A Holocaust denier arrested in a Scottish fishing village after two years on the run from French authorities has lost an extradition battle.
Vincent Reynouard, 54, was caught living a double life in Anstruther and was remanded in custody while French authorities launched an extradition bid citing videos where he allegedly denied the existence of gas chambers in concentration camps.
Reynouard was arrested in November 2022 on a domestic warrant issued by a French court regarding seven videos made between September 2019 and April 2020, including one where he allegedly described the Nazi atrocities as “crude slanders” and another where he spoke of “the Jewish problem”.
The alleged offences include “public trivialisation of a war crime” and “public challenge to the existence of crimes against humanity committed during the Second World War”.
Holocaust denial has been a criminal offence in France since 1990 and Reynouard has been convicted on previous occasions, including being handed prison sentences in November 2020 and January 2021.
READ MORE: Why a Holocaust denier ended up living quietly in an East Neuk village
Following a hearing at Edinburgh Sheriff Court in October last year, Sheriff Christopher Dickson said the YouTube videos were “beyond the pale of what is tolerable in our society” and were a breach of the Communications Act, and ruled that extradition could go ahead.
Reynouard challenged the extradition, but his application for leave to appeal has been refused.
An Appeal Court written judgment from Lord Carloway issued on Friday said extradition “cannot be regarded as disproportionate” and that “any reasonable person” would be offended by the videos.
Lord Carloway said the criminality involved in sharing offensive videos online was “one of relative seriousness judged by Scottish standards”.
No specific crime exists in Scotland regarding Holocaust denial but the videos were branded “grossly offensive” by the Lord Justice, who said they were “patent falsehoods” and “threaten serious disturbance in the community”.
The videos included the denial of the massacre at Oradour, a small village destroyed by the SS on June 10 1944, with the deaths of 642 villagers, many of whom were burnt in a church, while another video denied the killing of 1.1 million people at gas chambers in the Auschwitz and Birkenau camps.
The judgment said: “The videos were, taken at their highest, racist denials of the existence of the Holocaust and other war crimes.”
Lord Carloway said the “prohibitions of such statements… were necessary in a democratic society”.
The judgment added: “The court has no hesitation in describing the appellant’s treatment of all three matters as grossly offensive. The phenomenon of ‘fake news’, in the context of the internet and social media, is well-known, as are its damaging effects.”
It added: “The denial of the holocaust is a gross insult to the members of the Jewish and other communities whose members perished at Auschwitz and Birkenau. The same applies to those living with the memory of Oradour.
“It is not necessary to be a member of the relevant communities to be grossly offended by such statements; any reasonable person would be. The other statements by the appellant about the Jewish community are anti-Semitic racism.
“Although it is not an offence to hold these views and, in certain contexts, to express them, it is a breach of section 127 of the 2007 Act to communicate them to the public on the internet.”
Reynouard’s defence was that the videos “did not involve a call to arms”, however this was dismissed by the judge.
Lord Carloway added: “This is the modern world in which posting videos on YouTube or social medial can have a significant practical and enduring consequence relative to the behaviour of others.
“It is not too difficult, especially in the present climate of tension in several parts of the world, to envisage that a repeated publication of anti-Semitic, or other racist, material could provoke serious disturbance by certain sections of society.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel