Original subtitles

I don't see any reason to be tasteful about Auschwitz.

I say to you quite tastelessly

that more women died on the back seat

of Senator Edward Kennedy's car at Chappaquiddick

than ever died in a gas chamber at Auschwitz.

Holocaust denial rests on

four basic assertions.

Number one.

That there was never any systematic or organized attempt by the Nazis

to kill all of Europe's Jews.

Number two.

That the numbers are far fewer than five or six million.

Number three.

That there were no gas chambers

or specially built extermination facilities.

Number four.

That the Holocaust is therefore a myth

invented by Jews

to get themselves financial compensation

and to further the fortunes of the State of Israel.

War, the deniers say, is a bloody business.

There's nothing special about the Jews,

they're not unique in their suffering.

They're just everyday casualties of war.

What's the fuss?

Okay, and here's another question,

how do we know the Holocaust happened?

Seriously. I'm asking. How do we prove it?

Photographic evidence?

Not one person in this room or outside it

has ever seen a photograph of a Jew inside a gas chamber.

You know why?

Because the Germans made sure that none were ever taken.

So how do we know?

How do we know that so many were murdered?

So what's the proof? Where's the proof?

How strong is it?

Good morning on Veterans Day,

ceremonies being held today

here in Washington and across the country.

Here, Mutt. I'm Bob Edwards.

Today is Friday, November 11th,

and this is NPR's Morning Edition.

- Morning, Professor Lipstadt. - Good morning.

Good morning, Professor. Morning.

- Morning. - Morning.

Speech. Two copies with corrections.

And Jamie called from NBC.

They still want the interview about the book.

These go back to the library. You make copies.

All right. I'll take this.

And he needs water.

- You want a hand with that? - I'm okay.

And Atlanta weather on this Veterans Day,

mostly sunny with clouds creeping in

by the end of the afternoon.

I do a lot of these events.

So if you could put a table at the back.

Right by the door, uh, perfect as they leave.

Oh, I certainly will.

Any writer will tell you, at these events

you always sell 37 books.

No matter what size, uh, the audience.

If it's 50 people, 37 books

and I'm wondering, you know, is it fixed? Do you think it's fixed?

Thank you so much, Deborah.

But I think we better get things started, yeah?

Everyone, it is my pleasure to introduce

the holder of the Dorot Chair

in Jewish and Holocaust Studies

at Emory University

and the author of Denying the Holocaust;

The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory,

Deborah Lipstadt.

Whatever the reasons that people become deniers,

when you look closely,

they often have an agenda which they won't admit to.

So denial is a pick to undo the lock

to open the door to something else.

Yes.

Somebody told me you don't debate with people

who say the Holocaust didn't happen.

Uh, that is correct.

Like I don't debate with people who say Elvis is alive.

Talking to people you don't agree with,

that's democracy, isn't it?

It's cowardly not to talk to them.

Are you calling me a coward?

Well... No, no, listen.

I... I don't see it that way.

You can have opinions about the Holocaust.

You can argue about why it happened

and how it happened.

But what I won't do is meet with anyone, anyone,

who says it didn't happen.

Because the Holocaust happened. It happened.

And that isn't opinion. That's fact.

And I won't debate fact.

In your book, why do you continually

denigrate the work of David Irving?

He's a scholar. He's discovered all sorts of

primary sources no one else knew about.

Well, to be honest,

I don't think I do denigrate him.

Actually, I don't really think about him that much.

I don't think he's worth my time.

Yes, sir. Gentleman in the back.

Professor Lipstadt.

Uh, let me reveal something to you, Professor.

I am that David Irving about whom you have been so rude.

Yes, yes, lam he.

And it puzzles me

that you think yourself qualified to attack me,

given that I have 30 years' experience in the archives

and my books have been published by

some of the greatest publishing houses in the world.

Viking Press, William Morrow, E.P. Dutton.

I have to conclude

that the reason you don't engage

with people you disagree with

is because you can't and you might learn some facts.

Facts, Miss Lipstadt,

which don't suit your opinions.

Well? Well?

Mr. Irving, I will not debate you.

Not here. Not now. Not ever.

So if you would please just sit down

and you can go and speak

in another room at another time.

You want gullible students to believe

that there are mounds of documents

which prove a Holocaust.

You even said that Hitler ordered it.

Well, I've got $1,000

in my pocket. Yes, $1,000,

and I'm willing to give that $1,000

to anyone, anyone, who can show me a document

that proves that Hitler ordered the killing of the Jews.

Here it is. This is not your Q&A.

You can go and speak somewhere else.

Who pays for you to write your books?

I need someone from security.

Who is it that finances all your expensive trips...

Sit down. Mr. Irving! Sit down or leave.

Can you deal with this guy?

Okay, step in.

Ah, Miss Lipstadt not only won't debate.

She calls security to stop me from debating.

No, leave it. Leave it. GUARD: I'm gonna need you to sit down.

So be it. If anybody wants,

I shall be signing my books after the event.

My books, they're free.

Come and get one.

Thank you.

$1,000! $1,000!

An example of real history.

I hope you find it edifying.

Real history opposed to

manufactured history and sentimentalized.

Ah.

Today I've heard you telling lies to students.

Speak in another room at another time.

You want gullible students to believe...

Perfect.

Deborah, I'm glad you've called.

It's wonderful to hear from you.

I'm guessing you got our letter.

It's why I'm calling.

Irving's just sent us notice of a suit to be filed in the High Court

because we've failed to withdraw the book.

The High Court? The High Court in London.

It's a libel suit.

He's saying you're part of a concerted worldwide conspiracy

to rob him of his reputation as a professional historian

and thereby of his livelihood.

I Wish.

So what's the next step?

Next step is, you tell us if you want to fight.

A throng with 400 skinheads, neo-Nazis

and supporters of extreme right-wing groups.

The British historian David Irving,

speaking in German, addressed the rally...

telling them that Germans no longer

had anything to be ashamed of.

Praising Hitler's deputy, Rudolf Hess,

as a German hero and a martyr.

According to the evidence I've seen,

there were no gas chambers anywhere at Auschwitz.

I'm dealing with Auschwitz because it's the capital ship

of the whole Holocaust campaign.

Now if Auschwitz sinks, and it is, believe me,

a very leaky vessel indeed,

then the whole Holocaust campaign is in doubt.

- I've decided. I'm taking him on. - What?

Why are you letting him get to you?

Nine-tenths of these things don't even get to court.

They don't get to court 'cause people settle. I can't settle.

The man's a liar. Someone needs to say so.

What I don't get, why has he chosen you?

Know what I think?

I have two essential qualifications for David Irving.

I'm a woman and I'm a Jew.

He gets more bang for his buck.

So this is your book on denial he's objecting to?

Correct. Did you even mention Irving?

What did you say about him?

I think I called him a Hitler partisan

who distorted evidence

in order to reach historically untenable conclusions.

Okay, well, maybe you better get yourself lawyered up.

Here you go.

You must be Anthony Julius.

And you must be Deborah Lipstadt.

Please.

Good of you to come all this way. It's my pleasure.

And it's nice to combine our meeting with a lecture.

Anti-Semitism in the poetry of T.S. Eliot.

Yes, correct.

I'm looking forward to hearing you speak.

You're not afraid of taking on the big boys.

I try not to be.

In fact I was wondering

if it was my interest in anti-Semitism

which made you consider me to represent you.

In fact not. Or if it was the Diana thing.

Uh, no.

Someone I know said to me,

"You need a junkyard dog

"and in England that's Anthony Julius."

Right, right. Junkyard dog...

Oh, someone who's gonna be ferocious in court.

Oh, well, I'm afraid I don't appear in court.

I prepare the case, I don't present it.

In Britain, solicitor and barrister

are two quite different functions.

And, uh, you mentioned "the Diana thing." I...

I don't know what that is.

Diana is the... Is the Princess of Wales.

Well, yes, I know that.

I just don't know what your connection to her is.

Uh, no, just, um,

that Diana needed a divorce and I acted for her.

You represented her?

Yes, yes.

But I thought you did defamation.

Well, you're quite right. I... I...

I put that point to Diana herself.

I said, "I've never handled a divorce case before."

And she said, "That's all right, Mr. Julius.

"I've never been divorced before."

Interesting woman.

Deborah, I have to warn you

that there's a reason why he's bringing the case in London.

I wondered about that. Thank you very much.

You're welcome.

It's to his advantage.

Over here in America,

uh, if you're accused of defaming someone,

then it's up to them to prove that what you said is untrue.

In the UK, the reverse is true.

Wait. I have to prove what I said was true?

Mmm. Correct. Yes, but I'm the innocent party.

A man accuses you of something

and it's your job to prove he's wrong?

It's against natural justice.

In the US there's a presumption of innocence.

Yeah, not in the UK.

Tricky, isn't it?

So what do you know about Mr. Irving?

Well, I've read every word he's written.

I know some of the personal stuff.

His father abandoned him when he was four.

He fell in love with Hitler when he was eight.

His brother said he used to run around bombed-out buildings in London

during the Blitz shouting, "Heil Hitler."

He's self-educated. Extremely proud of it.

He learned his German working in a factory.

I hear it's perfect. Yeah. How's yours?

Adequate.

He wants it both ways, Mr. Irving.

He wants to be the brilliant maverick, the provocateur

who comes along and reinvents the Second World War.

But he also wants respect,

the respect of his colleagues in the club.

England's a club, Deborah, and he wants to join.

But he's an anti-Semite.

You'd be amazed how many military historians see that as just a detail.

They see him as a serious historian

who happens to see things from Hitler's point of view.

Yeah, but it's not a detail.

You know, I think it's at the center of everything he thinks and does.

So do I. Yeah. He's a liar and a falsifier of history.

Yes, and this may be the chance to say so.

My mother named me Devorah.

You know what it means.

Leader. Defender of her people.

Warrior.

There was an expectation when I was a kid.

My mother always said there was gonna be an event.

That I was picked out. I was chosen.

Well, here it is.

Good morning. I think we're expected.

Goodness me. Oh. Ah.

Ah, yes, hello, delighted to see you.

I'm David Irving.

Here, take Jessica, please.

Darling, Daddy's just going to be busy for a minute.

Here we are. A little treat for you.

Yes, open and...

What's it going to be? A red one. Ooh-oh-oh.

Darling. Bye-bye.

You must be, uh, bringing me Miss Lipstadt's documents.

Yes.

That's everything that contributed to her analysis.

The full extent of her research.

You must be her representatives.

Yes. I'm James Libson and, uh, this is Miss Tyler.

She's our paralegal. Paralegals indeed.

David against Goliath, already.

You must work with the, uh, famous Mr. Julius?

Yes.

Gonna be a fascinating encounter, don't you think?

Fascinating.

You see, as I see it, it's academia versus the rest.

Remember, the greatest historians

have never been academics. We're outsiders.

Cato, Thucydides, Gibbon, Churchill...

I field a very strong team.

Perhaps you'd like a cup of tea?

Uh, no, thank you. There's just one more thing before we leave.

You keep a diary?

Yes, yes, um...

We'd like to apply to include the diary

in the process of discovery.

Hmm.

You... You're smiling.

Well, I don't much fancy the prospect

of Miss Lipstadt poring over my private writings.

Oh, no, no. Access would be limited to us,

the legal team only.

Come.

I've kept a diary for 20 years.

I promise, I've nothing to hide.

But I doubt if even Goliath has the resources

to read between 10 and 20 million words.

And straightaway you can see that perhaps tonight,

uh, Gareth Southgate could be the toast of Rio,

'cause Villa are 2-1 up

at the home of the league leaders, Leeds United.

Let's get the latest on that now. Harry Gration.

Yes, Ray, the new century

and a miracle has just about happened.

Two goals from Gareth Southgate

have given Villa a richly deserved...

All right. That's five...

Yes. No, that's too much. I need...

Okay. Lovely.

Have a nice day. Bye. Cheers, then.

Oh, thank you.

Ah, here she is!

Here she is. The client. The defendant.

All the way from Atlanta. Anthony.

You sure you got enough people?

Well, we'll introduce you to everyone as we go.

But for the moment, everybody, Deborah Lipstadt.

- Say good morning. - Morning, Deborah.

Morning. I'm, uh, Richard Evans. How do you do?

Hello. How are you?

Richard is, uh, Professor of Modern History at Cambridge.

Yes, I know. I know. I asked for you specifically.

Oh, yes, of course.

Well, uh, Richard is gonna be one of our eight expert witnesses.

It's a pleasure to meet you. It's an honor.

Anthony. ls that a...

ls that a note from the Princess?

Uh, yes, yes, His, yes, yes.

Hoping for a similar result with you.

You wanna do to the Holocaust deniers

what you did to the monarchy?

Um... Yeah. Sort of.

Well, I think we should argue

that David Irving is not a real historian.

Oh, right. Well,

we'll be sure to take that on board.

Thank you so much.

James. James is gonna talk you through your legal options.

I'm, uh... I'm James Libson. I work with Anthony.

We've spoken. Yes, yes, yes. Carry on.

So normally there are, uh, three routes

that any libel defender can take, okay?

So, first of all, you can argue that

Irving is misinterpreting the offending words.

Mmm-hmm. However, since at one point in your book

you say that Irving seems to conceive of himself as continuing Hitler's work,

I don't think we can say he's misinterpreting anything.

I don't think we can.

Nor can we take the second route,

which would be just to say that the offending words

aren't as offensive as Irving makes out.

- Oh, we can't take that route. - No, they're offensive.

I hope so. God knows I tried to be.

Yeah. So really it does just leave us with this one option.

We call this the atom bomb defense.

That's the one we're gonna go for.

We plead justification.

So even if the words are defamatory,

they are still nevertheless true.

Quite. Not every word. It doesn't have to be every word.

We can get some things wrong. But we do have to prove,

what we call "the sting" of the libel.

We argue that Irving deliberately subordinated the truth

in order to propagate anti-Semitism

and engender sympathy for the Third Reich.

- More coffee? - No, thank you.

- Yeah. - Um...

We are still left with the special problem that we have in the UK

that the burden of proof lies with the accused.

Um, I'd like you to listen to Laura. Have you met Laura?

Miss Lipstadt. Hello.

Uh, Laura's 23. Uh, it's her first case.

We've just been discussing this very point. Attack it, Laura.

We feel... Anthony feels, oddly in this particular case,

the peculiarity of the British law

can actually work to our advantage. Yes. Say.

The first reaction everyone has

when they hear about this trial is horror.

More like disbelief. I mean,

a court of law has to be a lousy place to judge history.

I must agree, as a historian.

They say, "My God, are you serious?

"You sit down in a court and some pompous English judge

"rules on whether the Holocaust happened?"

And let's think about this. What if we lose? Huh?

It suddenly becomes acceptable, it becomes respectable

to say the Holocaust didn't happen?

Has anyone thought about what that will mean?

But the wonderful thing is, you see, if we play this right,

it's not going to be Irving putting the Holocaust on trial.

No. It's going to be us putting Irving on trial.

Laura's right. Thank you.

Laura's very sound on this. And if we focus on his lies,

and, equally important, his motives for lying,

there's absolutely no reason we should have to produce eyewitnesses to these horrors.

Wait a minute. What do you mean,

that the survivors won't appear?

No, no, no. No, we don't want them to.

You don't want their testimony?

No. Under no circumstances.

Why not? Why the hell not?

Because even to let survivors appear

would be to legitimize his right to question them.

Can I say something

before you go any further with this strategy?

Yeah, please do.

You once said to me that this trial might have implications

for the whole of the Jewish people.

Now you're saying you won't allow the Jews to speak?

Right, I'll explain the thinking

just so you understand the thinking.

Yes, please, I would love to understand the thinking.

We believe that Irving is planning

on being what we call a litigant in person.

He plans to conduct his own case.

What do you mean? He's not hiring lawyers?

No. No, it'll be just him. Imagine that.

David Irving, international Holocaust denier,

finally getting his hands on a survivor. Imagine it.

The hurt. The damage. The insult.

It's unthinkable. He's not gonna have that.

I won't allow it. I won't allow that to happen.

What are you gonna allow?

He keeps a diary. He has done for years.

He told us he had nothing to hide,

but we still had to subpoena him to get hold of it.

What, you've spoken to him in person?

Yes, yes, we have.

Deborah, the first rule of a good defense is a strong offense.

First rule? First rule of litigation,

whether you're prosecuting or defending,

always run your case as if you're prosecuting.

It's a good rule. So that's why Laura

is leading this group of researchers here. They joined last week.

And they're gonna be combing through all the diaries,

uh, locking in particular for any contact with right-wing groups.

Neo-Nazis, skinheads, anti-Semites, SS revival groups,

all kinds of assorted riffraff.

And, just as important, Professor Evans here,

with his, um, his two able graduate students,

Nik Wachsman and Thomas, uh...

Thomas Skelton-Robinson.

My team will be doing the historiography.

Examining every published word Irving ever wrote.

Checking sources, comparing editions.

Generally testing the reliability of his history.

You can't imagine what fun we're having.

We're gonna end up with a charge sheet of inaccuracies

as long as your arm. One mistake after another.

We think it'll take about a year. Full-time.

Well, I'm glad that you guys have got it all sewn up.

We aim to.

Okay, well, thanks very much, everyone.

As you know, uh,

we had been planning to do everything for free.

But given the mounting scale of the thing,

I think we may need to revisit the question of charges.

Of course, if we lose,

the firm will be happy to carry the cost.

But we will need some support.

So you are allowing me to do something?

Um, I get to go fundraise?

Uh...

Yes, yes, if, um...

Whatever you can do.

I think people here do have concerns about the trial.

The community's very keen to support you.

Mmm-hmm. I'm glad to hear it.

But we're also interested to know what you're thinking.

Mr. Julius is a very brilliant young man.

He is.

Can we speak frankly? Please, please.

There's... There's some fear you may have fallen under his spell.

You won't be the first woman

to be attracted to his intellect.

Diana.

So far, I've raised, um, most of my funds back home.

- Was that easy? - It wasn't difficult.

Not as difficult as in London, is that what you're saying?

There's a principle and I've stuck to it.

No single source of finance.

There was one man, he offered to pay for the whole thing.

But when the history of this moment comes to be written,

I think it's important many people gave, not one.

You talk about history.

Look at it from our point of view.

We live with David Irving. He's British.

And he's a has-been.

What's a trial gonna do?

It's gonna give him a new lease of life.

Well, I can't help that

because I didn't bring the prosecution.

He did. No,

but you could prevent the whole thing from happening.

HOW would I do that? Settle.

I mean it.

Sign some piece of paper. Is that so terrible?

He's never gonna give you Auschwitz, okay,

but, then, he's... He's David Irving.

We've lived with worse.

And what would you want me to settle for?

Four million dead? Three? One?

What number would you be comfortable with?

Here in England, you may like appeasement, but I don't.

I don't think you should be using a word like appeasement.

No? Then what word should I use?

All we're saying, beware of Anthony Julius.

He does these things for his own glory.

Other women have been in his pocket

and found it an uncomfortable place to be.

Oh, well, if it's pockets we're talking about,

maybe you can explain why the British find theirs so hard to open.

The area forecast for the next 24 hours.

Viking, North and South Utsire, 40.

Southwesterly, veering northwesterly,

6 to gale 8, perhaps severe gale 9 later.

Rain, wintry showers, moderate or full...

I had a hellish night last night.

I couldn't sleep. I was so angry.

Really? Why?

I had dinner last night with some

leaders of the Jewish community.

Oh, the community, huh?

And did the community tell you it would suit them better if you dropped the case?

I was defending you.

I'm sure you did a very good job.

Maybe you should take it up professionally.

They think you took this case for your own glory.

Glory? Gosh. I hadn't thought about glory.

Glory? Fascinating. So what did they give you to eat?

- I don't understand this thing, I really don't. - Oh, here we are.

Richard Rampton, Deborah Lipstadt.

Ah!

"'Tis the author of our misfortune."

Please, please, please, come in.

Come in and warm yourself.

Hi. Hello.

Richard will be your leading counsel.

I've explained to Deborah the difference

between barrister and solicitor.

Our legal system seems forbidding but it works, I think.

If your legal system worked, I wouldn't be in this mess.

I don't mind Dickensian,

it's Kafkaesque I'm worried about.

And this is our junior counsel, Heather Rogers.

How are you? Hi, Heather.

Look, I've.... I've just opened up

this rather decent bottle of red.

Hope you don't mind plastic?

No, Richard, I'm not gonna drink.

I haven't eaten. And Deborah hasn't slept.

No, I'll taste the wine. Why not?

Everything else is being decided for me.

Yes, so Heather and I have been introducing ourselves to the subject.

Hmm. I can see that. A little light reading.

Oh, is this you?

You catch fish?

Yes, I do.

And how's your German?

Ah, you see? Just like a barrister.

Go straight to my weak point.

Um, well, I know the libretto to The Magic Flute.

That's, uh... That's all the German I have.

It's probably not very useful in our forthcoming encounter.

Anyway, cheers.

Cheers.

Cheers, Heather.

Yes, I was going to get on with my Life of Mozart,

- but I shall have to postpone. - Again.

Richard is the most skillful advocate in the country.

I don't mind saying it.

Yes, well, in this case I wish I...

I wish I thought skill were enough.

What else do you need?

A rarer quality.

Such as?

Appetite.

Plainly, I shall have to go to Auschwitz

and I would be very grateful if you would accompany me.

Why do you need to go to Auschwitz?

Legal reasons.

Is he coming?

He wants us here, and then he doesn't show up.

He's late, that's all. He's often late.

Is he late for court?

Morning, everyone.

You must be Professor Van Pelt? Lam.

Good. So, uh, let's get down to business.

Heather. Deborah.

I suggest we start by taking a walk

around the perimeter fence.

Yeah, I just did that.

Good. Then let's look at the plans. Omer?

I want you to understand the scale of the operation.

What we are looking at here is one of the largest

and most efficient killing machines in human history.

Yeah. Yes, we know what it is. It's how we prove what it is,

that's what we're interested in.

We're not here on a pilgrimage, we're preparing a case.

Okay.

These are the remains of Crematorium ll.

The buildings were deliberately demolished by the Germans

in the autumn of 1944

to destroy the evidence of what they did here.

They dynamited them again

one week before the end of the war.

These steps led down into the undressing room.

The Olére drawings, please.

David Olére was a French artist. A survivor.

He was able to draw a lot of what he saw here.

He made a drawing of this arrangement here.

These are the steps in the drawing.

Then they were led through here,

past a sign that said, "To the Baths"

and into the gas chamber...

Here.

Please watch your step. Tread carefully.

This is a shrine.

What we are standing on here

is all that remains of the gas chamber itself.

This was the roof.

The chamber was right under here.

Under our feet.

The doors were locked and cyanide crystals, Zyklon-B,

were poured in on them through holes in the roof.

One, two, three, four.

OW! Shit.

It... It's okay.

Now here are the delousing chambers.

Typhus was a terrible problem in the camp

and the lice that carried it had to be destroyed.

Right, now we get to it.

So we need to talk about Leuchter.

Yes, I'm coming to Leuchter. Yeah.

This building was used to delouse the prisoners' clothing.

They used Zyklon-B for that, too.

To kill the lice.

We know that? Yes.

For sure? You have proof?

We can't take anything for granted.

I need to see the proof.

Yes, I can give you proof.

However, in February 1988,

a Holocaust denier called Ernst Zundel sent Fred Leuchter,

an engineer and self-styled execution expert from America,

to test in different parts of the camp

for evidence of poison gas in the brickwork.

Traces of hydrogen cyanide, HCN.

The blue stains here

and here.

He came with a chisel?

That's fight.

And he hacked away... Correct.

Illegally, without any permission

from the authorities,

and then he smuggled the pieces out of Poland in his suitcase,

wrapped in his dirty underwear.

Be that as it may. We can criticize his methods,

but it's his conclusions we have to discredit.

He found higher levels of HCN

here in the delousing chambers

than he did in the gas chambers themselves.

From this he concluded that

no human beings were killed at Auschwitz.

Only... Only lice were killed.

Why are we talking about Leuchter?

I mean, he's really not worth the paper he's written on.

Well, so you say. Now say why.

I'll tell you why.

Because of course there was a higher concentration in here.

It takes 20 times more cyanide

to kill lice than it does human beings.

Twenty times! Just Leuchter didn't know that.

Oh, this whole thing is infuriating.

I know. It beggars belief.

Why has there not been a proper scientific study of this whole site?

By reputable scientists?

Fifty years since the fact?

I mean, it's ridiculous.

Where's the proof? Where's the evidence?

I need to know that.

You know what? This is a place where you show respect.

Whoever you are, you show respect.

I have to ask some more questions.

Would you be happier outside?

What proof is there

that Leuchter's conclusions are wrong?

I thought we weren't gonna try the Holocaust.

We're not. I thought we weren't gonna debate,

"Did the Holocaust happen?"

That's what we agreed, Heather.

That's what we agreed.

He's asking questions, that's all.

He has to ask questions.

This isn't about memorializing,

it's about forensics.

God full of mercy who dwells in the heights,

provide a sure rest upon the Divine Presence's wings,

in the realm of the holy, pure and glorious...

Pure and glorious,

whose shining resembles the sky.

I, um, bought you a drink.

I thought you might need it.

Thanks. I think I do.

You get what you wanted from the visit?

Deborah, you mustn't characterize me

as being without feelings.

I have feelings. What did you feel today?

Oh.

Shame.

I have this terrible fear that if I'd have been ordered

to do some of the things we saw today that...

That I would have agreed.

Out of weakness.

Well, that is honest of you to say so.

Well, that's how it is. The world is full of cowards

and I've always had this nervous feeling that...

That I was one of them.

There's this line from Goethe,

"Der Fiege droht nur, wo er sicher ist."

It means, "The coward only threatens

"when he feels secure."

I thought you didn't speak German. Hmm.

You learned German in the last year?

Well, I had to master all these documents.

Irving had a 40-year start on me,

so I had to catch up.

Did you?

No.

You know, you haven't taken my statement yet.

No. No, I... Why is that?

No. Why? Anthony didn't talk to you?

Well, um, we made a couple of decisions.

Uh, the first was that we don't want to put this case to a jury.

We think it'll be safer to put it to a judge.

A single judge? Yeah.

What, the whole thing decided by one man?

Is that a good idea?

Well, we were worried about the kind of antics

that Irving might get up to with an audience of 12.

I'm surprised it's our choice.

Well, it isn't. He has to agree.

Why would he do that?

We have a notion.

Mmm.

And the other one? I'm sorry?

Well, you said a couple of decisions.

Yes, well, um...

We decided, Anthony and I, that, um,

it would be better if you didn't testify.

Excuse me? Well, that's it. We...

We don't believe you should testify.

Why?

Because you don't trust me? No. No, not at all.

You think I'm gonna get emotional?

Well, I... After today...

Richard, we were at Auschwitz.

Let me remind you that I teach,

I lecture, I talk to the press...

I know. I order ideas.

It's what I do. It's what I'm good at.

You... You don't need to protect me.

No, we're not protecting you.

We're protecting our case.

Our strategy is to keep the focus on Irving and Irving alone.

It's not a test of your credibility, it's a test of his.

You don't think I'm good enough.

No, no, no. I didn't say that at all.

Everything you have to say, you've said in your book.

Our task is to starve Irving,

and putting you in a witness box would feed him.

This case is happening to you,

but it's not about you.

This man hates me. He's coming for me.

And when someone comes after you,

you take 'em on.

You know what people will say?

Yes, I think I do. They'll say I'm a coward.

That I was too afraid to go on the stand

because I thought I would lose. Yeah.

That's what they'll say. And you want me to live with that?

It's the price you pay for winning.

Uh, just one question, sir.

What is it?

Uh, on our side,

we're beginning to feel that for the layman

this particular subject may represent

an impossible challenge.

I see. You're asking to dispense with a jury? We are.

Have you asked Mr. Irving his views?

Mr. Irving? Well, um...

Perhaps before Mr. Irving speaks?

Yes, go ahead.

We all know Mr. Irving has devoted his life

to the study of the Third Reich.

I admit myself to having sometimes struggled

with the demands of the material.

I wonder if Mr. Irving really believes it's fair

to ask the regular Joe or Joan who walks in from the street

to grasp in a mere few weeks

what he himself has taken a lifetime to master.

I agree.

The issues before the court are sufficiently complex

to require the attention of a learned judge,

and too complex to confront a jury with.

Are you sure, Mr. Irving?

Quite sure.

Trial by judge alone it is, then.

Thank you very much, sir.

This morning we'll see the beginning

of an extraordinary case in which...

question the evidence for the mass killing of Jewish people

at Auschwitz during the Second World War.

Including the movie director, Steven Spielberg,

are paying for Miss Lipstadt's defense.

Mr. Irving is rumored to have

a list of around 4,000 contributors...

Miss Lipstadt's book, in which she refers

to Mr. Irving as a Holocaust denier.

Morning, Deborah. Morning.

I didn't want you to go in alone.

Sweet of you. It's not sweet at all.

I just wanted to make sure you didn't speak.

It's a short statement. No, no, no. This way.

- Come on. - Professor!

Julie McCarthy, NPR. A quick word.

We need to hear your voice.

It's Julie McCarthy, NPR. We need to hear your voice.

Just a quick word. Lying Jewish bitch!

You think it all finished with Hitler? It didn't.

We know which hotel you're in. We know your room.

You think you're safe. Well, you're not.

Morning. Morning, everyone. Morning, everyone.

Good morning, everyone. I'm looking forward to this.

May I say a few words?

Well, obviously...

Do you see that? He's gonna be all over the front pages.

Deborah, there's only one person that matters and that's the judge.

If you don't speak in court and you do speak to the press,

the judge is gonna be furious and with just cause.

And we both know what would solve that problem.

Another thing. You jog the same way every day.

Don't.

What are you saying? I'm not saying anything.

I'm just saying, vary your route. Come on.

Vary my route?

Stay with her.

What, you think you can get away with it?

Let's have some order!

Please. Press in the public gallery.

Front two rows. Take the door on the left.

Hello, Nik. Janet

General public upstairs. General public upstairs. Thank you.

Let the defendant through, please.

This way, Miss Lipstadt. Thank you, Clive.

They were lively. Yes.

- How are you? All right? - Fine, fine.

Just through here.

This is me? This is you.

Good morning. Good morning.

- Morning, Mr. Irving. - Good morning.

- Good morning. - Morning.

Good morning. Good morning.

Morning.

Good morning. I'll just take that for you.

Thank you. There we are.

As advertised. David and Goliath.

They're ready, my Lord.

Silence!

Court rise!

BOW.

- Bow. - I'm American.

Everything else but no bowing.

My Lord...

I intend to show that far from being a Holocaust denier,

I have repeatedly drawn attention

to major aspects of the Holocaust.

These defendants have done very real damage

to my professional existence.

By virtue of the activities of Miss Lipstadt

and those who funded her and guided her hand,

since 1996

I have seen one fearful publisher after another falling away from me

and turning their backs on me as I approach.

My Lord,

if we were to seek a title for this libel action,

I would venture to suggest Pictures at an Execution.

My execution.

The word "denier" is particularly evil.

For the chosen victim

it is like being called a wife beater or a pedophile.

It is enough for the label to be attached

for the attachee to be designated a pariah,

an outcast from normal society.

It is a verbal Yellow Star.

So, what did you think of him?

I thought he was oddly impressive. Did you?

Well, did you enjoy it?

Look, there he is. Look, still at it.

It was confusing. It was like he already knew all of our questions.

Well, yes, of course he does. We sent them to him.

What? You sent him our questions in advance? What...

Why would you give away our strategy?

Deborah, there is no strategy.

We're gonna box him in with the truth.

My Lord,

Mr. Irving calls himself a historian.

The truth is, however, that he is not a historian at all.

He is a falsifier of history.

To put it bluntly, he is a liar.

Now, between the publication

of the first edition of Hitler's War in 1977,

and the second edition in 1991,

Mr. Irving's view of the Holocaust

underwent a sea change.

In the 1977 version,

he accepted it as historical truth in all its essentials.

But in the 1991 edition,

all traces of the Holocaust had disappeared.

So, what are the reasons for this astounding volte-face?

Well, the principle reason can be expressed

in one word, Leuchter.

Hmm.

Now, according to Mr. Irving, the Leuchter report is,

"The biggest caliber shell

"that has yet hit the battleship Auschwitz."

Unfortunately for Mr. Irving,

the Leuchter report is bunk and he knows it.

So why did Mr. Irving

embrace the Leuchter report with such enthusiasm?

Why did he choose to publish it himself

and even to write an introduction?

Well, the answer must be

that he wanted it to be true.

After all, if the Holocaust hadn't happened,

Hitler couldn't have ordered it or known about it.

And that's the point.

Shh. Please. Please, just...

That was a very good start.

Mmm, I'm glad you're happy.

I saw his face when you called him a liar.

I don't think he's used to hearing things like that.

No, I don't think he is. Excuse me. Miss Lipstadt?

Yes, that's me. May I speak to you?

Yes. Um, could you give us a minute, please?

I would like you to come and meet some of my friends.

Friends with something in common.

Would you like to sit?

We want to know, how can you let this happen?

None of us have been called. We have to be heard.

A trial of the Holocaust and no witnesses?

How can that be right?

There is a whole group of us.

Deborah, we have to testify. We have to.

On behalf of the others. For the dead.

I make you a promise.

The voice of suffering will be heard.

I promise you that.

I was looking at Irving all the time.

Yeah, me too. Couldn't take my eyes off him.

He is kind of riveting, isn't he?

Oh, I think this could well become a ritual.

A welcome one, don't misunderstand me.

Deborah? Not for me, thanks.

You know, a very famous Attorney General once told me a long time ago

that one would become a much more effective advocate...

Can we talk privately?

After a few glasses of claret.

And, of course, sandwiches.

Ah!

Bravo.

They're always in the cupboard.

I have, uh, cheese sandwiches...

I just talked to a survivor.

Yeah, well, that's likely.

There's several of them in the court.

Deborah, we're not gonna discuss this again.

Why not? I've explained to you.

Well, tell me again, Anthony.

Whatever you say, the survivors are not on trial.

That's the end of it.

They confuse the issue.

Oh, so you can look a survivor in the face

and you can tell her she's not allowed to speak?

You can do that? Because I can't. I can't do it.

Deborah, these people have been through hell.

I understand that.

After all these years,

they haven't been able to process the experience.

I understand that, too.

But a trial, I'm afraid, is not therapy.

It's not my job to give emotional satisfaction

to a whole group of people

who can never forget what happened to them.

You think they wanna testify for themselves?

It's not for themselves they wanna testify.

They wanna give voice to the ones that didn't make it.

To their families, their friends.

Anthony, I... I promised that their voice would be heard.

I promised.

Well, then you'd better go back out there

and break your promise.

Professor Van Pelt.

May I first of all welcome you to our country

and say what a great pleasure I had

in reading your book on Auschwitz.

You were deeply moved to visit the actual location?

More than moved. I was frightened.

It's an awesome responsibility.

Professor, would you agree

it is the duty of historians

to remain completely unemotional?

One's duty is to be unemotional,

to be objective,

but one's duty, I think,

is to remain human in the exercise.

Can you explain to the court, please,

why it is in the very earliest references to Auschwitz,

published by the Russians

after the capture of the camp in January 1945,

there is no reference whatsoever

to the discovery of gas chambers?

Uh, I would need to see the documents you refer to.

Well, that's fair, I think.

It is fair, my Lord.

Your report quotes extensively

from firsthand testimony

of a man called Tauber.

Yes. Uh, Tauber was a Sonderkommando

in Crematorium ll.

He helped with the prisoners.

He was interrogated at the end of May 1945.

And, in his document,

what does Tauber tell us about the liquidation procedure?

The... The simulation, please?

What he describes is the underground arrangement of the crematorium.

The entrance was through an undressing room.

The prisoners went into a corridor,

and then through a door on the right

into the gas chamber.

The door was closed hermetically

by means of iron bars which were screwed tight.

The roof of the gas chamber

was supported by concrete columns and wire mesh pillars.

Professor?

In your simulation,

that is the roof in this big photograph here?

Uh, yes.

It is the self-same roof?

Yes.

Uh, Tauber says the sides of these pillars,

which went up through the roof,

were of heavy wire mesh, like this.

What does it mean when it says that

the pillars went up through the roof?

Went up to the roof, presumably?

Yes, but they popped out, uh, above the roof.

The pillars "popped out"?

The pillars went through a hole in the roof

and the earth, which was arranged on top of the roof,

and then there was a little, kind of, chimney on top of that.

What was the purpose of that,

architecturally speaking?

Because these were hollow pillars

and these were the pillars

in which the crystals of Zyklon-B

were inserted into the gas chamber.

My Lord, you can see the layout.

You can see the pillars with

the wire mesh columns next to them.

You have drawn in

those wire mesh columns, have you not?

In the sketches and on the computer?

One of my students did, yes.

But the wire mesh is an addition,

it is not based on drawings

and blueprints, is it?

It is based on the drawing made by the man

who actually made these pillars.

Michael Kula. In the camp workshop.

And this hole

in the roof, or these holes,

how many wire mesh columns were there? Four?

Uh... One, two, three, four.

Professor Pelt, we are wasting our time, really, are we not?

You yourself have stood on that roof

and looked for those holes and not found them.

Our experts have stood on that roof and not found them.

My Lord, there are no holes in that roof.

There never were any holes.

Therefore they cannot have poured cyanide capsules through that roof.

You will appreciate,

if there had been those holes in that roof,

which are the cardinal linchpin of the defense in this action,

they would have found them by now. They have not found them!

And all the eyewitnesses on whom he relies

are therefore exposed as the liars that they are.

Uh, my Lord, it is now 3:56.

Unless Mr. Rampton wishes to say

something to repair the damage...

My Lord, may I respond to this?

You may. But not until tomorrow.

Court rise.

Just walk.

Say nothing. The trial took an extraordinary turn...

Why did Rampton drop it? Why did he let it go?

Deborah, there are journalists everywhere.

Just look straight ahead and keep walking, please.

Richard, can we get some of your time, please?

I don't have much time now. It won't take long.

We have an unhappy client. Okay, yes.

Deborah, this is disastrous.

I'm sorry. I'm going to have to take her. I know.

I'm so sorry.

A major setback for the defense

who are now at the bottom of an uphill struggle.

Let's all calm down, please. Try not to panic.

Irving pulled a rabbit out of the hat at 3:55.

He thinks it's clever. It isn't clever.

No, it's not clever. It's amateur dramatics.

It doesn't mean it's not effective.

Richard is gonna deal with this tomorrow.

Look at these, look at these. Not that one.

I've looked at them. I've seen them.

I know them. Look.Look. Perfectly clear.

The Olere drawings. The US Air Force aerial photo.

And there they are. I know these photos.

I don't need to look at them. Holes in all of them, Deborah.

Look, look, look. Same shape, same pattern.

One, two, three, four.

And you know what Irving is gonna say?

Irving's gonna say, "They're not holes.

"They're shadows, they're forgeries,

"they're glitches on the negative,

"they're paint cans on the roof."

Yes, and it's our job to prove otherwise.

But how are you gonna do that? Anyway, it's too late.

It's already out there. It's in the press.

Oh, it's in the press? So what it's in the press?

So Irving got what he came for.

You know, he wanted headlines, he got 'em.

"No holes, no Holocaust!"

He wanted a catchy phrase, he's got it.

It's gonna... It's gonna spread like a virus.

Do you want tea?

No, I don't want tea. Just asking.

Don't you see what he's doing?

He's making it respectable to say

that there are two points of view.

People are gonna see the news now

and they're gonna think, "Oh, okay.

"Some people think there were gas chambers at Auschwitz,

"and, oh, this is interesting, some people don't."

Yes, but Deborah, you know why he chose Auschwitz in the first place.

Why he chose Auschwitz? Because everybody heard of it.

Because of its emotional impact. No.

Because“. I don't know. What are you getting at?

No. Because it wasn't built as an extermination camp.

It was built as a labor camp.

- I know that. - Then it was modified.

Yes, I know that.

That's why he's going after it.

It's a battering ram into a much bigger subject.

Auschwitz is at the very center of Holocaust belief,

so Auschwitz is at the very center of Holocaust denial.

Think about it logically.

It doesn't make any sense at all what he says.

"No holes, no Holocaust."

He seizes one tiny fact

and because that can't be physically proved, he says,

"Oh, well, then that throws everything into doubt.

"The Nazis didn't do any murdering.

"They didn't do any murdering at all."

I know that. I wrote a whole book about it.

- For God's sake... - I know that.

It's the same thing as the Hitler trick.

It's exactly the same thing. Exactly the same thing!

"Give them $1,000."

Tell me about it. I'm the one that he did it to.

You know, if you can't find a piece of paper

where it says, you know,

"Please murder the Jews,"

it means Hitler never wanted them to die in the first place.

"Hitler was the Jews' best friend."

Irving said that! He actually said that!

I have to go.

Wait a minute! I wanna say something.

And for once I want you all to listen to me.

I'm the defendant

and I know the rule.

The rule is the client instructs.

Well, the client's instructing.

The survivors go on the stand. And I go on the stand, too.

Gentlemen.

Richard? Where's he going? Richard?

Did you hear what I just said? Deborah!

Richard. Richard.

Why is he leaving? Because he has to prepare.

That's why he's leaving.

He doesn't just turn up in court.

He devotes his entire day, every minute of his day,

rigorously, to this case and nothing but. And that's the point!

No, what you're not getting, what you're ignoring,

is that we know what happened at Auschwitz

because there were people there who actually saw it.

Oh, Deborah, Deborah. Yes, yes!

With their own eyes.

They're called survivors.

Yes. And put survivors on the stand

and Irving will humiliate them.

Remember the Zundel trial. Remember the Exodus trial.

They were torn apart.

Because survivors don't remember.

Not every detail. They forget something.

They say a door was on the left, when actually it was on the right,

and then, wham! Irving's in.

You see? "They're liars, you can't trust anything they say."

That's it, that's the technique.

Will roll up her sleeve and show you the tattoo

to prove that, yes, she was in Auschwitz.

Do you think Irving's gonna respect them?

You want that? Holocaust survivors mocked and humiliated?

You've got to get tasteless.

I shall say,

"Mrs. Altman, how much money

"have you made out of that tattoo since 1945?"

You want more of that, do you?

You think that's helpful?

So, now, Mr. Irving,

I will ask you to explain why,

if, as you claim, there were no gas chambers in Auschwitz,

the gratings taken in 1945 by the Polish authorities

from Morgue 1 in Crematorium ll were covered in cyanide,

and why the camp's chief architect, Karl Bischoff,

specifically refers to Morgue 1

as a Vergasungskeller,

a "gassing cellar."

Well?

I am willing to concede that they did indeed find

in the ventilator gratings traces of cyanide.

They did? Yes.

I will also concede that it was indeed

used as a gassing cellar.

It was? Yes.

Good. So...

Gassing what?

Well, I think the evidence is clear

that the room was used as a gassing cellar

for fumigating cadavers.

Fumigating cadavers? Yes.

Why exactly do you say that?

That is what mortuaries are for.

In mortuaries you put cadavers.

What is the evidence that that room

was used for gassing corpses?

That is what it was built for.

I'm sorry, this, uh,

seems a crude question,

but what is the point of gassing a corpse?

Because, my Lord,

they came in heavily infested

with the typhus-bearing lice which had killed them.

Did they?

Did they, Mr. Irving? Did they indeed?

Then please explain to me

why they needed a gas-proof door

with a peep hole with double 8mm glass

and a metal grill on the inside?

You will remember at this time

most of Germany was under the weight

of Royal Air Force bomber command.

There was a concern about the need

to build bomb-tight shelters.

So now it's an air-raid shelter, is it?

I beg your pardon?

It is either a room for gassing already dead corpses,

or it's an air-raid shelter?

Did I say either/or?

In early 1943?

An air-raid shelter?

When you know perfectly well that

the first bombing raid near Auschwitz

wasn't until late 1944.

And the placing

of this so-called "air-raid shelter,"

if it was for the SS,

it was a terribly long way from the SS barracks, wasn't it?

Have you thought of that?

It's two and a half miles, isn't it?

If there was a bombing raid,

they'd all be dead before they got there.

But can you really see lots of very heavily armed men

running the two and a half to three miles

from the SS barracks to a cellar

at the far end of Birkenau?

You see...

I'm trying to understand

if there was this, this dual function,

so see if you can help me.

Now, if the corpses

were also gassed there,

then, as I understand it,

they were then sent to be incinerated?

Yes.

What is the point in gassing a corpse

that is about to be burnt?

I'm not sure, saying this

off the top of my head, Mr. Rampton.

I'm not a Holocaust historian,

I'm a Hitler historian.

Then why don't you keep your mouth shut about the Holocaust?

The truth is, as usual, Mr. Irving,

you jump in off the board

spouting whatever rubbish comes into your head

in order to avoid the obvious conclusion.

This is not because you're a rotten historian.

It's because you're a bent one, as well.

Come in!

Um, forgive me. I should have rung,

but I thought it would be interesting

to see where you lived.

Is that all right? Yes, of course.

Come in, please. Thank you. Thank you.

It's, uh, very messy.

Well, that's not going to bother me.

Let's see, the, um, 1995 Pommard les Epenots.

Uh, it's rather special, I think.

You've had it before, remember?

Oh, uh, yes.

Well, there are glasses here.

Ah, shame. I rather like plastic.

Still, you can't have everything.

I like to treat myself, don't you?

Why should all the bad people

have all the good things in life?

Like this?

You had a good morning. Yes, I did. I did, didn't I?

I rather think it went my way.

Cheers. Cheers.

Mmm.

It's paying off. What is?

Your technique. That thing you do.

You never catch his eye.

Ah! You've noticed, have you?

Well, what do you think I've been doing these...

These past weeks?

Please, uh...

Sit. Oh, thank you.

Yes, well, it's my way of

telling him what I think of him.

I don't look at him. It's getting under his skin.

I owe you an apology.

I can't think why.

For Auschwitz. Oh.

I thought you were rude.

I thought you were late.

But now I understand.

You were just... You were pacing out the distance.

Yes. Yes, I had to.

Well, I understand that from today.

Yes, it's a scene of a crime. I have to go to the site.

You were preparing a case. You had to be sure.

However disrespectful you seemed.

However heartless.

That's what I do.

I didn't know what to expect.

It was... It was a brief.

I mean, my previous brief, believe it or not,

was from McDonald's.

How could Auschwitz be just another brief?

I am sorry that

perhaps you felt that that's what it was to me.

Very upsetting to see a client in such distress.

We didn't mean to make you unhappy.

I know that.

But I have never trusted anyone

to do anything on my behalf

since I was a child.

And all I have is my voice and my conscience

and I have to listen to it.

Your conscience? Yes!

Yes.

They're strange things, consciences.

Trouble is, what feels best

isn't necessarily what works best.

I mean, by all means,

stand up, look the devil in the eye,

tell him what you feel.

Why not? It's very satisfying. See what happens.

And risk losing.

Not just for yourself.

For the others.

For everyone. Forever.

Or?

Or... You know "or."

Stay seated.

Button your lip.

Win.

An act of self-denial.

Do you have any idea how hard it is

to hand over your conscience to somebody else?

This is everything I thought I would never do.

All right.

I'm gonna hand mine over to this, uh, fly-fishing,

wine-drinking

Scotsman.

There you are. Hello.

Morning. Here, let me move this.

Sit down.

What is that?

Ah. It's black pudding.

It's traditional.

It's made of blood.

And you wanna live until the end of the trial?

Well, you've cheered up since last night.

I've cheered up because of last night.

Shutting up's not gonna be easy but...

Oh, could I have a black pudding

for my friend, please?

Ignore him. I want a bagel, please.

Oh, and not toasted. Thanks.

Oh, I need this. It's gonna be a tough day.

Proving intention.

Richard Evans gave us plenty of places

where Irving got his facts wrong.

But we have to prove he got 'em wrong intentionally.

He's fighting for his life.

And remember,

he knows the law as well as we do.

Unless we prove that Irving's mistakes are deliberate,

we lose.

We lose.

Mr. Irving,

the defense are claiming that

you deliberately falsified evidence

to suit your own political purposes.

You must address that charge.

We must deal with what we call "keine Liquidierung-"

Very well. We're looking first at the November 30th entry.

Am I right?

My Lord,

if I may explain the context?

Please.

Heinrich Himmler, the Head of the SS, kept a log

in which he made a record of every telephone call

he gave and received.

In 1941,

he called Heydrich from Hitler's bunker

to give him instructions.

After the call, he wrote some words.

"Jodentransport aus Berlin.

"Keine Liquidierung.

"Jodentransport aus Berlin. Keine Liquidierung."

Which clearly means,

"The Jew Transport from Berlin.

"No liquidation."

"The Jew Transport," singular,

"from Berlin."

In Hitler's War,

you write something completely different.

"At 01:30, Himmler was obliged

"to telephone from Hitler's bunker to Heydrich

"the explicit order that Jews were not to be liquidated."

In other words, you mistranslate the log

so as to pretend that this order came directly

from Hitler, which it didn't,

they hadn't even met that day,

and that it applied

not to just one particular trainload of Jews,

but to all Jews throughout Germany.

And in order to bolster

this false impression,

you omit the word "Berlin" altogether.

So your claim to have

incontrovertible proof that Hitler tried to stop the liquidation of the Jews,

as opposed to one particular trainload of Jews, is false.

You knew that then. You know it now. It's wrong.

Of course, if you privately decided

it was a...

A reasonable kind of mistake to make

when one is reading a new document for the first time,

you would, uh, you would immediately tell the court, would you not?

Of course, I would.

I do not feel this is a reasonable mistake to make.

I believe it's deliberate.

Ha!

In Hitler's War,

you write something completely different.

"At 01:30, Himmler was obliged

"to telephone from Hitler's bunker to Heydrich

"the explicit order that Jews were not to be liquidated."

What? Because I'm tired of it.

You didn't even want to be a lawyer.

The Holocaust, the Holocaust.

There are other things.

At some point isn't everyone gonna have to let go?

It... It's an obsession.

How many years?

Are they ever gonna let go of this grievance?

I think it's rather more than a grievance.

I find the whole

Holocaust story utterly boring.

The Jews keep going on about the Holocaust

because it's the only interesting thing

which has happened to them in 3,000 years.

I'm not interested in the Holocaust,

I don't know anyone who is.

And that's an excerpt

from a speech you made

at the Best Western Hotel in Tampa

on July the 25th, 1998.

I remember speaking,

um, I do not know what the date was.

You said, "I think 95% of the thinking public

"find the Holocaust endlessly boring,

"but they dare not say it

"because it is politically incorrect."

Uh, Mr. Irving, next I want to refer you

to a talk you gave to the Clarendon Club,

whatever that may be,

on the 19th of September, 1992.

Uh, the transcripts. Tab five, my Lord, page 35.

Thank you.

But if there is one thing that gets up my nose,

I must admit it's this.

When I switch on my television set

and I see one of them reading our news to us.

Mr. Irving, who is the "them" and who is the "us"?

Trevor McDonald.

McDonald?

A newsreader, my Lord.

A black newsreader.

Well, in fact, this is a stock speech I used to make.

I used to say,

"In the good old days,

"the announcer would wear a dinner jacket.

"Now they've got women reading the news,

"and they have..."

It's just part of a general speech.

Yes. "It is our news and they're reading it to me."

If they could have their own news, which they were reading to us,

I suppose it would be very interesting.

But for the time being,

I'd be prepared to accept that the BBC

should have a dinner-jacketed gentleman

reading the important news...

followed by a lady reading the less important news...

followed by Trevor McDonald giving us all the latest news

on muggings and drug busts.

"Rest lost in loud laughter and applause."

Are you not appalled by that?

Not in the least.

This was a witty speech

delivered after dinner to an audience at a private club.

You were talking to a bunch of racists.

No, they were not. They were perfectly ordinary guests...

Ordinary people? Then why were there cheers?

Well, obviously they liked the jokes.

Mr. Irving, I think you might be advised

to have a look at your own diary,

if you wouldn't mind.

Thirty-eight, please, Mr. Irving, 38.

Tab 10

of the bundle K4.

"A quiet evening at home. Jessica..."

Who is Jessica?

My little infant Child.

Yes.

She was nine months old at the time.

Nine months old in September 1994.

"Jessica is turning into a fine little lady.

"She sits very upright on an ordinary chair,

"a product of our regular walks to the bank, lam sure.

"On those walks, we sing the 'binkety-bankety-bong' song.

"She stars in a poem

"when half-breed children are wheeled past."

And then you go into italics.

"I am a baby Aryan

"Not Jewish or sectarian

"I have no plans to marry

"An ape or Rastafarian."

Racist, Mr. Irving?

Anti-Semitic, Mr. Irving?

I do not think so.

Teaching your little child this kind of poison?

Do you think a nine-month-old can understand words

spoken in English or any other language?

This poor little child

has been taught a racist ditty

by her racist and perverted father.

Have you ever read Edward Lear?

Hilaire Belloc?

They haven't brought a libel action, Mr. Irving. You have.

You sued because you said that

we had called you a racist and an extremist.

Yes,

but I'm not a racist.

Mr. Irving,

look at the words on the page.

Well done, Richard.

That's it. Racism, anti-Semitism

and the guy's a Holocaust denier.

I mean, we always said it was a package deal.

We've got symptoms, purpose, motive.

I really don't see what else they'd want.

What did you think, Anthony?

What did I think?

I thought it was the most boring morning

we've had in court so far.

My God, you love to be contrary.

Well, the man's an anti-Semite and a racist.

It's like having shit on your shoe.

You wipe it off. You don't study it.

Thanks a lot.

You know, my whole life's been studying it.

You could hardly accuse me of being racist.

Among my domestic staff

I've had a Barbadian, a Punjabi,

Sri Lankan, a Pakistani.

And I can tell you, though, they were all very attractive girls

with very nice breasts.

I'm sorry? Can you say that again?

You know what I'm gonna miss?

- I'm gonna miss these lunches. - Ah.

Me, too, Richard. Me, too.

Me, too.

The excellent chutney.

It's something I never expected.

My parents made me take up law

and the first case I get,

I feel I'm making a difference.

It's a wonderful feeling.

I never, ever expected that.

I feel exactly the same... Still.

- Cheers. - Cheers.

All right, who wants any more of this excellent vintage?

- Yes, please. - Oh, no, not for me.

This trial has been both long and hugely expensive,

costing an estimated three million pounds or more

and running for almost eight weeks.

As the trial enters its eighth week,

some are saying it raises freedom-of-speech issues.

Only the two opposing speeches remain

before the judge, Mr. Justice Gray,

retires for what we are told will be at least four weeks

to consider his judgment.

My Lord, during this trial

we have heard from Professor Evans and others

of at least 25

major falsifications of history.

"Well," says Mr. Irving,

"all historians make mistakes."

But there is a difference

between negligence,

which is random in its effect,

and a deliberateness which is far more one-sided.

All Mr. Irving's little fictions,

all his tweaks of the evidence,

all tend in the same direction,

the exculpation of Adolf Hitler.

He is, to use an analogy, like the waiter

who always gives the wrong change.

If he is honest,

we may expect sometimes

his mistakes to favor the customers,

sometimes himself.

But Mr. Irving is the dishonest waiter.

All his mistakes work in his favor.

How far, if at all, Mr. Irving's anti-Semitism

is the cause of his Hitler apology,

or vice versa, is unimportant.

Whether they are taken together or individually

it is clear that they have led him

to prostitute his reputation

as a serious historian

in favor of a bogus rehabilitation of Adolf Hitler

and the dissemination

of virulent anti-Semitic propaganda.

Yes, this is a question

I have to ask you, Mr. Rampton.

Yes, by all means, my Lord.

My question is this,

if somebody is anti-Semitic,

anti-Semitic and extremist,

he is perfectly capable

of being honestly anti-Semitic, yes?

He's holding those views and expressing those views

because they are indeed his views?

Well, yes.

And so it seems to me, if it comes down to it,

that the anti-Semitism

is a completely separate allegation

and has precious little bearing on your broader charge

that he has manipulated the data?

No, no, my Lord. No.

The whole endeavor of the defense

has been to prove that the two are connected.

But he might believe what he is saying.

That is the point.

That is why it is so important.

My Lord, if we know that Mr. Irving is an anti-Semite,

and if we know there is no historical justification

for Holocaust denial,

then surely it is no great stretch

to see that the two are connected.

Yes. Thank you.

Carry on.

What the fuck just happened?

Anthony, what just happened?

Well? How was it?

I'll tell you what happened at the end.

We summed up. Irving summed up.

And?

And everyone kept saying, this is all great,

everything's gonna be fine. And then suddenly this judge,

this unbelievable character from Masterpiece Theatre...

Oh, I like Masterpiece Theatre- I know.

Anyway, at the last minute, he looked up and he said,

"Well, you know, maybe Irving actually believes it.

"He's an anti-Semite and he believes it.

"You can't accuse someone of lying

"if they genuinely believe what they're saying."

That's crazy. That's insane.

And that's when I thought, "I've been suckered."

I stared at this judge for eight weeks

and I thought I was looking at wisdom,

but maybe I was just looking at prejudice.

Well, what can you do?

I just wait. Just wait.

And do they tell you the result in advance?

No. But my lawyers get told.

What, they get told and they can't tell you? You're kidding?

Yeah. They get the verdict 24 hours in advance.

To the minute. 09:00 a.m. the day before,

to give 'em time to prepare a response.

And what's worse,

yeah, Irving gets it, too.

Why? Because he's his own lawyer.

So he's allowed it and I'm not.

I think this trial is sending a chill

through the community of 20th century historians.

Which historian isn't thinking,

"Would my work survive this kind of scrutiny?"

Show me one historian who has not broken into a cold sweat

at the thought of undergoing similar treatment.

When people glibly say,

"Oh, if I'd have been in Germany,

"I would never have collaborated,

"I'd have resisted,"

I just wanna laugh.

Do you have any idea

how dangerous and difficult it was?

Standing up to the enemy was arduous

and uncertain and exhausting.

But they had to do it.

Only in hindsight that things get called heroic.

At the time you're just afraid.

Afraid of how things will turn out.

Deborah Lipstadt.

Ah, good. There you are.

Anthony.

Yeah. Just to say we've been told to expect the verdict on Tuesday.

On Tuesday? Are you sure?

You know, I don't think they'd have said it unless it were true.

I've been wondering if we could

work out some kind of code.

Like I call and say, "How's the weather?" and you say, "Good."

Meaning... Yeah, yeah, I get it.

Or you say the weather's bad and that would mean...

Only, of course, I'd be disbarred.

I'd never be allowed to practice law in England again.

Oh, well, there'd be an upside.

Ah.

Yes?

That one.

Deborah.

Well?

Out of the way, please. Out of the way.

Guilty! Filthy Jew!

Jewish scum!

Shame on you!

Shame on you, Nazi lover!

David! David! David!

Oh.

- My Lord. - Hmm?

Thank you, Jay. One per person. Thank you.

Ladies first, I think.

There you go. Thank you.

One per person. Thank you. I'll do it.

This massive 334-page document,

which does not yet disclose the final verdict,

is studiously even-handed.

It is difficult to say on which side

Mr. Justice Gray's decision will land.

It praises Irving's skill as a military historian,

while at the same time drawing attention to flaws

in some of his reasoning.

Court rise.

David Irving v. Penguin Books Limited

and Deborah Lipstadt.

I shall read my judgment.

It appears to me that the correct

and inevitable inference must be

that the falsification of the historical record

was deliberate and that Irving was motivated by a desire to present events

in a manner consistent with his own ideological beliefs,

even if that involved distortion

and manipulation of historical evidence.

In the result, therefore,

the defense of justification, succeeds.

The court finds for the defendants.

Court rise.

- I can't believe it! - It's true.

Well done. Well done.

Well done.

Mazel tov!

You've been brilliant. Mazel tov!

You didn't let me say anything.

I didn't say a thing.

Well, nor did I. Think how I feel.

It's not true. It's not true, Deborah.

It was your book.

Your book held up in every aspect.

Every aspect. Every detail.

We defended it. But it was the book.

- I - know, I know, I know...

- Thank you for all your hard work. - You are so welcome.

It was like a dream job.

Well done. Well done.

Laura. Genius!

This has been called one of the most

crushing libel judgments in history.

The judge called Mr. Irving

an anti-Semite, a racist,

and a distorter of history.

Can you tell us how you're feeling at this time?

I feel terrific. This is a wonderful day.

A wonderful day for everyone.

Deborah. Deborah, how do you feel about today's verdict?

Now you can speak.

Great.

Can you expand at all on that?

Come on. Come on... Come to the press conference!

We saw this as a free-speech issue.

Penguin defended D.H. Lawrence.

We defended Salman Rushdie.

It was inconceivable

we wouldn't defend Deborah Lipstadt.

She's here. She's here.

Miss Lipstadt? Miss Lipstadt?

Deborah?

Can I ask, do you have any regrets

about bringing the case?

I don't know how to say this often enough,

I didn't bring the case.

Mr. Irving did.

Although I'm not sure he realized

when he agreed to a trial by a single judge,

that it would mean a written judgment.

This judgment is gonna stand against him forever.

Now, some people are saying that the result of this trial

will threaten free speech.

I don't accept that.

I'm not attacking free speech.

On the contrary, I've been defending it

against someone who wanted to abuse it.

Freedom of speech means you can say whatever you want.

What you can't do is lie,

and then expect not to be held accountable for it.

Not all opinions are equal

and some things happen,

just like we say they do.

Slavery happened.

The Black Death happened.

The Earth is round.

The ice caps are melting and Elvis is not alive.

Miss Lipstadt?

You've conducted yourself with dignity

throughout the trial.

Thank you. Uh, but I know what that means.

That's code in England for "I've shut up,"

and I don't promise to shut up in the future.

Miss Lipstadt, how convinced were you

that this trial was going to have a good outcome for you?

Um, well, before I came to London,

I was definitely not convinced that a court of law

was a good place to investigate historical truth.

But...

I underestimated the value of a team.

Of real teamwork.

And it turns out it's not a bad place.

As long as you have great lawyers with great passion.

And, uh, my God, did I have great lawyers.

Miss Lipstadt, if you could say

something now to David Irving,

what would you say?

I wouldn't say anything to David Irving.

I would say something to the survivors and to the murdered.

And I would say...

"You were remembered.

"The voice of suffering was heard."

You really are quite good at this.

Thank you.

I think if you look at the judgment closely,

you'll see there are all sorts of things there in my favor.

You're not seriously suggesting

that this judgment supports you?

Well, plainly I ran rings round the defense.

My only regret is I didn't use a mallet of sufficient caliber

to ram my case into the thick skull of the judge.

Mr. Irving, what people want to know

is whether, on the basis of this judgment,

you will now stop denying the Holocaust.

Me? Stop? Good Lord, no.

Despite the fact that

the judge says, "It appears to me..."

Hello? Deborah?

He seems to be saying he won.

I know. He used to be a Holocaust denier,

and now he's a verdict denier.

The fact that she didn't even dare to appear

tells you everything you need to know about Miss Lipstadt.

Let's just turn him off.

I don't think her Brooklyn accent

would have endeared her to the court.

It's Queens.