Holocaust Denial on Trial, Trial Transcripts, Day 20: Electronic Edition
Pages 1 - 215 of 215
1IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
1996 I. No. 113
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
2Royal Courts of Justice
4 Tuesday, 15th February 2000
7MR JUSTICE GRAY
9B E T W E E N: DAVID JOHN CAWDELL IRVING
11(1) PENGUIN BOOKS LIMITED
12(2) DEBORAH E. LIPSTADT
14The Claimant appeared in person
15MR RICHARD RAMPTON Q.C. (instructed by Messrs Davenport Lyons and Mishcon de Reya) appeared on behalf of the First and
17MISS HEATHER ROGERS (instructed by Davenport Lyons) appeared on behalf of the First Defendant Penguin Books Limited
18MR ANTHONY JULIUS (of Mishcon de Reya) appeared on behalf of
19the Second Defendant Deborah Lipstadt
21(Transcribed from the stenographic notes of Harry Counsell
&Company, Clifford's Inn, Fetter Lane, London EC4
23(This transcript is not to be reproduced without the written permission of Harry Counsell &Company)
25 PROCEEDINGS - DAY TWENTY
1 <Day 20 Tuesday, 15th February 2000.
2 < Professor Evans, recalled.
3< Cross-Examined by Mr Irving, continued.
4 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving?
5 MR IRVING: May it please the court. I have placed in your
6Lordship's bundle F a continuation of about 20 or 30
7pages, and I have also provided your Lordship, as you have
8just noticed, with a copy of Nuremberg to which we were
9referring to yesterday.
10 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I see that. Thank you.
11 MR IRVING: And if we can just take up one or two of the points
12your Lordship requested yesterday? Your Lordship
13requested a copy of what the pull-down menu says. That is
14in the bundle which I have just given you, bundle F. It
15is at the back of bundle F which your Lordship was using
17 MR JUSTICE GRAY: The pull-down menu, where do I find that?
18 MR IRVING: If you go to page 93 of bundle F, my Lord, it
19should be -- unless the numbering has gone wrong.
20 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I had this in a different form yesterday, did
21I not, from Mr Rampton?
22 MR IRVING: Well, I did not have it yesterday from Mr Rampton.
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Did you not? Well, I got something.
24 MR IRVING: It is difficult to obtain, but that is the works of
25it, in what is called HTML.
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Having looked through it, whilst we are on
1this, it did appear to me that whatever their titles may
2be, they are mostly Jewish organisations of one kind or
4 MR IRVING: My Lord, that is not correct. If you look at the
5list, there are 16 items, of which seven are not, if I can
6put it like that.
7 MR RAMPTON: I do not think we have 16.
8 MR IRVING: That is precisely why your Lordship should be
9looking at my pull-down menu rather than the one given to
10you. Shall I read through them?
11 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think that would serve any
12particularly useful purpose.
13 MR IRVING: No. But your Lordship will notice the Australian
14Government, the Centre for Democratic Renewal, the
15Coalition for Human Dignity, the German Government.
16 MR RAMPTON: There are only two I think that are not Jewish, my
18 MR IRVING: Searchlight ----
19 MR RAMPTON: Two National Governments.
20 MR IRVING: Well, Mr Rampton, if you would just allow me to
21finish reading out those that are not Jewish that are on
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY: You read out the ones you say are not Jewish.
24 MR IRVING: I will start again. Australian Government, Centre
25for Democratic Renewal.
26 MR RAMPTON: That is Jewish.
1 MR IRVING: I beg your pardon?
2 MR RAMPTON: It is Jewish.
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let him read them, Mr Rampton, then we can
4debate it further, if needs be.
5 MR IRVING: Coalition for Human Dignity, the German Government,
6Searchlight, and Surf Watch Internet Censorship.
7 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes.
8 MR IRVING: Each of those, if you would click on that, you
9would come to a subindex, my Lord, which has the actual
10documents which qualified for inclusion in the list of
11enemies of free speech.
12 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. I think this is in a way dicing with
13words because I have actually got the indices supplied
14yesterday. It appears to me, without knowing in detail
15what the individual items on the indices are, that really
16all of these organizations, there is a great deal of
17interplay, put it like that, between these organizations
18and what you would, perhaps, describe as the Jewish
19lobby. Is that not fair?
20 MR IRVING: In some of the documents quite clearly there is, in
21some of the documents listed on the index, and, obviously,
22I then have to make the point that this is a website which
23has been set up in response to the attack on me.
24 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I follow.
25 MR IRVING: So, clearly, this is not a global attempt to
26address all the world enemies of free speech when,
1undoubtedly, you bring in the Chinese Government and all
2sorts of other ghastly organizations, but these are the
3bodies that have impinged on my professional career. That
4is why they figure on my personal list of traditional
5enemies of free speech.
6 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I follow that. I think I interrupted
7Mr Rampton. Did you want to add anything?
8 MR RAMPTON: I was just going to say, Mr Irving has identified
9as being not Jewish I think four that, in fact, are
10Jewish. The only two that are not that we can tell are
11the Australian and the German governments.
12 MR IRVING: Perhaps you should say which of the four that you
13consider are Jewish.
14 MR RAMPTON: All the rest are Jewish.
15 MR IRVING: Centre for Democratic Renewal?
16 MR RAMPTON: Yes.
17 MR IRVING: A Jewish body?
18 MR RAMPTON: Yes -- so I am told.
19 MR JUSTICE GRAY: We may or may not come back to that at some
20later stage. Let us leave it for the moment. I cannot
21actually find my bundle F.
22 MR IRVING: I asked your clerk, my Lord, this morning to put
23the fresh documents into it.
24 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I then think I said not for the time being
25until I know that is what everybody thinks is right.
26 MR IRVING: Your Lordship will need bundle F9, in fact.
1 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not seem to have F. Yes. So I put this
2in the back?
3 MR IRVING: That is correct, my Lord. Mr Rampton's
4intervention, of course, has highlighted the problem that
5I face in view of the fact that the representative of the
6Centre for Democratic Renewal and the Coalition for Human
7Dignity who gave statements relied which have been relied
8upon by Professor Levin, those statements are not sworn.
9They are just put in by way of evidence. They are relied
10on by Professor Levin. Professor Levin is not going to
11give oral evidence, so I cannot test the validity of any
12of the statements that Mr Rampton has made or any of the
13statements these witnesses have made.
14 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Professor Levin, who is not coming to give
15evidence, I had understood (and perhaps I am wrong about
16this and perhaps we can clarify now) that his report is no
17longer relied on.
18 MR RAMPTON: No, that is not right. There is a Civil Evidence
20 MR JUSTICE GRAY: For an expert?
21 MR RAMPTON: Yes, in respect of that. What weight it has is
22another question, but it has to be a 1968 Act Notice
23because this case was started before the 1995 Act came
24into force. So there is a Civil Evidence Act statement in
25respect of Professor Levin.
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is highly unusual to have an expert's
1report subject to the Civil Evidence Act.
2 MR RAMPTON: It may be unusual but ----
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not know whether I have ever heard of it
5 MR RAMPTON: --- there is nothing the matter with it in
7 MR JUSTICE GRAY: That may be right.
8 MR IRVING: It does place me at a serious disadvantage, of
10 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I know. Actually, I thought the disadvantage
11was less great than it now appears to be because I had
12wrongly taken it (and I am glad I have now discovered my
13error) that the Defendants were not any longer relying on
14Levin and Eatwell.
15 MR RAMPTON: If I can say this, quite frankly, I do not myself
16believe I need to depend very heavily on Professor Levin
17anyway for ----
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think that is probably right.
19 MR RAMPTON: --- quite different reasons. The factual
20witnesses probably, so far as the United States and Canada
21are concerned, are more important.
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. To help you with your difficulty,
23Mr Irving, can I suggest this, that when you come to be
24cross-examined, as you will be I think on ----
25 MR IRVING: Next week sometime.
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- the sort of rogues' gallery point, if
1I can rudely call it that, namely your associating with
3 MR IRVING: Guilt by association.
4 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, well, that is the way you put it. I am
5not sure it is as simple as that.
6 MR IRVING: It is the way Morland J would put it probably too.
7 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, you might then take the opportunity,
8either in cross-examination or perhaps re-examining
9yourself, to make the points you are wanting to make in
10reference to Professor Levin or Dr Levin's report.
11 MR IRVING: I was proposing to make it by way of submission.
12 MR JUSTICE GRAY: All right. You can do it that way as well or
14 MR IRVING: But is a rather unfortunate halfway house that he
15is going to partly rely on Mr Levin's report, and we have
16no way of knowing which part he is relying on and which
17part he is not. Either he should or he should not, in my
18view, my Lord, and your Lordship may wish to make a ruling
20 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, you may want to make the application
21that it is not legitimate for a party to use the Civil
22Evidence Act machinery to avoid having the expert witness
23in question called and cross-examined.
24 MR IRVING: Now that we are under the CPR, as we are, I think
25it should be either or.
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well I am not going to that now because
1Professor Evans is, no doubt, wanting to get on with his
2evidence, but if you want to make that application, feel
3free to do so. But, as I say, I think it is unusual.
4Yes, now, are we ready to resume?
5 MR IRVING: One more minor matter, your Lordship asked to see
6the index of the Hitler's War books, the new version, and
7that also appended as -- it is the very last page of what
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: When you say the "new" version, the one that
10is about to come out?
11 MR IRVING: No, this was an index we commissioned for the 1991
12edition, in other words, it is a fuller index for 1991.
13 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I see.
14 MR IRVING: It has now been superceded because we are about to
15do a completely updated edition.
16 MR JUSTICE GRAY: So this is just the extract dealing with...
17 MR IRVING: That, I presume, is the page that your Lordship was
19 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, you are quite right.
20 MR IRVING: Also, finally, my Lord, if you look two items back
21from that, your Lordship will find The Spectator.
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Is this "as many as"?
23 MR IRVING: "As many as", yes, my Lord. Your Lordship will see
24that I was absolutely correct; either Professor Eatwell or
25Professor Levin or both omitted the word which completely
26reversed the meaning.
1 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. Professor Evans, this is a point at
2which I think you ought to join in, if I can put it like
3that. I think, Mr Irving, the point he made yesterday is
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is right, yes, indeed.
6 MR IRVING: Is it right to say that I, therefore, did not
7double the death roll by means of the comparison, in
8fact? I adhered to a death roll in Hamburg of up to or
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is right, yes.
11 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Not, I think, your error, but Professor
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It looks like it, my Lord.
14 MR IRVING: My Lord, the problem is Professor Evans' report has
15turned out to be a bit of a dummy minefield. I am
16advancing into it, but very gingerly, because I do not
17know where the real mines are and where the dummies are
18like that one, and this is what is delaying us.
19 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am not sure I accept any of that, but let
20us move on anyway. We have got to about 100?
21 MR IRVING: 128, my Lord, is where I propose to continue, my
22Lord. I am on 128 at paragraph 4, Professor Evans.
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY: You are still on the topic of Holocaust
24denial, are you not?
25 MR IRVING: We are, my Lord, and we are dealing just briefly
26with the experiment made with the gas vans. Your Lordship
1was concerned that I described this as an experiment in
2view of the large numbers. So Professor Evans has quoted
3me as saying, "So I accept that this kind of experiment
4was made on a very limited scale". Do you agree that
5there was, in fact, an experiment, Professor Evans, the
6use of the gas vans for a limited period of months on the
7Eastern Front and elsewhere?
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You go on to say: "But, I don't accept that the gas
9chambers existed, and this is well known. I've seen no
10evidence at all that gas chambers existed". So what I am
11saying there in that quotation is that you say that
12gassing took place on a very limited scale, experimental
13scale, but, as you say, it was rapidly abandoned as being
14a totally inefficient way of killing people.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes.
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I understand that during the trial you have now admitted
17that that was wrong, that it was, that gassing was not
18merely used on a limited experimental scale.
19 Q. [Mr Irving] You are overlooking the use of loaded words like
20"conceded" and "admitted". Do you accept that,
21therefore, the gas vans were used as an experimental basis
22for killing, and that they were abandoned then for
23whatever reason afterwards?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I do not. They were used for killing on a large
25scale, as I think----
26 Q. [Mr Irving] Did they continue using them throughout the war or did
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] There was a transition to mainly using gas chambers, but
3they were used on far more than a limited scale, as
4I believe you yourself have said in the course of this
6 Q. [Mr Irving] Looking purely at the word "experimental" at this point,
7you have agreed that Professor Burrin, the Swiss Professor
8is something of an expert. He is not an extremist or what
9you call a Holocaust denier.
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is so, yes.
11 Q. [Mr Irving] I just put to you one sentence from his standard work on
12this. This is on page 112 of Philip Burrin: "The gas
13truck had been an improvised response to a situation no
14one had foreseen or imagined". Would you agree with that?
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I would have to see the whole passage. I find it
16difficult to comment simply on a single sentence taken out
17of that. In any case, the context of this section of my
18report is concerned with your denial that gas chambers
19existed, that gas chambers were used. That is the
21 Q. [Mr Irving] Before we move on, just a simple answer. You do accept
22therefore that the gas vans were used and then abandoned
23at some stage as a means of killing?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, yes. In the end of course the gas chambers were
25abandoned as a means of killing when they had fulfilled
26their purpose. I do not accept----
1 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I just want to see where we are
3 MR IRVING: That was the end of that.
4 MR JUSTICE GRAY: At an earlier stage in this case -- correct
5me if I am recollecting wrongly -- you were presented
6with a document which indicated that at Chelmno 97,000
7Jews were killed in five weeks.
8 MR RAMPTON: Five months, my Lord.
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I agree you did not accept that figure was
10correct, but I believe you did accept in terms that the
11gas vans were not used on a solely experimental basis but
12were used for the systematic killing of substantial
13numbers of Jews.
14 MR IRVING: They were. I do not agree that they were used only
15at Chelmno. They were certainly used once at Chelmno
16because there was an explosion there, but there is no
17evidence they were used only there.
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I did not say "only there". I am using that
19as an illustration of what I had understood you to have
20accepted earlier in this case.
21 MR IRVING: I am trying to justify the use of the word
22"experimental" by the virtue of the fact that other
23historians of reputation have also described this as being
24an interim phase and it was abandoned, as it proved not to
25be a very feasible or practical way of doing things.
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: That may be rather a different thing from
1saying it is experimental, but there we are.
2 MR IRVING: I think that you had fastened on the word
3"experimental" as being something repugnant in this
4particular connection and I can appreciate that, but I was
5just trying to establish what was meant by the word
7 Can we now proceed to paragraph 6 on the same
8page 128, where we are talking about the subsequent Polish
9tests which attempted to replicate the Leuchter tests.
10You say that I allege that there was a refusal of the
11authorities to call for site examinations and that
12forensic tests were carried out by the Poles, but the
13results were suppressed". Is that correct in the last
14four lines on page 128?
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
16 Q. [Mr Irving] Are you suggesting that I have got it wrong somehow?
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] In this paragraph I am trying to sum up your views as
18succinctly as I can.
19 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you accept that the Poles did carry out tests and
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I do not. I have to say I am not an expert on
22Auschwitz and there has been a separate, as I call
23attention to at the top of the next page 130, expert
24witness report by Professor van Pelt, who is an expert on
25Auschwitz, who goes into this in very great detail.
26 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes. So we will not dwell very long on this, but would
1you go to page 56 of the little bundle, which is the first
2page of the Polish report I am referring to. We are going
3to look at two dates on it.
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] It is a Polish document. I am told that the date at the
6top in Polish means 24th September 1990, and that is the
7date that the report was submitted by this Polish
8Institute to the museum at Auschwitz, as you can see in
9the address line on the top right quarter. If you look in
10the rubber stamp box, can you see a date on the final
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Indeed, 11.10.1990.
13 Q. [Mr Irving] Did the Polish State authority, the Auschwitz authorities,
14at any time thereafter publish that report, or did it sit
15in their safe for some months and years?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am not an expert on this subject. I cannot really
17comment. I think probably, if one consulted Professor van
18Pelt's report, one would be able to clear that up.
19 Q. [Mr Irving] You spent a whole page -- again on the foot of page 129
20you say that Irving went on to claim that Dr Piper, in
21other words the Auschwitz State Museum, had suppressed the
22fact and filed the report away.
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, I say that.
24 Q. [Mr Irving] You disqualify the Leuchter report in your view. I have
25to ask you these questions because it is said that I have
26relied on the Leuchter report and that this was an
1unjustifiable act of a responsible historian.
2 MR JUSTICE GRAY: You do not have to ask these questions. I
3have already indicated that on Auschwitz -- I know it is
4referred to in Professor Evans' report -- it does not
5appear to me that, if I may respectfully say so, Professor
6Evans' opinions really bulk very large. I think that is
7really Professor van Pelt. So do not feel you have to ask
9 MR IRVING: I would like to ask him purely then about one
10matter. Is it right that you suggest that the report was
11not admitted as evidence at the Toronto trial, and that
12this in some way discredits the report?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I cannot see that in my report. I say it was
14discredited at the Zundel trial in 1988. That is my
15understanding, having read some of the transcripts of the
17 Q. [Mr Irving] Was the report actually admitted as evidence of the Zundel
19 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think we know it was, do we not? We can
21 MR IRVING: The point that I am trying to make, my Lord, is
22that I have had considerable dealings overnight with the
23Canadian solicitors involved in that action who confirmed
24to me -- I just put the essential three lines of their
25letter to you. The solicitor Barbara Kulaska has written
26to me saying that the Leuchter report itself was not filed
1as an exhibit for the sole reason that such engineering
2reports are not generally admissible under Canadian rules
3of evidence unless the other side consents.
4 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I treat that with a certain amount of
5scepticism. The evidence up to now is that it was not
6admitted in evidence at the Zundel trial because it was
7not accepted that Leuchter was suitably qualified as an
9 MR IRVING: My Lord, with the utmost respect, I have to say
10that I have a very large bundle here now which contains
11the actual transcript on that matter between the
12prosecution and the defence and the court in Toronto.
13 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Shall we put that on one side? I do not
14suppose Mr Rampton has had a chance to look at what you
15are referring to me at the moment. At any rate, let us
16got on with Professor Evans. I am not shutting you out
17from adducing that evidence.
18 MR IRVING: I am prepared to make this transcript available to
19the Defence in this matter.
20 MR RAMPTON: I have the transcript. I used it in
21cross-examination of Mr Irving. It is perfectly clear the
22judge would not admit Mr Leuchter as an expert.
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY: What you have not seen is what Mr Irving is
24relying on from the Canadian lawyers giving an entirely
25different reason why.
26 MR RAMPTON: I have seen it. There is a one page letter
1I think in this new bundle.
2 MR JUSTICE GRAY: What I am suggesting is that Mr Irving
3follows this up later.
4 MR RAMPTON: Yes, I agree. I attach no weight to what the
5lawyer says at all.
6 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Rather than now.
7 MR IRVING: Whether Mr Rampton attaches weight to it or not is
8neither here nor there. In that case I shall put it to
9your Lordship by way of submission later on.
10 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Would you mind.
11 MR IRVING: At page 130 line 8 you say that my arguments derive
12from previous work from well-known Holocaust deniers, and
13then you mention some.
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] Professor Faurisson. . Are you familiar with the
16expertise of Germar Rudolf?
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I mention Faurisson there. I do not mention Rudolf there.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] I can make this very brief. Can you accept that there are
19a number of other documentary bases on which I base my
20arguments, for example the air photographs as interpreted
21by a man called John Ball?
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is clear I think that in the documents that I cite you
23do rely heavily upon Faurisson, whose work you did read in
24the late 1980s, as you recall in your diary.
25 Q. [Mr Irving] Which works of Professor Faurisson do you allege that
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It was an article in your diary entry of 26th July 1986.
2You wrote "Faurisson's paper on Auschwitz set me thinking
3very hard." I presume that is an article that he
4published or a paper that he gave to you.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] Are you suggesting that he is my only source, the only
6basis of my arguments that I do not rely----
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I am not. I give that as an example there.
8 Q. [Mr Irving] When is set thinking very hard, as no doubt you have also
9been occasionally made to think very hard, you then start
10looking at other sources to see how one should finally
11align one's own political or scientific or historical
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. I say here that it derives from previous work by
14well-known Holocaust deniers such as Faurisson.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] Would you call Professor Hinsley a well-known Holocaust
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think that these arguments, the arguments are
18derived -- you misuse Professor Hinsley's material in your
20 Q. [Mr Irving] But you have here referred of course only to Professor
21Faurisson. Does that imply that he was my only source of
22any change of mind or new direction of my thinking that
23I may have adopted?
24 MR JUSTICE GRAY: "Such as" are the words used.
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] "Such as", yes. You were familiar with the brochure, Did
266 million really die, by Richard Verul of the National
1Front published under the pseudonym of Richard Harwood.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] You are saying I am very familiar with it. When did
3I become familiar with it?
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You note in 1988 that you said in the Zundel trial in the
5evidence you gave over 90 per cent of the brochure is
7 Q. [Mr Irving] Have you also read in the diary that the Verul report was
8given to me to read one day before I gave evidence, and
9that I looked at it the same as you look at documents here
10in order to be able to form an opinion of it?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am saying you read it, Mr Irving.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes, but are you suggesting that I thought it out and read
13it and then used it as a basis for my arguments?
14 MR JUSTICE GRAY: He cannot possibly answer that, can he?
15 MR IRVING: I mean, the allegation, the suggestion, the
16imputation, from the witness is that I have read it and
17used it as a source when, in fact, I read it as an expert
18witness has to read documents that are put to him.
19 MR JUSTICE GRAY: You just said you were familiar with it,
21 MR IRVING: I had sufficient familiarity with it on the basis
22of 24 hours study in order to be able answer questions as
23an expert witness. This is the point I wish to put to
24him. If the witness makes a statement like that, which is
25intended to create an impression, then I am surely
26entitled to rectify the impression.
1 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, you cannot ask him questions to which
2he obviously cannot possibly know the answer.
3 MR IRVING: My Lord, he can because the reference to this
4particular report is in my diaries which he has just
5quoted from and it makes quite plain that the Verul(?)
6Report was submitted to me. It was put to me by the
7Defence counsel to read in order that I could answer
8questions on it when I came into the box.
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, what is the answer?
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am not sure what the question was, my Lord.
11 MR IRVING: Are you familiar with, have you read my diary and
12do you accept that, in fact, the Verul report was put to
13me purely for that purpose?
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is what your diary says. I am familiar with the
15diary entry. The fact is that you read the report and you
16judged it 90 per cent correct. Similarly, you are
17familiar with the work of another Holocaust denier,
18Dr Wilhelm Steglisch which you have commented on on a
19number of occasions.
20 Q. [Mr Irving] Notwithstanding your desire to move on to other matters,
21can we deal with one thing at a time and say that a number
22of documents have been put to you by me in the last few
23days, is that is right?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is right.
25 Q. [Mr Irving] Would you find it repugnant if people said you have
26relied on these documents that I have put to you and that
1you have read these Irving documents and that,
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, please, come on. It is just
4becoming unhelpful and argumentative. Let us get on to
5what matters. I say that for, I should think, the 12th
7 MR IRVING: 132, Professor, page 132, line 4. I am afraid
8I have to demolish this witness in detail, my Lord. It is
9the only way I can do it.
10 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I am sorry, I am intervening more
11than I want to, but I have told you before that on
12Auschwitz I do not regard Professor Evans as being, if
13I may say so, authoritative. Therefore, you do not have
14to ask interminable questions about Auschwitz. What
15matters starts at about page 150, as I have said many
17 MR IRVING: If I am accused of putting things into documents
18which are not in the documents, this goes to the root of
19one of the principal libels on my name, my Lord. That is
20in line 4. That is why I will ask this witness now to go
21to page 57 of the bundle and see the document to which I
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Page 54.
24 MR IRVING: Page 57. Is this an invoice for the supply of
25Zyklon-B to Auschwitz concentration camp?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, it appears to be.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you in your report say: "It makes no mention at all of
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, I do, yes.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] Would you now look at line 5 of the invoice, the typed
5portion? Do you agree that it says: "This material was
6sent to Auschwitz Abteilung, Entwesung und" ----
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. My mistake, Mr Irving.
8 Q. [Mr Irving] This is your mistake?
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
10 Q. [Mr Irving] So, in other words, I did not fake and I did not distort
11and I did not insert and I did not manipulate on that
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Let me read the paragraph. "The plates", we are still on
14the plates of your Nuremberg book, and the caption says:
15"Tonnes of Zyclon-B pellets, containing poisonous
16hydrogen cyanide, are shipped by the Degesch factory to
17the Pest Control division of Auschwitz and other camps
18including Oraneinburg in 1944". The delivery note, though,
19only concerns Auschwitz. I agree I overlooked the mention
20of the pest control in Auschwitz, but it does not affect
21the other camps.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] It does not affects the other camp? But that is not the
23point I am making here. It is just that once again I have
24been accused of distorting and manipulating and you have
25now admitted that you are wrong?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, no ----
1 Q. [Mr Irving] Just as on the Spectator letter and other things.
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] --- because you are illustrating, you have an illustration
3there of a note to Auschwitz and you are making claims on
4the basis of it about other camps.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] I am not going to put to you all the other invoices which
6I have in the file which show deliveries to the other
7camps which makes the point. But the point I am making
8here, will you accept that, is purely that you wrongly
9accused me of mistranslating or distorting a document?
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think I wrongly -- and I admit I am wrong on that
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Thank you.
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have already admitted that.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] Footnote 60, very briefly, you reference there the
15Gerstein report. Will you now accept that the Gerstein
16report has been totally discredited by the people you call
17the Holocaust deniers because of the figures and ludicrous
18facts it contains?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I will not, no. As I have said, I am not an expert on
20this subject, but it is a report that is -- I will not
21accept simply on your word, that it has been discredited.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] The next footnote, No. 61, you refer to an interview
23between me and Radio Ulster, but, unfortunately, is not
24produced in any of the bundle of documents, so it is
25difficult for me to judge how accurate this is.
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can you help about that, Professor Evans?
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I cannot, I am afraid.
2 Q. [Mr Justice Gray] Do you know where the transcript is?
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am unable to locate it, but we can quite well dispense
4with that. There are plenty of other statements here on
5which we can rely, as in the very next sentence: "There
6were no gas chambers in Auschwitz" as you said on 5th
8 MR IRVING: Are you familiar with the distinction between
9Auschwitz and Birkenhau?
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think we have been through this in this case, Mr Irving,
11and that ----
12 Q. [Mr Irving] No, but I am asking you. Are you familiar ----
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is generally understood that when one talks about
14Auschwitz, one talks about the whole complex of all the
15various camps inside covered by the name of Auschwitz.
16When one talks about Birkenhau, that includes Birkenhau.
17 Q. [Mr Irving] Have you been to Auschwitz?
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have not been to Auschwitz.
19 Q. [Mr Irving] So I cannot ask you and there is no point in my asking you
20questions about that. You refer on page 133 to the shower
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am not, really not an expert on this. What I am trying
23to do here is to assemble evidence that you have denied
24that there are gas chambers, there were gas chambers
26 Q. [Mr Irving] I am placed at a disadvantage and I appreciate his
1Lordship's impatience with this procedure, but you have
2rambled on for pages in your report about Auschwitz and
3included numerous false statements and I am trying to
4proceed at speed, but every time I ask you you say you are
5not an expert on this.
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] What I am trying to do here is to include and present
7numerous statements of yours to the effect that gas
8chambers were not used, did not exist, and so on, at
9Auschwitz and elsewhere. I presented a substantial number
10of these statements here. I do not really propose to read
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, I am afraid you will have to do what I ask under
13cross-examination. One of them is look at line 1 at page
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
16 Q. [Mr Irving] "On 8th November 1990 he", that is Irving, "repeated the
17same claim to an audience in Toronto: 'The gas chambers
18that are shown to the tourists in Auschwitz are fakes'."
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
20 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you now agree that this is true?
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is true that you said that.
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Do we have to go through this again? You say
23fake, Mr Rampton says reconstruction. I have the point.
24 MR IRVING: This is my way of now introducing a cardinal
25document which is on pages 59 and 60, my Lord, on which
26I shall very definitely rely. It is a visit by a very
1well-known French news magazine called L'Expresse on the
2anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz. On page 60
3there is the admission that everything in it is fake, and
4they do not know how to tell the tourists this.
5 MR RAMPTON: I really do not know where this is going. This
6was not put to Professor van Pelt who made it perfectly
7clear that the single gas chamber at Auschwitz (i),
8Sturmlager, is a post-war reconstruction and he
10 MR IRVING: It is a postwar reconstruction.
11 MR RAMPTON: He explained how it had been done and that the
12beginning and the end of that story. How Professor Evans
13is expected to deal with this, I do not know.
14 MR JUSTICE GRAY: The difficulty, as you know, is that one does
15have the section on Auschwitz. That is the problem.
16 MR RAMPTON: I know, but, as your Lordship knows, as I have
17shown your Lordship already and Mr Irving has been in
18court, again and again Mr Irving has referred to gas
19chambers in the plural, not just at Auschwitz but
21 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I just have never from the word go
22understood the point that you make about these so-called
23fake gas chambers.
24 MR RAMPTON: There are two points, my Lord. First of all,
25Mr Rampton calls it a "reconstruction", I call it a
26"fake". The second point is if I am accused of having a
1criminal conviction in Germany, which is used against me
2by the Defence, I am entitled to point out the criminal
3conviction is for saying precisely this sentence and it
4turns out to be true.
5 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am not remotely interested in your criminal
6conviction in Germany. I simply am not.
7 MR IRVING: I am indebted to your Lordship for saying that
8because the Defence has repeatedly referred to it ----
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am now going to rule that you get on.
10Please, Mr Irving, this is enough about Auschwitz. I just
11do not think that there is anything to be gained by any
12further cross-examination on Auschwitz. You have spent a
13long time on it.
14 MR IRVING: Just about Auschwitz or about the Final Solution,
16 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am not stopping you on the Final Solution.
17 MR IRVING: Page 134. "Systematic nature of the
18extermination". You take exception to my suggestion that
19Jews were the victims of a large number of rather
20run-of-the-mill criminal elements, and I mention there the
21Latvians, Lithuanians and Estonians?
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] And Austrians.
23 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes.
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] And Germans.
25 Q. [Mr Irving] Are you familiar with the report by Jan Karski who was one
26of the first people to report on the Final Solution?
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Not -- I am not, no.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] In that case I cannot ask you about it. On page 135,
3paragraph 3: "Irving's view that these local initiatives
4were excusable", is the word "excusable" excusable in this
5context? Have I ever tried to excuse what the Germans are
6doing to the Jews?
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, let me read what you told the press conference in
8Australia in 1986 which is the quote beginning halfway
9down the quote on the previous page where you say, you are
10questioning whether the killing of Jews "was a tragedy
11ordered and organized on the very highest German state
12level, namely by Hitler himself. Because if my hypothesis
13is correct, it means that all these Jews - and it may be
14any figure, I don't look at the figure concerned - if my
15hypothesis is correct, it indicates that the Jews were the
16victims of a large number of rather run-of-the-mill
17criminal elements which exist in Central Europe. Not just
18Germans, but Austrians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians,
19feeding on the endemic antisemitism of the era and
20encouraged by the brutalization which war brought about
21anyway. These people had seen the bombing raids begin.
22They'd probably lost women, wives and children in the
23bombing raids. And they wanted to take revenge on
24someone. So when Hitler ordered the expulsion, as he did
25- there's no doubt that Hitler ordered the expulsion
26measures - these people took it out on the person that
2 Q. [Mr Irving] And you say this is somebody excusing the Nazis for taking
3these ghastly actions against the Jews?
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It seems to me that that is the implication in that
6 Q. [Mr Irving] Is it not, in fact, a very sloppy use of the English
7language? What you meant was not "excusable" but
8"explicable" and there is a very great difference between
9these two words?
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think, given your attitude -- well, first of all, I find
11it very difficult to see how Latvians, Lithuanians and
12Estonians could get so worked up by bombing raids on
13Germany that they started killing Jews.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] Is that what I say?
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is the clear implication, "these people", and in the
16previous sentence you say, "Not just Germans, but
17Austrians, Latvians, Lithuanians and Estonians". "These
18people had seen the bombing raids begin".
19 Q. [Mr Irving] Are you familiar with the fact that Jan Karski, the man
20whom I previously referred to, warned the Polish
21government of the likelihood of pogroms in the Baltic
22states, and he had explained the reasons why in a 1940
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Mr Irving, there is plenty of documentation to show that
25there were, that Latvians, Lithuanians and Estonians and
26so on were involved in the mass killing of Jews with the
1encouragement of the SS unit and the Einsatzgruppen.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] But are you not by using the word "excusable" suggesting
3that David Irving said that what had happened to the Jews
4was right, that I am excusing it, whereas, in fact, I am
5explaining it and there is a substantial difference. Do
6you not agree?
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I do not. I am afraid the tenor and tendency of your
8explanations is to find excuses.
9 Q. [Mr Irving] So ----
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] And you go on, and I go on to quote numerous places in the
11report at some length arguments which you put forward to
12try to suggest (and sometimes say in so many words) that
13the Jews were responsible themselves for the misfortunes
14which befell them.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] You still do not appear to appreciate the difference
16between the word ----
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think this falls into a pattern.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] --- to excuse and to explain. Your use of the word
19"excusable" implies that David Irving welcomed the
20Holocaust, that I am excusing it; whereas I am explaining
21it by saying, "These people had a vengeance, these people
22had a grudge, these people felt wronged, these people took
23it out on the people they perceived as being the ones who
24did it". Is that an excuse or is that an explanation?
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think given the fact that they not been bombed, that is
1 Q. [Mr Irving] I think we can abandon bombing for a moment and point to
2other things. I do not want to go into the reasons why
3the Baltic Jews had a particular grudge, but that is
4neither here nor there.
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, I think it is very much here or there. If you want
6to use as an explanation of the massacres of Jews by
7Baltic peoples, if you want to use in explanation of that
8allegations that you want to make about their maltreatment
9by Jews or justified -- or in some ways grievances that
10they had which were in some ways justified, that seems to
11me that you are excusing it.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] In other words, what you are saying is that I welcomed the
13Holocaust, is that the way you are trying to put it to the
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not use the word "welcome", Mr ----
16 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, I am trying to understand why you use the word
17"excusable". If something is excusable, then this
18implies that the person who is making the excuses thinks
19it is a jolly good thing.
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I do not think that is true actually. Those are two
21rather different things. Applauding something and
22excusing it are rather different things, Mr Irving, and
23I come back to this fact that you say, "These people had
24seen the bombing raids begin, they'd lost probably women,
25wives and children in the bombing raids". So these poor
26Estonians who had been subjected to allied bombings,
1therefore, felt so angry with the Jews that they took it
2out on them. Now, I do not think there is evidence that
3Estonians were heavily bombed by the Allies in 1941.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] Forget the bombing raids for the time being.
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am not forgetting the bombing raids because that is a
6central passage -- a central part of this passage,
8 Q. [Mr Irving] My Lord, let me explain the reason why I am dealing with
9this at length. This is one of the issues pleaded. In
10the pleadings one of the complaints is that I am accused
11by the Second Defendant of having, I think, applauded the
12incarceration of the Jews in the concentration camps.
13 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not believe that she ever has made that
14accusation. What you are accused of in this part of the
15report is making excuses for those who took part in the
17 MR IRVING: Finding something excusable rather than explicable,
18and there is a substantial difference there. I find the
19use of the word "excusable" which I hope the Professor
20will admit was a slip, but now he is trying to justify it?
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I will not admit it is a slip, no. I mean, I looked at
22this passage and it seems to me to excuse these massacres.
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Speaking for myself, I think I understand the
24point you are making, Mr Irving, and I understand the
25answer as well.
26 MR IRVING: In that case, I will now wish to speak another
1paragraph about the explanation why the Baltic Jews took
2revenge on their native Jewish population during the brief
3interregnum between the time the Soviets moved out and the
4German Army arrived. Did you appreciate that there were
5substantial killings in that period?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I would have to be provided with evidence, I think, to
8 Q. [Mr Irving] So you make the allegations without the evidence then?
9You say that the bombing raids and so on, you say they
10had, the Nazis, the Latvians and Lithuanians the Estonians
11had no ----
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Let me set the context here, Mr Irving, is that I am
13talking about your denial that there was a systematic
14element in the Nazi extermination of Jews.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] You are going substantially further; you are saying that
16I am welcoming it, I am excusing it?
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not say you are welcoming it. Welcoming is different
19 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, he is not saying you are welcoming
20it. He is saying you are making excuses for it.
21 MR IRVING: And this is precisely the point that I have to
22challenge, my Lord, because, of course, what I am actually
23saying is there are explanations for these pogroms
24committed by the local population against the Jews, and
25that is not making excuses for them in any way at all.
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I have already said, I understand the point
1you are making and I understand the answer.
2 MR IRVING: But it is a repugnant allegation to be made
4 MR JUSTICE GRAY: There is no point in just using this point as
5a sort of punch bag and going on and on because I have the
7 MR IRVING: Well, I am beginning to feel like a punch bag when
8I read this report with things being thrown at me the
9whole time like that, and I find that allegation
10particularly repugnant. I have described the atrocities
11committed by the Nazis against the Jews and by their
12collaborators against the Jews in very much detail in my
13works and never at any time have I given even the
14slightest hint of relish or welcoming these things.
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is not what I am saying, Mr Irving.
16 Q. [Mr Irving] I have repeatedly tried to argue away the Wannsee
17conference, you say at the foot of page 137. I am not
18going to dwell at length on that. If you are an
19historian, you would, no doubt, know that there is a great
20debate raging among genuine historians and scholars -- to
21spare you any difficulties here -- as to whether the
22Wannsee Conference was important or not. Do you agree
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] There are arguments about how important it was, yes.
25 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes, so if somebody tries ----
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think anybody has said that it was unimportant.
1It is a question of the level and degree of importance you
2attach to it.
3 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you agree that there is no reference to the word
4"liquidation" in the records or to any order by Hitler or
5to any systematic killing in the Wannsee Conference?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, that is true.
7 Q. [Mr Irving] Middle of page 138, please. You say that I relied on
8Eichmann's testimony on other occasions but not when it
9does not suit me. This is another allegation of
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Can you tell me what other occasions I did rely on
13Eichmann's testimony? Are you just referring to the
14episode where he looks through the peep hole in the back
15of the van and saw the gas vans operating?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think that is one of them, yes. There are others,
17I think, which I mentioned in the report.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] I relied on it when it suited me -- why would it suit me
19to use Eichmann's confirmation of something which I, as a
20denier, am supposed to be denying?
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, this comes back to the point that we talked about
22yesterday, that I made it clear that Holocaust deniers as
23a group have, on the whole, always admitted, as Faurisson
24said, there were some small scale, relatively small scale,
25killings on the Eastern Front of Jews, and that belongs to
1 Q. [Mr Irving] Have you ever read very much of Eichmann's testimony
2either in his memoirs or in the subsequent trial in
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have read some, not the whole thing.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] Are you familiar with the passage where Eichmann,
6challenged about a particular episode, interrupted the
7interrogator two minutes later and said words to this
8effect: "I am sorry. You asked me two minutes ago about
9that episode, and I have to say now I cannot remember
10whether I am actually remembering it or just remembering
11being asked a question about it more recently"?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, you would have to show me that document.
13 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you agree that sometimes this happens in
14interrogations, that the interrogator puts questions with
15such force that sometimes the person being interrogated
16comes to believe what is being suggested to him by the
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, that is a very general statement, Mr Irving, and
19I suppose in some integrations somewhere or other that
20kind of thing takes place.
21 Q. [Mr Irving] Going on to page 139, the Commissart Order, and the
22guidelines for jurisdiction issued to the German Army and
23armed forces in the spring of 1941. I am not asking you
24in detail about them, but would you agree that these are
25documents of a military nature?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am sorry, I cannot see this.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] 139, paragraph 11. We are dealing here with the orders to
2kill Jews, Red Army Commissarts and others in the German
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Oh, yes, yes.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] So this is a reference to the Commissart order, is it not?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
7 Q. [Mr Irving] All I am trying to get from you is a concession that the
8Commissart order issued by the German High Command of the
9armed forces was a military document concerned with
10military measures and that it did not convey a clear and
11overriding intent to kill the Jews as such?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is, no, it is an order that Red Army Commissarts will
13be killed. There were orders issued to that effect in
14its -- I mean, it is very hard to describe that as a
15military order in the sense that it did not seem to me, or
16to most historians, there to be any military justification
17for it. It is a political act.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] The simple question there is were they being killed as
19Commissarts or as Jews?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] As Commissarts. The Jews are a separate matter in these
22 Q. [Mr Irving] And do you accept that at this time the Soviet Union was
23not a signatory of the Geneva Convention on
24prisoners-of-war and, therefore, the Germans had no
25obligation whatsoever to treat their prisoners properly?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is a rather different matter, Mr Irving, and actually
1issuing an order to the Army to kill Red Army Commissarts
2is a very different matter from simply not treating people
4 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, you accept that when nations become belligerent,
5they have a choice that they can make, they can agree both
6sides, they can become signatories and parties of a
7convention like the Geneva Convention on treatments of
8prisoners-of-war, and the Soviet Union had specifically
9opted out of it and, therefore, at no time opted into it,
10so the Soviet Union, legally speaking, Soviet prisoners
11could not expect to be treated as prisoners-of-war and, in
12fact, nor could German prisoners be expected to be treated
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, if you are advancing that argument as an excuse or
15justification for the order to the Germany Army to kill
16all the Red Army Commissarts found and for the deliberate
17killing of between 3 and 4 million Soviet prisoners-of-war
18by the Germans, then I do not think it is a very strong
19justification or excuse.
20 Q. [Mr Irving] Did you hear me express it in those terms as an excuse?
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That seemed to me what you were saying.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] Was I not, in fact, just taking up the point you made
23before I mentioned the Geneva Conventions in which you
24referred to the illegal killing of these Commissarts?
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You have lost me, I am afraid.
26 Q. [Mr Irving] In paragraph 12 you refer to Holocaust denier, Paul
1Rassinier, and on the following page, the first line of
2page of 140, you refer to Austin App?
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] Why do you refer to these people? Is it not totally
5irrelevant to bring in all these names of people?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No. I am suggesting here that these are familiar -- the
7arguments you are putting forward are familiar arguments
8from well-known Holocaust deniers, advanced by many other
10 Q. [Mr Irving] Unless his Lordship disagrees, what possible relevance
11does that have to this case that other writers have
13 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Very, very marginal, in my view, so we can
15 MR IRVING: In other words, I need not prepare to address it?
16 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, you do not.
17 MR IRVING: We do, however, on this point come to the important
18matter of the allegation by me that the Holocaust story in
19part is an echo of our own propaganda. My Lord, I do
20think we have dealt with this allegation before, have we,
21in this court?
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No.
23 MR IRVING: It is quite an intricate allegation, and, witness,
24you disagree with this. Can we take it in stages? Do you
25agree that the Allies at any time started making
26propaganda broadcasts to Germany with references to the
1extermination of the Jews?
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. I certainly agree with that.
3 Q. [Mr Irving] Can you put a rough date on when these broadcasts began?
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Sometime in 1942.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] Sometime in 1942?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] As I recall.
7 Q. [Mr Irving] Have you read the memoirs -- do you know who Thomas Mann
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
10 Q. [Mr Irving] Was he a famous German novelist?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Indeed.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Author of I think "Wooden Brooks" and various other ----
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, that is right.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] --- famous novels? Where was he during World War II?
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] He was in the United States.
16 Q. [Mr Irving] In the United States. Was he engaged by the Allies as a
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That, I am not sure about, but he certainly did make
20 Q. [Mr Irving] Have you read his memoirs and his own diary?
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] If I put to you either now or later passages from the
23Thomas Mann diary of 1941 in which he describes making
24broadcasts relating to -- here we are ----
25 MR JUSTICE GRAY: In a way, Mr Irving, you have got your answer
26because Professor Evans has agreed that there were
1propaganda broadcasts from 1942 about the extermination of
3 MR IRVING: I was going to bring you back to 1941. It may seem
4completely immaterial, my Lord, but -- in January 1942
5Thomas Mann broadcast the following words in German:
6"[German - document not provided] "400 Young Dutch Jews
7have been brought to Germany to be used as experimental
8objects for poison gas in January 1942". Can you accept
9that if he writes that in his diary as a propaganda
10broadcast that he made that there was such a broadcast?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, could I see a copy, please?
12 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Do we need to take terribly long? This is
13actually 1942, not 1941, but you have got your answer that
14there was propaganda use being made of the alleged
15extermination of Jews.
16 MR IRVING: Right.
17 MR JUSTICE GRAY: From, at any rate, 1942.
18 MR IRVING: Buttressed with three more sources but we will not
19go into detail, my Lord. Have you heard of the
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] Will you accept that Ringlebloom makes reference in June
231942 in the ghetto to receiving broadcasts about the
24extermination of Jews with poison gas?
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, I will accept that.
26 Q. [Mr Irving] If you have read my Goebbels biography, as no doubt you
1have for the purposes of this case, will you agree that
2the German Propaganda Ministry monitored a wave of
3propaganda broadcast in November 1942 referring to the
4gassing, mass gassing, of Germans?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
6 Q. [Mr Irving] In other words, they were Nazi monitoring reports of the
7BBC. You yourself, Professor, are an expert because you
8have written a box on the subject, have you not, of German
9wartime morale, of the reports? I think you wrote a book,
10did you not, on the subject of reports on public opinion,
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, no. I think the book you are thinking of covered the
13years 1892 to 1914.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] So this is the wrong war? In other words ----
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is not even the war at all. It is before the First
16World War, I am afraid.
17 Q. [Mr Irving] So you are not familiar with the SD reports or with the
18letter intercept reports or anything like that on German
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Slightly familiar, but I would not say that I was a major
21expert on them. I mean, I know what the SD reports were.
22I have read a few of them, but I am in no sense a real
23expert on them.
24 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes, you are absolutely right. I am wrong. Your book
25was [German] was it not? So you have not read any of the
26corresponding reports on German public morale, public
1opinion, that were gathered by the Gestapo or by the
2Propaganda Ministry in the war years?
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Only those which were cited in publication of other
4scholars and one or two in the original, but I have not
5read them thoroughly.
6 Q. [Mr Irving] How much talk was there in Germany during the war years of
7gas chambers, do you think, in public or in private?
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think that is very difficult to say. We have to
9remember that there was a great deal of secrecy
10surrounding them. I think there was a fair amount of talk
11about shootings behind the Eastern Front, but of course it
12was against the law, and punished severely, if you spread
13news about what was going on in concentration camps or
14extermination camps in Germany.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] Given that the BBC made -- I am going to keep this
16brief -- repeated broadcasts during 1942 about the Nazi
17atrocities, and about the extermination of Jews, and about
18gas chambers, even before the gas chambers began operating
19on a large scale ----
20 MR RAMPTON: Wait a minute. If Professor Evans is to deal with
21that, Mr Irving must give some precise dates. One
22remembers evidence is that the evidence is that Chelmno
23started killing people in gas trucks 8th December 1941,
24and that the three Reinhardt camps were in full operation
25during the summer 1942. I think we need some dates.
26 MR IRVING: With respect, Mr Rampton, I think, in view of the
1fact that Professor Evans has stated himself that he is
2not an expert on this matter ----
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, Mr Irving, that will not do, will it?
4You cannot put a question which has as its premise a
5misstatement about the date when gas chambers began
6operating. That is the point that Mr Rampton is
7making. It does not impinge on that objection that
8Professor Evans may not himself be an expert. If you are
9going to ask that question, and it is a relevant question,
10you must premise it correctly.
11 MR IRVING: I was really trying to save the court time.
12 MR JUSTICE GRAY: That will not do either, Mr Irving, if I may
14 MR IRVING: It will certainly take time for me to look up the
15actual dates and references and I do not want to take up
16the court's time shuffling papers.
17 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can I reformulate it for you and try and
18help? Or would you rather do it yourself? Do it
20 MR IRVING: Your Lordship is much better reformulating
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. I think I must not interfere too much.
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Can I say that what is at issue here are Mr Irving's
24statements that "the British Intelligence Service
25suggested a propaganda campaign against Germany on the
26basis of invented allegations of gas chambers", or another
1quote at the top of page 141, "The story that the Germans
2are using gas chambers for the mass extermination of Jews
3is, so and so on forth, psychological warfare, etc, warned
4the cabinet this is a lie that we ourselves had
5invented." That is really what is at issue.
6 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I follow that.
7 MR IRVING: This is very helpful. In fact, the witness has
8been very helpful and this helps me to zero in on the
9particular matter. Witness, will you therefore go
10straightforward to page 148 of your report? You are
11quoting here from a clip of Foreign Office documents, are
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] In the Public Record Office. They are well-known
15documents and I am going to rely on the final paragraph of
16page 148. Is this document dated August 27th 1943?
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, that is right.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] At this time does Mr Victor Cavendish-Bentinck, who I
19think later became Lord Portland, state, "I think that we
20weaken our case against the Germans by publicly giving
21credence to atrocity stories for which we have no
22evidence." Is that right? Does he write that?
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is what he says, yes.
24 Q. [Mr Irving] So at this time in August 1943 the British had no evidence
25of gas chambers, because that what is specifically being
26talk about in this document?
1 MR RAMPTON: The Professor must be allowed to read the
2preceding two paragraphs that he himself has set out in
3his report because that is to rip something right out of
5 MR IRVING: I thought it would be helpful to go forward to 1943
6to see what we did not know.
7 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let us see what the context is for what
9 MR IRVING: As regards putting Poles to death in gas chambers,
10that is pretty plain, is it not here? Here is the Foreign
11Office saying we have no evidence for this, and yet back
12in 1942 they are making the propaganda broadcasts.
13 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I am just trying to read it. Can
14you just pause for a second (Pause for reading). I am
15bound to say that I do think that, in fairness to
16Mr Irving, one of the things about which
17Cavendish-Bentinck is saying that there is no evidence
18available to the British at that stage is the putting to
19death of Poles in gas chambers.
20 MR RAMPTON: Polish children, and the underline is in the
21original. It is not Professor Evans.
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I agree what is being talked of is killing
23Polish children, or selling them. But also, as a separate
24topic, it seems to me a fair reading of this suggests, the
25putting of Poles to death in gas chambers.
26 MR RAMPTON: Yes. Nothing to do with Jews so far as I can
2 MR IRVING: Are Jews Poles? Is there some distinction there,
4 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Anyway, I see the point. We have now at any
5rate seen the whole document.
6 MR IRVING: My Lord, now I see that I have your Lordship's ear,
7may I now ----
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Could I just make a couple of points here? These
9documents emerged during the formulation of a joint
10British/American declaration on German crimes in Poland,
11which is released at the request of the Polish government
12in exile, so it is focusing on Poles.
13 MR IRVING: Do you agree that the statement concerned is on the
14facing page 147, and that the sentence causing problem is
15the allegation on the authority of His Majesty the king
16that Poles are "now being put systematically to death in
17gas chambers", and the word "systematically" figures in
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. That is the first thing. The context of this is
20negotiations involving the Polish government in exile
21about German atrocities in Poland. The second point is
22that of course Cavendish-Bentinck's position is not
23necessarily to be accepted as a correct one. He was
24extremely sceptical, and indeed has been criticised by
25historians for his negative attitude towards reports. As
26he says, the Poles and, to a far greater extent, the Jews
1tend to exaggerate German atrocities in order to stoke us
3 MR IRVING: Are you saying that he was anti-semitic?
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Thirdly, and the really crucial point here is that this is
5not the same as saying that these stories about gas
6chambers have been invented, deliberately invented. What
7he says is: "As regards putting Poles to death in gas
8chambers I do not believe there is any evidence that this
9has been done." I am bound to say that is probably
10correct. He goes on to say: "There may have been stories
11to this effect and we have played them up in PWE rumours
12without believing that they had any foundation".
13 MR IRVING: What is PWE?
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Political Warfare Executive. "At any rate", he says,
15"there is far less evidence than exists for the mass
16murder of Polish officers by the Russians at Katyn. On
17the other hand we do know that the Germans are out to
18destroy the Jews of any age unless they are fit for manual
19labour". So what he is saying is this. He is not saying
20we have deliberately cooked up these atrocity stories. He
21is saying we have received stories which we are using.
22That is quite a different matter from what say. You say
23they are invented by the PWE. Secondly, he is saying it
24is about Poles, and he is making a distinction, saying
25explicitly that the Germans are out to destroy the Jews of
26any age unless they are fit for manual labour. That is
1really the context of the quote that you originally gave.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] Very interesting. Will you now tell the court who Victor
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] He was a Foreign Office official, I think.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] He was Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, was
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Right, yes.
8 Q. [Mr Irving] Did he therefore have access to every single scrap of
9intelligence evidence that came into the British
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I doubt very much whether he had that. He would have
12received more general reports, I imagine, but I am not an
13expert on British intelligence in the Second World War.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] As Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee he
15received all the police decodes, all the other decodes,
16all the intercepts, all the agents reports, all the
17prisoner of war messages, is that not right?
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not know, to be quite honest. I am not an expert on
19British intelligence. That sounds an awful lot for one
20man to master by himself. As I said, I would imagine that
21he would have received summaries of some description.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] The fact remains that he states in August 1943, when
23requested to authorize a government statement signed by
24Churchill and Roosevelt, that Poles were being
25systematically put to death in gas chambers on the facing
26page. He specifically issues a minute to the Foreign
1Office officials, saying, "We weaken our case by publicly
2giving credence to atrocity stories for which we have no
3evidence". He then goes on to say, "These mass executions
4in gas chambers", in other words the story of the mass
5executions in gas chambers, "remind me of the story of the
6employment of human corpses during the last war for the
7manufacture of fat, which was a grotesque lie and led to
8true stores of German enormities being brushed aside as
9mere propaganda". He is not pussy footing around with
10the way he is describing the state of British knowledge on
11gas chambers in August 1943, and yet you have accepted
12that during 1942 the BBC and the Americans repeatedly
13broadcast in German these stories of gas chambers, which
14must therefore have been invented.
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think that last statement follows at all.
16 Q. [Mr Irving] He says we have no evidence, so where else could it have
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] He is talking about mass executions of Poles in gas
19chambers. He says: "We do know that the Germans are out
20to destroy the Jews of any rage unless they are fit for
21manual labour." I think this is a good example, which you
22have just quoted, of the scepticism which unfortunately
23was engendered by the belief in many Foreign Office and
24other officials that a lot of the atrocity stories in the
25First World War were mere inventions of allied propaganda.
26 MR IRVING: My Lord, this now goes back to the reason for this,
1which is page 141, where the allegation is that I said
2this with no justification.
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: You have to grapple at some stage, and
4I think you are inviting my comment, with this, that,
5whatever may have been the state of knowledge within
6British Intelligence in 1942 or even 1943, the Defendants
7say that you have been alleging that the Holocaust is an
8invention by British Intelligence after all that we now
9think we know about what went on in the concentration
10camps has come to light. I think that is really the
11thrust of their case. You have established, I think, if
12I may say so, Mr Irving, that propaganda use was made of
13alleged gassing in gas chambers at a time when the senior
14officials in British Intelligence had no evidence for it.
15But you have to grapple with the next stage of the
16Defendant's case on this and I am sure you are coming to
18 MR IRVING: I appreciate, and this is not the time to do that,
19but I can only tackle each particular part of the
20allegations against me piecemeal. I think I have shot
21that one right out of the water, if I may put it like
22that, that the allegation was that I had no foundation for
23saying that the Political Warfare Executive started the
24gas chamber stories running long before we had any proof
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. I think you are failing to understand
1the Defendants' point.
2 MR IRVING: I appreciate fully what your Lordship is saying.
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, please listen. What the Defendants say,
4and Mr Rampton will correct me if I have this wrong, is
5that you are saying that the whole Holocaust story is a
6lie invented by British Intelligence. You have, as it
7were, part of the way along your line of argument, but you
8have to grapple, as I say, with the fact that the
9Defendants are contending that you have been making the
10allegation that the whole thing is a lie invented by
11British Intelligence in the teeth, they say, of all the
12evidence that it was nothing of the kind.
13 MR IRVING: The gas chamber lie, if I can put it like this, is
14the story that the Germans gassed to death millions of
15people in factories of death. I am going to deal with
16that in a separate manner. We dealt with it partly with
17the witness van Pelt and I shall deal with it also by
18submissions on documents, and with further questions,
19either through this witness or other witnesses. But I can
20only tackle each element of this piece by piece. It may
21well be that there are bits of the story that I cannot
22bridge, rather the same as there are bits of the story in
23this systematic nature of the killing that the defence
24cannot bridge. The convergence of evidence here is, if
25I can establish there were no factories of death and that
26there were no holes in that roof, to put it bluntly, and
1if I can establish that PWE started the story of the gas
2chambers running in 1942, then I have got a substantial
3part of the way towards justifying what I claim, even if
4there are one or two bricks still left out of the wall, if
5I can put it like that.
6 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes.
7 MR IRVING: Moving to page 150 please -- we have now dealt
8with that, my Lord -- paragraph 21, witness, do you take
9exception to my suggestion that witnesses and survivors,
10by virtue of the ordeal they have been through, have been
11subjected to some kind of traumatic stress which would
12affect their powers of recollection?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Let me see what I say here.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] It is the final sentences on that page, really.
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, where you are asking a question about how you judge
16the credibility of Holocaust survivors, and you say,
17"I say that psychiatrists should concern themselves with
18this matter some time. There are many cases of mass
19hysteria". So I do take exception to the view which you
20put there that all the recollections of Holocaust
21survivors are the outcome of mass hysteria.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] Have I had said all the recollections of Holocaust
23survivors or just a part of them?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think that is the clear implication of that.
25 Q. [Mr Irving] Are you aware, witness, that there is a body of medical
26expertise assembled over the last 50 years into precisely
1these matters of the ordeals suffered by concentration
2camp and slave labour camp survivors, what they have been
3through, the undernourishment, the effect this has on the
4powers of the brain, the bad nutrition, the post traumatic
5stress and all the rest of it and there have been very
6many learned disquisitions into this? The sentence which
7you have quoted was not intended to be some kind of slur
8on the character of people, the fact that somebody has a
9psychiatric disorder is in no way to be interpreted in a
10derogatory manner. It is just an attempt to analyse why
11sometimes they say things that do not exactly fit in with
12what the documents show.
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think you are saying it is more than sometimes,
14Mr Irving. I am not familiar with the literature you
16 Q. [Mr Irving] So, in analysing all the eyewitnesses and the sources that
17one is going to use in writing this kind of history, you
18cast aside the possibilities of medical problems or
19medical objections to relying too heavily on these
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think you would have to look at each case in turn
23 Q. [Mr Irving] Are you familiar with the case of Benjamin Gilcormesky?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am indeed, yes.
25 Q. [Mr Irving] How you would assess his motivation, shall we say?
26Obviously he went through some kind of wartime ordeal?
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Very difficult to say. The evidence seems to be that he
2did not in fact.
3 Q. [Mr Irving] That he did not?
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. As I understand from what I have read, this is
5someone who claimed in a book, or wrote a book, called
6I think "Fragments", a Swiss gentleman, which was
7purported to be a story of his incarceration as a child in
8various concentration camps, and subsequently he was
9revealed to be an imposter.
10 Q. [Mr Irving] He was totally spurious, was he not?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] He was completely spurious. He was not in the
12concentration camps. Indeed, I think he was born after
13the war and brought up in Switzerland. He was not Jewish
14and was not a victim in any sense.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] He was a spurious survivor of the Holocaust?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is indeed correct, yes, as I understood it.
17 Q. [Mr Irving] He had a tattoo, did he?
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have no idea.
19 Q. [Mr Irving] Did he maintain that he had been in Auschwitz?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] He maintained all these things, I have already said that.
21 Q. [Mr Irving] He described all the grisly horrors that he had seen?
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, you have your answer. He made it
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] What seems to have been the case is that he had read an
25enormous amount about the Holocaust, and somehow persuaded
26himself that he had gone through it. That is a very
1unusual case and that is precisely why, of course, it has
2given rise to such widespread debate and such a number of
3essays, investigations, writings and so on.
4 MR IRVING: Was not the reason why it attracted widespread
5attention the fact that he was awarded literary prizes for
6his work, and that he was then found out to be spurious?
7Was that not the reason for the widespread attention?
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It was widely praised when it came out, yes, and therefore
9the shock when it was discovered to be spurious was all
11 Q. [Mr Irving] You think that he is the only such case, do you?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] The only one of which I am aware. It is a rather unusual
13thing to do. I think one has to admit.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] But he made a lot of money out it, did he not?
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That I cannot say.
16 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, if he won major literary prizes for his book?
17 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I am conscious we are still on
18page 152. We have about 600 pages to go. It is not a
19race, but we have to keep an eye on what matters and what
21 MR IRVING: I have said I will finish with the witness in two
22and a half days, my Lord.
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I want you to take your time when we get to
24what matters. We have not started on what matters, in my
26 MR IRVING: What matters is this witness's credibility, my
1Lord, and your Lordship may or may not have formed
2opinions about that. On page 153, half way down, line 4
3of paragraph 26, you refer to the fact that I evade the
4question by pointing minor inaccuracies in details of
5these reports. Would you say that the inaccuracies that
6we have pointed to in the reports by Hoess and Gerstein
7and Verba and Bimko and Tauber were all minor?
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am referring here to a radio interview in June 1989.
9 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes. But what you are saying is that I pointed to minor
10inaccuracies in the reports of people on whom the
11Holocaust historians rely, the eyewitnesses, and I am just
12challenging whether these inaccuracies are in fact so
13minor. Are they not sufficiently large, in fact, to
14disqualify any reasonable historian from wanting to rely
15on that source?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I do not think on the whole they are sufficiently
17large. One has to reach a balanced judgment, in dealing
18with testimony after the event, sometimes many years after
19the event, as to how reliable it is. Of course, that kind
20of testimony usually contains some inaccuracies. The fact
21is that one should not use that as a basis for a sweeping
22dismissal of all this testimony.
23 Of course, there is a larger point here, that
24you yourself rely quite heavily on the postwar testimony
25sometimes obtained in interviews which were conducted by
26yourself of members of Hitler's entourage, which you do
1not approach in this critical way. You do not point to
2inaccuracies, and generally speaking accept it as the
3truth. So I think you have a double standard. You wholly
4dismiss all the evidence of postwar testimony from the
5victims of Naziism and you accept the postwar testimony of
7 Q. [Mr Irving] I am not going to answer that point because this was not a
8question you were asked. Would you now go to paragraph 29
9please? You deal there with a French woman called
10Marie-Claude Vaillant Couturier. Did you read her
11testimony at Nuremberg? Did you form an impression of her
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. This is dealt with at some length on the basis of
14Professor van Pelt's report.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] What was her maiden name?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I cannot recall that.
17 Q. [Mr Irving] Was she the daughter of Lucienne Vogal, who was one of
18Willi Muntzenberg's closest collaborators?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I will accept that, if you say that.
20 Q. [Mr Irving] You know who Willi Muntzenberg was?
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] Was he one of the leading commentators and agents and
23propagandists in, first of all, Russia and then in France?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Indeed, yes.
25 Q. [Mr Irving] So she came from these propagandist circles -- is that a
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No. I do not think, because you are a daughter of a
2propagandist, that makes you a propagandist.
3 Q. [Mr Irving] Did she then marry somebody called Paul Vaillant
4Couturier, who was the editor of Humanite?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I will accept that that is the case.
6 Q. [Mr Irving] Which is the Communist Party newspaper in France?
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Indeed.
8 Q. [Mr Irving] When she was examined or cross-examined in Nuremberg by
9one of the defence counsel, Hans Marks, did he ask her
10whether she had any literary background or any training as
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You would have to present me with the documentation, I am
14 Q. [Mr Irving] What inference would you gather Mr Marks was trying to
15make from this question?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I really cannot comment without actually seeing a
18 Q. [Mr Irving] Is there any proof that this woman was ever in Auschwitz
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Her testimony.
21 Q. [Mr Irving] In other words, purely what she said?
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] There may be some other evidence, but I am not really an
23expert on Auschwitz.
24 Q. [Mr Irving] I am not only going to ask one more question. In view of
25that fact that she testified that at the time she was in
26Auschwitz she obtained records showing that 700,000
1Hungarian Jews had passed into the camp in 1944, when in
2fact that was the entire number of Hungarian Jews who
3existed, was she liable to have been testifying to
4something from her actual knowledge?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Let me say the point at issue in this paragraph of my
6report, I should make clear, is that you rely, and I think
7the court has been through this already ----
8 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, we have.
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] On the notes of Judge Biddle.
10 MR IRVING: On the use I made of Judge Biddle's notes?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] -- which you misinterpret in order to discredit this
13 Q. [Mr Irving] Is it likely that Judge Biddle, being no fool, would also
14have seen through her on the basis of the
16 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, we are not going to go through
18 MR IRVING: Right. At page 155 we come to the Anne Frank
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
21 Q. [Mr Irving] Was the Anne Frank diary a diary or a novel or both?
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It was a diary.
23 Q. [Mr Irving] It was a diary. Was it one diary or was it several
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That depends what you mean.
26 Q. [Mr Irving] In other words, did she write it and then did she rewrite
1it and then did she rewrite it?
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] As I understand it, it is a diary that is written through.
3 Q. [Mr Irving] Will you accept that she wrote it, and then she rewrote
4it, and then she rewrote it as a novel shortly before she
5was kidnapped by the Nazis?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No.
7 Q. [Mr Irving] What is your criticism of my -- in fact, I am sorry, page
8156, line 2 of paragraph 31. You object to my calling the
9diary a novel, do you not?
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
11 Q. [Mr Irving] Yet, if the final version of the diary, as has been
12determined by the experts in Holland, is described as a
13novel, then that description by me is not unjustified?
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You would have to show me the document of the experts in
15Holland which describe it as a novel.
16 Q. [Mr Irving] You object to the fact that I suggest that whole pages are
17written in ball point pen?
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
19 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, if you are relying, just let me
20say what I am going to say, on what you describe as the
21determination by experts in Holland that it is a novel, at
22some stage that will be something you ought really to put
23to Professor Evans. I cannot find it but I think he deals
24with Anne Frank and her diary as a substantive criticism.
25Am I wrong about that?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Pages 156 to 7.
1 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I thought you came back to it. Perhaps not?
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No.
3 MR IRVING: My Lord, clearly, the reason I am asking these
4questions is that I understand that I am going to be
5cross-examined on this.
6 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Now is your chance. I suspect -- Mr Rampton
7will tell me if I am wrong -- that Professor Evans may be
8the right person for you to target your cross-examination
9on the Anne Frank diary.
10 MR IRVING: That is precisely what I was waiting for. Every
11new subject I adumbrate I am frightened of being stopped.
12 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am trying to stop you when you are on
13irrelevances. It seems to me Ann Frank is perhaps
14relevant and therefore do not take that aspect too
16 MR RAMPTON: It is. The allegation is made against Mr Irving
17that without any foundation whatsoever he has alleged that
18the Anne Frank diaries were a fake, or are a fake. What
19is more, he has since admitted that he was wrong about
21 MR IRVING: Well, can we elucidate this matter in my
22cross-examination rather than your statements from the
24 MR RAMPTON: Certainly.
25 MR IRVING: Witness, will you go to the bundle of documents
26bundle F, and look at one item there, which is page 86?
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] Professor Evans, are you aware of the fact that the father
3of Ann Frank fought a number of libel actions against
4people who maintained that the diary was suspect?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, I think he did.
6 Q. [Mr Irving] I think three or four libel actions. Are you familiar
7from the discovery with the fact that I corresponded with
8the father of Anne Frank on a number of occasions?
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
10 Q. [Mr Irving] He never of course sued me for libel, did he? Is that
12 MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is neither here nor there.
13 MR IRVING: My Lord, in the allegations is the fact that we
14paid damages, or I paid damages to the father.
15 MR JUSTICE GRAY: That may be relevant.
16 MR IRVING: That is why I was trying to get this admission from
17the witness that the father never sued me for libel.
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is the other way round that may be
19relevant. If you paid damages because you had alleged
20that the diary was a fake, that, I would have thought,
21might be relevant.
22 MR IRVING: If your Lordship had waited, there would have been
23two questions, with a follow up, but we have not had an to
24the first one yet.
25 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Ask the question again.
26 MR IRVING: Witness, are you aware of any libel action brought
1by the father against me?
2 MR RAMPTON: My Lord, I do not know----
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I cannot understand what the relevance of
5 MR RAMPTON: I do not make an allegation that the father sued
6Mr Irving for saying that the diaries were a fake. Maybe
7he could have done but, as far as I know, he did not and
8I have never said that he did.
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am trying to find the passage in my report which you are
10referring to here.
11 MR IRVING: Can we have an answer to the question?
12 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, because the question, I have ruled, is
13irrelevant, Mr Irving. Can you please pay some attention
14to what view I rightly or wrongly am taking about some of
15your questions. Sorry, Professor Evans, you were about to
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No.
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, press on. You were asking the
19witness about page 86.
20 MR IRVING: Are you aware that, in the course of these libel
21actions, a German court ordered the father of Anne Frank
22to subject the diaries to chemical and forensic tests?
23Can I have an answer, Professor?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] If you are telling me that, I will accept that that is the
25case, yes. They certainly were subjected to tests.
26 Q. [Mr Irving] Were the results of these tests leaked to the German
1magazine Der Spiegel in 1980?
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I will accept your view that they were.
3 Q. [Mr Irving] Document No. 86 is a New York Post summary of what Der
4Spiegel has announced. Do you agree that this states that
5the finding is, on the second page, the result of the
6tests performed at the Bundescriminalamtlaboratories show
7that portions of the works, especially of the fourth
8volume, are written with ball point pen?
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is what it says, but this is of course is third hand
10information. It is a reporter who is reporting another
11reporter's view of a report. I think, before accepting
12that this particular reporter is giving an accurate
13account, I would need to see the original report.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] I do not really want to get bogged down in this kind of
15maze. Can I just put it to you like this? Will you
16accept that, on the balance of probabilities, the
17Bundescriminalamt did carry out tests on the ink and came
18up with the surprising conclusion that portions were in
19fact ball point ink?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It depends what you mean by "portions". I think that is
21the crucial point. My understanding, having read the
22summary of the forensic scientific investigations carried
23out on the diaries, in the introduction to the kind of
24official standard edition, scholarly edition, is that
25there were some small stylistic emendations in ball point
26pen, but that paper and ink and so on were all of the
1diaries themselves were derived from the 1940s, i.e.
2before the end of the war.
3 Q. [Mr Irving] How long has this been your understanding? Did you have
4this understanding at the time you wrote your expert
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Let me just see.
7 Q. [Mr Irving] In other words, is this knowledge about portions of the
8diary being rewritten in ball point ink or whatever recent
9or some years ago?
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, I have looked -- my knowledge or whose knowledge?
11 MR IRVING: Your knowledge we are talking about.
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] My knowledge.
13 Q. [Mr Irving] At the time you wrote this report.
14 MR RAMPTON: Footnote 118.
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Thank you. Yes, The Critical Edition, 1989.
16 MR IRVING: My question is, of course, if you were aware of the
17fact that these tests had been carried out and that there
18was this, shall we say, ambiguous finding?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think it is ambiguous at all, Mr Irving.
20 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I wanted to ask about that.
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is quite clear.
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Professor Evans, may I put this question to
23you because then we can get on? Would it be an unfair
24reading of the report that you have just been shown by
25Mr Irving that it, in fact, far from confirming that it is
26a forgery, confirms that it is authentic because it says
1that there are some sections which were added
2subsequently, but by necessary inference is saying that
3most of it was genuine and already there and not in ball
4point? Not very articulately expressed, but do you agree
5with that proposition?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, yes, and that is my understanding of the forensic
7investigations which were carried out both by the Federal
8German Criminal Office and by the Dutch Centre for War
9Documentation, that the diaries were genuine, but that
10there were some small stylistic emendations, certainly not
11whole pages or whole sections, let alone the whole thing
12being fake or a novel.
13 MR IRVING: Have I ever said that the whole thing was written
14in ball point pen?
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You said whole pages are written in ball point pen.
16 MR JUSTICE GRAY: You said it was a novel, Mr Irving, did you
18 MR IRVING: The third version is a novel, my Lord. The third
19version is a novel with the names changed.
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You did say in the Daily Mirror on 27th November 1979:
21"Many forgeries are among records, including the diary of
22Anne Frank". "The Anne Frank" -- another occasion in
231986: "The Anne Frank diary of which you have all heard
24is partly written in ball point ink, parts of the Anne
25Frank diaries are written in ball point ink".
26 Q. [Mr Irving] Are you aware of the fact that the father of Anne Frank in
1one of the libel actions obtained an affidavit from a
2handwriting expert who testified that the entire diaries
3were written in the same handwriting of the same person,
4including, therefore, the ball point passages?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I am not aware of that.
6 Q. [Mr Irving] Whether that is true or not, in other words, this
7allegation that the entire diaries, or this finding by the
8expert that the entire diaries were written in one
9handwriting, was it not reasonable for somebody to say in
101979, as I said in the passage you just quoted, that the
11diaries were suspect?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is not quite what you said, Mr Irving. You did not
13say they were suspect. You said they were fake.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] Let us take it stage by stage.
15 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let the witness answer first. You suggested
16that you were only saying that they were suspect.
17Professor Evans, do you think that Mr Irving went further?
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do, my Lord. He is saying they are a forgery.
19 MR IRVING: Is that not a reasonable conclusion, if the father
20himself has produced evidence to the courts that the
21handwriting is the same the whole way through,
22graphological evidence by affidavit in one of these libel
23actions that the handwriting is the same and that the
24handwriting turns out to be partly in ball point ink?
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Mr Irving, you said in 1993 that the diaries were a novel,
26the handwriting was not hers, whole pages were written in
1ball point pen, a 13 year old girl would not have the
2nouse to write a document of that sort at all ----
3 Q. [Mr Irving] Professor Evans, can you stick with chronology ----
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] This is a long time after the ----
5 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let the witness answer.
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] This is well after the official edition had been published
7in 1989. This is talking, what, four years after that.
8 MR IRVING: Can we stick to the chronology, please? We are at
9present back in 1979 and 1980, right?
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, and in my report, Mr Irving, I cite what you say in
111989, in 1993.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] And it is very convenient to confuse the chronology, but
13if we sort things out ----
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] There is not confusing about that chronology at all,
15Mr Irving. It is quite clear what you say in 1993; you
16assert that it is, that it is a fake. It is a forgery.
17 Q. [Mr Irving] Let us take this in stages. First of all, will you accept
18that the third edition written by the daughter of Otto
19Frank, Anne Frank, is written by her as a novel in which
20she has changed the names in her own diary into novel
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, the official edition published by the Dutch Centre for
23War Documentation is a diary.
24 Q. [Mr Irving] Will you accept that the third eversion she has written is
25written as a novel with the names changed in novel form?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have to at this point confess I am not expertise -- I do
1not have the expertise to go into that amount of detail.
2I have looked at the official edition and it is quite
3clear to me that that is a diary.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] So if it is a diary, why are the names changed then?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] The official edition.
6 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, I can think of all sorts of reasons.
7At the moment I do not understand the significance of Anne
9 MR IRVING: Well, because he is emphasising there ----
10 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Please let me finish. I do not understand
11the significance of it having been converted into a diary
12if it be the case that the original was a diary -- sorry,
13into a novel if it be the case that the original was a
15 MR IRVING: If your Lordship attaches no significance to the
16word "novel", then I will abandon that particular line.
17 MR JUSTICE GRAY: My impression of the evidence so far is that
18you have dismissed Anne frank's alleged diary as being in
19its totality no more than a novel, i.e. a work of
20fiction. If I am wrong about that, no doubt you will
22 MR IRVING: If your Lordship is going to attach importance to
23the word "novel", then perhaps we should look at precisely
24what the allegations are and the passages that are
25quoted. Can I just get the chronology straightened out
26because this is what the expert witness is, I think,
1seeking to confuse.
2 There are two important thresholds to be crossed
3here. The first threshold that we cross is the
4investigation by the German Government laboratory in 1980,
5and the second threshold is the authoritative
6investigation by the Dutch authorities which was a few
7years ago. Now, the question is whether I heeded each of
8these authoritative enquiries or whether I disregarded
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] And the answer is that you disregarded them.
11 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, let us take it stage by stage. Before 1980, was
12I entitled to say that because the handwriting expertise
13said that the handwriting was the same the whole way
14through this opus and parts of it were in ball point ink,
15therefore, the whole opus was suspect. Was that a
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I do not think it was because the parts that were in
18ball point ink were only stylistic emendations.
19 Q. [Mr Irving] But if they were said by the father to be in the same
20handwriting the whole way through -- this is the point
21I am trying to make -- if he produced expert evidence that
22the handwriting was unchanged?
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, you would have to -- you would have to present me
24with the written evidence for the claims you are making.
25I find it very difficult to deal with it in the way that
26you are ----
1 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, you have set yourself up here as an expert on this
2particular matter and now each time we come up with an
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Let me try to give the context of this again, I am trying
6 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Page 156, the criticism you are making,
7Professor Evans, is of what Mr Irving said in 1993.
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
9 Q. [Mr Justice Gray] That is the criticism.
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Exactly.
11 Q. [Mr Justice Gray] There is no point, Mr Irving, in going back to 1980
12because it was in the late 80s, as I understand it, that
13the scientific evidence, so the Defendants say, emerged
14which established that these were authentic diaries. You
15went on after that to say that they were novels and that a
1613 year old could not have written such a document.
17 MR IRVING: My Lord ----
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is the point that is made against you.
19 MR IRVING: What exactly is said in this 1993 passage? Your
20Lordship has it in front of you. It is the indented
21passage here: "Are you aware that they have made a full
22report? I say: "Doesn't surprise me". This is a very
23selective excerpt. If there was any specific reference by
24me in 1993 for saying that the diaries in their totality
25are a fake, believe me, this expert witness would, surely,
26have quoted it?
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, let me quote 9th November 1993 broadcast. This is
2video tape 207, and it is in English in tape 213.
3 Q. [Mr Irving] Is this in your report?
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No. This is in my response to your written questions, so
5it is available.
6 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Shall we try to find this? I would quite
7like to find it if we can.
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] My Lord. It is in my written response to Mr Irving's
10 Q. [Mr Justice Gray] No, I meant the original. Is it in one of the bundles?
111993? Where was the speech? Do you know? Was it in
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is rather complicated, my Lord. It is a -- yes, it was
14in Australia. It is not clear whether it is Australian or
15American. It is a version of a Danish television
16programme which is also broadcast in German on German
17Television, but there should be a transcript of tape 213.
18 MR RAMPTON: My Lord, if your Lordship has got, I do not know
19what it is called, Evans 2, is it, the file Evans 2?
20 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes.
21 MR RAMPTON: Behind tab 1 there are Professor Evans' responses
22to Mr Irving's written questions. On page 5 -- sorry,
23somebody has restamped it. Page 5 is the internal
24numbering of that document. At paragraph 9 your Lordship
25will see set out the history, as it were, for the
26genealogy of this extract in the report. There is a "7"
1stamped at the bottom of the page.
2 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not know what you are looking at, but
3I am looking at, I think, something different.
4 MR RAMPTON: Well, the document is dated 7th February 2000 and
5it should be in the front of Evans 2.
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] This is the second set of replies to Mr Irving's written
8 MR RAMPTON: Yes.
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Have I got it?
10 MR RAMPTON: You should have. It should look like that.
11 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Sorry. Yes, I have. I beg your pardon.
12 MR RAMPTON: In tab 1.
13 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Page 5?
14 MR RAMPTON: Page 5, paragraph 9. Page 5 at the top, paragraph
159, it runs over to page 6 is the history of this
17 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Have you got this, Mr Irving?
18 MR IRVING: I do not want, but I wish to make some comments on
19this. Your Lordship will remember that on November 4th
20when we had the pretrial review, I expressed grave
21misgivings about the use of edited broadcast programmes
22with all the, I will not say the chicanery that has gone
23into it, but all the clever cross-cutting and, unless we
24see the transcript of the whole programme or, at any rate,
25very substantial excerpts which are clearly indicative
26that nothing has been put in or nothing has been cut out,
1I would be very hesitant about allowing this kind of
2material which may be prejudicial to be put in in this
4 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, you say that, but if I read to you
5one of the extracts ----
6 MR IRVING: Yes, please do.
7 MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- it is in these terms: "To me, the Anne
8Frank's diaries are a romantic novel, rather like 'Gone
9With the Wind' and I would not read something like that".
10 MR IRVING: As a source, yes.
11 MR JUSTICE GRAY: How can the context really affect what you
12are saying which is that it is all made up?
13 MR IRVING: I am not saying that at all, my Lord.
14 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Oh, I thought you were saying...
15 MR IRVING: That is certainly not the point of what I am
16making. The Anne Frank diary, I am sure that your
17Lordship, like myself, has never had the pleasure of
18reading that particular work, but I have read a great deal
19about it, including the official Dutch investigation into
20it. I had lots of newspaper articles about it and I am
21quite familiar with its genesis; the way it started off
22first as a fragmentary diary, it was then rewritten by her
23in captivity because she had nothing else to do and then,
24as she grew up, she then rewrote it as a novel.
25 That is what I am saying there, but to take just
26that one sentence and to hang on that the imputation that
1I am saying the whole thing is a pack of lies, which your
2Lordship just put on it, I think is a very adventurous
4 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, do we have the ----
5 MR RAMPTON: My Lord, I really do think this is becoming the
6most frightful waste of time.
7 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, at least it is relevant.
8 MR RAMPTON: I know.
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: We have spent two days on the wholly
11 MR RAMPTON: I have been as patient as I possibly can be, but
12now I really cannot sit here any longer because I have in
13my hand a piece of paper taken from Mr Irving's website,
14or through his website, on 7th February of this month of
15an interview that he gave to something called CNN, which
16is a satellite news station, and he was interviewed on
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I have that. I have read that.
19 MR RAMPTON: This year.
20 MR IRVING: Here we go again. It is another very heavily
21cross-cut and edited broadcast.
22 MR RAMPTON: Well, I just read these four lines: "Interviewer
23to Irving: Did you say that the Anne Frank diary was a
24forgery? Irving: Guilty. Interviewer: Is it a
25forgery? Irving: No".
26 MR IRVING: Absolutely right. Absolutely right. Before 1979
1I was of the opinion that it was a highly suspect document
2for precisely the reasons I have set out, namely the
3father said the handwriting was the same the whole way
4through. He produced expert evidence in court to that
5effect in order to win a libel action. The handwriting
6was partly in ball point ink. So the conclusions there
7are absolutely plain.
8 After 1980 we had the German Government
9investigation which confirmed that the ball point ink was
10there and it was not until the Dutch carried out their
11authoritative tests that I was perfectly satisfied I had
12been wrong with that belief. I have made not the
13slightest hesitation in admitting that I was wrong, which
14is absolutely the right way to handle the matter.
15 But to take things out of chronology, which is
16what this witness has been doing, and to imply that by
17calling it a novel I am suggesting that the diary is in
18some way a pack of lies, is I think very unjust and not
19borne out by the evidence when it is presented in the
20proper sequence. But I repeat what I said about the
21prejudicial nature of producing fragments of very heavily
22edited sound bites from American or German or Danish
23television programmes. Your Lordship is familiar with how
24these programmes are concocted. The scissors play an
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] My Lord, may I make three points?
1 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes.
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] The first is when you describe something, when one
3describes something, as a novel, one surely implies that
4it is fictional, it is not telling the truth. I do think
5that is a significant use of words.
6 Secondly, in my report on page 156 I quote an
7interview in 1993: "Interviewer: Are you aware that the
8Dutch Centre for War Documentation has made a full report
9about this?" that is to say the allegations of
10falsification and so on in the diaries. "Irving: Doesn't
11surprise me. Interviewer: And they say it's - they have
12made public all the diaries, and they examined the
13handwriting, and all there is to know about it. Irving:
14Doesn't surprise me. A lot of money is at stake. The
15Anne Frank Foundation is a very wealthy political
16organization in Amsterdam. Interview: We're talking
17about the Dutch State War Documentation Centre here.
18We're not talking about the Anne Frank Foundation. We're
19talking about a public institution. Irving: But I'm
20talking about the financial interests which are at stake
22 I think, Mr Irving, the clear implication of
23that is that the full report of the Dutch Centre for War
24Documentation is a falsification and is not reliable in
26 The third point I want to make ----
1 MR IRVING: Why have you not ----
2 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, there are three points.
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] And If I can make my third point, is that again in 1993,
4his Lordship has already quoted part of this interview
5that you gave, saying that you would not read it, you read
6certain passages and so on. "We have samples of Anne
7Frank's real handwriting in postcards which she wrote to
8friends in 1940 and 1939. They were recently auctioned in
9an auction house in the United States about two years
10ago. That handwriting is totally different from the
11handwriting in the diaries. They are as different as
12chalk and cheese and the extraordinary finding is that
13some of the pages of the diaries have been written in ball
14point pen which is a pen that didn't exist in Anne Frank's
15lifetime". 1993, Mr Irving.
16 MR IRVING: Yes, and, quite clearly, the parts that are written
17in ball point ink in the diaries cannot have been written
18by the girl who wrote the postcards, am I right?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You are saying some of the pages -- that simply is not the
21 Q. [Mr Irving] But some of the pages were written in ball point pen, is
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No. As I understand it, there were stylistic
24emendations. There are not whole pages written in ball
26 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you have any evidence for the words "stylistic
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] --- pen. Well, this is -- yes, the report of the Dutch
3Centre for War Documentation which is summarized in their
4introduction to their Critical Edition which you dismiss
5as being the product of financial manipulation by the Anne
6Frank Foundation, whereas a few minutes ago, Mr Irving,
7you just said that you had accepted that report ----
8 MR IRVING: I do totally.
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] --- in 1989 when it came out ----
10 Q. [Mr Irving] And I did and I always have done.
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] --- and here you are in 1993 saying that you do not accept
12it. I cannot accept what you are saying there.
13 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I think we have now had enough
14evidence on the Anne Frank diaries. I think we will move
15on to the next topic.
16 MR IRVING: My Lord, he made now points.
17 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I have got to introduce some
18control. We have spent this morning so far dealing with
19pages, I think you started at 128, is that right, and we
20have now got to 156.
21 MR IRVING: If this expert report was not so flawed ----
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: So we have spent nearly two hours dealing
23with very subsidiary points. We still have not got on to
24the guts of this report.
25 MR IRVING: If this expert report was not so flawed and bias,
26then I would not have been bogged down in the marshes,
1shall we say, before we came to the real materials.
2 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I have made my ruling. You are going to have
3the opportunity to answer questions in cross-examination.
4We are moving on to the this next topic, and I am afraid I
5am going to have to be much more firm with you than I have
6been up until now.
7 MR IRVING: If the witness could possibly answer more briefly,
8then we would not spent so much time on these matters.
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, that is not fair.
10 MR IRVING: I advance with the utmost trepidation, my Lord,
11because I have no idea where ----
12 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, advance and then see whether the
13trepidation was justified.
14 MR IRVING: One never knows whether the mines are dummies or
15not. Page 158, the end of paragraph 34, you complain that
16I state that the witness Hoss made statements which
17contain egregious anachronisms, inconsistencies and other
18generally implausible passages. Do you not accept that
19that is so then?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Let me -- where are we? Yes. Let me read the paragraph.
21We are talking about the memoirs of Rudolf Hoss, the
22Kommandant of Auschwitz, and the interrogations of Rudolf
23Hoss which were made in Polish captivity. In your book on
24Nuremberg you allege, I say, that Hoss was "manhandled" by
25those who arrested him and kept without sleep until he
26confessed. You term this "torture". You say: "Hoss's
1confessions contain many deliberate errors to make it
2clear they were untrue. His memory is patchy about days
3and places, and about the events of four or five years
4earlier. There were many inconsistencies in his account.
5He signed a confession in English although he had no
6reading knowledge of English. He frequently changed his
7testimony about numbers. Hoss wrote his memoirs in Polish
8captivity 'as a means of postponing his fate'. His
9statements, Irving charges, contained 'egregious
10anachronisms, inconsistencies and other generally
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Will you now answer the question?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] So I am trying to summarize your views there.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you dispute the fact that his statements contain these
15inaccuracies and implausible statements?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think there is -- well, first of all, I do not
17think there is any evidence that there are deliberate
18errors to make it clear that what he said was untrue.
19 Secondly, I think one has to distinguish between
20the interrogations and the memoirs. Hoss says in his
21memoirs that he was manhandled and very badly treated.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] Where did he write the memoirs?
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] He writes his memoirs in Polish captivity, and the
24confessions, well, the first of his confessions which,
25admissions, statements, which resulted from interrogations
26was, therefore, discounted. What I am referring to here
1are the memoirs.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] I only have two questions to ask. Would a confession or a
3statement obtained by these means ever be accepted by a
4British court of law?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have already said, this is only one statement, the first
6statement. The memoirs that he wrote were certainly not
7obtained under duress. They were written in captivity
8under the imminent prospect of death and, to my mind, that
9makes them more likely to be honest.
10 Q. [Mr Irving] Would you answer the question? Would it be acceptable in
11a British court of law, this kind of statement?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am trying to explain the context. The statement which
13he made under duress, the first of his statements, was not
15 Q. [Mr Irving] If he was such a reliable witness and so convincing, why
16was he not called by the prosecution at Nuremberg when he
17was actually in the building in a cell?
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is a question to which this witness
19cannot possibly know the answer.
20 MR IRVING: On page 160 at line 4 of paragraph 36: "Irving
21casts doubt on almost all testimony at the Nuremberg War"
22-- is that an exaggeration, that I doubt almost all the
23testimony produced at Nuremberg?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is not what I say.
25 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, you say that I say it does not fit my arguments;
26I say it was obtained by torture and threats?
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, no, I do not, Mr Irving. I say: "Irving casts doubt
2on almost all testimony at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials
3or during the prior interrogations if it does not fit his
4arguments, alleging it was obtained by torture and
5threats". Those are my precise words.
6 Q. [Mr Irving] In other words, that I deliberately manipulate, I accept
7the evidence that I like and all the other evidence
8I disregard on this rather threadbare pretext of tortures
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] In your book on Nuremberg you refer constantly to -- and
11again, my Lord, this is in my written response No. 10 on
12page 6 of my reply to the second set of written questions
13by Mr Irving, where you talk about "the unsavoury methods
14of the OSS, intimidatory American tactics appear to have
15been routine, harassment of the prisoners, a paralysing
16regime of psychoterror enforced on the defendants", and so
17on. That seems to me to be general attempts to discredit
18the testimony at the Nuremberg War Crimes trials.
19 Q. [Mr Irving] Having you investigated the methods used by the Allies and
20the interrogators at Nuremberg? Are you able to state
21with confidence to this court that I am wrong?
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You do not present, you present to me -- you present in
23your book some isolated incidents of maltreatment of
24prisoners of Streichier(?), I think, and, of course, in
25the initial interrogation of Hoss, but you do not present
26evidence in your book that this was general. I do not
1really see evidence there to justify those statements
2which you make in a general sense.
3 Q. [Mr Irving] So you have complete confidence yourself, therefore, in
4the methods used by the allies to obtain ----
5 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. This witness has said many times you
6have to look at all the circumstances and evaluate the
7particular witness and his evidence.
8 MR IRVING: If you look at your footnote on that page, the
9second footnote: "Irving in an interview in New Zealand,
10recording a conversation with SS Colonel Gohler" which
11I claimed to have had at the end of the war when I would
12have been a child?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, I look up the transcript. You said: "I remember
14right at the end of the war I asked one of Himmler's
15staff", and so on and so forth, but it is not a very
17 Q. [Mr Irving] So why did you put it in then?
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let us move on we all. Agree it is not a
19very important point.
20 MR IRVING: But you are implying there that I have lied again,
21are you not, in that footnote?
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I am not, no. It is an amusing little mistake that
24 Q. [Mr Irving] You agree that it is a misreading, therefore, of a
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Don't let us spend time on it, Mr Irving.
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I do not agree it is a misreading. I think it is just
2a misformulation of yours, Mr Irving. It is not very
3important at all.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] These verbatim transcripts can easily be misread?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I think I read it correctly. I am just saying it is a
6slip of your tongue, that is all.
7 Q. [Mr Irving] Or a slip of the punctuation of the person doing the ----
8 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, will you please move on?
9 MR IRVING: You are still critical, of course, of my methods of
10obtaining information from Hitler's private staff. Would
11you see, please, pages 83 to 5 of the little bundle? This
12is the complete passage from that interview you have just
13quoted, the one where I was allegedly conducting
14interviews as a six year old. Why did you not pay more
15attention to the surrounding three pages of that interview
16instead of this rather amusing little footnote you put in?
17Do I not describe in those three pages (and this is the
18question) how I have persuaded Hitler's private staff to
19reveal to me ugly secrets of their memories of their times
20with Hitler, if I can put it like that, and is that not
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, that is not the context here of what I am talking
23about here at all, Mr Irving.
24 Q. [Mr Irving] Have you referred to these three pages anywhere in your
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] These are?
1 Q. [Mr Irving] The reference to what Hitler's private secretary told me
2about the Night of the Long Knives, for example? The
3reference to what Johannes Gohler told me about Hitler's
4order to Himmler to liquidate the inmates of Buchenwald?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] The Night of the Long Knives is not a -- I think I do
6mention the Night of the Long Knives briefly, but it is
7not really a central point in my report.
8 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think you made this point on Thursday to
10 MR IRVING: We did, my Lord, but I am just drawing attention to
11the fact that he uses the transcripts very selectively to
12imply that I am lying about the date I conducted an
13interview, but there are three pages ----
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am sorry, Mr Irving, I did not.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] Will you please not interrupt?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I did not imply that you were lying. I am quite happy to
17accept it is a slip of the tongue.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] But he ignores the three pages ----
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is not an important point.
20 Q. [Mr Irving] --- which show me quite clearly using interviews in the
21manner that they should be conducted.
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, you made a perfectly sensible
23point on Thursday, namely that you often do refer, so you
24say, to the unfavourable things that the Adjutants and
25their relations told you about Hitler. You have made that
26point. I have absorbed it and I have digested it. There
1is no point in going back over it all over again.
2 MR IRVING: My remark goes purely to the selective nature of
3this expert witness's report and reporting on the basis of
4the evidence before him.
5 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Would you like to move on now?
6 MR IRVING: Page 162, when we are now dealing with Hans
7Aumeier, you allege that: "It did not fit into my
8preconceived notion" - this is three lines from the end
9- "it did not fit into my preconceived notion that there
10were no gassings" ----
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Is it not, in fact, the case that Hans Aumeier's reports
13are not eagerly seized upon by the Holocaust historians
14because he, too, presents information which does not fit
15in with the standard version, like the gassings times?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think that, in fact, the Aumeier documents, which you
17discovered in the Public Record Office after their release
18in 1992, were not seen by anybody else. So I do not think
19there is any suppression there by other people.
20 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes, but is it not the fact that the Aumeier documents do
21not fit in with preconceived notions in the way you
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY: We went through all this with Professor van
24Pelt, did we not?
25 MR IRVING: On page 163, now, paragraph 41, you ask: "Who
26could possibly have gone to all the immense trouble
1necessary to fabricate such a vast quantity of documentary
2material"? What documentary materials were you describing
3there, just so we can be sure of what you are talking
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, a number of different things, the memoirs, for
6example, of Holocaust survivors which exist in substantial
8 Q. [Mr Irving] You are not talking about wartime documents then?
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not say wartime documents. In addition, in the
10course of this trial, you have repeatedly alleged that
11wartime documents have been fabricated without really
12saying who would have done it or why, or what opportunity
13they might have had to do so.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] His Lordship knows this is not true. I cast suspicion
15only on one document.
16 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am afraid I do not accept that, Mr Irving.
17 MR IRVING: On the June 24, 1943 document, my Lord.
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, you cast suspicion on a number of other
20 MR IRVING: I am impugning the integrity of only one document
21then. Let me put it like that. I raise my eyebrows at
22certain others, but accept them just for the purposes of
23argument. In other words, you are not there talking about
24a vast quantity of wartime documents then. You are
25talking about a vast quantity of postwar ----
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am talking there in a general sense about the evidence
1of all the crimes, for example the existence of gas
3 Q. [Mr Irving] But this is important.
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It refers right back to the previous three sections of
5this particular chapter in my report.
6 Q. [Mr Irving] I am trying to narrow down here -- this is quite
7important. If his Lordship is led to believe by a
8careless statement of the witnesses that there is a vast
9body of wartime documents, this would be unfair, would it
10not, because you are not referring to wartime documents?
11You are referring to postwar documents?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am referring to all kinds of documents.
13 Q. [Mr Irving] You are not referring to wartime documents?
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am referring to documents including wartime documents,
15the totality of the written evidence for the Holocaust
16which you deny.
17 Q. [Mr Irving] Are you saying there is a vast quantity of wartime
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] What I am saying is that there is a vast quantity of
20documents and material for all aspects of the Holocaust.
21 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I expect you would accept, Professor Evans,
22just to move on, the number of overtly incriminating
23documents, wartime documents, as regards gas chambers is
24actually pretty few and far between?
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Gas chambers, other things such as the systematic nature
26of the extermination, I am referring to the whole package
2 MR IRVING: But I am trying to divide that package.
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Wartime, postwar, shootings, gassings, systematic nature
4and so on.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] Professor Evans, you accept that we cannot do things that
6way in this court. We have to divide things up into
7parcels and look at the Eastern Front, look at the
8systematic nature, and look at the gas chambers, and look
9at the documentary basis for each. As his Lordship has
10said, you do accept that the documentary basis for the
11gassings, the gas chambers and for the systematic nature
12of that is thin compared with the documentation of the
13Eastern Front shootings?
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, but what I am describing here is really -- I am
15moving on to the totality of all the different kinds of
16evidence. For example, I have dealt previously ----
17 Q. [Mr Irving] I am anxious you do not move on from the questions I am
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Have dealt previously in the report in an earlier section
20with your allegation that Holocaust survivors have made it
21all up, for example.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] Can we have a clear answer ----
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Stabbed their tattoos on their arms themselves and so on.
24 Q. [Mr Irving] -- so that we can move on. The documentation relating to
25the gas chambers and the systematic nature of gas chamber
26killings is sparse compared with the documentation of the
1killings on the Eastern Front, is that right?
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. I think that is correct, that I am referring here to
4 Q. [Mr Irving] Paragraph 44 on the facing page. You object to my
5suggestion that there was a well-financed campaign.
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I say it is a typical Holocaust denier's argument.
7 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes. If it is a true statement, is that an unjustified
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Let me quote the sentence. In the preface, this is a
10comment on a quote----
11 Q. [Mr Irving] Do not start reading all this out.
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am sorry, Mr Irving, but I do want to get quite straight
13what I am actually saying. I do not want the court to
14rely simply on your gloss on it.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] It is the question I am asking which you have to answer,
16I am afraid.
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, I am going to answer it.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you agree that it is a well-financed campaign?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am trying to -- can I just say what I say in the report,
20because that will make it much simpler to answer. In the
21preface to the English edition of the Leuchter report you
22wrote: "Nobody likes to be swindled, still less where
23considerable sums of money are involved". You go on to
24say: "Millions of honest, intelligent people have been
25duped by the well financed and brilliantly successful post
26war publicity campaign which followed on from the original
1ingenuous plan of the British Psychological Warfare
2Executive (PWE) in 1942 to spread to the world the
3propaganda story that the Germans were using 'gas
4chambers' to kill millions of Jews other 'undesirables'."
5I go on to say then that this is the typical Holocaust
6denier's argument that the "myth" of the Holocaust has
7been kept going by a "well-financed" campaign in order to
8legitimize the paying of German reparations to the State
9of Israel. Quite clearly, I do not accept that everyone
10who has written about the gas chambers in Auschwitz and
11elsewhere, and the Holocaust, the extermination of the
12Jews, has been financed in order to legitimize the paying
13of German reparations to the State of Israel. I think
14that is an appalling slur on the large numbers of decent
15and serious scholars who have devoted a large amount of
16their lives to doing this. I think it is a disgraceful
18 Q. [Mr Irving] I must insist that you answer my questions briefly because
19I ask the questions and then I am the one who gets into
20trouble when you answer at such length.
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, Mr Irving, but your question did not make it clear
22what I was saying in my report. I felt it necessary to
23say what I was saying.
24 Q. [Mr Irving] Have you heard of the phrase "instrumentalization of the
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have certainly heard of that, yes.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] Can you answer in two or three lines what you understand
2by the phrase "instrumentalization of the Holocaust"?
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is an accusation sometimes levelled at people who make
4a reference to the Holocaust and are accused of doing so
5for ulterior motives.
6 Q. [Mr Irving] Is this the allegation that somebody like Norman
8 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not really think that matters.
9 MR IRVING: Page 168, paragraph 50, line 3, those three dots,
10you agree, stand for 58 words, five commas, two full stops
11and a colon, is that right?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think we have already been through this. I do not think
13that is right, actually.
14 MR JUSTICE GRAY: We are not going to count the full stops.
15Come on, Mr Irving. You have made your point about
17 MR IRVING: Page 51: This goes to the anti-Semitism element,
18I suppose, does it not?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Paragraph 51.
20 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes. I have made a speech in 1992 and you take exception
21to my description of the Board of Deputies, and the words
22that I use. Is any criticism of an organization like that
23permissible, do you think?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do think it is rather over the top to describe the Board
25of Deputies of British Jews as cockroaches.
26 Q. [Mr Irving] If you are familiar with the methods that they have used
1to try to destroy a professional historian's career and
2family, would that professional historian be entitled to
3use pretty colourful language to describe these people who
4are secretly trying to destroy him?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is a very hypothetical question. I think what you
6are saying there is that the Board of Deputies of British
7Jews have been engaged in a secret campaign to try and
8destroy your livelihood.
9 Q. [Mr Irving] That is what I said. If the intention is to destroy an
10author and his family and his career and livelihood by
11underhand methods or by whatever methods, is he not
12entitled to defend himself and use occasional lurid
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I would have to first of all see evidence to persuade me
15that such a secret dastardly campaign had been carried
16out. I do not want to answer a hypothetical question of
17that nature. I do think that professional historians
18should be reasonably measured in their language. I do not
19think that is an appropriate word to use.
20 Q. [Mr Irving] If the court is shown a document showing that at this
21precise time that body was contemplating putting pressure
22on that author's publisher to stop publishing his books
23and thereby destroy his career and livelihood, and they
24were doing it behind armour plated doors in their
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Show the witness the document and then we can
2 MR IRVING: May I do so, my Lord?
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, of course.
4 MR IRVING: Would you go to bundle E?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am not sure I have this.
6 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Bundle E. No, you may well not have.
7 MR IRVING: I am looking for the document. Page 82 in the
8bundle called Global.
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] This is a meeting on 12th December 1991, Education and
11 Q. [Mr Irving] The Education and Academic Committee of the Holocaust
12Educational Trust. Can you read item No. 6 please?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] "David Irving. Concern was voiced over the publication of
14the second edition of Hitler's War. There was debate over
15how to approach Macmillan publishers over Goebbels Diary.
16It was agreed await news from Jeremy Coleman before
17deciding what course of action to take".
18 Q. [Mr Irving] I am not going to go into the remaining documents in that
19bundle, Professor Evans, but, if I put it to you that this
20is evidence and that other documents will be submitted to
21court later on, the pressure that was put on my publishers
22by this body, which is part of the Board of Deputies,
23which was meeting at their headquarters, am I not entitled
24to use that kind of language to describe these people?
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, to be quite honest, no. This is a meeting of five
26people, Mr Coleman, Professor Gould, Professor Polonski,
1Mr Nyman and Dr John Fox. It is not a meeting of the
2Board of Deputies of British Jews. Where it takes place
3I think is pretty immaterial. It says that there is a
4debate, but they agreed that they are not going to do
5anything. So I do not think that is justification for
6calling the Board of Deputies of British Jews cockroaches.
7 MR RAMPTON: What is more, there is another thing needs to be
8pointed out. That document, which is the first time I
9have seen, is dated 12th December 1991. It is predated
10therefore by some months by what Mr Irving said, which
11apparently was said on 5th October 1991.
12 MR IRVING: Are you ----
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It post dates it?
14 MR RAMPTON: Yes. The document post dates the Irving statement
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You said predates.
17 MR RAMPTON: I am sorry.
18 MR IRVING: I do not want to hold up the court at this point,
19but will you accept that that bundle you are holding
20called Global is about three inches thick, and contains
21many hundreds of documents?
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is not a terribly illuminating question.
23 MR IRVING: My Lord I do not really want to read through all
24the other documents.
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is not a very contentious statement.
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, I am not asking you to. Anyway, I think
1we will move on. You have put that document.
2 MR IRVING: Precisely. Witness, will you accept that, on the
3balance of probabilities, there are other documents of
4that nature in that bundle?
5 MR JUSTICE GRAY: If I may say so, Mr Irving, we must do better
7 MR IRVING: Mr Rampton has suggested that this was it, and so
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: What it comes to is, if there was in
10existence a document prior to what you said about the
11British Board of Deputies being cockroaches, which you say
12justifies you having said that, then put it to the
13witness. If you have not got such a document, move on,
15 MR IRVING: I shall put it to the court in due course, my Lord,
16the whole bundle, as your Lordship is familiar. If an
17author is aware that such a campaign is being conducted
18against him by a body of whatever class or colour or race
19or religion, is he entitled to use lurid language in
21 MR JUSTICE GRAY: You have asked that question many times
22before and that is a comment. You have not established
23the factual premise for it, so can you move to the next
24topic, which means going beyond page 168.
25 MR IRVING: My Lord, you say I have not established a factual
26premise. To do that I would have to go back to the bundle
1and I do not want to do that at this point.
2 MR JUSTICE GRAY: In that case you cannot ask the question.
3 MR IRVING: The final five lines of that same paragraph: "In
4April 1998 Mr Irving spoke of American Jews 'moving into
5the same positions of predominance and influence'", and so
6on, that they held in the Weimar Republic. This is a
7quotation, is it not, from my diary in April 1998?
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] From your website. Published on your website.
9 Q. [Mr Irving] It is a quotation from my diary in 1998?
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Published on your website. In other words, it is free to
11anybody to access, which is what we did.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Have you had access to all my private diaries?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I did not need access to your private diaries to get hold
14of this quotation.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] Will you answer the question?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] May I read the whole quotation first to establish what we
17are talking about?
18 Q. [Mr Irving] Just answer that question. Have you had access to my
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am sorry, I want to read the whole quotation to get
21clear what we are going to see, then I will answer your
23 Q. [Mr Irving] Will you answer the question first?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] In April 1998 he spoke of American Jews'moving into the
25same positions of predominance and influence..."
26 Q. [Mr Irving] My Lord, will you instruct the witness to answer questions
1put to him?
2 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am despairing. Would you let the witness
3-- and then you can ask the question. Read it out
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] "In April 1998 he spoke of American Jews 'moving into the
6same positions of predominance and influence (media,
7banking, business, entertainment, and the more
8lucrative professions like law, medical and dentistry)
9that they held in Weimar Germany, which gave rise to the
10hatreds and the resulting pogroms; and that this being so,
11twenty or thirty more years might see in the USA the same
12dire consequences as happened in Nazi Germany". Extract
13from Irving's personal diary April 13, 14th 1998, on
14Irving's Focal Point website. The answer to your question
15is yes, I have had access to your personal diaries.
16 MR IRVING: Do you have any reason to suspect this is not a
17genuine diary, what is on my website?
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think it is as genuine as the Anne Frank diary, yes.
19 Q. [Mr Irving] I will repeat the question. Do you have any reason to
20believe that this is not a genuine diary extract?
21 MR JUSTICE GRAY: The answer is no.
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] The answer is no. I answered it.
23 MR IRVING: Will you go to page 88 of the bundle which is F?
24My Lord, the purpose of this is purely to point out, not
25words left out but surrounding material left out.
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, context.
1 MR IRVING: Is this the diary as reproduced on my website?
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It looks like it, yes. I have downloaded on 15th February
4 Q. [Mr Irving] So it is a description of a lecture that I delivered to
5students at the University of Washington State in Pulman
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, seems to be.
8 Q. [Mr Irving] The questions are the best part as usual, a German girl
9student a quiet well spoken 20 year old, the Federal
10Republic's equivalent of a Rhodes scholar. I carry on now
11to the next paragraph. The paragraph begins: Several
12coloured students are there mostly training to become
14 MR JUSTICE GRAY: This has nothing to do with the context of
15what Professor Evans quoted. It is completely irrelevant.
16 MR IRVING: They are bright and friendly.
17 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I have read it all. The context? This adds
18nothing and subtracts nothing. What is the point,
19Mr Irving? Why are we looking at this?
20 MR IRVING: I am putting this in connection with the allegation
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: What, about several coloured students being
24 MR IRVING: "Several coloured students were there, mostly
25training to become teachers. They are bright and
1 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I see. I thought we were looking at this for
2context of what Professor Evans quoted.
3 MR IRVING: I used the eye witness testimony of General Walter
4Bruns, which your Lordship is familiar with. I read out
5the whole of that document to these students, which goes
6to the Holocaust denial issue. This is a typical speech
7by me to university students who are a bright and friendly
8lot, and we have had just this one passage taken out of
9context when a Jewish Professor from the floor asked
10questions and I put to him my take on the present
11situation in the United States.
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, I do think that that is completely irrelevant. If
13you want a little bit more, the context is: "One
14questioner addresses the issue that I had raised in
15discussing the Daniel Goldhagen thesis, that if I were a
16Jew I would want to see an answer to the vital question
17why the Jews are so hated within only a few years of their
18arrival in each host country. He points out that the Jews
19have now been in the United States in strength for 50
20years yet they are not hated. I reply that, on the
21contrary, my own perception is that they are moving into
22the same positions", and so on and so forth. That is the
24 MR IRVING: That is the context, my Lord, and I think that that
25substantially softens what might be taken to be the sting
26of that passage left, as it is, in that rather bald and
1exposed position in the paragraph as quoted in the expert
2report. I am being asked by a Jewish Professor for my
3take on the present situation and I am telling him in this
4semi-academic atmosphere the worries that I would have if
5I were Jewish.
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, to my mind, it does not actually soften it at all.
7There is no indication here that it is a Jewish Professor,
8incidentally. What he says is, he quotes you, saying
9that, if you were a Jew, you would want to see am answer
10to the vital question why are the Jews so hated within
11only a few years of their arrival in each host country. I
12think I have done you a favour by leaving that out.
13 Q. [Mr Irving] On page 170, this is a sentence beginning with the
14word "fundamentally". Here you have allowed yourself to
15say, "Fundamentally, however, as Irving conceded", there
16is that word again "conceded", "he was in basic agreement
17with Goebbels in his belief that 'they had it coming to
18them'". Who do you mean by "they"?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] The Jews.
20 Q. [Mr Irving] The Jews. So you are saying once again that I am
21applauding the Holocaust effectively?
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think I use the word "applaud". There again, let
23me just read the surrounding context which you are so keen
24on reading out in your own statements, so I hope I am
25allowed to do the same with mine.
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes.
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] In 1996 you recount the view of the publisher who
2eventually refused to publish the American edition of your
3book on Goebbels and you said: Maybe ... the chairman of
4St Martin's Press was right when he said: 'This book
5suggests they (the Jews) had it coming to them'. But if
6he is right, let me say in advance in my self-defence, it
7is not David Irving who says that, it is David Irving
8reporting Dr Goebbels who says that. Maybe I did not make
9it plain enough, or maybe I did not put enough distance
10between myself and Dr Goebbels or maybe I did not put in
11all the counter-arguments I should have done to be
12politically correct". "Fundamentally, however, as Irving
13conceded", I go on, "he was in basic agreement with
14Goebbels in his belief that 'they had it coming to them'."
15"For, Irving told an audience in Tampa, Florida, on 6th
16October 1995:", and then I have a very lengthy quote which
17I think has already been referred to in the trial, so I
18will not read it out.
19 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, it has. The short answer is that the
20Jews did have it coming to them, but there is a longer
21answer. I think that is a fair summary.
22 MR IRVING: My Lord, what he has left out from this quotation
23of course -- we have not actually looked at it in detail.
24 MR JUSTICE GRAY: We have looked at the Tampa, Florida one in
26 MR IRVING: The reference is to this violent demonstration that
1began in one of my speeches in Freeport in Louisiana?
2Have we had that? The fact that the local community came
3along and violently disrupted a lecture that I was
4speaking at, and that that is what has been left out of
5the middle of this speech, in the middle of this
6anecdote? I am sure that we have not had that, my Lord.
7 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am sorry, I have lost you temporarily. You
8are talking about Louisiana but this is Florida.
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] There is an ellipse in the indented quotation.
10 MR IRVING: There are four ellipses on that page, each of which
11was serious material and should not have been left out
12because it explains the remarks that follow.
13 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Shall we deal with that as a matter of
14submission? We have been through this speech in
15considerable detail already. I have it reasonably well in
16mind and I do not think it is going to be sensible to
17spend ten minutes filling in the ellipses.
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have looked at this speech again, my Lord, and the only
19passage that I considered should be reinstated is listed
20in my letter of 10th January 2000 with amendments to the
21report. So there is a short passage there. But otherwise
22I come back to the fact that this is a very long quotation
23already, and I think it gives a correct impression of your
25 MR IRVING: In that case, let us spend the remaining few
26minutes before the adjournment examining precisely what
1you consider my views to be, unless his Lordship
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No.
4 MR IRVING: "Irving conceded that he was in basic agreement
5with Goebbels in his belief that the Jews had it coming to
6them". That is, of course, a repugnant statement and you
7are prepared now to defend that, are you, Professor?
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
9 Q. [Mr Irving] So you are saying that Irving said that the Jews deserved
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is right. That is to say, of course, on your
12interpretation of the Holocaust.
13 Q. [Mr Irving] They deserved the gas chambers, the barbed wire, the
14millions of deaths, that they had it coming to them, and
15that this my own personal view? This is your view as an
16expert witness in this case?
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, I would not say the gas chambers, since you denied
18that in 1996 when you made this statement, but for the
20 Q. [Mr Irving] Ignoring the cheap laughs.
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am sorry, I have to make that point.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] This is a repugnant allegation for you to make and you
23should not be playing to the gallery with cheap laughs.
24 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think Professor Evans is playing to
25the gallery. I really do not.
26 MR IRVING: If he says I do not mean the gas chambers because
2 MR JUSTICE GRAY: He is making the serious point that, when
3you, as he argues, say that the Jews had it coming to
4them, you cannot have been meaning that they had the gas
5chambers coming to them, because at that stage you were
6saying that there were not any gas chambers. That is the
7point. It is a serious point.
8 MR IRVING: My Lord, this is characteristic of this witness's
9methods, that, when he come up against an awkward
10question, he attempts to push this particular express
11train on to a siding, and I am not going down the gas
12chamber siding, I am not going down that particular road.
13I am going to nail this witness down on his submission to
14this court that I applaud the Holocaust, which is what
15that sentence boils down to.
16 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. That is not quite what he is saying.
17What he is saying is that you had whatever you meant by
18the Holocaust, that the Jews had whatever you meant by the
19Holocaust coming to them. That is what he is saying you
21 MR IRVING: With respect my Lord, is that not precisely what
22I just said?
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Carry on with your questions and we will see
24where you get.
25 MR IRVING: "Irving said that he agreed with Goebbels that they
26had it coming to them".
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you not see the distinction between an author writing
3in a book saying Goebbels said that the Jews had it coming
4to them and he believed they had it coming to them, and
5the author himself believing the Jews had it coming to
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I just quoted a lengthy passage where you try and wriggle
8out of the suggestion made by the chairman of St Martin's
9Press that the book suggests that the Jews had it coming
10to them. The man who was going to publish your book and
11had read it took that message from the book and you say
12that maybe you did not make it plain enough, did not put
13enough distance between yourself and Goebbels. I then go
14on to quote your speech in Tampa, Florida on 6th October
151995, where you say precisely the same thing.
16 MR RAMPTON: Perhaps one could turn over the page for
17completeness because this theme is completed in paragraph
1856, and I do resist a lack of context.
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] In 1991 you said "they (and you mean the Jews) dragged us
20into two world wars and now, for equally mysterious
21reasons, they are trying to drag us into the Balkans".
22 MR IRVING: Can we narrow down----
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] There is another lengthy quote there, why does it always
24happen to the Jews, you ask.
25 Q. [Mr Irving] Can we therefore narrow down what your allegation against
26the author of this book is? Are you alleging that he
1applauded what happened to the Jews?
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] What I am saying here is ----
3 Q. [Mr Irving] It should be easy to answer. Does he applaud it or does
4he not, in your view?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Let us read the text of my report, Mr Irving.
6 Q. [Mr Irving] Can you just answer a simple question?
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] "Fundamentally, however, as Irving conceded, he was in
8basic agreement with Goebbels in his belief that 'they had
9it coming to them'".
10 Q. [Mr Irving] Will you now answer my question?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is what I am saying.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Will you answer my question?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] The word "applause" and "applauded" does not occur there.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] Just so that everybody in this courtroom can be plain what
15you are suggesting, are you suggesting that I, David
16Irving, applauded what happened to the Jews or not?
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am saying that you are saying that they deserved what
19 MR JUSTICE GRAY: That answer has been given now three or four
20times, Mr Irving.
21 MR IRVING: There is a certain amount of wriggling going on
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY: If you say you never said anything of the
24kind, put that to the witness.
25 MR IRVING: If what?
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: If you say you never said that the Jews had
1it coming to them, or they deserved what happened to them,
2put that to the witness.
3 MR IRVING: I am trying to get the witness to state
4specifically whether he sees a distinction between
5Dr Goebbels saying in his diaries, as quoted by me in my
6book, that the Jews had it coming to them on the one hand,
7and David Irving applauded what happened, the Holocaust,
8on the other.
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is a false antithesis because applauding
10does not come into it. No-one is suggesting you applauded
12 MR IRVING: Thank you very much. If the witness would say the
14 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Will you listen, please. What is being
15suggested is that you have on occasions said that the Jews
16brought it on themselves. Now, if you say that is not
17true, put it to the witness, and he will probably go to
18paragraph 56 of his report in his answer.
19 MR IRVING: Can we take this in two stages? Witness, you have
20heard his Lordship say nobody says that David Irving
21applauded the Holocaust. Does that include you?
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have already pointed out several times I do not say in
23these paragraphs that you applaud the Holocaust however
24you conceive of it.
25 Q. [Mr Irving] What you do say is that I state in my Goebbels biography
26that Goebbels believed that the Jews had it coming to
1them. That is the first question. Goebbels believed they
2had it coming to them?
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] And that in the following page to which Mr Rampton has
5drawn attention I go on then to examine that piece by
6piece and say to what degree was Goebbels right. Is that
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No.
9 Q. [Mr Irving] For example -- I do not want to go over old ground --
10the Baltic States and so on?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Let us leave the Baltic States out of it. What you say is
12that "maybe the chairman of St Martin's Press was right
13when he said this book suggests they (the Jews) had it
14coming to them, maybe I did not make it plain enough and
15maybe I did not put enough distance between myself and Dr
16Goebbels, or maybe I did not put in all the
17arguments, counter arguments, I should have done to be
18politically correct". One notes that sneering phrase at
19the end there.
20 Then you go on in paragraph 55 to recount what
21you said in a meeting. "I said", quoting you, "to a
22leader of the Jewish community in Freeport Louisiana, you
23are disliked, you people. You have been disliked for three
24thousand years. You have been disliked so much that you
25have been hounded from country to country, from pogrom to
26purge, from purge back to pogrom, and yet you never asked
1yourselves what is it that the rest of humanity does not
2like about the Jewish people, to such an extent" ----
3 MR IRVING: Witness, we have had all this so many times My
4Lord, if he is going to read these parts, he must read the
5other parts as well.
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] "that they repeatedly put us through the grinder?" --
7I know you do not want this read out, Mr Irving, but I am
8going to read it out.
9 MR IRVING: I want all of it read out and not just your
11 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, will you be quiet. The witness is
12trying to answer your question.
13 MR IRVING: He is not. He is just wasting time.
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] "And he went berserk", you go on, this Jewish man. "He
15said: 'Are you trying to say that we are responsible for
16Auschwitz? Ourselves?' And I said, 'Well, the short
17answer is yes'".
18 MR IRVING: "The short answer is yes". And?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] "The short answer I have to say is yes. If you had
20behaved differently over the intervening 3,000 years" ----
21 Q. [Mr Irving] But you have left out bits, have you not, the whole way
22through that? You left out four passages from that?
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, we have been through all this
24before. We are going to resume at five past two and
25I hope you will move on.
26 MR IRVING: With respect, my Lord, he should not have been
1allowed to read out the truncated version again.
2 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Five past two.
3 (The Luncheon Adjournment)
5Professor Evans, recalled.
6Cross-Examined by Mr Irving, continued.
7 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, Mr Irving?
8 MR IRVING: My Lord, I anticipate that in the rest of this
9afternoon we will get through as far as the
10Reichskristallnacht and well into it, in fact.
11 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Good.
12 MR IRVING: That is certainly my aim. In other words, we will
13definitely manage that.
14 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Good.
15MR IRVING (To the witness): Professor Evans, on page 171 you
16quoted this passage. I am not going back to that
17passage. I have one problem with that quotation you gave
18us in paragraph 56 -- you provided no source for it?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, that is oversight on my part. The source is given on
20page 7 of my answers to your written questions, your
21questions of 2nd January. That is video tape 225,
22interview in Key West, Florida, 1996, just 33 minutes into
24 Q. [Mr Irving] Tape 225?
25 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Have we got that?
26 MR RAMPTON: I am sorry, which one is it? I am lost.
1 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Tape 225, Key West 1996. Do you want us to
2look at it, Mr Irving, for context or not?
3 MR IRVING: I will not delay the court. Obviously, I wanted to
4see what the context was of that and see if there had been
5any omissions. Professor, when you make omissions from a
6document, do you always indicate it by ellipses?
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, of course. You will find one there, in fact.
8 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes, it would be very sloppy not to indicate the omission,
9would it not?
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It would be a mistake, yes.
11 Q. [Mr Irving] And if I were to do that, of course, you would rightly
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That would depend on the circumstances. It could either
14be just an oversight, a misprint, or it could be
15deliberate falsification, depending on the circumstances.
16 Q. [Mr Irving] I am anxious to try to shorten your answers. I know that
17the Welsh are famous for their loquacity, and I hope that
18this will not be taken by Mr Rampton as yet another
19example of my racist predilections when I say that, but
20your answers sometimes do tend to run overboard and his
21Lordship has given me little assistance in this matter.
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, well, I think that is the sort of thing
23you have to leave to me, Mr Irving.
24 MR IRVING: I am an unskilled cross-examiner, as your Lordship
25is aware, and if you feel that the witness is overrunning
26his time, I would be grateful if your Lordship would be
1bring it to the witness's attention.
2 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of course I will. That is one of my jobs and
3it has not happened yet though.
4 MR IRVING: I say that because we are now going to come to
5Madagascar briefly at paragraph 57 on page 172. Can
6briefly say, in your view, whether the Madagascar plan was
7not a feasible option when the Nazis talked of the
8Madagascar plan, whether it was a pipe dream or it was a
10 MR RAMPTON: Sorry, can I just interrupt? Before we move to
11Madagascar, my Lord, the reference is, in fact, in K4, tab
128. It is an interview called Cover Story on 4th March
131997, in fact -- that is the date of the programme. It is
14an Australian television company, and the relevant passage
15is at page 7 of that transcript.
16 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Thank you very much.
17 MR IRVING: Was Madagascar ----
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am sorry, can you pause again? I have a
19slight problem with my screen.
20 MR RAMPTON: K4, tab 8, page 7.
21 MR IRVING: In that case, before we come to Madagascar, in view
22of the fact it was an Australian company I was talking to,
23can I ask you one question? Witness, what is the time
24difference between Florida and Australia, approximately?
25Is it about 12 hours?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have no idea actually. I imagine, probably, yes.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] So if an Australian radio station is conducting a live
2interview in the day time, in fact, you are being
3telephoned in the middle of the night?
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] If it is a live interview.
5 MR RAMPTON: No, I am afraid again we have gone way off course
6somewhere around the end of the world. This is an
7Australian film crew travelling with Mr Irving in America
8and doing the interview when they are there.
9 MR IRVING: Right. In other words, this is another of the
10edited broadcasts which I shall have to pay attention to.
11 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, if you want to make a point that
12the context affects what you said about the Jews bringing
13it on themselves, then, by all means, go to the full
14transcript. You have been told where it is. But if you
15do not make that kind of point, then I think we really
16ought to get on to Madagascar.
17 MR IRVING: There would be a better time to do it, my Lord, in
18view of the fact that your Lordship is anxious to make
19progress. If I were to look at that transcript now, I
20would have to be provided with a bundle, look it up, sit
21down and read it and we would lose at least 10 minutes.
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: So Madagascar?
23 MR IRVING: Madagascar. (To the witness): Was Madagascar a
24feasible operation, in your view?
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] On the basis of the continued British effective command
26over the seas, it became clear well into the war that it
1was not. I mean, obviously, it requires the ability to
2travel across -- this is the plan, the solution, the plan
3to deport the Jews to Madagascar clearly requires command
4over the seas.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] But if the war had come to an end and an agreement had
6been reached with Vichy France or whichever French
7government was in power?
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] This is getting into extremely hypothetical realms because
9that makes assumptions about how the war might have come
10to an end and then about international agreements, and so
12 Q. [Mr Irving] I think the question I am really asking is did the Germans
13regard it as a feasible operation or was it just baloney?
14 MR JUSTICE GRAY: At what date? I think that is the relevant
15part of the question.
16 MR IRVING: At all relevant dates when Madagascar was
17discussed, in other words, from 1938 in, I think, June
18when it was first mentioned by Adolf Hitler to Goebbels
19right the way through to July 24, 1942 when it vanishes
20from the map of history?
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think they certainly took it seriously. There is quite
22a large amount of discussion about it in 1940 through
231941. I think it became increasingly clear in the course
24of 1941 that the conditions were not right. Of course,
25the invasion of the Soviet Union changed the picture
26somewhat and I think by the middle of 1942 it certainly
1was not taken seriously and references to it, I think, can
2be regarded as camouflage.
3 Q. [Mr Irving] Were these discussions that you are talking about at
4Hitler's level as well?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Including at Hitler's level, yes.
6 Q. [Mr Irving] Including at Hitler's level. At least for sometime, in
7your view, the discussions were not baloney, they were
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It certainly looks like that from the documents, so
10whether it was realistic is another matter, but they
11certainly took it seriously.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Is it not difficult to reconcile that notion with a Nazi
13ideological desire to exterminate all the Jews they could
14get their hands on?
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, as we know, the Nazi desire to exterminate all the
16Jews they could get their hands on only became, at least
17it grew in the course of war. I think while -- there are
18really two answers to that. One is that the systematic
19extermination of the Jews did not begin until well on into
20the autumn of 1941, and about the time in which the
21Madagascar plan began to, as it were, take second rank and
22then began to fade away.
23 Secondly, of course, I do think that one has to
24remember that the Madagascar plan, such as it was, I do
25not think it was ever seriously worked out in detail, was
26one which deported the Jews across the seas in, one
1presumes, extremely poor conditions, and just dumped them
2on a large, somewhat inhospitable tropical island in
3conditions that were entirely unsuited to sustaining a
4large society of millions of Europeans.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] Would those conditions have been worse than in a slave
6labour camp like Auschwitz or better?
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not accept that the conditions in the slave -- sorry,
8I do not accept that Auschwitz was simply a slave labour
9camp. That is the first thing I would say. The second is
10that it is very conjectural, but they may well have been
11comparable certainly in terms of disease, malnourishment.
12It is sort of a parallel in a way to the ghettoization,
14 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you accept that the population of Madagascar has grown
15from around 2 million in 1938 to 13 million now?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not see what the relevance that is to -- of that is
17to Nazi plans in 1940 and '41.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] The final question on this field. What you are saying, in
19other words, is that Nazi ideology towards exterminating
20the Jews changed sometime in 1941 from getting them out of
21sight, effectively, to exterminating them? Is that what
22you are saying, there was a change in their ideology?
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] There is a sort of continuum. I think that Nazi
24anti-Semitism always had its murderous elements, as became
25clear immediately on the invasion of Poland or, indeed, in
26the Reichskristallnacht and so on. But the systematic
1extermination of European Jews was a policy that only
2gradually became formulated in the course of 1941 and the
3early months of 1942.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] Would you turn now to page 173? We will just look very
5briefly at your four central tenets of Holocaust denial.
6You think that to be Holocaust denier, you have got to be
7somebody who says that the number of Jews killed by the
8Nazis was far less than 6 million? Is that one criterion?
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is, yes.
10 Q. [Mr Irving] I am not quite clear about the criteria. Does one have to
11be a member of each of these four groups or any one of
13 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think we have had this before and the
14answer is, no, you do not have to be a subscriber to all
15four views. You can, as it were, adopt one or two of them
16and you can hold them in a full-blooded way or less so.
17 MR IRVING: So any one would qualify you to be the title.
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Professor Evans, you have dealt with this
19before in your evidence?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have dealt with this before -- it is on the transcript,
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is on the transcript.
23 MR IRVING: Yes, but if his Lordship is right, then his
24Lordship is, effectively, saying that anybody who says the
25figure is not 6 million but 5 million or 4 million is a
1 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am not saying anything. I am saying what
2Professor Evans said yesterday.
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] If I may say, sir, what I argued was that you really need
5 MR IRVING: All four?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is a package, but that, of course, it is a kind of
7fluid, and I said earlier on that there are some people
8who will deny one, deny the other, partially deny one
9proposition, partially affirm another. It is not
10something that ----
11 Q. [Mr Irving] It sounds to me as though the package is adjusted
12according to whom you are trying to sling it around the
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, that is not the case.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, you are just saying that one has to be a member of
16all four except in some circumstances when it can be less
17which seems to be ----
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Sorry, no. What I am saying is that it is a matter of
19degree and so on, but I would describe Holocaust --
20I would have no doubt that someone who subscribed to all
21four propositions was a Holocaust denier in the sense that
22is generally understood.
23 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes.
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] And, indeed, appears in Professor Lipstadt's book.
25 Q. [Mr Irving] So we rapidly wrap up that passage, the second criterion
26is that the person says that gas chambers were not used?
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] If somebody says they were used in some places but not in
3other places, does he qualify or ----
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, no, not if he or she is accurate. I mean, clearly,
5gas chambers were used in some ----
6 Q. [Mr Irving] If somebody says that they were used in a small scale but
7not on a large scale?
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am trying to give you an extremely brief summary of a
9rather lengthy section of where I go into these in a great
10deal more detail.
11 Q. [Mr Irving] This is what is at the root of the case, you appreciate
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Of course I do. That is why I have written this section.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, it is quite a brief section and I am trying to
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I mean the whole section on Holocaust denial, not this
17very brief conclusion.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] But if somebody denies that the gas chambers were used on
19a mass factories of death basis, but they were used on a
20smaller scale, wherever, would he be a Holocaust denier?
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well I have explained earlier on that this very, that what
22I mean is that gas chambers were not used for the
23systematic extermination of large numbers of Jews, that is
25 Q. [Mr Irving] The third criterion is that there was no systematic
26killing of Europe's Jews, in other words ----
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, that is right, that it was not systematic, yes.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] I think we all understand what we mean by that.
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] If it was haphazard, if somebody accepts it is haphazard
5but denies it was a government action, State action?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
7 Q. [Mr Irving] Then he qualifies, he is a Holocaust denier. Then the
8fourth one is the propaganda story, the fact ----
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
10 Q. [Mr Irving] --- that the Allies invented this story as a propaganda?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is right.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes. But as you are having difficulty even now in
13determining to the satisfaction of myself, certainly, and
14a large number of people in this court, perhaps, exactly
15what is meant by these four criteria, it is a bit of a
16vague concept, is it not, but it is like an elephant, you
17know what it is, you cannot necessarily describe it, is
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am not having difficulties, Mr Irving.
20 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, I am having difficulty getting a clear definition
21from you on any one of these four.
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I have been told what the
23definition is. It is for me to decide whether it is a
24satisfactory definition, but I am in absolutely no doubt
25what the definition is. It could not be more clearly set
1 MR IRVING: You accept that one has to be a member of all four
2or just one of them?
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, I think I said a few minutes ago when
4reciting what Professor Evans has said, no, he does not
5think you have to subscribe to all four view points.
6 MR IRVING: But am I right in believing that it is your
7Lordship who decides rather than the witness's
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of course it is.
10 MR IRVING: Yes. Can we now proceed to "Connections with
11Holocaust deniers" which is section 3.5, page 174? The
12burden of the charge you are trying to make here, am
13I right, is guilt by association? "Tell me who your
14friends are and I will tell you who you are", I think is a
15Spanish expression, is that correct?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, it is not, no.
17 Q. [Mr Irving] You list here a number of names of people who you identify
18as Holocaust deniers and you say because these people have
19been seen in the same room as me, effectively, this makes
20me one too. Is that putting it too simply?
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] Right. Can we leap straight ahead to page 183 because
23this, I think, justifies me in doing the leap? Beginning
24at paragraph 15, we are talking about the institute of
25Historical Review, is that right?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] And you do not consider this is a bona fide Institute at
2all, do you?
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] It is just comprised of people who have no qualifications
5and have the wrong views or views you disapprove of?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I do not say that.
7 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes. But what you do make plain at the beginning of this
8paragraph 15, and I quote: "Irving has denied that he is
9affiliated to the Institute in any formal capacity, and
10this is strictly speaking true"?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. I go on to say: "He is a member neither of its
12Board nor of the Editorial Advisory Board of its
13Journal". I think it is only fair of me to point that
15 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, do you accept that this is true?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
17 Q. [Mr Irving] That I have no affiliation whatsoever with that body.
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No formal affiliation.
19 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, what other kind of affiliation can there be?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] An informal affiliation.
21 Q. [Mr Irving] What do you mean by informal affiliation? That they send
22unsolicited materials to me? Is that an informal
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No. I go on to describe that in the rest of the
26 Q. [Mr Irving] "He has been a frequent visitor", line 3 on page 184, is
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, you have been a frequent visitor.
3 Q. [Mr Irving] "... frequent visitor to the annual conferences organized
4by the Institute of Historical Review"?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is right, yes. You spoke.
6 Q. [Mr Irving] Can you estimate how many times in the last 17 years I
7have visited these conferences to justify the word
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Why have you chosen 17 as a number?
10 Q. [Mr Irving] Because it is 17 years.
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Since what?
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Between -- over the period you are talking about.
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Oh, I see. Well, it is -- you are ----
14 Q. [Mr Irving] How many is frequent? 20, 30, 50?
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Your contacts of -- your speech of speeches ----
16 MR JUSTICE GRAY: They are annual, so it could not be more than
1717, could it?
18 MR IRVING: My Lord, I can cut to the bottom line, as we say,
19and say the answer is five. Would you say that the
20correct number of occasions on which I have attended their
21annual conference in whatever capacity is five?
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, speaking. I say here: "To date you have spoken to
23audiences at the Institute five times. You spoke at the
24ninth, tenth, eleventh and twelfth conferences in
25succession". So at that time, therefore, that is in the
261990s, I think, am I right, you are ----
1 MR IRVING: It is a span of 17 years.
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, at that time, that is to say, in the immediate run up
3to Professor Lipstadt' book, you were there on an annual,
4virtually an annual basis. There were also many articles
5about you in the Journal that the Institute prints and
6many articles by you.
7 Q. [Mr Irving] I am picking on this word "frequent" visitor to the annual
8conferences and it turns out to be five times in 17 years?
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You spoke at the ninth, tenth, eleventh and twelfth
10conferences in succession and at one other conference.
11 Q. [Mr Irving] That sounds like five to me.
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, that is four and one other conference, and at that
13time you were a frequent visitor. I do not say you are a
14frequent -- I do not say, "He is a frequent visitor at the
15annual conferences", I am saying you have been and I
16then go on to say precisely which conferences you spoke
18 Q. [Mr Irving] Five times in 17 years does not -- but I do not want to
19keep on hammering this point in otherwise I shall earn a
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Four times in four years, Mr Irving, that is frequent.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] Five times in 17 years is not a frequent visitor, by any
23reckoning, is it?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Four times in four years is a very frequent visitor,
26 Q. [Mr Irving] What makes you think that the ninth, tenth, eleventh and
1twelfth conferences were on an annual basis?
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Ah, you may be -- you may have me there. Were they not?
3 Q. [Mr Irving] No. But you are assuming that they are?
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, I thought they were, I must say.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] So the word "frequent", in other words, is wrong?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Are you telling me they are not then? Would you like to
7tell me the dates of those conferences?
8 Q. [Mr Irving] They are either every two or three years.
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] So in that case, 17 years, there would be eight, seven or,
10let me see, eight or nine conferences, so that five visits
11is actually rather frequent; it is the majority of them,
12is it not?
13 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you agree that five times in 17 years does not qualify
14for the word "frequent visitor"?
15 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think the point he is making is that if
16they are every two or three years, you have been to every
17single one. I mean, that is the result of what you ----
18 MR IRVING: I must have learned English at a different school.
19The word "frequent" to me does not imply five times in 17
20years, my Lord.
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] But, Mr Irving, if you are saying that the conferences
22took place every two or three years, then in 17 years
23there can only have been six or seven, or at most eight
24conferences, and you admitted, you said that you were at
25five of those, that is almost every one; and that
26certainly justifies saying that you are a frequent
1visitor. In fact, if that is the case that the
2conferences were not, as I had thought, annual, then
3I would have said an "almost 100 per cent attender", not
5 Q. [Mr Irving] Not a frequent visitor?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Almost 100 per cent attender if they were at greater
7intervals than one year each. As it is, I say, "He has
8been a frequent visitor to the annual conferences". Then
9I say, I give when these conferences were, the ninth,
10tenth, eleventh and twelfth conferences in succession.
11That is frequent to me, that period. I am unclear now as
12to whether you think the conferences were annual or not.
13 Q. [Mr Irving] The conferences were held (and I can tell you this) I am
14sure on the basis of once every two years?
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Right.
16 Q. [Mr Irving] And sometimes less frequently.
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] In that case, in the last 17 years we are talking about
18majority of the conferences and I think that justifies
19saying that you were a frequent visitor at them.
20 Q. [Mr Irving] Five times is not a frequent visitor and I am sorry to
21have to keep on ----
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Five times is a frequent visitor when there have only ----
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY: This is becoming utterly futile ----
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] --- been eight conferences.
25 MR IRVING: Let us move on. We are now moving on. You quite
26rightly say there have been articles about me in the
1Journal. Are you suggesting that I have in any way
2engineered these articles about me in the Journal of the
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] In the fourth and sixth issues of Volume 13. That shows,
5I think, that the Journal thought highly of you.
6 Q. [Mr Irving] I now start six lines from the bottom: "The first issue
7of volume 13 included one article by Irving and two others
8about him. The next issue had another article by Irving,
9and he also printed two more articles in the first volume
10of" -- have you any evidence that I have on any occasion
11whatsoever written an article for the Journal?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, we have been through this before, Mr Irving, last
14 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes, and what was the answer?
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] The answer was that these are edited versions of the
16speeches you gave at your frequent visits to the
17Institute's conferences, and that I presume that these
18versions appeared as articles in the Journal with your
19approval and permission since, presumably, they are
20copyright, its copyrights assigned to you.
21 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you accept that ----
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Are you suggesting that they appeared without your
23knowledge and without your permission?
24 Q. [Mr Irving] This is not the question and you cannot ask me questions,
25Professor. Are you suggesting that there is no
26distinction between an article written by an author for a
1journal and a paper written by that journal?
2 MR RAMPTON: I have to say, my Lord, I do find this very
3trying. Time is passing. I do worry about creatures like
4Reichskristallnacht and Schlegelberger and all those
5people down the line. We know from Mr Irving's own
6answers in cross-examination that the Journal reprints
7versions of his speeches which he has edited and approved
8in advance of publication.
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I remember.
10 MR RAMPTON: It is on the record.
11 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am anxious not to interrupt too much, but
12Mr Rampton is plainly right.
13 MR RAMPTON: I know that, but I have a duty to the court and
14also to my clients.
15 MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is not a criticism of you. I think you
16have been very restrained, but it is very difficult,
17Mr Irving. I really cannot tell you often enough that
18I want to get on to the meat of Professor Evans' report.
19 MR IRVING: I have assured you how far we shall certainly get.
20 MR JUSTICE GRAY: We have had two full days' of
21cross-examination and we still have not got there. We
22have not even begun.
23 MR IRVING: My Lord, I am not responsible for the fact that the
24instructing solicitors did not instruct the witness to
25write his report in a way which would be useful to this
1 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, well ----
2 MR IRVING: I can only cross-examine on the basis of the report
3which is before your Lordship and myself.
4 MR JUSTICE GRAY: When the Judge tells you time and again that
5he is not deriving any assistance from the
6cross-examination on these earlier passages in the report,
7surely, Mr Irving, it makes sense to get on to what the
8court wants to hear about.
9 MR IRVING: But if your Lordship were to say to me, "Mr Irving,
10tear up pages 1 to 250 of the report", I would willingly
11have done so.
12 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Right, on to the next point.
13 MR IRVING: No one would have done so more willingly than I. I
14have had to devote a lot of very scarce resources to going
15through these in great deal on the basis that they are
16before your Lordship also and I cannot allow these ----
17 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let me tell you this, Mr Irving, it is the
18last case I would want to do this, but what sometimes has
19to happen is that one says after a certain amount of
20cross-examination, "Right, this is going too slowly. You
21have X amount of time to complete the cross-examination".
22I would be very loath to do that in a case of this kind,
23but I can see that coming if we do not move to what really
24is at the heart of Professor Evans's expert report.
25 MR IRVING: My Lord, I said very clearly yesterday that I was
26going to ask for two and a half more days. I shall
1certainly keep to that timetable which I think allows
2possibly sufficient time for re-examination in the
3remaining half day.
4 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am really interested to hear Professor
5Evans being cross-examined by you on these points that
6makes on the historiography.
7 MR IRVING: But he has also made these points on guilt by
8association, my Lord, and they stand unless I challenge
9them. He says that Judge Steglisch was once introduced to
10me at a hotel breakfast, this kind of thing.
11 Page 184, witness. We are still back on 184.
12You complain about the fact that the IHR sells my books or
13advertises my books.
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I am not complaining at all. Who am I to complain
16 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, you say that they advertise my books -- the second
17and third lines, the book is obtainable through the
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
20 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Look. What he is saying in the whole of that
21paragraph is that you are closely associated with the
22IHR. If you want to put to him that you are no more than
23the occasional speaker at the odd conference, put that and
24then move on. If that is your case? I do not know what
25your case is.
26 MR IRVING: It certainly is. Professor Evans, are you familiar
1with any of the other speakers there? Would you agree
2that John Toland is an occasional speaker at the IHR
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think he has spoken once, to my recollection.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] Is John Toland a Pulitzer prize winning author on the
6American literary scene?
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Plenty of people have won Pulitzer prizes. It does not
8mean to say that I think that their views are admirable
9simply because of that.
10 Q. [Mr Irving] Is he a Holocaust denier or right-wing extremist, to your
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That I do not know presently. I know him only as the
13author of a biography of Hitler.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] Are you familiar with the fact that the Canadian liberal
15journalist and author Jim Back has spoken at the IHR?
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes or no?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, I am.
20 Q. [Mr Irving] Are you familiar with the fact that the Japanese
21general Hidi Omiki has spoken at the IHR?
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Let me just mention James Back because he is an author who
23has claimed that many, and I go into this on page 186 of
25 Q. [Mr Irving] He is a Holocaust denier?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] He is somebody who has written two books now, alleging
1that the Americans murdered six million Germans after the
2end of the Second World War, that they deliberately killed
3at least a million German prisoners of war at the end of
4the Second World War.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] Has that book been taken very seriously?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No. I do not regard him as a serious author and, of
7course, as I say, his paranoid style of writing based on
8the manipulation of statistics which historians have
9easily shown to be totally false, bears a striking
10resemblance to the pseudo history of the Holocaust
11deniers, which is no doubt why he has been welcome at
12their meetings and indeed why you quote his work in your
13book on Nuremberg.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] He is a Holocaust denier?
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not know whether he is or not, but certainly I think
16his ludicrous ----
17 Q. [Mr Irving] Has he not expressed strong opinions against Holocaust
18denial, both in the Canadian press and elsewhere?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] If you can show me documentary evidence of that, I will be
20prepared to accept it, but not otherwise.
21 Q. [Mr Irving] Are two other speakers at the IHR, the Japanese general
22Hidi Omiki, and the CIA senior official, Victor Marcheti,
23are they Holocaust deniers?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] What I would need to do to, as it were, make a judgment on
25the full import of what you are saying there is to see
26what they actually said at the meetings of the Institute,
1provide documentation of what they said, and if what they
2said has nothing to do with Holocaust denial, then, either
3directly or indirectly, I will accept your point. But
4I do think that Mr Back's thesis of course, I directly
6 Q. [Mr Irving] You do not like them, this is plain, right? You do not
7like the thesis of Mr Jim Back?
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is not that I do not like them, Mr Irving, it is that
9they are completely phoney.
10 Q. [Mr Irving] Are you an expert on those matters?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Why do you think that he has alleged that the Americans
12killed 6 million Germans after the end of the Second World
14 Q. [Mr Irving] Have his books been published by the world's leading
15publishers, including St Martin's Press?
16 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, can we please move on? This is a
17man who says that the Americans killed 6 million Germans.
18One's eyebrows rise slightly, do they not?
19 MR IRVING: My Lord, I am not going to go down that particular
20cul-de-sac and, if I had done, your Lordship would have
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: You were suggesting that the man was a
23respectable historian. I do not know whether he is or he
24is not, but I really think we must get on, please.
25 MR IRVING: I am in a dilemma there because, if I had taken up
26that particular red herring, then I would have been
1rightly reprimanded by your Lordship. I have just moved
2on. Is it right to say therefore that the IHR has a
3reputation for inviting revisionist speakers with
4unorthodox views to speak there?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] In its own self understanding of revisionism, yes,
6revisionism in which Holocaust denial is the central
7element. That not to say of course that every speaker
8there gives a speech which is purely centrally or wholly
9concerned with Holocaust denial, but that is what they are
10about and that is why they invite people like Mr Back.
11 Q. [Mr Irving] So it is correct to say that sometimes Holocaust deniers
12speak there, but the fact that people speak there does not
13make them Holocaust deniers?
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think, if anyone accepts an invitation to the Institute
15of Historical Review, it is quite clear to everybody that
16it is a Holocaust denial Institute with no academic
17respectability or credentials whatsoever and that
18therefore, by appearing there, you are approving, at least
19in part, of what they do.
20 Q. [Mr Irving] So, if somebody comes and speaks at Caius College, they
21would be automatically accepting the tenets of all the
22other professors who have spoken there? Is that the kind
23of position ----
24 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, please.
25 MR IRVING: It is such an absurd kind of argument to make that
26I thought I would highlight its absurdity.
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not know if that is a question, my Lord.
2 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think it is.
3 MR IRVING: Page 191, paragraph 4, you state that I published
4on my website a very lengthy tract by somebody with the
5pseudonym of Samuel Crowell.
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
7 Q. [Mr Irving] Very brief answer: Are you familiar with the difference
8between publishing something on a website and just putting
9a link on a website to somebody else's documents somewhere
10else in the world, in other words what is called an
11outlink or hyperlink?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, I think I am.
13 Q. [Mr Irving] Would it be the same as being editor of a magazine under
14the footnote of the magazine saying, readers might be
15interested in this document by Mr Crowell which they will
16find in that library somewhere over there? Would that be
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] There is a similarity, but of course the link is close in
19the case of the Internet because you do actually have to
20trail across to another library or go out to a bookshop to
21buy the book. You can just flick a switch and it is
23 Q. [Mr Irving] But to suggest, as you have, that Irving has published on
24his website this very lengthy tract is in other words
25inaccurate? I have posted a link to a document by another
26author somewhere else.
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I understood that it was on the Auschwitz section of your
2website. My recollection is that that is where I read
3it. It is on the Auschwitz index, is it not.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] If you had clicked on it, would you have been surprised to
5find that you were no longer in my website but somewhere
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have to say I did not realize that, if that is the case.
8 Q. [Mr Irving] If you are referring to the Auschwitz index, will you
9agree that that same page also has hyperlinks to
10organizations like Niscore and Holocaust History Project?
11Do you know those web sites?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You would have to provide me with a print out so that
13I could examine it.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] If I say to you that on those pages you will find a
15hyperlink to Niscore, do you know what Niscore is?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, I know what Niscore is, Mr Irving .
17 Q. [Mr Irving] What is Niscore? Is it a body friendly to me?
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, it is not. I accepted this on Thursday, Mr Irving.
19On your website you do include a reference to, or the
20ability, you say, to make people alert to the fact that
21there is a Niscore website which gives a contrary view to
22your own. Indeed, you print the whole text of my own
23report. That is up on your website. The daily
24transcripts of this trial are on your website. But you
25also use your website to disseminate Holocaust denial
26material, such as that by Samuel Crowell.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] Is not what I do precisely what a balanced and neutral
2observer should do? He should provide material on the one
3side, material on the other side, and easy instantaneous
4links by Internet to people with a totally contradictory
5point of view? Is that not what I do? The Holocaust
6History Project, Niscore, these are web sites with a
7viewpoint that are completely the opposite and yet I put
8an instant and easy link to them.
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, but what you are doing here is suggesting that these
10are two equal sides of some academic scholarly argument
11and therefore you, as it were, give yourself credence and
12respectability by doing that.
13 Q. [Mr Irving] Your final sentence on that page says, "In other words,
14Irving is using his website to publicize Holocaust denial
15material", but you do agree that I publicize the other
16side of the story too, do I not?
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, you do.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] You think there is only one side of the story that should
19be publicised? Is that your viewpoint?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think that the Internet should be used to
21publicise phoney, fake and falsifying material.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] You would like to see it censored, would you? You would
23like to have automatic filters installed? Is that what
24you are saying?
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am not saying that at all. I am saying it is your
26responsibility for what you do.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] In other words, to say that I only publicise Holocaust
2denial material, as you call it ----
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think I do that. I do not say that.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] You accept that on my website I also put documents giving
5the other point of view?
6 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think he said that two or three times.
7 MR IRVING: Yes. Thank you very much. Can you now turn to
8page 193? I am now going to look briefly at the DVU, the
9Deutsche Volks-Union, the German People's Union. Can you
10estimate approximately how long that political
11organization has been active in Germany? About 20 years
12or 30 years?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] My Lord, I am not the expert on this. I understand there
14is another expert report on this.
15 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Is that Professor Funke?
16 MR IRVING: Yes. That is why I am only going to question you
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: He is coming. I think he is a better chap to
19ask about DVU.
20 MR IRVING: I am only going to question him very briefly, my
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am only concerned with it here in so far as it is
23connected with or purveys Holocaust denial.
24 MR JUSTICE GRAY: It does not seem to me the best point in the
25world anyway, so let us move on and leave that for
1 MR IRVING: Just the last line of that paragraph, my Lord, in
2case Professor Funke does not raise it. "Mr Irving had
3also been asked by the DVU 'to do lucrative research in
4the Berlin Document Centre'". That is a quotation from my
5diary. Is that right, May 19th, 1984?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
7 Q. [Mr Irving] About 16 years ago. Are you familiar with the lucrative
8research that Dr Frey of DVU asked me to do in the Berlin
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Remind me.
11 Q. [Mr Irving] Is it right that the Berlin Document Centre at that time
12was an American government organization which held the
13entire biographical records on all the top Nazis?
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] Millions and millions of them?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. A lot, anyway.
17 Q. [Mr Irving] Is it evident from my diary and from the papers that have
18been put before you that the research that Dr. Frey and
19the DVU asked me to was to weasel out the ex Nazis in the
20German government, get hold of their biographical records
21showing they were members of the Nazi party, and is this a
22despicable thing to have done, or in any way would you
23wish to criticise that kind of operation?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It depends for the purposes for which they want to do it.
25For all I know, they may want to do it to make contact
26with them and applaud them.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] In the spirit of his Lordship's admonition, I shall move
2on. Just briefly though, you do accept that the German
3People's Union has at all times been a legal body and has
4never ever come up against the legal authorities in
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think this is more a matter for Professor Funke, really
7but I understand that it has been under constant
8observation by the Germans, or for a considerable time
9under observation by the German Office for the Protection
10of the Constitution at various land branches of that, as
11I say, an extreme right-wing organization.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Page 195, we are now on a Mr Anthony Hancock. Again, I am
13not going to deal with him in any detail because
14I understand that I am going to be cross-examined on
15Mr Hancock so that is probably the right time to deal with
16that unless your Lordship feels I should fill in any of
17the detail. I am only concerned with the fact that you
18drag in not only Anthony Hancock, but his father, saying
19that he was a former member of Oswald Mosley's
20blackshirts. Should this be held against him?
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] I seem to remember that, when I was last in the High Court
2330 years ago, the judge was Mr Justice Lawton, and he had
24also been a member of that organization before the war.
25 MR JUSTICE GRAY: My own view of this is, if may say so,
26Professor Evans, by all means criticise Mr Irving for his
1relationship with Anthony Hancock if he is a member of the
2National Front and so on, but I cannot for life of me see
3what relevance his father's membership of the blackshirts
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am happy to have that left out. It is of no great
6importance to my report.
7 Q. [Mr Justice Gray] It is gratuitous and I personally do not think it has
8any significance at all, so I am entirely with you,
9Mr. Irving, if I may say so.
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I understood that both of them published, Did 6 million
11really die, by Richard Harwood?
12 MR IRVING: What connection has that with me?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is a Holocaust denial book and you have an
14association with Anthony Hancock.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] So a printer prints a Holocaust denial book and this is
16somehow linked immediately to me. Is this the way you
17have built up your evidence?
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No. You have an association with Mr Hancock.
19 Q. [Mr Irving] And, because his father -- is that not what the Nazis
20called sippenhaft, if somebody in a family has done
21something wrong, you arrest the whole family?
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Let me read the passage from my report: "Anthony Hancock
23junior Anthony Hancock hired the venue and distributed
24tickets for a 'revisionist' seminar in London on 4th July
251992 in which Irving spoke. Hancock's Historical Review
26Press printed Irving's newsletter Focal Point in the early
11980s and Hancock was filmed at a Holocaust denial meeting
2in Munich at which Irving was a guest of honour, and there
3were various mentions in your diary of the older Hancock
4who is offering funds and facilities to publish the
5Churchill biography". I am simply trying to establish
6there that you have connections with these two Holocaust
8 Q. [Mr Irving] This word "Holocaust denier" has become quite frequently
9fixed in your vocabulary, has it not, 300 times in this
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I was asked, Mr Irving, to comment on that.
12 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Do not rise to the bait.
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am sorry, we have been through that many times before,
15 MR IRVING: Everybody who is sinister is suddenly called a
16Holocaust denier and it begins to grate after a time. Can
17you look at paragraph 11 now? This is the next
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I will not rise to that, Mr Irving, on his Lordship's
21 Q. [Mr Irving] Here we are: "Perhaps the most sinister of the Holocaust
22deniers with whom Irving has had extensive and long term
23contacts was General Otto Ernst Remer". Is that still
25 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think the way to cross-examine, if I may
26say, on this sort of allegation is, I do not know what the
1facts are, but, Professor Evans, do you realize that I
2have only met the man twice, or whatever? Asking him if
3it is still his view is not going to help. Just put what
4you say is wrong with the proposition that you have had
5long term contacts with him. That is really the quickest
6way of dealing with it.
7 MR IRVING: Will you turn to page 91 of bundle F, please. Is
8that a page from my diary dated July 22nd 1989?
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Sorry, which page?
10 Q. [Mr Irving] 91 or thereabouts.
11 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Something may have gone wrong with the
13 MR IRVING: It has. Towards the end it has become a bit
14screwed up. It will be at the end somewhere.
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No. I am sorry, I do not seem to have it.
16 Q. [Mr Irving] Bundle F?
17 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think 91, oddly enough, seems to be
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. I do not have it, my Lord.
20 MR IRVING: It will be one of the last two or three pages, a
21page headed July 22nd 1989.
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not have it. I think it should be after
23the Spectator letter, and it is not. Some people have
24it. I am sorry, I just do not have it.
25 MR IRVING: The content is almost immaterial. Have you found
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I have not, but I am familiar with it.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] It is a one page entry from my diary July 22nd 1989. Does
3it refer to my driving to a place called Vlotho, and
4meeting a general called Remer?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. If it helps, this is dealt with in my written
6responses. It would hurry things up a bit.
7 Q. [Mr Irving] Now I come to the question which his Lordship wishes me to
8ask. Will you agree that this is the only one time or
9occasion on which I have ever met General Remer and had a
10conversation with him?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. I will withdraw the "extensive and long term
12contacts". You had contacts with him in 1989 at that
13particular occasion that you mention. There Remer was
14present at Munich on 21st April 1990 when you were
15speaking. You were to have spoken to a meeting which was
16cancelled, a meeting alongside side Remer in 1991.
17 Q. [Mr Irving] I am sorry to halt your flood of rhetoric but can I read
18out to you your first sentence of paragraph 11, please?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You had plenty of close and repeated contacts with----
20 MR RAMPTON: I do believe that Mr Irving is occasionally guilty
21of discourtesy. My Lord. I would not interrupt a witness
22like that in that aggressive----
23 MR IRVING: I have to interrupt, Mr Rampton, because otherwise
25 MR RAMPTON: I am speaking to his Lordship, Mr Irving. Please
26remain quiet. I am making an objection to the way in
1which Mr Irving is attempting to harrass the witness.
2 MR JUSTICE GRAY: The objection is entirely well founded.
3Would you like to pick it up where you left off, Professor
4Evans, which was you were talking of a meeting in 1991.
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, and you had repeated contacts with Karl Philip, who
6was Remer's assistant in 1989 to 1991, page 1967. I
7mention the meeting in Munich again, and of course your
8Action Report website carried an obituary praising Remer
9as loyal to the old cause. So what I think I say I is
10that I withdraw "extensive and long term contacts" and
11I would say that you were in contact with General Remer in
12the period 1989 to 1991 1.
13 MR IRVING: Can I now read into the record therefore the
14sentence which you are withdrawing: "Perhaps the most
15sinister of the Holocaust deniers with whom Irving has had
16extensive and long term contacts was General Otto Ernst
17Remer", and it turns out I had a conversation with him
18only once. As your Lordship will see from the diary
19entry, it was an entirely proper conversation where I
20interviewed him for the purpose of the Goebbels book and
21all the rest is waffle.
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have said I would withdraw "extensive and long term". I
23hope that satisfies you.
24 Q. [Mr Irving] On 197, five lines from the bottom, you say: "He (Irving
25in other words), was active" ----
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, sorry. That is a mistake. That is Remer.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] So you are not suggesting that I was active in the HIAG?
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No. That is a misunderstanding on your part, Mr Irving.
3It refers back to Remer early in the sentence.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] I continue: "He was active in the HIAG, an organisation
5for ex members of the SS with which Irving also had
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
8 Q. [Mr Irving] Now what on earth is the source for that particular
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] The February 1979 issue of the HIAG house magazine Der
11Frewillige, volunteer, carries an interview with you by
12someone called Joachim Cannicht, which I presume is a
13pseudonym, and one presumes therefore that contact with
14the magazine and thus with its parent organization were
15necessary in order to set up and carry out the interview
16unless you are telling me you did not give the interview
17or you were not aware of who was doing it.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] So a journalist does or does not have an interview with
19me, which he then passes on to a magazine which publishes
20it, which you say has contacts with the HIAG and out of
21that connection you say I had contacts with the HIAG. In
22other words, if I gave an interview to the Tablet, would I
23have contacts with the Pope? Is what you are suggesting?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think that is very different. This is the house
25magazine of the Waffen SS Veterans Association, Mr Irving.
26 Q. [Mr Irving] It is exactly the same, is it not?
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is not exactly the same.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] If a journalist comes and speaks to me and asks me for an
3interview, and I give him an interview, and he then passes
4that interview on to a magazine which is called Der
5Freiwillige, which I have never heard of from start to
6finish, and you say that that is the house magazine of
7HIAG, which may or may not be true, and you say this is
8evidence of me having contacts (in the plural) with HIAG?
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. I assume that someone must have set up the interview
10and that then you must have had the interview. Is this in
11the court's record, because I have a photocopy of this
12here. This is another one of my written answers. I am
13not quite sure why we are going through all these written
14answers to your written questions, I do not accept that
15you were not aware of who was doing the interview or where
16it was going to be published.
17 Q. [Mr Irving] But you are suggesting that I have contacts with HIAG,
18which is a pretty serious and almost indeed a repugnant
19allegation to make. You are saying I do not have just the
20one contact through a journalist but I have contacts in
21the plural with them. You have already withdrawn the
22previous part of this sinister allegation about being a
23contact with a sinister denier, Mr Remer, and it turns out
24that this contact too just turns out to be an interview
25with a journalist?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think it is just a journalist, Mr Irving,
1otherwise why would he have adopted what appears to be
3 MR IRVING: What you think is neither here nor there. It is not
5 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Please, Mr Irving, there is no point in
6asking questions if you constantly interrupt the answers.
7I expect you have forgotten what the question is; I have
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. This is not just any old journalist who then gives
10you an interview and then kind of hawks it around until he
11somehow, by some extraordinary chance, comes across the
12house magazine of the Waffen SS Veterans Association and
13manages to find a spot for it there. This is clearly
14somebody who is acting on behalf of this organization and
15its house magazine who comes and interviews you.
16 MR IRVING: Then you invite two further questions. Have you
17found in my private diaries, to which of course you had
18complete access for the purposes of this trial, any
19suggestion of any contact between myself and the HIAG or
20any of its officials whatsoever?
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I have not. That does not mean to say of course that
22there were not any.
23 Q. [Mr Irving] Have you found in all my files of correspondence, to which
24of course you have also had complete access by way of
25discovery, any suggestion of contact between myself and
26the HIAG whatsoever?
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, but it is the sort of thing you would like to keep
2quiet, is it not?
3 Q. [Mr Irving] The sort of thing I would like to keep quiet? Are you
4suggesting that I have destroyed ----?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You have just denied all knowledge of this magazine and
6this interview, and you describe it as "some journalist"
7who came to you without your knowing what the source was
8and where he was going to place the interview.
9 Q. [Mr Irving] By your reference to "the sort of thing I would like to
10keep quiet", are you alleging that I have destroyed
11materials instead of properly discovering them?
12 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I did not understand that to be the
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No.
15 MR IRVING: Because it is a very serious allegation to make.
16In fact, it is a criminal charge.
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am not saying you destroyed materials, Mr Irving.
18 MR IRVING: Destroying evidence instead of producing it for
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have no evidence that you have destroyed any.
21 Q. [Mr Irving] You have no evidence whatsoever that I have destroyed
22material, rather than produce it for discovery?
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY: He did not say that.
24 MR RAMPTON: What he said was it does not appear in the diary
25and he is not surprised it does not, considering what a
26tainted piece of information it is.
1 MR IRVING: That is not what he said. We were talking about
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: As a matter of fact, it is, Mr Irving, but
4I am not going spend time reading back the transcript to
5you because I am very anxious that we move on.
6 MR IRVING: The witness has referred to the obituary of General
7Remer. Can I ask that his Lordship be shown the actual
8text of the obituary to General Remer which I published?
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: If there is a reason for my doing so, yes.
10 MR IRVING: Because he says I published an obituary of him
11praising him. In fact, I made it quite plain that he is a
12reprobate and an unreconstructed Nazi, and I think that
13words like that should be before the court.
14 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, I suppose, yes, if you want me to look
16 MR IRVING: Unless your Lordship wishes to move on, in which
17case we can move on.
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. If you say that is wrong, I had better
19look at it.
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] May I just read it then? It is quite short.
21 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, do.
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] General Remer is dead. "Famed German Army General Otto
23Ernzt Remer, who was forced into exile by Bonn in 1994,
24died in Spain 1985 on October 4th. Born in Brandenborg on
25December 18, 1912 Remer played the key role in crushing
26the uprising against Adolf Hitler by disgruntled officers
1and disaffected aristocrats on July 20th 1924 .
2Originally sent by the plotters to arrest propaganda
3minister Dr Goebbels, he learned that Hitler had survived
4the bomb, recognised His Master's voice on the phone, and
5acted swiftly against the plotters. His troops put them to
6death by firing squad in Berlin a few hours later.
7Described by baffled newspaper men as an unreconstructed
8Nazi, Remer remained loyal to the old cause. In 1950 he
9founded the socialist Reichs party. In March 1952 he was
10jailed for three months for slandering the July 1944
11plotters as traitors. The SRP was banned. He allowed his
12name to be used by German revisionists publishing the
13Remer despatch in 1994, sentenced to two years jail
14despite his medals for heroism, advancing years and
15illness. He was wheelchair bound and breathed with an
16oxygen pump. He took refuge in Spain. The Spanish
17government resisted repeated demands by German prosecutors
18for his extradition, saying that his "offences" did not
19exist as such under Spanish law. He is survived by his
20widow Marie Oberstein."
21 MR IRVING: So I draw attention to the fact that he founded
22this neo-Nazi party, the Reichs party, and I say that he
23was described as an unreconstructed Nazi, and you left
24that out in the references that you published in your
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] By baffled newspaper men.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes.
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think the tenor of that obituary is positive, that is my
3reading of it.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] Proceed now to paragraph 15, please, on page 198, the last
5sentence on that line. You say that the activities which
6led to the imprisonment of my friend Gunter
7Deckert included translating a lecture".
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, I have got this.
9 Q. [Mr Irving] Are you aware of the fact that Gunter Deckert served a
10seven year prison sentence for translating that lecture?
11Do you approve of that?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am not sure what the question is meant to elucidate.
13 Q. [Mr Irving] Just answer the question. Are you aware that he served a
14seven year prison sentence?
15 MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is a fair enquiry. So what?
16 MR IRVING: It goes indirectly to the political situation in
17Germany where all the historians are encouraged to write
18history one way, and they are sent to prison for seven
19years if they breathe a word in the other direction or if
20they even translate a lecture, my Lord.
21 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think that has anything to do with
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Deckert is not an academic historian. He is Federal
24Chairman of the National Democratic Party, which is an
25extreme right-wing political organization in Germany in
26the early 1990s. He has a number of convictions for
1incitement to racial hatred, insulting the memory of the
2dead, slandering the Chairman of the Central Council of
3Jews in Germany, and other similar offences. The
4activities which led to his imprisonment, I say, included
5translating a lecture.
6 MR IRVING: Are you answering the question or just making a
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am, because you have misrepresented what I said in my
9report yet again Mr Irving. The activities which led to
10his imprisonment included translating a lecture given in
111991 by Fred Leuchter, denying existence of gas chambers
12at Auschwitz. Then I quote you, "Dear Gunter", you write
13to him, "I am shocked about what the police state has done
14to you yet again". You describe him as a freedom fighter
15and so on, defender of this great cause, which presumably
16is the cause of Holocaust denial.
17 Q. [Mr Irving] You say, "presumably is Holocaust denial"?
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] What else?
19 Q. [Mr Irving] Is this just your interpolation?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] What is this great cause that you write about or speak
22 Q. [Mr Irving] I am only going to ask you one question. Do you approve
23of people being imprisoned for translating?
24 MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, you do not need to answer that question.
25 MR IRVING: Exactly. I do not really want to ask questions
26about Deckert here. I think this is not the appropriate
1place to ask questions about Deckert.
2 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Then we can move on.
3 MR IRVING: I was rather shocked that he was allowed to
4continue just reading out the whole of that paragraph. In
5paragraph 16 you summarize. You say: "In general,
6therefore, Irving's close association with virtually all
7the most prominent Holocaust deniers in several different
8countries demonstrates once more that he is to be counted
9amongst their number". How many have you actually dealt
10with in this chapter? About five people?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Goodness. Do you really want me to count, Mr Irving?
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Of the order of five or ten? I am not counting their
13fathers, just the actual people.
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think the senior Hancock is a Holocaust denier. Eleven,
16 Q. [Mr Irving] Eleven.
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] There are not very many of these people.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] There are not very many, exactly, and we have already
19discovered that I had no contact with Mr Ahmed Rami, who
20is paragraph 13.
21 MR JUSTICE GRAY: We have dealt with Mr Rami.
22 MR IRVING: I am just saying, my Lord. I am just knocking some
23off this 13.
24 MR JUSTICE GRAY: We not going to go back through all of them.
25 MR IRVING: We have discovered that General Remer in fact was
26only talked to once. This is the quality of the evidence
1I am up against. This grandiose closing sentence,
2"Irving's close association with virtually all the most
3prominent Holocaust deniers".
4 MR JUSTICE GRAY: This is cross-examination, Mr Irving, not a
5speech. So move on to your next question, if you would?
6 MR IRVING: Then on page 200, you conclude at 3.6.1.: "Not
7everyone who has studied Irving's writings and speeches in
8the 1990s has reached the conclusion that he has become a
9consistent and undeviating Holocaust denier". You then
10mention one or two cases, do you not, and immediately bang
11them on the head for it?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, I felt it fair to mention that. I did not want to
13suppress that fact.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you accept what they say?
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I do not.
16 Q. [Mr Irving] Halfway down that paragraph you say: "Moreover, in the
17course of his conversation with Rosenbaum", now he is a
18Jewish writer, is that correct?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That had not occurred to me actually. If you say he is
20Jewish, I do not usually think about whether people are
21Jewish or not when I read their writings.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] Answer my question. Is it likely that if he is a Jewish
23writer he is probably not going to be disposed to me in a
24very friendly way initially until he gets to know me, is
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, it seems to be -- I do not accept that, no.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] "Moreover, in the course of his conversation with
2Mr Rosenbaum, Irving admitted", you say, "of some
3Holocaust deniers 'that there are certain organizations
4that propagate these theories which are cracked
5anti-Semites'". Does that show that I am a great admirer
6of these organizations?
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, I do not know. You do not say, or Rosenbaum does
8not say, what organizations you are referring to, so it is
9impossible to guess.
10 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, you would not expect a Holocaust denier like David
11Irving roundly to dismiss other organizations of Holocaust
12deniers as "cracked anti-Semites"?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Do you do not mention what those organizations are. It
14would be more plausible, more plausible if you did.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, what organizations do you think I was talking about
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I really ----
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Why do you not put to the witness which
20 MR IRVING: My Lord, that was going to be the follow up
21question when he answered, "No, I do not know which ones"
22and I was going to say could it possibly be -- would I
23have been talking about the Institute of Historical
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You do not mention them.
26 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes. Would I have been talking ----
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is impossible to tell who you are talking about.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] Are you surprised to hear somebody ----
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] As I say here, you say this without actually saying who
4you meant by this or what kind of damage or harm you are
5referring to ----
6 Q. [Mr Irving] Does it surprise you to hear that ----
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] --- the damage done to you.
8 Q. [Mr Irving] --- I regard a number of these Holocaust deniers as
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have not read anything that you have written that refers
11specifically to any specific individual or organization as
12being "cracked anti-Semites", only these very, very
13general statements which really have very little value
14because they have no precision, no reference.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] They have no precision, but this is as represented by a
16neutral observer who has spoken to a lot of authors, and
17do you accept that -- are you surprised to read in a book
18that I have described Holocaust deniers as "cracked
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have -- some Holocaust deniers. What you say, "there
21are certain organizations that propagate these theories
22which are cracked anti-Semites" but it is impossible to
23say who you are referring to.
24 Q. [Mr Irving] Now, Rosenbaum's book was reviewed, thank goodness, by
25Norman Stone who pointed out that Rosenbaum is yet another
26of these ignorant, negligent reviewers whom have met
1before, is that is correct; that he had not done his
2homework and he did not know enough to write such a book
3properly? Is that the next paragraph's burden, 3.6.2?
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Let me just have a look. He says that stone was critical
5of Rosenbaum. He said he could not follow subjects, he
6had misunderstood one of books he was writing about. That
7is certainly the case, yes. It is a critical review.
8 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes. So why did you mention the Rosenbaum book because
9you do accept that there are serious authors out there who
10accept that I am not a Holocaust denier and that I do have
11differentiated views and that I regard Holocaust deniers
12as "crack pots" and you could not get passed this?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Nobody says that you regard Holocaust deniers as crack
14pots. What you say is that there are certain
15organizations, unnamed, that propagate these theories
16which are cracked anti-Semites. You do not say that all
17Holocaust deniers are crack pots.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] Does it matter what the name of the organization is if I
19just refer to Holocaust ----
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, of course it does because this is so vague it is
21completely meaningless. It is just -- I mean, one could
22read this as just some kind of alibi. It has no reference
23at all. It is a meaningless statement unless you actually
24say who you are talking about.
25 Q. [Mr Irving] I could hardly be more specific.
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Put to him the organizations that you regard
1as consisting of cracked anti-Semites. Is the IHR one of
3 MR IRVING: I did, my Lord, and he waffled. We did not get a
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, let me say ----
6 MR JUSTICE GRAY: So your case is -- I want to be clear about
7this -- you do regard the IHR as an organization
8consisting of cracked anti-Semites, is that your case?
9 MR IRVING: I think that the correct thing to say there is that
10it consists of some elements which are cracked
11anti-Semites. I do not think I would wish to brand an
12entire organization. As far as I know, some of the
13officers of that organization, I would regard them as
14cracked anti-Semites. That is the point I wanted to make
15plain in my discussion with Mr Rosenbaum, but I
16would respectfully submit ----
17 MR RAMPTON: I would like to know who those people are. It has
18some bearing on what is to come.
19 MR IRVING: Your time will come in cross-examination,
20Mr Rampton, to ask that question, and it would be helpful
21if you did not interrupt. I would say that ----
22 MR RAMPTON: Perhaps it would have more value, my Lord, if it
23came directly now, otherwise we may find a list composed
25 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, if I may say so, Mr Rampton, since
26Mr Irving has taken the point that he does not want to say
1at this stage in the course of his cross-examination of
2Professor Evans, I think he is entitled to say that.
3 MR RAMPTON: All right.
4 MR IRVING: And I would respectfully submit ----
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] However, Mr Irving, if you were, of course -- if you do
6think that the certain organizations that propagate these
7theories and certain organizations, not individuals, which
8are cracked anti-Semites and if the Institute of
9Historical Review is an organization which is cracked
10anti-Semites, then it is extraordinary that you should
11have spoken so regularly at their meetings in the course
12of the 1990s.
13 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you consider this view, as you just stated, expressed
14to Mr Rosenbaum, as a kind of alibi that I just use to
15people like him?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, in its vagueness, it sounds rather like that to me,
17but I am speculating there. I am simply quoting your
19 Q. [Mr Irving] Is this the only occasion when I have expressed such a
20view, to your knowledge, having had complete access to all
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think there is one other occasion, but I cannot recall
23exactly where it is.
24 Q. [Mr Irving] Can I suggest you look at page 90 of my bundle, please?
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Ah, yes.
26 Q. [Mr Irving] A letter to "Dear Connie" -- does your Lordship have it?
1 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Sorry, when you say your bundle, do you mean
3 MR IRVING: Bundle F, yes.
4 MR JUSTICE GRAY: 90, that is a letter.
5 MR IRVING: "Dear Connie""?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, I have this, yes.
7 MR JUSTICE GRAY: "Dear Miss Kadashka" I have got at page 90.
8 MR IRVING: No, it has to be "Dear Connie".
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mine is 89, but it does not matter.
10 MR IRVING: Is this letter dated June 24th 1988?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is, yes.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Is this about two months after I read the Leuchter report,
13in other words, two months after the Zundel conference --
14the Zundel trial?
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] The trial.
16 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes.
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You will have to remind.
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think that is right. Take it from me.
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Is that right? OK.
20 MR IRVING: Can I read to you the final paragraph or the bits
21thereof? First of all, looking at the address at the
22bottom, am I writing to my publishers, William Morrow &
23Company in New York ----
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
25 Q. [Mr Irving] --- who published the Goring biography. "I have been
26invited to speak as a guest speaker at a right wing
1function in Los Angeles next February. They have offered
2a substantial fee and all my expenses and until now I have
3adopted a policy of never refusing an invitation if the
4organizers meet my terms, namely free speech and fat fee.
5On this occasion I intend to give the audience a piece of
6my mind about some of their more lunatic views". Does it
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It does indeed, yes.
9 Q. [Mr Irving] So, in other words, I do not just express views about
10crack pot anti-Semites and crack pot ideas or whatever as
11an alibi, but on the evidence of this letter (which
12I found in the early hours of this morning by chance) on
13quite a few occasions I have expressed robust views about
14people I associate with?
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] This, Mr Irving, is not evidence of what you actually said
16at this meeting, if you indeed went to it. It is simply a
17letter to a publisher, obviously. You do not say what
18their lunatic views are and there is no evidence here that
19you have gave them a piece of mind.
20 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Who was the right-wing organization holding a
22 MR IRVING: That was the IHR, my Lord. That was precisely this
23body, the Institute of Historical Review, who at that time
24were under different management, if I can put it like
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: So the lunatic views attached to the old
1management, not to the present regime, is that it?
2 MR IRVING: I shall be submitting to your Lordship at the
3proper occasion that as the years passed, I tried to
4persuade them to adopt a more serious profile, to invite
5respected historians as well as more unorthodox
6revisionist historians and try to straighten their act
7out, if I can put it like that. There is correspondence
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: So you did have an association that enabled
10you to bring that sort of pressure to bear, did you?
11 MR IRVING: Oh, yes. They looked to me. They were constantly
12wooing me and I wrote them letters saying, "In my view,
13you should do this and you should do that", and I am sure
14they got similar advice from other people.
15 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Thank you very much.
16 MR IRVING: Thank you. So do you accept that on the basis of
17those two letters I had a robust attitude towards the
18Institute which indicated I was in no manner travelling in
19their tow or in their wake?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Sorry, what is the other letter?
21 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, on the basis of the Ron Rosenbaum ----
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Ah, yes, the interview.
23 Q. [Mr Irving] --- matter and this letter.
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have to say that on the basis of having read your
25speeches or articles in the Institute and its Journal that
26you did come to them in the 80s for the first time that
1you went to speak at the Institute with what seems to me
2like a certain apprehension of the fact that your views
3would differ somewhat from theirs, but this disappears, in
4my view, entirely in the 1990s when you were a regular
5attender at their conferences and a regular speaker.
6 Q. [Mr Irving] At their conferences I regularly rubbed their noses in
7what actually happened in the Holocaust and that I read
8out the Bruns' interrogation report in all its gory detail
9of the shootings on the Eastern Front, and that I was held
10up to criticism by some of their members for doing this?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You read out parts of the Bruns' report, excluding the
12reference to Hitler's order which we went through sometime
13ago in this trial. You have a very selective version of
14it. I think you did say at the beginning of this trial
15you had not actually read it out before.
16 I do not deny that there were some arguments in
17discussion (as there always is in discussions) after your
18speeches, but in the 1990s I think you were purveying the
19same views as they had on the whole. There were some
20minor differences between yourself, in particular,
21Professor Faurisson, but your speeches to the Institute of
22Historical Review did not meet with jeers and cat calls,
23as I recall.
24 Q. [Mr Irving] They did not meet with jeers and cat calls. Do you
25believe that a body like the Institute of Revisionist
26Historians, or whatever they call themselves, performs any
1useful function at all?
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No.
3 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you accept that without the existence of such a body
4there would have been such major concessions in the
5Holocaust story that have occurred since the end of World
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, to the question and no to the premise.
8 Q. [Mr Irving] Have there been major concessions in the story since the
9end of World War II?
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You would have to tell me exactly what they were and
11demonstrate that they were based on the work of the
12Institute of Historical Review before I accepted that.
13 Q. [Mr Irving] Is it true that the Israeli authority at Yad Vashim now
14officially agree that the Nazis never manufactured soap
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think that has long been the case. Indeed ----
17 Q. [Mr Irving] Can you put a date on it?
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I cannot, no.
19 Q. [Mr Irving] Was it about 1989?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I would have to see documentation of that.
21 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you agree that the figure of Auschwitz has been brought
22down from 4 million to 1.5 million?
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] We have already been through that.
24 MR JUSTICE GRAY: We had this, I think, last Thursday.
25 MR IRVING: I am just trying to look at the concessions that
26have been made largely as a result of revisionist
1agitation, if I can put it like that?
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think, Mr Irving, that that was the result of the
3work of the Institute of Historical Review which was not
4founded at the time that that number was changed.
5 MR IRVING: Have you read the work of Michael Berenbaum -- I am
6sorry, of Aberhard Jackeln who states that it was not
7until 1977 that the whole of this Holocaust research
8industry began, that the historians started doing their
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think we have already been through that, I think, when
11you cross-examined Professor Browning, that certainly
12I would need to see a copy of that statement by Professor
13Jackeln, but if he does say that, then he is certainly not
15 Q. [Mr Irving] You would not agree, therefore, that the revisionists,
16having created the Aunt Sally which the genuine historians
17needed, the scholars needed, you do not agree with the
18premise that the scholar would not have done the job as
19rigorously as they have had to?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, not at all, no. I have to say, on the whole, I do not
21serious scholars pay any attention to the work of the
22Institute of Historical Review at all.
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I wonder whether the time has not
24come to move on to what is important which is page 205,
25what you have written about Hitler.
26 MR IRVING: Well, I, in fact, leapt on to page 207, my Lord.
1 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Good.
2 MR IRVING: Would you look at that quotation at the top of page
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] 208? Yes.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes. Have you left anything out of that quotation, do you
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Not that I can see.
8 Q. [Mr Irving] It is about the euthanasia programme, is it not?
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
10 Q. [Mr Irving] If I start reading about where it says: "About a quarter
11of a million hospital beds", I am going to read it from
12the book which is the actual source, which is the 1977
13edition at page 20?
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Could I have a copy, please? Page 20?
15 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes. "About a quarter of a million hospital beds were
16required" -- this is the actual text -- "for Germany's
17mental institutions for Germany's disproportionately large
18insane population, a result of centuries of lax and
19indiscriminate marriage laws: of some 7 or 800,000 people
20all told, about 10 per cent were permanently
21institutionalized. Others were in and out of hospitals.
22They occupied bed space and the attention of skilled
23medical personnel which Hitler now urgently needed for the
24treatment of the casualties of his coming campaigns". You
25missed passages out without indicating it, have you not?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Let me just have a look at this.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] Three passages have vanished?
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, let me try to sort this out. Certainly, those two
3passages, the passage you read and this passage, would
4seem to indicate that. Now, here I refer to, it is
5actually pages 227 to 8 of the 1991 edition that I am
6citing, as you can see from the bottom of the previous
7page. Could I have the 1991 edition, please? We have 227
8to 8. No, it is the wrong one. 227 to 8.
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: About a third of the way down.
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Right, let me read this from page 227 of the 1991
11edition: "About a quarter of a million hospital beds were
12required for Germany's disproportionate large insane
13population: of some 7 or 800,000 victims of insanity all
14told, about 10 per cent were permanently
15institutionalized. They occupied bed space and the
16attention of skilled medical personnel which Hitler now
17urgently needed for the treatment of the casualties of his
19 So I have quoted absolutely correctly from the
20source that I give without any omissions at all.
21 Q. [Mr Irving] But you have not actually realized that, in fact, the
22original quotation was fuller and you preferred the
23abbreviated version to base your ----
24 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, really! What sort of a point is
26 MR IRVING: Page 209.
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] May I just say, Mr Irving, I think you are entirely right
2to condense that quotation because the reference to lax
3marriage laws in 1977 is entirely wrong. German marriage
4laws up to the middle of the 19th century, in most of
5south Germany, at least, were extremely strict. As you
6say yourself, you are condensing all the way along. There
7is no fault in that.
8 Q. [Mr Irving] Page 209, paragraph 4.1.8 please. This is the Night of
9the Long Knives?
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Sorry, could you remind me?
11 Q. [Mr Irving] 4.1.8, 209?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] 209? Yes.
13 Q. [Mr Irving] 209, you say in the final sentence of that paragraph
144.1.8: "Irving defended the Night of the Long Knives in
15June 1934". This is rather like saying I applauded the
16Holocaust, is it not?
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I think it is somewhat different.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] I "defended the Night of the Long Knives"?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I go on in the next paragraph to outline your views. You
20say that "the SA was planning to" was underlined --
21"overthrow Hitler's government". "In an act of rare
22magnanimity Hitler ordered state pensions provided for the
23next of kin of the people murdered in the Knight of the
24Long Knives. Even so he began to suffer nightmares and
25could not sleep" although, in fact, as I point out, Hitler
26personally marked crosses against the names of
1considerable numbers of people that he ordered to be
3 Q. [Mr Irving] I am going to come to that in a minute. The idea of
4defending the Night of the Long Knives suggests that I
5defended the murder of people when they were planning a
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, the nub of it, of course, is were they planning a
8revolution or not.
9 Q. [Mr Irving] Well ----
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] And in any case, and also, of course, the murder, that was
11done wholly outside the judicial process.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] If I establish in a biography of Hitler that, in fact,
13these SA leaders were plotting something, this is not the
14same as defending their murder, do you agree with that?
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think it is -- I am prepared to jettison the word
16"defending" and say "excusing". We have been down this
18 Q. [Mr Irving] "Excusing" is almost as bad as "defending". But can we
19now move to the next paragraph where you are saying that
20the charges were trumped up. Do you not accept that the
21brown shirt movement were, in fact, planning the overthrow
22of the Nazi government of Germany?
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think the evidence is very thin.
24 Q. [Mr Irving] Have you read various works on the subject, for example,
25by Heinz Werner?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I have read some.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] So you have read some works, but just on the basis of
2having read some works, you are prepared to say that I am
3wrong and that these other authors are wrong?
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, let me see what I say. You see: "Most authors have
5seen the Night of the Long Knives as a shocking violation
6of moral and legal norms" ----
7 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes.
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] ---- "in which Hitler not only brought retrospectively
9trumped-up charges against the SA leaders of plotting a
10coup, but also used the opportunity to bump off
11politicians, such as Kurt von Schleicher and Gustav von
12Kahr, who he felt knew too much about his past, or whom he
13simply strongly disliked, and against whom no conceivable
14political suspicions could be directed in 1934".
15 Q. [Mr Irving] On the basis of your limited knowledge of the Night of the
16Long Knives, what evidence do you have that Hitler ordered
17the murder of Schleicher which was an appalling act --
18there is no question -- that Hitler was personally
19involved in that? Do you have any evidence?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not present it here, no. I would have to do some
21research on that.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] And what evidence do you have for saying that Hitler
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Let me respond to that by saying can you present evidence
25that he did not? Maybe that is the way to go.
26 Q. [Mr Irving] Are you familiar with the excellent paper on the murder of
1General Schleicher that was published by the Institute of
2History about 35 years ago, giving the entire background
3of the case?
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I thought you did not read work by other historians,
6 Q. [Mr Irving] For some historians I make exceptions?
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Ah, so you do read work by other historians?
8 Q. [Mr Irving] This was a documentation. You appreciate the difference
9between a documentation and a book? Two lines from the
10bottom you say: "Hitler personally marked crosses against
11the names of scores of people on the night in question".
12What evidence do you have for that?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is what I understand from my reading. I agree,
14I cite in footnote 11 the sources which I have used for my
15extremely brief account of this.
16 Q. [Mr Irving] So this is one of those cases where the historian has sat
17in his book lined cave and taken four books off a shelf
18and written a fifth, effectively?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No.
20 Q. [Mr Irving] He has not really added to our knowledge?
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think -- oh, you mean me?
22 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes.
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, if you can show that they are wrong or somebody can
24show that they are wrong, then I would be quite happy to
26 Q. [Mr Irving] If you can take it from me that Field Marshal Milch
1described to me personally, sitting at the Execution
2Council, together with Himmler and the other leading
3members of that gang, watching as Himmler read out a list
4of names and they personally approved and wrote little
5ticks against the names of those to be liquidated which
6were handed out through the door to the flunkers who
7ordered it carried out, that this was the way the
8Execution Council took place, and that Hitler was nowhere
9near, would you accept that version? It is contained in
10one of the books you have read, the rise and fall of the
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, Mr Irving. That is a recollection a long time after
13the event. It is not a contemporary document. You
14yourself would be the first to impugn the reliability of
15that source if that source if it said something you did
17 Q. [Mr Irving] Would you accept that Milsche kept diaries throughout that
18episode and also that Milsche would hardly relate
19something to me which under circumstances could be taken
20as counting against himself if he was a participant in or
21an eyewitness of this Execution Council?
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, this is getting rather hypothetical. If you present
23to me documents that demonstrate that what I say here is
24wrong, I will be quite happy to accept it.
25 Q. [Mr Irving] That is not the way it works, Professor.
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I thought it was the way it worked.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] You are saying here in an expert report which you now
2concede is written on rather flimsy evidence that Hitler
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think I did that at all, Mr Irving.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] --- marked crosses against the names of scores of people?
6 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think if you are wanting to say that there
7is documentary support for what you write, Mr Irving, and
8for what Professor Evans criticises, you really ought to
9be equipped to show Professor Evans what you rely on. For
10example, I mean, did you record what General Milsche was
11telling you about the absence of Hitler, and so on?
12 MR IRVING: I wrote a whole book about it, my Lord. I wrote
13his biography. He provided his private diaries to me and
14that has been in discovery and in evidence to the Defence
15throughout this case, and I really do not want to hold up
16the matter by producing evidence for that. I have
17only been delayed by the fact that the witness has
18admitted that his evidence for these assertions was based
19on -- his own concession -- very limited sources.
20 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes.
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think so I said that.
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think he did, but the point is that
23it is not terribly satisfactory to have cross-examination
24by assertion, if you follow me.
25 MR IRVING: Yes.
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Sometimes I think it is going to be necessary
1to give chapter and verse for what you are asserting.
2 MR IRVING: Yes.
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: And I know that makes life difficult for you.
4 MR IRVING: It is a flimsy assertion against an even flimsier
5submission by the witness, if I can put like that. The
6final sentence there, witness, Professor Evans, is you
7say, you have quoted where I say: "Hitler ordered state
8pensions provided for the next of kin of the people
9murdered in the Night of the Long Knives, as June 30th
1019934 came to be known"?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you have any reason to challenge that statement?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I do not.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] You have held it up there for the delectation of his
15Lordship and others as those it is slightly incredible?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, I am giving your views on Hitler here. This is the
18 Q. [Mr Irving] Should I have cut that out then?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You describe Hitler as a dictator by consent, he had an
20act of rare magnanimity in ordering state pensions, he was
21a "friend of the arts, benefactor" -- I am quoting you
22here -- "benefactor of the impoverished, defender of the
23innocent, persecutor of the delinquent" ----
24 Q. [Mr Irving] We will come to that one in a minute.
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] --- this is what I am trying to establish here.
26 Q. [Mr Irving] But are you suggesting, therefore, that if Adolf Hitler in
1this rather odd act of generosity, I suppose, ordered
2bloated pensions provided to the widows of those he has
3just murdered that I should somehow suppress this because
420 years later Professor Evans is going to stand in a
5witness box and say, "This is evidence of Mr Irving's
6admiration for Hitler" that I should not have mentioned
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It seems to me that it is evidence of your admiration for
10 Q. [Mr Irving] And you would not, therefore, have mentioned this
11document; you would have pretended this document did not
12exist? Is that the way you would work?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not understand the question there.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] I cannot understand -- let me put it ----
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Oh, I see what you mean.
16 Q. [Mr Irving] If you were writing a biography of Hitler, would you have
17left this document out?
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Which document?
19 Q. [Mr Irving] The reference to the pensions.
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, I would have to see the document before I could
21answer that question.
22 Q. [Mr Irving] If you were writing a biography of Hitler and you came
23across a document which said: "The Fuhrer has ordered
24pensions paid to the next of kin of those executed in the
25Night of the Long Knives", would you have left it out?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, of course not.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes. So, in other words, you are criticising me for doing
2something that you too would have done, is that correct?
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, that is to say, if the document bears, you know,
4sustains the interpretation you put on it.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] Now, moving on to the final sentence of that paragraph
6where you mockingly have quoted where have apparently
7said: "Hitler, according to Irving, was a 'friend of the
8arts, benefactor of the impoverished, defender of the
9innocent, persecutor of the delinquent'", is this not --
10my memory may be wrong and his Lordship is already looking
11it up -- a slightly mocking entry at the beginning of a
12chapter where, having set that out, I then ----
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Sorry, could I have the 1991 edition? The first section,
14the first file?
15 Q. [Mr Irving] Has your Lordship find it?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] 109.
17 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I have.
18 MR IRVING: Yes. I do not have it in front me, but my
19recollection is that the way I used that was slightly
20mockingly offsetting it against what then follows.
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think that offsets it. This is the "popular
22dictator, friend of the arts, benefactor of the
23impoverished, defender of the innocent, persecutor of the
24delinquent. In an early Cabinet meeting in June 8th 1983
25he had come out against the death penalty for economic
26sabotage, arguing, 'I am against the death sentence
1because it is irreversible. The death sentence should be
2reserved for only the gravest crimes, particularly those
3of a political nature'", and so on. So it does not seem
4to be a kind of ironic or sarcastic setting off.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] Then is there what we call a topic sentence for what
6follows, that having set out the topic sentence, I then
7hang the meat on it, so speak?
8 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think -- I mean, it is there in black and white.
9"Friend of the arts, benefactor of the impoverished,
10defender of the innocent, persecutor of the delinquent".
11 Q. [Mr Irving] But do you agree that what follows then effectively hangs
12the meat on that particular topic sentence?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, it refers back both backwards and forwards. If you
14like, it is a linking sentence.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes. Can you now go forward please to page 213?
16 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Are you leaving the Night of the Long Knives.
17 MR IRVING: I have left it entirely, my Lord, yes.
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can I just ask one question? Professor
19Evans, it seems to me -- I may be wrong about this -- the
20sort of main point on the Night of the Long Knives is
21whether or not Hitler was in any way complicit or involved
22in the murder of 90 former associates of the Nazi Party?
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, that is correct, my Lord.
24 Q. [Mr Justice Gray] Mr Irving has, as I understand it, put to you that Hitler
25had nothing to do with it, it was Heydrich?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am not sure that is what he says.
1 MR RAMPTON: I think the position is in the book Hitler is
2guilty of seven only ----
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I see.
4 MR RAMPTON: --- out of 82 or 90, whatever it is.
5 MR IRVING: Can I be more specific? He was guilty originally
6of seven. Eventually, over the next few days he was told
7it was 84 or 90 and in private he expressed annoyance to
8the people who brought the message saying, "It has got out
9of hand" and this is the evidence of the Adjutants
10Bruchner and Schaub, whose papers I quoted on various
11occasions, and, in fact, there is a letter written by
12Victor Lutze, who was the successor of Rume to Himmler
13four years later harking back to that period saying that
14the Fuhrer was very angry that so many people had been
15killed, including some of his closest friends. That is
16one sentence that sticks in his mind.
17 MR JUSTICE GRAY: So to that extent, I am grateful to you,
18Mr Rampton, he is disapproving what happened, and I just
19wanted to know, Professor Evans, whether in the light of
20your knowledge of what happened, whether that is an
21account you accept?
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No.
23 Q. [Mr Justice Gray] Can you elaborate slightly?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Sorry. I have been asked to keep my answers short.
25 Q. [Mr Justice Gray] I know. It is very difficult to get it right.
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, Hitler was directly responsible for these murders and
2 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Thank you. I am sorry, Mr Irving.
3 MR IRVING: In that case I will just have to re-examine briefly
4on that. You say he is directly responsible. Do you have
5any evidence whatsoever for that statement on the basis of
6your admittedly flimsy reading on the matter?
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, certainly. I mean I quote this in footnote 11 of
9 Q. [Mr Irving] Other authors. Had any of them had access to the private
10diaries of Dr Joseph Goebbels covering the Night of the
11Long Knives which I had?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, Kershaw's Hitler certainly and Fry's National
13Socialist Rule in Germany, both of those. The third book
14I mention there is not really about that, but about the
15legal proceedings after 1945 concerned with trying to
16bring the perpetrators to justice.
17 Q. [Mr Irving] Have you read Kershaw's Hitler in this respect?
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, I cite it there.
19 Q. [Mr Irving] Would it surprise to you notice that he has made no use
20whatsoever of the new Goebbels' diaries, and corresponded
21with him about this?
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] In the entire book?
23 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes.
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I would have to check that up. I find that difficult to
26 Q. [Mr Irving] Can we now ----
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It depends what you mean by the "new Goebbels' diaries".
2 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, the ones that I found in Moscow, the ones that
3I brought back from Moscow in 1992.
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think that is right, Mr Irving.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, I shall leave my question as it was, that
6I corresponded with him about that and does it not
7surprise you to hear that he told me he had not made use
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It does because that is not my understanding. You would
10have to show me the letter before I could accept that.
11 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes, but we are going to make progress now, please, to
12page 213. We are now dealing with the assassination, with
13various things on which I appear to have exonerated
14Hitler. Beginning with the previous page: "Charles
15Sydnor found that I portrayed Hitler not as a monster but
16as a fair-minded statesman of considerable chivalry."
17 Would you have portrayed Hitler as a monster,
18Professor Evans? Do you think that Hitler should be
19portrayed as monster?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think I am summarizing Sydnor there.
21 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes, but I am asking you. Do you think that Hitler should
22be portrayed as a monster? In other words, am I to be
23criticised for not portraying Hitler as a monster?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, let us take the full sentence there, not as a
25monster but as a fair-minded statesman of considerable
26chivalry, who never resorted", and so and so forth: "Who
1never resorted to the assassination of foreign opponents;
2who never intended to harm the British Empire and wanted
3peace with Britain after June 1940, and who attacked the
4Soviet Union in 1941 only as a preventative measure."
5This is Sydnor. This is in a section in which I am
6commenting and begins in the middle of page 210. I am
7recounting a number of authors who have considered that
8your position is extremely favourable to Hitler. I think
9here again I am trying to -- I am in a slight difficulty
10that I am quoting the views of other authors -- I am
11trying to establish that it is not merely a quirk of
12Professor Lipstadt that she says that you are an admirer
13of Hitler, because this is a view that has been adopted by
14a number of other writers. If you want me to say whether
15Hitler was a monster or not ----
16 Q. [Mr Irving] That was the question.
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] --- if you want to put in those terms, yes, he was a
19 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes, he was a monster.
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is undeniable.
21 Q. [Mr Irving] We now turn the page, the specific allegations are that
22I said that he never resorted to the assassination of
23foreign opponents. Is that correct? Is that a true
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] This is what Sydnor says, how Sydnor says you portray
26Hitler. He is not ----
1 Q. [Mr Irving] But you have quoted him.
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, I am quoting him.
3 Q. [Mr Irving] Can I ask you on the basis of your knowledge as an
4historian of that period ----
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am not quoting Sydnor as saying that all these things
6are entirely wrong.
7 MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is where we get into difficulties, is it
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
10 MR JUSTICE GRAY: What we want to concentrate on, Mr Irving,
11I think is really where Professor Evans states his own
13 MR IRVING: Rather than the views of other people about views
14of other people.
15 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Rather than the views of other people.
16 MR IRVING: Yes.
17 MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is not your fault that you pick up these
18references to other historians because they are there to
19be picked up, but what is going to help me is when you
20tackle Professor Evans about his views about your
21portraying Hitler in a favourable light rather than more
23 MR IRVING: Yes. On the facing page -- I will try to move
24forward and your Lordship will appreciate that I am
25abandoning good points there. I am doing it willingly in
26the cause of making court progress.
1 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. I have tried to say that I understand
2why you are being distracted, as it were, by these
3references to other historians. That is not your fault.
4 MR IRVING: On the foot of page 214 you have, metaphorically
5speaking, raised your eyebrows at the fact that one of
6Hitler's doctors recorded in his diary the fact that
7Hitler had described his future biographer in terms that
8appeared to fit me, if I can put it like that?
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. An interesting ----
10 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes, a very simple question.
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] --- put.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] If that diary does exist then I am perfectly justified to
13quote that whole passage, am I not?
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, it is an interesting comment on your attitude of your
16 Q. [Mr Irving] A comment on my attitude?
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, what you conceive was your mission.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] If you had got that diary first, you being admittedly not
19English but Welsh, I suppose you would still feel yourself
20qualified by Hitler as being an Englander?
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think that Germans, unfortunately, do include the Welsh
22amongst the English, yes.
23 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes, unfortunately. You would have quite happily have
24quoted that, would you now, if you were writing a Hitler
25biography and you came into possession of that diary, you
26too would quote it, would you not?
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I would have been too embarrassed I think.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] Too embarrassed?
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. I certainly would not want to give the impression
4that all these things the Doctor says would apply to me.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, some of them do not of course?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is a very tempting quotation, but I think I would have
7added that after the end of it "this is not me". He
8records Hitler saying: "Perhaps an Englishmen will come
9one day who wants to write an objective biography of me.
10It has to be an Englishman who knows the archives and
11masters the German language, and that is why you are
12getting the diaries, Mr Irving, the doctor said." I think
13I would have said: Well, I am not going to fit the bill.
14I am not, as a biography of Hitler, his ambassador in the
16 Q. [Mr Irving] Does this explain to you why so often I manage to get hold
17of these unusual documents, and there was no kind of
18bribery or promising involved? These people just turned
19this material over to me?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Does what explain?
21 Q. [Mr Irving] This kind of episode that I ended up with the good
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] You have to give a little more detail.
24 Q. [Mr Irving] Let us move on.
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I am not sure what you mean by that.
26 Q. [Mr Irving] The foot of page 216.
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] The fact that you are English I do not think makes a great
2deal of difference.
3 Q. [Mr Irving] No, but the fact that I knew the archives and I have taken
4the trouble to learn the language as an Englishman?
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, obviously it would be pointless if you did not know
7 Q. [Mr Irving] At the foot of page 216 you state, again without any
8evidence, that there was massive intimidation of the
9electorate in the 1938 plebiscite?
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
11 Q. [Mr Irving] Do you have any proof of that?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, this is the context where you simply say that Hitler
13had risen from nobody, become the admired and respected
14leader of two great nations. Just five years after 1933
15he got 49 million Germans to vote for him which was 99.8
16per cent of electorate. In my response to your questions
17of 4th January 2000, your written questions, I have two
18whole pages accompanied by a considerable amount of
19documentation of the intimidation which took place in the
20plebiscite of 1938. I am not sure -- would it save the
21court's time if I could just refer to this without
22actually going through it?
23 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think so to begin, and then if with
24Mr Irving wants to follow it up then he can.
25 MR IRVING: Perhaps I can just ask you in general: Was there
26any evidence that there was not a secret ballot?
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, there was. Yes.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] In what way do you have that evidence? Is it contemporary
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, there are reports on the plebiscite, official
5reports from electoral authorities which I quote on page
62: "Members of the Election Committee marked all the
7ballot papers with numbers. During the ballot itself a
8voters' list was made up."
9 Q. [Mr Irving] This is was well-known, is it not, but that is not
10intimidation, is it?
11 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Do not keep interrupting, Mr Irving. It
12destroys the whole object of the exercise.
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] The ballot papers were handed out in numerical order.
14Therefore, it was possible afterwards with the aid of this
15list to find out the persons who cast no votes. The
16Gendarmerie stationed in the Bavarian village of Elsass
17reported that the ballot papers of people regarded as
18unreliable had been marked. Reports from the XR
19leadership of the Social Democrats, so-called day reports,
20who have numerous instances, they have a whole section
21which I include here in the documents on the lack of
22secrecy in the voting.
23 MR IRVING: Is this evidence of intimidation?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No. It is evidence of lack of secrecy in the voting,
25which is what you asked the question about.
26 Q. [Mr Irving] Is there evidence of intimidation?
1 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, there is evidence of intimidation. Do you want me to
2go through it? I list it again here and provide
4 Q. [Mr Irving] The fact that ballot papers are marked, just as they are
5in England, and numbered, is not evidence of intimidation
6of any kind of hanky-panky, is it?
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No. It is evidence of lack of secrecy of the ballots, as
8the source I quote says, it was possible with the aid of
9this list to find out the persons who cast no votes.
10 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes, but how would this lead to a 99.8 per cent vote?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Ah, because there was enormous -- because, of course,
12people suspected that, well, this is one element in a
13number of elements in these elections. People obviously,
14I think, quite clearly suspected that if they cast a "no
15vote", and rightly suspected if they cast a "no vote", it
16would be identified as theirs and they would suffer the
17consequences. In addition, there was a huge effort in
18which agents of the Nazi Party and various other
19organisations known as Schleppe or people who drag, really
20carriers or draggers of voters to the polls, went round on
21a number of occasions asking people to vote, sending them
22written warnings if they did not, going to visit them, and
23then later on, and I quote a number of examples,
24physically maltreating those who did not vote, taking them
25off to lunatic asylums, expelling the Catholic Bishop of
26Rottenburg from his diocese when he refused to take part
1in the vote; dismissal of a street warden in Steischlinger
2for telling people his boss had said that people could
3vole whichever way they wanted, which the boss of course
4denied. There was someone who was identified as voting
5"no" in another community, according to a by day report,
6was identified dragged through the local pubs of the brown
7shirts and put a sign on her back saying "I am traitor"
8and spat at her. There were numerous arrests of known
9opponents of the regime before the vote, 250 people who
10were thought to be opponents of the regime were arrested
11in Leipzig before the vote and then released just in time
12to go to polls. So that it is quite clear what the
13intimidatory effect of that was.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] Are those kinds of measures sufficient to get a 99.8 per
15cent turn out in favour of Adolph Hitler, do you think?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is a different, that is a somewhat different
17question. What I say is that I think it is clear that
18there is no, I do not know of any democratic and free
19election in which anyone has got 99.8 per cent of the
21 Q. [Mr Irving] Would you agree there was a mass ----
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Had the election been free, what the vote would have been
23is another matter. It is a matter for conjecture. What
24I am saying, in other words, is that the difference
25between whatever the result would have been in a free
26election and the amazing 99.8 per cent is the result of
1intimidation, pressure, lack of secrecy of the ballot.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] Would you agree there was a massive propaganda effort to
3lead to this huge turn out?
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] There was indeed a massive propaganda effort, yes.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] And that there was in that respect as much carrot as
6intimidation by your account?
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think propaganda is carrot. It is propaganda.
8 Q. [Mr Irving] Would you agree that in fact the overwhelming majority of
9the German people were by that time, in April 1938,
10dazzled by Hitler, I suppose that is the correct word, his
11achievements, full employment?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No. Well ----
13 Q. [Mr Irving] National unification, the Czar land, all these great
14achievements, and that this is one reason why 99.8 per
15cent of people could easily be persuaded to sign "yes" to
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think if you read the SD and by day reports carefully it
18is clear that fairly soon after 1933 there was quite
19widespread grumbling and discontent. That is a slightly
20different matter from what people thought about the union
21of Germany and Austria. I think, for what it is worth,
23 Q. [Mr Irving] There was a plebiscite, was there not?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] May I finish, Mr Irving? That in the vote a plebiscite on
25the union of Germany and Austria in 1938, in a wholly free
26election, it is more than likely that there would have
1been a "yes". In other words, the majority of people in
2Germany and Austria were in favour of unions, but I do not
3think it is 99.8 per cent.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes, but what you think of course is not evidence.
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think -- I mean can you name me any free, fully
6free, fair and secret election in which any side has 99.8
7per cent of the vote?
8 MR JUSTICE GRAY: We are going rather ----
9 MR IRVING: We are going round in circles.
10 MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- long. That is the Anschluss vote. I did
11not realize that.
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
13 MR IRVING: It was not an election, my Lord. It was a
15 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] There was a Reichstag election at the same time. What you
16say, Mr Irving, is that he got 49 million Germans to vote
17for him, which is 99.8 per cent of electorate.
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can I just ----
19 MR IRVING: Can I ask you, are you familiar with the wording of
21 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, will you listen to me for a
22moment, because I think we probably have spent long enough
23on the 99.8 per cent. There is a danger I think, and this
24is designed to help you, that we are missing the wood for
25the trees. The whole of this section of the report, which
26I think myself is quite important, is on the theme or the
1thesis that you always write about Hitler in terms which
2portray him favourably. Various examples are given of
3that and various statements made by you which tend to
4confirm are recited by Professor Evans.
5 I personally would find it more helpful if you
6were, perhaps to begin with, to ask a few rather more
7general questions in which you would set out what your own
8case is about this. I do not know, but could you not ask
9Professor Evans whether it is not right that actually you
10are very balanced and objective in what you write about
11Hitler? I think you need to set the scene.
12 MR IRVING: My Lord, we know precisely what the answer will be
13if I ask that. He will say he dislikes me. He has never
14read the book. He would never have read the book if he
15had not received this commission from these instructing
16solicitors. So that would be, frankly, in my submission,
17a waste of the court's time.
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Then you would follow it up, would you not,
19and give some examples, and this is really what I am
20asking you for, of events, significant events, when you
21take a critical line about what Hitler said or did. That
22is what I am missing at the moment. We are just going
23down this slightly blind alley of the 99.8 per cent
24Reichstag vote, whereas one is missing your putting the
25case in rather broader terms. I am only putting it
26forward as a suggestion. You do not have to follow it,
1but it would help me if you were to do that.
2 MR IRVING: My method, my Lord, an you may think it totally
3wrong, has been to graze through this passage and come
4across these occasionally indigestible rocks where he
5picks on something where I know I am right and where your
6Lordship probably does not appreciate that I am right. By
7virtue of this cross-examination trying to establish it
8firmly in your Lordship's mind that out of us two experts,
9if I can put it like that, on balance, probably I am
10better right or righter than he is.
11 MR JUSTICE GRAY: If I may say so, if that is what you are
12planning to do for the next 550 pages of this report, I am
13not going to find that helpful. I am sure you are going
14to find, as you indeed have already found, a number of
15instances where Professor Evans has got it wrong. But
16I am not really helped by that. I need to look at it in
17much broader terms than that.
18 MR IRVING: We are just coming in fact to the
19Reichskristallnacht, and I did promise that we were going
20to make substantial inroads into that today.
21 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, but I personally think the section on
22what is called "Admiration of Hitler" is quite important,
23and you do not really seem to have grasped the nettle of
24what is being said about you by Professor Evans. That is
25all I am inviting you to consider.
26 MR IRVING: I have looked at the Night of Long Knives.
1 MR JUSTICE GRAY: True you did. I accept that.
2 MR IRVING: Which was one matter. I thought I read your
3Lordship's mind to be that I should not deal with every
5 MR JUSTICE GRAY: We are now getting into the meat of the
6report, and certainly not every single episode. There we
7are. I have said what I have said.
8 MR IRVING: Just one final matter on the plebiscite. Do you
9know the wording that was on the ballot? You say this was
10not a plebiscite for Hitler personally. Do you know the
11wording on the ballot form, on the ballot paper?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, do read it to me. Remind me.
13 Q. [Mr Irving] Does it say words to the effect of: I personally approve
14of Adolf Hitler as Chancellor of the greater German Reich
15and Austria combined and approve of the union of these two
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, those are the terms in which it is put.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] It is in terms of personal approbation of Adolf Hitler
19then as a person?
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Indeed the propaganda effort also emphasised that apsect
21of it, but of course it was not purely, simply a vote
22about Hitler. The key part of it was the union of or the
23creation of the greater German Reich of Germany and
25 MR IRVING: My Lord, your Lordship does not wish me to look at
26the Putsch of 1923 and the Hoffman episode again. We have
1been over that already with the other witnesses. We now
2come on to page 233 to the night of broken glass.
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am sorry, Mr Irving, the last thing I want
4to do is to prolong this, but if you remember the heart of
5Professor Evans' report is that the chain of documents
6which you rely on as establishing that Hitler did not have
7any knowledge of, let alone authorization for, the Final
8Solution, can be at every link in the chain, as it were,
9attacked. My understanding of the structure of this
10report is that a step in the chain of reasoning, if I can
11put it that way, does indeed start with the 1924 trial and
12you were going to omit that altogether.
13 MR IRVING: My Lord, the chain of documents episode starts on
15 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, quite.
16 MR IRVING: That is where his heading starts.
17 MR JUSTICE GRAY: The first link in the chain is the 1924
18trial, is it not?
19 MR IRVING: It is the 1924 trial. If I had appreciated this
20witness's remarks and under cross-examination by
21Mr Rampton your Lordship will remember that we elicited
22the fact that I was relying on a different set of
23documents on the original microfilm version of the trial,
24I did not use the published text.
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Can I just comment on that, my Lord? They are the same.
26The published text is the complete verbatim transcript.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] Can you go back to page 230, please? You say that
2Hofmann's testimony of Hitler's trial has little
3credibility. Is this your view?
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
5 Q. [Mr Irving] You base that view you on the fact that Hofmann was a Nazi
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. As I say, a long-standing Nazi supporter and party
8official, tried to present Hitler in a favourable light as
9a law-abiding citizen.
10 Q. [Mr Irving] Yes, and you suggest that I ought to have known that fact?
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Indeed I think you did know that fact, Mr Irving.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] On what document or evidence do you base your suggestion
13that I knew that fact?
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] On the evidence of Hofmann.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] On the evidence of Hofmann?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
17 Q. [Mr Irving] In other words, what he himself stated in this trial?
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: And who was he was?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That is right, yes. Well, he says in the course of his
20evidence that he was -- first of all, the court says at
21the beginning of the transcript of his evidence that he
22had a close relationship with Hitler and was involved in
23the Putsch, and therefore should hot be required to give
24evidence on oath. That is the first pointer. Then he
25goes on to say that he was, and I quote all of this in my
1 MR IRVING: Yes, but ----
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] --- that he was the head of the Nazi Political
4 Q. [Mr Irving] The question is ----
5 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] That he was frequently with Hitler, and that he took part
6in the Putsch.
7 Q. [Mr Irving] The question is, what evidence do you have that that
8evidence was before me when I wrote my book on Hermann
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Because you read the transcript, you read the transcript
11of the trial which is where the evidence is.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] What evidence do you have that I read those pages of the
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is not a very long testimony and you recount what you
15must have done, I cannot believe you did anything else,
16was to start at the beginning of Hofmann's testimony and
17go on to the end.
18 MR JUSTICE GRAY: If your case is, Mr Irving, that you did not
19ever read Hofmann's testimony, then you should put that
20because that would be an explanation.
21 MR IRVING: I hope that I was making that point, my Lord.
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: You were not. You were careful not to put it
23quite that way. You said: Have you got any got evidence
24that I had Hofmann's testimony in front of me? If your
25case is that you never read it, I think you should put
1 MR IRVING: If I can explain to your Lordship, my problem is
2that the entire Hermann Goring book was written on an old
3fashioned Xerox word processor. I am having those disks
4converted and I can then prove exactly what part of the
5testimony was before me, but they have still not been
6converted yet. It is just a technical problem. But I
7will now put the question to the witness in this way.
8 Was there any evidence before you that I had
9read the Hofmann testimony?
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] The evidence of your book, yes. You quote the testimony
11in the book.
12 Q. [Mr Irving] Was there any evidence before you that I had read that
13part of the testimony relating to his Nazi party
14membership and to his closeness to Hitler on which you are
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is not a very lengthy testimony, Mr Irving. It takes
17about I suppose ten minutes to read it.
18 Q. [Mr Irving] Did you read this in a printed book or did you read it on
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I just said that they are the same. I have read it in a
21volume, a multi-volume or a very large collection of
22documentary presentation edited by people on the staff of
23the Institute for Contemporary History in Munich.
24 Q. [Mr Irving] Can I ask you, did this printed volume have an index with
25names in it?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I think so, yes.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] Do my microfilms with 8,000 pages on film have an index
2with names on it?
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, but it is not difficult to ----
4 MR RAMPTON: My Lord, I am afraid I think again we are going
5out into outer space. In cross-examination on 31st
6January, page 61, Mr Irving said to me: "I knew nothing
7about Hofmann's background that was not before the court.
8I read the entire court transcript which was many
9thousands of pages which was adequate for writing a
10biography of Hermann Goring."
11 MR IRVING: Yes. Do you accept that if some ----
12 MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is why I think it is important.
13 MR IRVING: I will now clarify this matter.
14 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think that bears out, if I may say so, the
15correctness of what I said to you. If your case was that
16you had never read the testimony, then you ought to have
17put it. But it now turns out that actually you have
18already conceded that you read the whole thing.
19 MR IRVING: Professor Evans, when somebody reads an 8,000 page
20transcript of a trial for the purposes of writing a
21biography of a very minor character in that trial, is he
22going, in your opinion, to pay attention to the background
23of every single witness who gives evidence at that trial?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, Mr Irving, you read the entire transcript. You read
25all of Hofmann's testimony, which is fairly brief. You
26use it in your ----
1 Q. [Mr Irving] Would you estimate to the court how brief this testimony
2was in terms of typescript pages?
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: So it takes ten minutes to read, I think?
4 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, something like that. I have actually read it.
5 MR RAMPTON: My Lord, again I intervene. I think sometimes
6I live in a parallel universe. I asked Mr Irving in
7cross-examination what that passage in the book was where
8he says that Goring goggled at the exchange between Hitler
9and the young lieutenant.
10 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I remember.
11 MR RAMPTON: Mr Irving said: "That was Hofmann, was it, that
12testified about that? Answer: Yes. Yes, the whole
13episode is based on Hofmann."
14 MR IRVING: The fact that the whole episode is based on Hofmann
15does not presuppose that one has read the whole of Hofmann
16with great detail as to his origins, his party membership
17number and all the other matters on which Professor Evans
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, I have the typed pages here.
20 Q. [Mr Irving] The printed pages or the typescript pages?
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, the printed pages.
22 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think we now know that they are the same.
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] The printed version is called [German] which is the
24verbatim account of the principal proceedings before the
25people's court at Munich 1, and Hofmann, in other words,
26it is a verbatim account, it is the same. Hofmann's
1testimony begins on this printed version, that is on
2seventh day, it begins on page 540, and goes on to page
3545 I think, a little bit further. It is really not very
4long. In any case, Mr Irving, if you read the entire
58,000 pages you certainly must have read those handful of
7 MR IRVING: Will you accept that when one reads 8,000 pages of
8a transcript of a treason trial one is not paying
9attention to the political background of the individual
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, certainly not. It is extremely important. You
12present yourself as a professional historian who has an
13extremely critical attitude towards written evidence,
14particularly in trial testimonies as it happens, and here
15you have the testimony of somebody in an important trial
16of Hitler in 1924, a fairly brief testimony, and this is
17somebody who is the head of a political intelligence
18section of the Nazi party who is with Hitler a great deal,
19who is quite clearly a Nazi party member, so closely
20associated with the Nazis and with the Putsch that the
21court actually mentions the fact; at the beginning and at
22the end the judge congratulates Hofmann for being so loyal
23to his Fuhrer. This right through the evidence, Hofmann
24makes no secret of it all in his evidence, and you
25suppress this entirely. You present the evidence of this
26police officer as an entirely neutral statement. You
1suppress, you deliberately suppress these facts which you
2must have known from having read this report.
3 Q. [Mr Irving] Must have known and ought to have known, is this
4sufficient evidence for you, Professor, when you write
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I cannot put myself inside your mind when you are reading
7this stuff and say whether or not you closed your eyes
8when it came to the passages where all these things are
9mentioned. Even if you did that, even if you fell asleep
10repeatedly during reading this five or six-page account,
11I cannot really believe, it still seems to me that it is
12more than irresponsible. You have suppressed this
13information. You have not presented it to the reader.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] Precisely what information have I suppressed, the fact
15that he was a Nazi party member, that he was on Hitler's
16staff, is that what you are saying?
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes .
18 Q. [Mr Irving] Does this render him incapable of speaking under oath the
20 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Can you show to me the passage in your book where you
21mention these facts which is necessary for an assessment
22of the reliability of his evidence?
23 Q. [Mr Irving] Does it render him incapable of speaking truth under oath
24in a case like this?
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] As the court recognized, he did not speak the truth under
26oath. It dispensed him of having to take the oath because
1he was regarded as a biased witness.
2 Q. [Mr Irving] When you translate the passage, "Es ist ein schones
3Zeichen von Ihnen, wenn Sie zu Gunsten Ihres Fuhrers
4aussagen", you translated that as: It is a nice testimony
5to you, that you are speaking out on behalf of your
6leader." What is the German for "testimony"?
7 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I can put a nice sign of you, that is fine, it just does
8not sound quite right in English.
9 Q. [Mr Irving] What is the German for "testimony"? Is it "zoitnes"?
10 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Something like that, yes.
11 Q. [Mr Irving] So you have mistranslated a word there?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No, I disagree. I am trying to find something that reads
13reasonably well in English. I think the meaning is the
14same. Can you just to point to me the page?
15 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I cannot find it.
16 MR IRVING: Page 230, paragraph 2, the last line.
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, if you want to do it literally it is a beautiful sign
18of you when or if you speak out in favour of your leader.
19 Q. [Mr Irving] That would be a bit wooden.
20 MR JUSTICE GRAY: It reflects well on you?
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It reflects well on you. It is a nice testimony to you.
22I do not mean by using the word -- may I just fish, Mr
23Irving? I do not mean by using the word "testimony" it
24has anything to do with the testimony he has given.
25 MR IRVING: But it would be a bit wooden, would it not, that
26translation if you were to translate it with sign and all
1the rest of it?
2 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, it would. "It is a beautiful sign of yours". I am
3trying to steer a course here between -- we have spoken
4about this before.
5 MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is a free translation, but it is an
6entirely accurate one.
7 MR IRVING: You appreciate the point I am trying to make, your
9 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do, but I am afraid I am not very impressed
11 MR IRVING: Not impressed by it? The fact that one is inclined
12to take liberties in a literary sense with a sentence in
13order to make it more legible.
14 MR JUSTICE GRAY: As long as you get the flavour of what is
15being said right.
16 MR IRVING: Is not the correct translation of that sentence
17"good for you, good for you that you are speaking out on
18before of your leader"?
19 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] No.
20 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Not quite.
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] If I may say so, the judge was obviously rather pompous
22and says it in this rather kind of convoluted pompous way,
23not in that colloquial manner.
24 MR IRVING: Is it not exactly the same as when his Lordship
25says things like, "You have done rather well, Mr Irving",,
26for example, as his Lordship did yesterday, we take it at
1face value and it is not something to be taken all that
3 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] What he says is, "It is a beautiful sign of you when you
4or it is a nice testimony to you or good for you", if you
5want to put it colloquially, "it is not just good for you
6or you have done well; it is good for you that you are
7speaking out on behalf of your leader", that is what he is
8saying, your leader. It is quite clear the presiding
9judge regards ----
10 MR IRVING: But he is not actually saying ----
11 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] --- regards -- may I finish, Mr Irving? May I just
13 Q. [Mr Irving] But you carry on and on and on?
14 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, come on. This is a witness who is
15trying to answer a point you have made and let he him
16finish, if he can remember where he had got to.
17 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] It is quite clear the judge knows from the start to finish
18that Hofmann, that Hitler is Hofmann's leader and he
19treats the evidence accordingly.
20 MR IRVING: Is it not just a throw away remark by his Lordship
21in this case to put this witness at his ease, and that is
22exactly what happens again and again and again in the
23courtroom, and you have put all this pompous significance
24on to it in order to try to undermine the value of this
25police sergeant who is doing his job?
26 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] First of all, I agree of course that it is intended to
1make, it is a nice comment, the judge is trying to be nice
2to Hofmann. After all, Hofmann whose has not been treated
3very well. He has not been allowed to present evidence on
4oath. He has been told that he is too heavily involved in
5the whole thing, but he says, "it is your leader", and it
6is quite clear to anybody who reads this rather brief
7section of testimony that everybody is perfectly well
8aware that this man's evidence is tainted, because Hitler
9is his leader, not just because of that statement, but
10also because, as he says, he was with Hitler frequently,
11he was head of the political section of the Nazi party's
12Intelligence Unit, participated in the Putsch, accompanied
13Hitler for most of the evening of the Putsch.
14 Q. [Mr Irving] But cutting to the bottom line, is there any reason to
15believe that this witness made the whole story up? Is
16there any reason, any subjective or objective reason why
17we should accept that he made the whole story up?
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Which story?
19 Q. [Mr Irving] The story about how he had been a witness of Hitler,
20ticking off this lieutenant and throwing him out of the
22 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] There is a serious reason to distrust that testimony.
23 Q. [Mr Irving] Purely on the basis of the fact he was a Nazi ----
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I do not think it was taken very seriously by the court,
25and I think that a responsible author has to present this
26particular problem to the readership. If you want to make
1use of Hofmann's evidence you simply have to say that he
2is heavily involved in the Putsch, he is a Nazi party
3supporter and is regarded as such by the court.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] Your final criticism is that I do not give proper source
5notes for this, is that correct?
6 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. Where is this?
7 Q. [Mr Irving] Well, that I failed to provide a proper footnote
8reference. It is the bottom of page 230.
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
10 Q. [Mr Irving] Is that a serious criticism or is just your irritation
11that you had to go and look in the index of your printed
12edition of this trial?
13 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Well, it is more than that. I think that you have made it
14deliberately difficult for people to go and check it out.
15 Q. [Mr Irving] I have made it deliberately difficult?
16 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes.
17 Q. [Mr Irving] In what way?
18 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Do you want to have a look at the footnote reference which
19you provide or do not provide?
20 Q. [Mr Irving] Is it not correct that I give the reference as being
21microfilm version of the trial of the Bavarian people
22against Adolf Hitler and others?
23 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes, that is 8,000 pages, as you said, Mr Irving. I do
24think that simply referring to an 8,000 page collection
25does make it difficult. You could, for example, easily
26have put the day on which it occurred and given a frame
1number, if there are frame numbers, or a real number, if
2there are real numbers. There are ways in which you can
3be more precise.
4 Q. [Mr Irving] Will you take it from me that the American publisher
5William Morrow asked me to cut 2,000 lines out the proofs
6of this book. In other words, at proof stage, they said,
7Mr Irving, please cut 2,000 lines out of this book. Can
8you accept that?
9 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I would have to see the documentary evidence of that.
10 Q. [Mr Irving] Very well. If that was the case, what are the first
11places that you would be tempted to make the cuts?
12 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] I agree of course in the footnotes.
13 Q. [Mr Irving] In the footnotes?
14 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] But in that case I think you still have to abbreviate
15footnotes. You have to provide footnote references which
16will enable other people to go and check up what you have
17written. You could have, you know, done this in such a
18way as to achieve that object.
19 Q. [Mr Irving] So, in summary, on the case of this policeman Hoffmann
20your allegations against me rest on the statement that
21I ought to have known, or ought to have noticed, there was
22a Nazi party member and I ought to----
23 MR RAMPTON: No, my Lord, he did not say "ought to", he said
24"must have", which is quite different.
25 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] Yes. He did know.
26 MR IRVING: Very well. In that case I have to ask again, on
2 MR JUSTICE GRAY: We have been all over that, Mr Irving,
4 MR IRVING: Do you have any evidence that I did know?
5 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, Mr Rampton has just reminded you
6that you accepted that you had read the whole of the trial
7evidence, including Hoffmann.
8 MR IRVING: Has your Lordship any idea of how many words there
9are on 8,000 pages of transcript?
10 MR JUSTICE GRAY: You have just been through that point.
11 MR IRVING: Yes, but the fact that one reads 8,000 pages of
12transcript with no doubt many millions of words does not
13mean to say that one knows everything that is stated about
14every person in that transcript.
15 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, what I am going to suggest is that
16you read the transcript of the last 20 minutes again
17perhaps, if you have time between now and tomorrow, and
18I think you will understand why I think you will not do
19any good to your case by going all over it again.
20 MR IRVING: Well ----
21 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] The answer to your question, Mr Irving, is no, my case
22against you here does not rest solely on that.
23 MR IRVING: On Hoffmann?
24 A. [Professor Richard John Evans] On the fact that you suppressed your knowledge of the bias
25in his testimony. I also, as you know, say that you
26manipulate what he said.
1 Q. [Mr Irving] What is your evidence for the fact that he was biased in
3 MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think that question has been asked and
5 MR IRVING: Except that he stated it as a fact, and of course
6it is an opinion.
7 MR JUSTICE GRAY: In a sense it is perhaps neither. It is an
8inference from all the circumstances.
9 MR IRVING: A possible bias, this is true. We now pass to
10Reichskristallnacht, page 233.
11 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I accept that it is slightly my
12fault that we spent the last 20 plus minutes on the 1924
13trial, but frankly I think it was vital that you did
14address that. But, having got to ten past 4, would it be
15sensible to start on Kristallnacht tomorrow morning?
16 MR IRVING: It would be sensible, my Lord. Perhaps I can wave
17a little flag and say I shall reserve the right to come
18back to Hoffmann on a later occasion with more material,
19as your Lordship obviously attaches more significance to
20it than I do.
21 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Only because is it one of the chain of
23 MR IRVING: I intend dealing with the chain of documents in
24sequence on a different occasion, I think. It makes more
26 MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can I say in advance that I am going to have
1to rise just a little bit early tomorrow, say about
24 o'clock rather than 4.15. 10.30 tomorrow.
3 < (The witness withdrew).
4(The court adjourned until the following day)