The Trial of Germar Rudolf in Mannheim District Court,
Days 9 and 10, February 12-13, 2007

Report by Günter Deckert
English translation by Wolfgang G. Müller

Again we are in the small court room with only 24 audience seats + 12 Seats reserved for Media Representatives in the first row (only one journalist is in attendance). Four Police, including one female one, were present for "crowd control". All seats in the court were occupied by 8:55 a.m.

At the request / suggestion of defense lawyer Stolz, which was transmitted to the presiding judge of the court, Schwab, Judge Schwab permitted the seating of the first row, with the proviso that the seats would be vacated if journalists appeared. The trial was to start at 9:00 o'clock. Defendant Germar Rudolf was brought into the hall by guards at 9:08 o'clock; his supporters stand in his honor; the Court begins at 9:12 a.m.

Present in the Court in the known configuration; 1) Judge Schwab; 2) State Prosecutor Grossmann; 3) both Defense Lawyers; 4) one State Security ("staschu"); two policemen and one Court Clerk – all armed; 5) Media: DPA; 6) Spectators, 33.

Judge Schwab opens and notes the presence of all parties. He informs us that Germar Rudolf wishes to add another comment to his previous statements regarding the facts and gives him the floor. Germar replies to some descriptions in the Prosecution's Writ regarding his critique of the Reparation payments to "Survivors" in Germar's book Vorlesungen ueber den Holocaust (Lectures on the Holocaust) and explanations by Jewish critics. He hands the Court four books for closer study. He wishes to refer to these, to demonstrate that many Jewish persons also criticize such reparations much more strongly and more drastically than Germar did, but are not being prosecuted, while he is.

He begins by quoting from the book Why Did the Heavens Not Darken by Prof. Arno Meyer and from Raoul Hilberg's standard work. Germar quotes extensively from a book by Prof. Norman G. Finkelstein, Die Holocaust Industry (234 pages, Munich, 2000); and from Die Erpressung, (The Extortion), published by G. Frey, Munich. Germar is demanding equal justice, particularly since he does not know of any investigation launched against these authors and publishers who critique reparations paid to "Survivors."

Judge Schwab announces the decision of the Court regarding the defense lawyer Stolz's application for acknowledgement of the seven books referred to in the last report (trial date Jan. 29, 07). The Judge said "NO." The content of these books is not subject to this trial. They are therefore not relevant, whether or not the contents are subject to any penalty.

Defense Lawyer Stolz counters that the Persecution Writ mentions the listing of these books being listed as subject to penalty. She applies therefore the Introduction of these seven previously mentioned books for the purpose of a Self-Reading Process, and lists them again, book by book. Before any judgment is pronounced, it is necessary to clarify, whether or not, according to the understanding of the Court, there are any facts, subject to penalty, contained therein. At the request for a Statement, the Prosecuting Attorney only expresses a "NO".

The process is interrupted at 9:45 a.m. for barely 10 minutes, for the purpose of obtaining a ruling on this application. The relatively quick decision: REFUSED, since the contents of the books are not subject to this trial. The contents of these books are of no importance, the Court rules.

The "staschu" (State Security police) are no longer present after a recess. Judge Schwab asks for further Submissions of Proof. Germar submits a request with the aim to clarify, what the Court's understanding is, regarding a "scientific work or treatise."

Defense Lawyer Bock elaborates, explaining that the Court in the extension of the Arrest Order of January 29, 2007, classifies Germar's books as "pseudoscientific".

Bock requests an Expert Opinion for the purpose of clarifying what is to be understood by the term: "self evidently accepted historical Holocaust".

Was there a Plan by the Nazi rulers? If yes, which rulers, which plan? Did execution gas chambers exist? What is known to the Court? Is the essay by Fritjof Meyer known? If not, application is herewith made to introduce this essay in the proceedings. In addition, a decision is requested about whether this essay is scientific or "pseudoscientific."

Germar applies for the Court to assume as true that the papers, which are in the prosecution writ classified as subject to penalty, are in accord with scientific form and will therefore have to be classified as scientific. Furthermore, he requests that Dr. Hoyer be summoned as an expert on the theme to be proven, that Germar's scientific studies satisfy the criteria of the requirements of science. Besides, according to Germar, it is the right of human dignity to doubt.

Günter Deckert

Important notice: This report is based on my personal observations. It is not based on any literal transcription that I have made and certainly not on the official court transcription. It is a rendition of the course of the proceedings as I observed them. Whoever makes use of this report, in whole or in part, please be so kind as to mention my name as the source.Thanks! G.D.

Ernst Zündel was sentenced at the Mannheim court on February 15th 2007 to five years imprisonment. For more on the Zundel case, click here.