All language subtitles for Denial.2016.1080p.BluRay.AVC.DTS-HD.MA.5.1-FGT

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, I am 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.
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. Is that a...

Is that a note
from the Princess?

Uh, yes, yes,
it is, 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, looking 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.

South westerly,
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?
I am.

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 Olère drawings, please.

David Olère 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 Zündel 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 right.

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 Olère 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.

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 Zündel 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, I am 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.

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.