Leuchter report

The most current plaintext version of Part One and Part Two of this FAQ is available via ftp. Leuchter's claims during his Zündel testimony, and the reality of his perjury, Leuchter's admission that he is not an engineer (in American court), court order to quit publishing

This was contrary to the plans, however, which indicated that the room placements were the same.

Shop by category

The most current plaintext version of Part One and Part Two of this FAQ is available via ftp. Leuchter's claims during his Zündel testimony, and the reality of his perjury, Leuchter's admission that he is not an engineer (in American court), court order to quit publishing

Leuchter, a Bostonian execution equipment designer. Faurisson reported that Leuchter initially accepted the mainstream account of the Holocaust, but after two days of discussion with him, he stated that Leuchter was convinced that homicidal gassings never occurred. After having met Zündel in Toronto and agreeing to serve as an expert witness for his defence, Leuchter travelled with them to spend a week in Poland.

Although Zündel and Faurisson did not accompany them, Leuchter said that they were with them "every step of the way" in spirit. After arriving in Poland the group spent three days at the former Auschwitz concentration camp site, and another at the former Majdanek concentration camp. At these, they filmed Leuchter illicitly collecting what he regarded to be forensic quality samples of materials [2]: The compiled report was published in Canada as The Leuchter Report: The End of the Line.

Before Leuchter could do this, he was examined by the court. He admitted that he was not a toxicologist and dismissed the need for having a degree in engineering:. Well, I would question, Your Honour, what an engineering degree is. I have a Bachelor of Arts degree and I have the required background training both on the college level and in the field to perform my function as an engineer.

Leuchter admitted under oath that he only had a bachelor of arts degree and implicitly suggested that an engineering degree was unavailable to him by saying that his college did not offer an engineering degree during his studies. Boston University actually offered three different kinds of such qualification when he was a student there.

Judge Ronald Thomas began to label Leuchter's methodology as "ridiculous" and "preposterous", dismissing many of the report's conclusions on the basis that they were based on "second-hand information", and refused to allow him to testify on the effect of Zyklon B on humans because he had never worked with the substance, and was neither a toxicologist nor a chemist.

His opinion on this report is that there were never any gassings or there was never any exterminations carried on in this facility. As far as I am concerned, from what I've heard, he is not capable of giving that opinion He is not in a position to say, as he said so sweepingly in this report, what could not have been carried on in these facilities. When questioned on the functioning of the crematoria, the judge also prevented Leuchter from testifying because "he hasn't any expertise". DuPont, the largest American manufacturer of hydrogen cyanide, stated that it had "never provided any information on cyanides to persons representing themselves as Holocaust deniers, including Fred Leuchter", and had "never provided any information regarding the use of cyanide at Auschwitz, Birkenau or Majdanek.

The contents of the report, in particular Leuchter's methodology, are heavily criticised. James Roth, the manager of the lab that carried out the analysis on the samples Leuchter collected, swore under oath to the results at the trial.

Roth did not learn what the trial was about until he got off the stand. The samples of brick, mortar and concrete that Leuchter took were of indeterminate thickness: Roth offered the analogy that the investigation was like analyzing paint on a wall by analyzing the timber behind it.

Leuchter's opposition to the possibility of homicidal gassings at Auschwitz relies on residual cyanide remains found in the homicidal gas chambers and delousing chambers at Auschwitz. In order for Leuchter or Rudolf to demonstrate the significance of their findings, it is necessary for them to prove the necessity of Prussian blue formation under the conditions that the homicidal gas chambers were operated.

Showing that the delousing chambers have Prussian blue and that the homicidal gas chambers do not, proves nothing, if it cannot be shown that conditions in the gas chambers were such as to produce Prussian blue.

In other words, Green states that Leuchter failed to show that Prussian Blue would have been produced in the homicidal gas chambers in the first place—meaning its absence is not in itself proof that no homicidal gassings took place. The problem with Prussian blue is that it is by no means a categorical sign of cyanide exposure.

Insects have a far higher resistance to cyanide than humans, with concentration levels up to 16,ppm parts per million and an exposure time of more than 20 hours [5] sometimes as long as 72 hours being necessary for them to succumb.

In contrast, a cyanide concentration of only ppm is fatal to humans in a matter of minutes. Another exceedingly sensitive factor by which very small deviances could determine whether Prussian blue may form is pH. This would have severely affected his results, because unlike Prussian blue and other iron based cyanides, cyanide salts are highly soluble in water.

Since the formation of Prussian blue is not an unconditional outcome of exposure to cyanide, it is not a reliable indicator. Leuchter and Rudolf claim to have measured much more cyanide in the delousing chambers than in the homicidal gas chambers, but since they did not discriminate against an unreliable factor, Green maintains that instant bias is introduced into their experiments.

Green describe this as "disingenuous". Introduction Markiewicz and his team were not optimistic at being able to detect cyanides so many years later; nevertheless, having the legal permission to obtain samples, they collected some from areas as sheltered from the elements as possible. Leuchter's report stated that the small amounts of cyanide he detected in the ruins of the crematoria are merely the result of fumigation.

However the IFRC points out that the control samples they took from living areas which may have been fumigated only once as part of the typhus epidemic tested negative for cyanide, and that the typhus epidemic occurred before the crematoria at Birkenau even existed. Accordingly, the IFRC demonstrated that cyanides were present in all of the facilities where it is claimed that they were exposed, i. Evans argued that due to Leuchter's ignorance of the large disparity between the amounts of cyanide necessary to kill humans and lice, instead of disproving the homicidal use of gas chambers, the small amounts of cyanide which Leuchter detected actually tended to confirm it.

By order of Heinrich Himmler, the crematoria and gas chambers at Birkenau were destroyed by the SS in order to hide evidence of genocide. Professor Robert Jan van Pelt labels Leuchter's comment that the facilities have not changed at all since or as "nonsense". Because hydrogen cyanide is explosive, Leuchter maintained that the gas chambers could never have been operated due to their proximity to the ovens of the crematoria.

Critics estimate conservatively that within 5 to 15 minutes, gas chamber victims were exposed to — ppmv [6] — again considerably lower than the lower explosion limit.

If Leuchter had gone to the archives, if he had spent time in the archives, he would've found evidence about ventilation systems, evidence about ways to introduce Zyklon B into these buildings, evidence of gas chambers, undressing rooms. Leuchter incorrectly assumed that the gas chambers were not ventilated.

When ventilation was not used such as in Crematoria IV and V although a ventilation system was later installed in Crematorium V in May [15] , Sonderkommando prisoners wore gas masks when removing the bodies. Leuchter was also prepared to act as expert witness regarding crematoria ovens despite admitting during cross examination that he had no expert knowledge. During cross-examination, he was presented with a letter written by the Auschwitz Central Construction Office Auschwitz Zentralbauleitung of June 28, , from SS- Sturmbannführer Jahrling to SS- Brigadeführer Hans Kammler stating that the five crematoria installations had a collective daily capacity of 4, corpses.

Leuchter conceded that this was quite different from his own figure, and that he had never seen the document in question before. A patent application by the makers of the ovens, both of which were made during the war and two independent testimonies confirmed the capacity of the crematoria.

At various times such as in the summer of when the crematoria couldn't keep up with the extermination rate , bodies were burnt in open-air pits.

In short, in Leuchter's opinion, the building would have been very dangerous to use not just for the inmates but for all camp staff and personnel. His purpose was to determine whether the facilities could have been used in such a manner. Leuchter examined plans of Krema II at Birkenau and had his own draftsman draw up a drawing of the site using his own on-site measurements and observations. He assumed they were prepared from something, but was never told what the original material was.

Four dots on the drawing of Krema II Exhibit indicated where vents were supposedly located on the roof of the building wing normally designated as the gas chamber. After an examination of the roof, from both inside and outside, Leuchter found no holes in these locations. For ventilation, the facility should have had some openings in the roof that could be closed during the operation and then opened after the gassing to allow the gas to ventilate.

In this case, it would have taken more than a week to ventilate the area, since there was only normal convection, or air current, to bring the gas out of the building. The buildings were sealed, and the chemicals placed on the floor. The windows were then opened and the facility was allowed to air for three to seven days, depending upon the size of the facility. This procedure was described in official German documents on the procedures to be followed for delousing buildings and materials.

There was no ventilation capability for Krema II at all. There was only one door going into the morgue. In Leuchter's opinion, there was no way of adequately venting the building. Leuchter entered the alleged gas chamber at Krema II through a broken portion of the roof slab.

Although there was not a lot of room below, he was able to walk amongst the piles of rubble and to make observations of the walls and roof area almost all the way around the facility. In particular, he was looking for anything which would indicate hydrogen cyanide use in the room. He saw no blue staining. He saw no evidence of any type of ventilation system. He removed samples from the walls, floor and roof.

Leuchter made computations of the amount of hydrogen cyanide it would have taken to use the facility as a gas chamber. The normal amount of gas that was required to kill one human being was a minimum of parts per million. The normal amount of gas that was used by the Germans to delouse buildings and the amount of gas used to kill human beings in the United States was the same, namely, 3, parts per million.

If 2, people were squeezed into this area, there would not be enough room for the gas to circulate. In Leuchter's opinion, there had to be sufficient room around the people for air to circulate, even by convection, which was the simple draft in any room moving the air around and carrying the gas.

To do this, a minimum of 9 square feet would be required for each person. Based on the 2, square feet area, the most people which could have been gassed in Kremas II and III was persons, requiring 5 lb. This would mean that it would take perhaps five to eight hours for the gas to totally permeate the chamber and kill the people therein. There was no heating capability in any of the facilities which would have been required, firstly, to drive the gas from the Zyklon B and mix with the air, and secondly, to avoid condensation of the gas on the walls, floor and ceiling.

When the hydrogen cyanide condensed into a liquid, it was absorbed by brick and by mortar. Condensation would have made the area very dangerous for anyone who came into the facility to remove corpses. In proper gas chamber design, there must be intake air and exhaust air in an equal volume.

The intake air was normally heated to an excess of 79 degrees Fahrenheit, being the minimum temperature required to prevent condensation and to make the chamber safe for those persons who had to enter and work in it. During the time he had inspected the facility in February, , the temperature in the room was 10 or 12 degrees Fahrenheit.

In Leuchter's opinion, if Zyklon B pellets had been dropped into the chamber in such circumstances, with no heating capabilities, it would have taken more than several hours for the gas to leave the pellets and permeate the room.

Holocaust literature alleged that gassings took place in winter. Leuchter concluded that the facilities at Krema II could not have been used, then or now, as a gas chamber for executing human beings. The building was not sealed with tar or pitch in any manner. There was no ventilation system. There was no means at all for introducing the Zyklon B gas. There was no evidence of a hollow column which available Holocaust literature alleged was used to drop Zyklon B into the room.

All of the columns were solid reinforced concrete. Anyone attempting to use the facility as a gas chamber for executing human beings would probably lose their life. Samples were removed and drawings made of the facility. Leuchter was unable to determine whether there had been any roof vents in Krema III's alleged gas chamber, as the roof slab had been broken up and much of it removed. Information regarding the alleged vents came from copies of original German drawings received from Auschwitz Museum officials.

In Leuchter's opinion, the facility did not indicate even reasonable gas chamber design, it being identical to Krema II. It was not tarred or pitched. There was no ventilation. It was cold and damp. It had no means of introducing the Zyklon B material. In his examination of Auschwitz-Birkenau, Leuchter obtained information from the Auschwitz Museum and the available Holocaust literature.

The information in both appeared to be identical. Leuchter also examined Krema IV and Krema V, two additional facilities at Birkenau that were presumably mirror images of one another and were likewise considered to be combination gas chambers and crematories.

Drawings were made based on floor plans provided by the Auschwitz Museum and on actual measurements made at the sites. He found that both buildings had been razed sometime earlier. Only the foundations were existing, and from these foundations, his team took measurements of the areas alleged to be gas chambers. He found no evidence of any tar or pitch sealant on either the inside or the outside of the facility. It was alleged that in these facilities, there were slots in the wall where the Zyklon B was thrown.

Leuchter stated that when such a material was introduced into a place, it should be dropped somewhere in the centre of the room so the gas, when it came out of the pellets, could travel throughout the room. If Zyklon B had been thrown in and fallen close to the wall, this would have certainly impeded circulation. As the buildings were not there, however, Leuchter relied almost entirely on the plans provided by the museum in forming his opinion.

These plans were floor plans and did not indicate location of electrical outlets or drainage. He found no evidence of any heating system in these buildings, no evidence of any ventilation system and no evidence of stacking. He was able to determine from inspection of the sites that while Krema IV and Krema V were mirror images in that their outer shape and size were identical, the placement of the rooms internally was not the same.

This was contrary to the plans, however, which indicated that the room placements were the same. Leuchter concluded that either the buildings had been remodelled before they were destroyed or were built differently from the original floor plans.

Leuchter examined the areas alleged on official maps of Birkenau to have been used as "burning pits" by the Nazis to dispose of corpses. Most of the Holocaust literature described these pits as being six feet deep or more; however, most of the pits examined by Leuchter were reasonably small. The most notable thing about all of them was the level of the water within one and a half feet of the surface.

Leuchter pointed out that it was impossible to burn bodies under water. There was no reason to assume this had changed since the war because all of the Holocaust literature described Auschwitz-Birkenau as being built on a swamp. Leuchter also investigated the Sauna building at Birkenau. Inside he found delousing chambers which had utilized steam to delouse bedding and other materials. No allegation had ever been made, to Leuchter's knowledge, that people were gassed in these facilities.

At Majdanek concentration camp, Leuchter examined a combination crematory and gas chamber facility, and a building known as "Bath and Disinfection no. Information supplied by the Majdanek Museum indicated that at the end of or just shortly before the end of the war, this entire facility was levelled, with the exception of the cremation ovens.

It was not explained how. After the war, the facility was rebuilt from plans that the museum officials said existed but which they no longer had and no longer knew the location of. This building was made of precast concrete with reinforced steel rods and bars and covered with wood to make it look like the original. An extremely small area inside designated as the gas chamber contained two non-sealable doors and a non-sealable window that led directly into the crematory area. In Leuchter's opinion, if the room had been utilized as a gas chamber, an explosion would have resulted from gas leaking from the chamber into the crematory area.

At this point, Judge Thomas directed defence counsel to stop further questioning about this building since it was a reconstruction and he would not have evidence in the court about "tourist attraction[s]. The interior of the first alleged gas chamber was mortar with an unpainted stucco surface, covering an underlining of red brick. There were two holes in the ceiling through which it was alleged the Zyklon B had been dropped into the chamber.

These vents went through the roof but had no stacks. There was simply a 6-inch collar around the top where a cover fitted, much like the vents at Krema I. Two ducts were located on one wall approximately two feet apart, each being under one foot in diameter. Leuchter noted that for an air circulation system, the ducts were in very strange locations. Normally, an intake duct would be located at one end of the room and an exhaust duct at the other end of the room, one located high and the other low, to guarantee complete air circulation.

These two ducts were placed much too close together to give proper air circulation. The ducts vented into a sealed area of the building which Leuchter was unable to enter. The room contained 7, cubic feet of volume and square feet of area. Venting of the room would have required about one week.

In Leuchter's opinion, the room could not have been used as a gas chamber. It had improper venting capability. It was not coated with any tar or pitch. The room was cold and damp and had no capability of circulating gas in the room. The building also contained two allegedly experimental gas chambers.

The four doors in Chamber 1 were essentially the same. Each was made of heavy steel and was mounted on a steel frame containing a rabbet: The doors had peep holes which were gasketed and made of heavy glass. Two doors had a chemical test cylinder which contained a chemical-test material. This material would have changed colour, depending upon the gas level in the facility.

Outside was a booth that, according to the official allegation, was used by an SS officer who would turn on the valves of the two carbon monoxide cylinders to supply the gas through a piping system to the two chambers. The cylinders were too small in Leuchter's opinion; he pointed out that a barred window beside the cylinders had no glass in it and had been constructed in such a way that it could never have had any glass or gasketed material to stop the gas from leaking out of the chamber into the booth where the person operating the system stood.

Before that much gas could be pumped into a chamber that housed that many people, the people would probably exhaust the available air supply and suffocate strictly from the lack of oxygen. Leuchter testified that to get 60, parts per million of gas into the room, the room would have to be pressurized to approximately two and a half atmospheres, or 55 pounds per inch. These chambers could not hold that pressure without leakage at the doors, the vents and cracks in the brick.

Leuchter believed that the facilities might have been experimental delousing chambers using carbon monoxide gas. Chamber 2 was alleged to have used Zyklon B gas. But Leuchter, upon inspecting the vent in the roof through which the pellets were allegedly thrown, found that while the vent was cut through the ceiling, it had never been cut through the roof of the building.

If this room had been used as a gas chamber, Leuchter testified, there would have been a problem in venting it. The alleged vent did not open through the roof and the only other means of venting the air was through a single door. The outside of the building was surrounded by a depressed concrete walkway that was about two and a half feet deep below grade.

In Leuchter's opinion, utilizing hydrogen cyanide gas in the building, a structure which had no coating of pitch or tar or anything else to prevent gas leakage, would inevitably have resulted in the gas leaking through the brick and foundation and mixing with any rain water which might be in the walkway. This would make the entire facility a death trap for anyone approaching it at any distance around the building.

Leuchter concluded that none of the facilities were used for homicidal gas chambers. Owing to the design and the inherent construction of the buildings, they would have been extremely dangerous and difficult at best to use, and anyone using them probably would have been endangering his own life and others in the area. Samples 1 through 7 were removed from Krema II.

Samples 8 through 11 were removed from Krema III. Samples 13 through 20 were removed from Krema IV. Samples 21 through 24 were removed from Krema V. Samples 25 through 31 were removed from Krema I. Sample 32 was a control sample taken from Delousing Facility No. The locations from which the samples were taken were indicated on the drawings prepared of each site.

Samples were collected from the walls and all available surface areas that possibly could have come in contact with hydrogen cyanide gas. Leuchter personally carried the samples from Poland and delivered them to Alpha Laboratories in Ashland, Massachusetts. The only area in Birkenau which indicated any blue staining was Delousing Facility No. Leuchter testified that he had graduated in with a Bachelor of Arts degree.

Leuchter had used his medical research licence when he designed and built a precise lethal injection system that took into consideration the poor vascular systems of the people on whom the instrument was to be used. Leuchter testified that he had never conducted an execution, nor had he witnessed an execution using poison gas. Since , Leuchter had been involved with execution hardware.

He designed and built the gallows now in use in the state of Delaware. He had designed the gas chamber at the Missouri State Penitentiary. It had not yet been completed; the hardware was presently being shipped and fabricated. Leuchter disagreed, stating that he had "completely altered the design" and that a new system was being installed. The entire gas chamber, originally built in , was being replaced with the exception of the steel.

Calculations to determine the amount of Zyklon B gas required to execute a human being were based upon the quantity required on a cubic foot basis which was about a half pound per thousand feet.

The calculation was the cubic footage of the room multiplied by half a pound. Depending upon the density of the air at the given time, the concentration of hydrogen cyanide in the air would reach approximately 3, to 3, parts per million. Leuchter agreed that hydrogen cyanide was lethal for humans at parts per million over approximately ten or fifteen minutes and that his calculations were based on the amount that was used in the United States to execute a condemned prisoner.

This was the concentration that had been used in the United States for the past fifty or sixty years. The calculations were also based on the executed person occupying 9 square feet of space. Leuchter stated this was the space necessary for air circulation and was a figure normally used by all air moving engineers throughout the world. In the old gas chamber in Missouri, the hydrogen cyanide had been generated by dropping sodium cyanide briquettes into sulfuric acid.

Leuchter had changed this to a procedure by which hydrogen cyanide liquid was vapourized. Zyklon B came in pellets. Leuchter agreed that one of the goals of the state of Missouri in its execution procedures was to have an installation that was as safe as possible for all personnel other than the condemned person. He did not agree that another goal was to have an installation which killed the condemned person as quickly as possible and that this was the reason for the recommended 3, parts per million concentration of hydrogen cyanide.

He agreed, however, that this concentration killed the prisoner quickly. Leuchter was contacted by Robert Faurisson in February of Some of the Holocaust literature he had referred to in his testimony had been provided to him by Faurisson and by Zündel, and he read some of it in the three weeks before going to Poland. The museum literature, he had picked up himself while at the sites in Poland. He was also supplied with photocopies of Hilberg's publications. He had no need to read all three volumes of Hilberg's work.