Deponent: Jonathan Mozzochi
For Second Defendant
Sworn: May 1998
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
1996 I No.1113
|DAVID JOHN CAWDELL IRVING|
- and -
(1) PENGUIN BOOKS LIMITED
(2) DEBORAH LIPSTADT
(3) DAVID CRANK
(4) ALISTAIR BABB
(5) STANLEY BROMLEY
(6) COLIN ORR
SECOND AFFIDAVIT OF JONATHAN GARY MOZZOCHI
I, JONATHAN GARY MOZZOCHI, who
can be contacted through the Coalition for Human Dignity in
Seattle, Washington, United States of America, MAKE OATH
AND SAY AS FOLLOWS:-
1. I swear this affidavit in
response to the first affidavit of the Plaintiff, David
John Cawdell Irving, sworn on 24th August 1998, which was
in response to the affidavit of Anthony Robert Julius
sworn on 13 May 1998 and my first affidavit sworn on 6
May 1998, both on behalf of the Second Defendant's
application against the Plaintiff for an order in the
terms set out in the Summons.
2. Since swearing my first
affidavit, I have left the Coalition for Human Dignity
("CHD), where I have worked for the last 9 1/2
3. In this affidavit I
respond only to those allegations made in the Plaintiff's
affidavit that are directed at me and therefore within my
own knowledge. Allegations have been made against the CHD
and various "associates" of mine but I am not in a
position to comment on these, and in any event they do
not go to any of the issues contained in my affidavit.
The CHD has been set up to monitor far right and neo-nazi
organisations, it is therefore not surprising to me that
it is the subject of complaint by these groups. However,
given that the allegations made against me are untrue, I
have no reason to believe that the allegations against
the CHD or its members in the Plaintiffs affidavit are
any more truthful.
The Allegations made against me In
the Plaintiff's affidavit
4. Most of the allegations
made against me arise out of "inquiries" that the
Plaintiff has made about me. Yet notwithstanding the
extremely serious nature of these allegations, the
Plaintiff does not explain the nature of his inquiries,
the source of his information, nor does he provide
evidence to support the allegations.
5. In paragraph 13 of his
affidavit, the Plaintiff makes the following
5.1 "In 1989, after an
investigation by the US Federal Bureau of
Investigation, the deponent Mozzochi was charged with
the firebombing of a residential building in
This is untrue. I was not
charged with any such firebombing neither to my
knowledge was I investigated. There is no reason why I
should have been since I was not involved. The
Plaintiff produces no evidence to support this
5.2 'In 1991 Mozzochi was
arrested at Eugene, Oregon and convicted of charges of
3rd degree theft."
This is untrue. I was not so
arrested, charged or convicted- again, because I was
not involved. Again, the Plaintiff has produced no
evidence to support this allegation.
then organised a Coalition for Human Dignity in
downtown Portland, and at a rally in May 1992 Mozzochi
and his cohorts ran riot, smashing windows, damaging
property and assaulting police"
This is untrue. Nor is it clear
to what rally Mr. Irving is referring. There are three
individual rallies that I can recall to which he may
or may not be referring.
(i) The first could be that he
is referring to a Rodney King rally, co-sponsored by
the CHD in downtown Portland. There were hundreds of
such rallies in those days in the US.
In an incident separate from the
CHD rally, there were some altercations and windows
smashed elsewhere in Portland. This had nothing to do
second one that he might be referring to is the May
Day rally held in Portland on May 2nd and organised by
American Front. If it is that rally to which he meant
to refer, it is possible that the CHD organised a
counter-rally, which would have been completely
(iii) The third could be a
campaign appearance by George Bush, which did turn
into a disturbance where windows were smashed. The CHD
did not organise the rally and were not even present.
I was there but only as an observer and to monitor the
event. I did not take part in any of the activities as
alleged by Mr Irving.
I do not know to which, if any,
of the above Mr. Irving is referring to. In any event,
I was at both CHD rallies, referred to at (i) and (ii)
above, which were entirely peaceful. At (iii), I
attended in the capacity of an observer and
5.4 "In October 1992, as I
can testify to from my own knowledge, this Coalition
for Human Dignity organised a protest against my
lecture in a local
centre, at which the deponent and his associates threw
rocks and bottled human excrements at police
This is untrue. I believe that
Mr. Irving is referring to a rally jointly organised
by the CHD, The Jewish Federation and the Catholic
Archdiocese. It was a peaceful rally and there was no
throwing of rocks or bottled human
6. In paragraph 15 of his
affidavit, the Plaintiff alleges that "Mozzochi is
listed as a Skinhead Gang associate in Portland Police
records by Portland Police"
7. It is true that for a brief
period of time in the early 1990s I was listed
as such. However, when I
was made aware of the listing, I immediately contacted an
attorney who asked for evidence from the Portland Police
that would warrant the listing. Shortly thereafter I was
removed from the list by the Portland Police
8. In paragraph 16, the Plaintiff
accuses me of taking $16,850 from donations to the CHD
and paying myself $4,429 for each 40 hour week. He goes
on to allege that the CHD had been warned by the State
Attorney General for improper tax filings as CHD is a tax
exempt, not for profit corporation.
It is not clear to what year Mr.
Irving refers. I recall that one year the CHD filed its
tax returns late and paid a penalty for that. I do not
have records of the salary that I was paid while at the
CHD but I know that it was nowhere near the figure that
Mr. Irving alleges. I do remember that in the early 1990s
I was paid in the region of $8,000 per annum. All the
records are kept in Seattle.
In any event, given that Mr. Irving
states that the CHD reported an income of $38,580, there
is no possibility that I could have been paying myself
anything like $4,429 a week.
9. In paragraph 17, the
Plaintiff alleges that on 12 February 1994, Matthew
Halperin and I took photos of people attending a private
meeting Beaverton, Oregon as a means of intimidation to
discourage people from attending public meetings, stating
that this is a typical method of intimidation used by the
In fact, the taking
of photographs is a means employed by the CHD, and others
in our field, in order to monitor extremist activities
and document what occurs at such meetings. Its purpose is
not one of intimidation. The photographs are then used to
aid the writing of reports, newsletters and as background
documentary evidence for reporters.
10. Again in paragraph 17, the
Plaintiff alleges that I am "connected" with lay priest
Bill Wassmuth of the "Northwest Coalition Against
Malicious Harassment" "a body with ties to violent
communist and Anarchist thugs who smash up meetings in
the best pre-1933 Nazi style."
Bill Wassmuth is not a lay priest.
He left the priesthood in order to get married in either
1987 or 1988.
The Northwest Coalition Against
Malicious Harassment is a very mainstream institution.
The governors of the five states of the northwest are
represented on its governing board. Thus it is a
well-respected body and has no ties to violent communist
and Anarchist thugs, as Mr. Irving alleges.
It is true that the CHD has some
connections with the Northwest Coalition. CHD
collaborates on joint publications and at conferences.
For example, in 1994 CHD members wrote a publication
entitled "The Northwest Imperative. Documenting a Decade
of Hate". This was published in association the Northwest
Coalition and the Forward to this publication was written
by Bill Wassmuth.
The Major Figures involved in
Promoting The Plaintiff's Appearances
11. The body of my First
Affidavit explains who promotes the Plaintiff's lectures
and appearances when he is on tour and how. The Plaintiff
does not deal with the
detail of my affidavit or
attempt to dismiss the documents exhibited to it as being
untrue. What he does say is that he has had no "contact"
with these organisers and that they do not figure "among
his supporters or subscribers to [his]
newsletter". It seems that the Plaintiff is deliberately
missing the point which is that for each of his tours he
has "relied upon a small coterie of neo-Nazi and
anti-Semites to officially sponsor, organise, publicise,
secure and handle the logistics associated with
organising his events " (Paragraph 19 of my first
12 The Plaintiff attempts to refute
paragraph 8 of my affidavit (at paragraph 20 of his) by
saying that the skinheads present at his lecture were
violent members of the CHD. Characteristically, he does
not exhibit the evidence he relies upon.
The CHD usually
sends academics to such events in order to monitor
attendance and note what goes on.
It is more likely that the skinheads mentioned in Mr.
Irving's affidavit were Neo-Nazis such as Derek
13. In paragraph 22 of his
affidavit. Mr. Irving complains that I misquote him in
paragraph 11 of my first affidavit. Mr. Irving is missing
the point of what I was stating. Whether he calls it
genocide or innocenticide is not the issue. It is the
fact that Mr. Irving stated that the Holocaust is the
"Jewish legend" and therefore stands within the camp of
Holocaust deniers. I stand by the contents of paragraph
11 of my first affidavit as being an accurate account of
what he said at the time
this [27th] day of
Text reproduced unchanged, tho' edited
for HTML purposes. Passages on which comment is invited are
printed here in
For a local newspaper report on Mr
Mozzochi's completely peaceful CHD demonstration, in
which several officers were injured, riot police were called
out, windows in public buildings smashed, and fourteen
leftwingers arrested, see the Portland newspaper
PDXS, May 11-24, pages 8-9, "Portland's Pointless
to text above].