Day 20: Tuesday, 15th February 2000

Table of Contents

Part I: Initial Proceedings (1.1 to 1.26)

Trial Transcription Details 1.1-1.26

Part II: Professor Richard Evans’ Cross-Examination by David Irving continued, Morning Session (2.1-114.3)

Section 2.1 to 22.16

Irving presents ‘enemies of free speech’ website as professional sabotage. 2.1-9.4

Irving questions Professor R.J. Evans about Nazi’s “continued or experimental” use of gas chambers. 9.5-16.8

Irving’s defends use of Verul Report. 16.9-22.16

Section 22.17 to 40.22

Irving questions Evans about authenticity of post-war gas chambers. 22.17-27.20

Evans debates Irving over explaining vs excusing the Holocaust. 27.21-33.7

Evans brings up well-known Holocaust deniers. 33.8- 40.22

Section 40.23 to 61.17

Discussion of Allied propaganda regarding Jewish extermination. 40.23-45.22

Discussion of Allied knowledge of German extermination efforts. 45.23- 53.6

Irving presents examples of spurious Holocaust survivors who received literary fame. 53.6-61.17

Section 61.18 to 82.13

Debating the authenticity of Anne Frank’s diary. 61.18-69.14

Irving’s relationship with Frank’s father and the ball-point pen allegations. 69.15-73.3

Further debate over Anne Frank, Justice Gray scolds Irving for wasting time. 73.4-82.13

Section 82.14 to 100.25

Discussion of the memoirs of Rudolf Hoss, Commander of Auschwitz. 82.14- 87.8

Discussion of various inconsistencies in the Holocaust records. 87.9- 92.3

“Instrumentalization of the Holocaust.” 92.4-100.25

Section 100.26 to 114.3

Irving defends against claims of antisemitism. 100.26-105.21

Evans asserts that Irving agrees with Goebbels in that the Jews “had it coming to them.” 105.22-114.3

Part III: Professor Richard Evans’ Cross-Examination by David Irving continued, Afternoon Session (114.4 to 215.26)

Section 114.14 to 145.9

Irving and Evans’ Reichskristallnacht discussion. 114.4-122.2

The four criteria for a Holocaust denier. 122.3-125.9

Irving’s informal involvement with the Institute of Historical Review. 125.10-132.1

Irving mentions James Back, John Toland, and others as respectable IHR associates. 132.2-137.15

Evans defends the claim that IHR is an implicitly Holocaust denying institute. 137.16-145.9

Section 145.10-164.23

Professor Richard John Evans questions Irving’s relationship with prominent Holocaust deniers. 145.10-152.15

Irving disentangles his support for the translation of SS documents with his agreement of their message. 152.15-158.2

Irving distances himself from the “cracked anti-Semites” of the Holocaust denial organizations. 158.3-164.23

Section 164.24 to 185.10

Irving explains his role in “straightening out” the IHR and their “lunatic views.” 164.24-169.20

Irving and his written treatment of the Night of Long Knives. 169.21-175.14

Irving defends his sources for Hitler’s involvement in the Night of Long Knives. 175.15-185.10

Section 185.11 to 198.7

Evans turns to Irving’s apparent admiration of Hitler according to Sydnor. 185.11-190.6

Irving describes Hitler’s rise to power and the details of the electoral vote in his favor. 190.7-195.20

Justice Gray questions Irving’s methods in court. 195.21-198.7

Section 198.8 to 215.26

Irving defends his source treatment of Hofmann’s role in Hitler’s trial. 198.8-205.6

Evan returns to critiques of translation and Irving’s deliberate suppression of information. 205.7-209.19

Irving’s rebuttal followed by Justice Gray’s closing remarks for the day. 209.20-215.26