The
question is whether what she
wrote when she wrote it is true
or not and she's not necessary
for
that.
--
Richard Rampton QC, explaining
why he did not call Deborah
Lipstadt to the witness
stand | [images added
by this website] Jewish Telegraph Agency, New York,
Wednesday November 14, 2001 A
BBC radio documentary explores Deborah
Lipstadt's legal strategy when Holocaust
denier David Irving sued her for
libel. Landmark
Holocaust denial lawsuit explored in BBC
radio documentary By Richard Allen Greene LONDON, Nov. 14 (JTA) --
Holocaust denier David
Irving emerges unrepentant in a BBC
radio documentary that explores the legal
strategy scholar Deborah Lipstadt
employed when he sued her for libel last
year. The 45-minute program, broadcast on
Nov. 8, contains interviews with all the
major players in the landmark trial,
which Irving lost. Lipstadt's lawyers describe how their
case rested on proving that Lipstadt had
been correct to label Irving a Holocaust
denier in her 1994 book, "Denying the
Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth
and Memory." They
subpoenaed his diaries and appointment
books in order to demonstrate that he was
an anti-Semite who spoke at neo-Nazi
events, and they had an expert witness
demolish his books as "falsifications"
that "can only really be deliberate." "Putting Irving's books on trial was
the strategy," lawyer Anthony
Julius explained. Irving -- who represented himself --
tells the BBC that he never grasped
that. He
describes the judge, Sir Charles
Gray,
(right) as
too "thick-skulled" to understand his
case. "There were occasions when I could see
he was not getting the point I was
extracting from the witness," he told the
BBC. There are times in the program when
Irving seems to be out to prove the truth
of the judge's verdict last year, when
Gray labeled him a racist anti-Semite who
had deliberately distorted history. "Lipstadt is part of an international
conspiracy to silence me," Irving
claimed. He also said he was "not surprised that
the Jews go on about the Holocaust,
because it's the only interesting thing
that's happened to them in 3,000
years." Criticizing Gray's sweeping verdict as
"so over the top that it missed its
effect," Irving said, "It's lucky the twin
towers hadn't been shot down by then, or I
would have been blamed for that too." Lawyer
Richard Rampton, who represented
Lipstadt, told JTA that at first he was
concerned that the program gives Irving
too much air time. But after talking to people who heard
the program, he said Irving said "just
enough to bury himself. Each sentence made
his hole deeper." Julius said there is no danger in
letting Irving speak in a forum like the
documentary. "The people who are impressed with
Irving will continue to be, and those who
are not will not be," he said. Irving, on a speaking tour in the
United States, was not available for
comment. Rampton said Irving was not harmed by
representing himself. "Getting him a lawyer wouldn't have
made any difference," he told JTA. "A good lawyer would have told him he
was dead in the water" and advised him to
drop the case, Rampton said. "You can't win a case if you're firing
blanks. You need ammunition, and he didn't
have any," he added. Rampton described the documentary as
"illuminating" and praised Lipstadt's
participation in the program. "I worry when she goes public because
she's so passionate," he said. "But I
thought she was extraordinarily good,
intensely moving." The American
scholar broke
down when she told the BBC of meeting a
Holocaust survivor who remembered a man
from Hamburg nicknamed "Handlebar"
Lipstadt because of his mustache. The survivor, who met Lipstadt during
the trial, asked her if she was related to
the man he remembered from his
childhood. On the verge of tears, she told the BBC
that "Handlebar" was her grandfather,
Gustav, whom she never knew. Lipstadt, who never took the stand
herself during the trial, said she had
wanted to do so: "I was sorry I couldn't
go into the witness box because I could
have bested" Irving. Rampton said there had been no need for
Lipstadt to give evidence. "The question is whether what she wrote
when she wrote it is true or not, and
she's not necessary for that," he
said. When the verdict came down last year,
Irving was ordered to pay Lipstadt's legal
costs, estimated at more than $3 million.
He has been denied
permission to appeal. © JTA.
Related
items on this website: -
Judge
[Gray] sees merit in trial
without jury
-
Judge to
discuss his ruling in radio show |
BBC
link
-
Lipstadt
action | press
index
|