Denial

David Irving interrupts Lipstadt's speaking engagement, drawing attention to his libel case against Lipstadt and her publisher. The confrontation highlights the looming legal battle and the stakes of historical truth versus distortion.

Irving files a libel lawsuit in the United Kingdom, targeting Lipstadt and her publisher for declaring him a Holocaust denier. The case places Lipstadt at the center of a protracted legal battle about how history is represented in court.

To prepare their defence, Lipstadt and Rampton travel to Poland to visit the site of Auschwitz. The historian Robert van Pelt explains how the gas chambers operated, helping the team frame the case against Irving.

The research team subpoenas Irving's extensive personal diaries, aiming to counter his narrative with his own words. These diaries become a key source for challenging his claims.

Lipstadt grows irritated by Rampton's questions she perceives as disrespectful. As the legal team debates strategy, they decide to limit her direct involvement to maximize the trial's chances.

Members of the British Jewish community urge Lipstadt to settle out of court to avoid giving Irving more publicity. The goal is to minimize propaganda while preserving a strong public case.

The lawyers persuade Irving to accept a trial by judge rather than a jury, believing this format reduces the risk of manipulation by him. Irving agrees, which the team sees as a strategic advantage.

Irving represents himself in court and attempts to twist the presented evidence for his defense. Lipstadt's team counters with rigorous cross-examination and a focus on Irving's claims.

A Holocaust survivor asks to testify, but Lipstadt's team insists the trial focus on Irving's lies rather than survivor testimony. This creates tension about how best to present the evidence.

Rampton visits Lipstadt at her home and explains his trial strategy, gradually earning her trust. The two develop a working relationship that strengthens the defense.

In the courtroom, Rampton delivers a skillful cross-examination that exposes Irving's positions as distortions. Expert testimony from scholars, including Richard J. Evans, supports the defense and undermines Irving's credibility.

As the trial concludes, Judge Charles Gray expresses concern that Irving's beliefs might still shield his claims, yet he ultimately rules for the defense. He is convinced of Lipstadt's portrayal of Irving as deceitful.

Lipstadt is hailed for her dignified demeanor during the proceedings. Her role as a writer provides the foundation for the victory, even though she remained mostly silent in court.

At a press conference, Lipstadt publicly praises her lawyers for their strategy and perseverance. The victory is framed as a triumph of evidence over distortion.

Later, Lipstadt and Julius watch Irving's TV interview in which he claims the trial went in his favor and continues to deny the Holocaust. The film closes on the tension between his persistent denial and the established historical record.