The Jewish Chronicle
Chabloz on trial for ‘grossly offensive’ videos
A BLOGGER who posted videos of herself performing songs in which she denied the Holocaust took place, mocked survivors and described Auschwitz as a “theme park”, went on trial this week.
Alison Chabloz, 53, who describes herself as a “Holocaust revisionist” appeared at Westminster Magistrates Court on Wednesday accused of posting three antisemitic songs on YouTube in September 2016.
Ms Chabloz is represented by barrister Adrian Davies, who appeared for Holocaust denier David Irving at the Court of Appeal in 2001.
Ms Chabloz was joined in court by more than 20 supporters. After the playing of one of the songs, they applauded from the public gallery, which led to District Judge John Zani warning them they would be removed.
The case was originally brought as a private prosecution by the charity the Campaign Against Antisemitism but has now been picked up by the Crown Prosecution Service which previously had refused to take it on.
In one of the songs, called (((Survivors))) Ms Chabloz mocked Holocaust survivors Irene Zisblatt and Elie Wiezel, insinuating that their accounts were made up to make money. She also questioned the authorship of Anne
Frank’s diary. As the song was played in court Ms Chabloz was seen mouthing along and her supporters were swaying along with the music.
In lyrics to her song, entitled Nemo’s Antisemitic Universe, she branded Auschwitz a “theme park” and the gas chambers a “hoax” and described the Holocaust as a “Holohoax”. She also sang “Isra-hell is a genocidal state with no right to exist”. Prosecutor Karen Robinson said the songs “are antisemitic, they are targeting the Jewish people as a whole and use both their content and their tone to ensure maximum offence.
“The songs are designed to provoke maximum upset and discomfort. By the standards of an open and multi-racial society they are grossly offensive.”
Ms Chabloz, from Derbyshire, is charged with five counts of improper use of a public electronic communications network to send messages described as “grossly offensive, indecent or obscene”. She denies the charges.
The case was adjourned to March 7.