⚠️ Historical Documentation Notice
This document is part of a historical archive and is presented for scholarly research and educational purposes.
The content reflects historical perspectives and should be understood within its historical context.
Real History and Lipstadt’s Dog-and-Pony Show your Lipstadt index your Lipstadt trial index next Toronto, Canada, “Get that Bastard,” man said to her Prof tells of battle with David Irving By LAUREN KRAMER, Pacific Correspondent VANCOUVER — When her book Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory was published in 1994, Prof.
Deborah Lipstadt devoted 300 words to David Irving, whom she called “the most dangerous of Holocaust deniers, an anti-Semite and racist.” [ Website comment: In fact the original book manuscript did not even mention Mr Irving; even as published it contained no hint of any allegation that Mr Irving was an anti-Semite or racist; these inventions were dreamed up by Lipstadt’s British lawyers for her defence strategy .] “The reason is that he knew the truth but distorted it,” Lipstadt, director of
Emory University’s Institute for Jewish Studies, told attendees at the Greater Vancouver Jewish Federation’s Combined Jewish Appeal opening night event
on Sept. 6. The venue, Schara Tzedeck Synagogue, was filled to capacity with those who came to listen to her talk, “Truth on Trial: My Day in Court with a Holocaust Denier.” But Lipstadt’s time in court with Irving went on much longer than a day — it lasted six years. It all started after Penguin published her book in the United Kingdom.
Shortly thereafter, Lipstadt learned that Irving was planning to sue her for libel. “This is a man who testified as a witness on [German Holocaust denier] Ernst Zündel ‘s behalf, and who called the Holocaust a legend,” she says. “It seemed, at the time, ludicrous that he could sue me for not being a Holocaust denier.” What she didn’t know back then was that in the United Kingdom, libel laws are precisely opposite to those in the United States.
Under English libel law, the burden of proof is on the defendant rather than the plaintiff, meaning the onus is on the author of a statement to prove the truth of what he or he she is saying. [ Website comment: Tough! A writer being called upon to prove she’s writing the truth .] “Irving had waited for the book to appear in the U.K. before suing me — in essence, he had venue-shopped,” she said.
Realizing that she would need to fight, Lipstadt hired Anthony Julius , senior consultant for the London law firm Mishcon de Reya and a prominent British lawyer and academic .
Best known for his actions on behalf of the late Diana, Princess of Wales , [ Website comment: His firm charged Diana’s estate a fee of two million pounds, four million dollars, for setting up the charitable fund in her memory ] Julius is also known for his opposition to anti-Semitism, and he offered to work on Lipstadt’s case pro bono. [ Website comment: Later however, as in the Princess Diana case, he submitted a whopping great bill.
Julius is one of those short-memory folks we all come across in life .] Twelve questions to put to Prof.
Lipstadt the next time you see herJulius promised her that he would fight the case as vigorously as any commercial case. “Also, we wanted to ensure this did not become a ‘did-the-Holocaust-happen’ case, and instead focus on proving I told the truth when I wrote that Irving was a Holocaust denier and anti-Semite,” Lipstadt recalled.
“We decided that if the case went to trial, we would not call Holocaust survivors to the stand, because they were witnesses of fact, and we didn’t think it was ethical or necessary to subject a survivor to that.” Lipstadt, Julius and their team began investigating Irving’s assertions regarding the Holocaust, tracing his footnotes