University Post
University of Copenhagen
Independent of management


Copenhagen 9/11 court case: ´Crackpot´ is NOT libel

Danish higher court ignores UCPH chemist Harrit's 9/11 video and ash in its ruling. The case was about libel, and in this case 'crackpot' was not libellous

There was videos of the World Trade Center crashing down, dust from the crash site, and expert testimony from physicists and architects. But when it all came down to it the Eastern High Court [Østre Landsret] kept to the narrower question of libel.

The issue was whether the Weekendavisen journalist Søren K. Villemoes’ naming the University of Copenhagen chemist Niels Harrit as an example of a ‘crackpot’ in an opinion piece on another subject was libellous. And in the event the higher court confirmed the lower court’s finding. It was not, in fact, libel.

It was a “newspaper article that had the character of a critical debating piece, raising questions of ordinary interest to society,” the court said in its ruling. A ruling that had otherwise been based on a courtroom debate about of Niels Harrit’s theory of a controlled demolition of World Trade Center 7 in connection with the 9/11 attacks.

Harrit: To decide next step

“The High Court finds that Søren K. Villemoes’ critical and provocative remarks in this, the relevant context, should be understood as Søren K. Villemoes’ views regarding the content of Niels Harrit and others perceptions, and thereby a characteristic of their opinions without thereby being an estimation of Niels Harrit’s subjective condition. The use of the word “crackpots” can therefore not be isolated or in connection with the reference to “creationist nuttiness” or “the Holocaust-denier environment” be seen as a violation of the penal code’s paragraph 267, 1. on insults as interpreted in the article 10 of the European Human Rights Convention.”

Read a report from the courtroom ‘Courtroom drama in 9/11 ‘crackpot’ libel case’ here

Read a more detailed overview in the article ‘New evidence on 9/11 attacks in Copenhagen court’ here.

Has court costs covered

A loss in the High Court is not immediately open to appeal in the Supreme Court unless this court wishes to take up a principled case on its own volition. Niels Harrit says to the University Post that he has not yet decided therefore what the next step will be.

“The Court has ruled any libel has to be evaluated in the context in which it occurs. But I think that the point is that I don’t belong in this context,” Niels Harrit says. He adds that it is an important verdict, as it means that “the Danish criminal code is now obsolete, and anyone can say anything about anybody. And this is destructive of the debate”.

Questioned by the University Post as to his court costs, Niels Harrit explains that all his costs are covered by a collection from the group Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

Villemoes: Confirmed you can call him crackpot

Søren K. Villemoes the Weekendavisen journalist keeps things short on his Facebook profile, where he has been commenting the case.

“It is hereby confirmed in two court hearings, that you may call Niels Harrit a crackpot [tosse, ed.]. This is not crackpot-ty [tosset, ed.]”.

Like us on Facebook for features, guides and tips on upcoming events. Follow us on Twitter for links to other Copenhagen academia news stories. Sign up for the University Post weekly newsletter here, and then follow the University Post on Instagram here.