ГУЛаг Палестины

self-trained individuals, particularly in fields for which no

academic accreditation exists, to advertise or present

themselves as Leuchter did--an "execution engineer." His

expertise in that field is amply demonstrated by work

experience. Shallit's comments are based on the events

following Leuchter's appearance in the Zuendel trial. A New

York based group called Holocaust Survivors and Friends in

Pursuit of Justice brought action in Massachussets based on

an obscure and never tested state law saying that people

working in areas involving public safety could not present

themselves as engineers unless they were licensed as such

by the state. Of amusing and revealing relevance is the fact

that the charge was brought and supported by a judge that

designing execution devices qualifies as working in an area

involving "public safety"!! Surely this is close to the height of

doublespeak. (See "The Execution Protocol" by Trombley,

Crown Publishing 1992)

But in 1990, according to the New York Times, his

misrepresentations began to unravel. The Attorney

General of Alabama questioned his expertise. Illinois

terminated his contract after determining that his

machine for injecting cyanide would cause prisoners

unnecessary pain.

The Alabama warden's actions were in response to Leuchter's

having testified against the Florida prison system when an

inmate brought suit against her electrocution sentence on the

basis that the antiquated equipment there constituted cruel

and unusual punishment, which it demonstrably did. The

Alabama produced letter to other wardens warned them that if

Leuchter tried to sell them equipment and they refused to buy,

he might wind up testifying against them. This libelous and

career threatening action might have brought great financial

penalty on him and the state of Alabama were not Leuchter by

this time a sufficient pariah who saw no hope of getting a fair

shake in court. The comments regarding Illinois describe only

an excuse given which has no basis in reality.

Then, in October 1990, Leuchter was charged with

fraud in Massachusetts. It was revealed that he had

only a bachelor's degree in history, and was not

licensed to practice engineering in Massachusetts. In

June 1991, to avoid a trial in which he would surely

have been convicted, Leuchter admitted that, "I am

not and have never been registered as a professional

engineer", and that he had falsely represented himself

as one. Under the consent agreement, Leuchter

agreed to stop "using in any manner whatsoever the

title 'engineer'", and to stop distribution of the

Leuchter report.

See comments above about this charge. Leuchter did not at

any time advertise himself as a "professional engineer" but

only as an "execution engineer." He never "falsely

represented himself as one" as Shallit states. It is not even

illegal for him to advertise and work as an execution engineer

unless one would seriously make the case that this involves

public safety. It is not illegal in Massachussets to work and

advertise as an engineer in a great many areas. Shallit's

comment is based on surmise which is in turn based on

ignorance of the terminologies and their meanings. The

difference between "professional engineer" and "engineer" is

not a trivial distinction. The title "Professional Engineer"

(Massachussets equivalent "licensed engineer" in other

locations "state certified engineer") is that used to legally

certify documents as correct, and the certifier must in many

states (but far from all) have certain qualifications (which vary)

to do this. Such a certification places all liability on the

certifying engineer for any errors, and absolves others of

blame for implementing his mistakes--hence the legal

importance. In Massachussets, it only applies to projects

involving public safety, quite a stretch for Leuchter's expertise,

which is directed toward insuring rapid death!

Leuchter does not distribute his report, other entities do that.

Trombley makes no mention of the report in his account of the

case, only the matter of the use of the title engineer, which has

nothing to do with the report since the report has nothing to do

with work in Massachussets.

Leonard Zakim, a spokesperson for the

Anti-Defamation League of B'nai Brith, said,

"Leuchter's admissions of lying to promote his

business in violation of Massachusetts law should

serve to discredit Leuchter wherever he travels."

A typical ADL smear tactic, Leuchter's credibility is in no way

discredited by the Massachussets/New York travesty of

justice. A biased court surrounded by several hundred

screaming demonstrators made a ludicrous interpretation of a

law and applied it against an unpopular defendant. None of

this has a thing to do with the scientific data contained in that

report, data later supported by several other sources whose

qualifications no one argues. Leanard Zakim's statement is

pure and hateful propaganda intended to silence those who

threaten his livelihood.

David Thomas, 2/28/97

CODOH can be reached at:

Box 439016/P-111

San Diego, CA, USA 92143

Comments from Fred Leuchter

Dear David Thomas,

Your remarks after the Irving to Shallit letter are not entirely