his own particular mind set, and the other
19historian will have perhaps better sources, he will be
20familiar with the CSDIC reports which you yourself have
21admittedly totally unfamiliar with; he will have worked
22for many weeks months in the police decodes with which you
23are also totally unfamiliar, and that this entitles to him
24to reach conclusions on the quality of evidence which you
25are not entitled to reach?

.   P-105

<< 1-5206-207 >>