Posted on 02/21/2006 12:05:55 PM PST by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Austrian prosecutors have filed an appeal against the three-year prison sentence handed to the British historian David Irving, arguing that he escaped too lightly for the crime of Holocaust denial.
Irving was left stunned and open-mouthed when the sentence was handed down after a one-day trial in a Vienna court yesterday.
After entering a guilty plea and publicly accepting that he had made a mistake when denying existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz, Irving had clearly expected a more lenient punishment over two speeches made to Austrian neo-Nazis in 1989.
Irving's defence lawyer, Elmar Kresbach, has already appealed against the severity of the sentence. But Walter Geyer, spokesman for the public prosecutor's office in Vienna, said that prosecutors in the trial filed their own appeal today.
"The public prosecutor believes the ruling was too lenient in light of a possible sentence of up to ten years and Irving’s special importance to rightwing radicals," Herr Geyer said.
Herr Kresbach was not available for comment this afternoon, but has said that Irving was unlikely to serve the full three-year term because of various factors, including his age.
Irving, whose reputation as a historical researcher was destroyed in a High Court libel trial in 2000, is the author of nearly 30 books, including Hitler’s War, which challenges the extent of the Holocaust and Adolf Hitler's knowledge of it. He has also contended most of those who died at concentration camps such as Auschwitz succumbed to diseases such as typhus rather than execution.
In yesterday's trial, Irving acknowledged denying in 1989 that there was an organised Nazi genocide against Jews and that gas chambers existed, but said he changed his mind in 1991 after reading the personal files of Adolf Eichmann, the chief organiser of the Holocaust. "The Nazis did murder millions of Jews," he told the court.
Herr Geyer said that the prosecutors had argued that Irving had only pretended to moderate his views in order to reduce his sentence. That echoed a declaration by the presiding judge in the case, Peter Liebetreu, who said that Irving's expressions of regret were "considered to be mere lip service to the law".
The appeals will be heard by the Austrian Supreme Court, although probably not until the second half of this year.
Ping
This is nuts.
What a shame. He ought to have the right to be an ignoramus if he wants. And might I ask what "You're dead, and we're glad. Rest in pieces, witch" means?
What it says.
While many on this baord blast this law, Europe has its reasons for having this law. They want to make sure an important part of its past is not re-written by modern 'historians', and holocaust denial statements are essentially viewed by Europe as hate speech.
I'm not sure the sentence accomplishes much, they should have simply thrown him out of the country, but clearly Austria is concerned about their local neo-Nazis. Who, I might add, are chummy with the local Islamists in many parts of the world. Think David Duke, and now Le Pen.
I think Irving's sentence is stupid. He is not a threat to anyone.
Pat Buchanan has not, to my understanding, engaged in Holocaust denial. You might want to bring in a specific reference for that.
These people think their goals are the same, but the neo-nazis will thrown aside quicker than a used condom when Islamists have no use for their 'infidel' tool has outlived his usefullness.
Irving's expressions of regret were "considered to be mere lip service to the law".
Austria's justice system sounds like it needs an overhaul. They jail a person for his beliefs then say he's a liar when he changes them.
The Holocaust denial laws are quite a different thing.
Who's the dead witch?
"Flapjack" Corrie.
You misread the guys post. I'm fully in favor of stating this man is as stupid as Pat Buchanan for engaging in holocaust denial
He said he is as stupid as Pat[insert break] for his[Austrian guy's] activity i.e holocaust denial. He isn't saying Pat has engaged in that actvity.
Le Pen may be anti-Semitic, but chummy with Islamists? I find that awfully hard to believe, because he hates Muslims too. Got a reference for any of that?
Rules of grammar and logic dictate to me that the dependent clause (for engaging in holocaust) applies to Pat Buchanan, against whom "this man" is being compared.
Best bet is to say ".... this man who engaged in Holocaust denial is as stupid as Pat buchanan....". that way it will be clear what is being said.
Remember, Pat was accused of being an anti-semite or a fascist sympathizer for two things ~ one of which was for alleged "softness" on neo-Nazis, and for supporting one side in a trial of a guy accused of having been a deathcamp guard. (Turned out guy had been a guard, but not the one some witnesses said he was). Because of this you really have to be careful how you refer to Pat in threads like this one because you will be asked for references to any item for which he was not previously accused.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.