Image via Wikipedia
I came across this piece when I googled his name and much to my disgust, and anyone else who has taken the same interest, I found, just as I thought would happen at the time of his release, that he is living a life of luxury, instead of rotting behind bars where he should have finished the life sentences handed out to him after his trial, and upheld after his feeble appeal.
I said at the time that the SNP would suffer at the elections, and suffer they did, and if there was any doubt in their minds that the Scottish people strongly disapproved of this deed, it will become even clearer at the elections next year once the votes have been counted to decide the Scottish Parliament.
Labour, in my mind had their input to this travesty of justice too, and was a factor in their defeat at the polls, but even so, the downfall of these two parties will be no consolation to the bereaved, especially when they read the progress report of the convicted mass murderer in the story below.
I hope all persons responsible for this disgrace will feel some kind of remorse, and as each day this slaughterer of innocent lives survives over his THREE months, they feel more and more a wrench of the guilt that should be burning inside them.
Then again, as we all know, Politicians HAVE no guilt, or Megrahi would not be living a life of luxury, and being treated as a hero in Lybia now.
Lets hope the likes of Kenny MacAskill, the "EX" Minister of Justice for Scotland and his buddies are never allowed to disgrace the Scottish Nation in this way again and will be stuck in the shadows of the back benches where they belong, keeping their heads and opinions as low as their morals are.
Libya
Lockerbie bomber Megrahi living in luxury villa six months after being at 'death's door'
The man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing is living with his family in a luxury villa in Libya six months after he was released from jail on compassionate grounds because he had less than three months to live.
By Andrew Alderson and Robert Mendick
Published: 9:00PM GMT 20 Feb 2010
Megrahi: Lockerbie bomber Megrahi living in luxury villa six months after being at 'death's door'
Megrahi: The latest disclosure will incense many of the relatives of those who died in the bomb blast in December 1988 Photo: AFP
Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, who is suffering from terminal prostate cancer, no longer receives hospital treatment after ending the course of chemotherapy that he had been given after returning to his homeland last August.
Professor Karol Sikora, the London-based doctor who examined Megrahi and predicted he would be dead by last October, admitted this weekend that the fact the bomber is still alive might be "difficult" for the families of the 270 victims of the attack.
The latest disclosure will incense many of the relatives of those who died in the bomb blast in December 1988 when Pan Am Flight 103 exploded in mid air over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 243 passengers, 16 crew and 11 people on the ground.
Most did not want Megrahi released and they suspected he would live longer than the predicted three months.
The Sunday Telegraph revealed last September that the Libyan government had paid for the medical evidence which helped Megrahi, 57, to be released. The Libyans had encouraged doctors to say he had only three months to live.
The life expectancy of Megrahi was crucial because, under Scottish rules, prisoners can be freed on compassionate grounds only if they are considered to have this amount of time, or less, to live.
Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish Justice Secretary, ruled last August that Megrahi should be freed. Megrahi's release came after Libyan leaders warned that lucrative oil and trade deals with Britain would be cancelled if the bomber died in jail.
One leading prostate cancer specialist cast serious doubt yesterday on the wisdom of predicting that Megrahi had only three months to live – when a patient still had to undergo chemotherapy. Dr Chris Parker said it was extremely difficult to give an accurate prognosis for individual patients. "Studies show experts are very poor at trying to predict how long an individual patient will live for," he warned.
Megrahi received the chemotherapy drug Docetaxel – trade name Taxotere – shortly after returning to Libya.
Dr Parker, who is with the Institute of Cancer Research and the Royal Marsden Hospital, said: "The average prognosis for survival after Docetaxel would be 12 months.
"It can vary enormously but it would be very unusual to live beyond two years."
Doctors in Libya supply monthly medical reports to Scottish authorities who can speak to Megrahi whenever they want. The conditions of his early release stipulate he must not leave Libya.
Megrahi, is now living in a spacious two-storey villa with his wife and their five grown-up children in a prosperous suburb of Tripoli, the Libyan capital.
The property has a spacious garden and an area where the family erects a large tent to entertain visitors for celebrations.
The property has a security gate and there is often a uniformed police officer sitting on a white chair outside.
The Megrahis, who are part of a prominent tribe, are well off and it is understood that his family was paid substantial compensation by the Libyan Government after he was jailed for life.
They are known to have urged Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, the Libyan leader, to get Megrahi, a former Libyan intelligence agent, freed from his jail.
Prof Sikora, one of the examining doctors who was paid a consultancy fee last July to examine Megrahi, told The Sunday Telegraph this weekend: "My information from Tripoli is that it's not going to be long [before Megrahi dies].
"They stopped any active treatment in December and he has just been going downhill very slowly at home. He is on high doses of morphine [a painkiller] and it's any day now."
Prof Sikora said that he suspected that Megrahi was still alive because he had received a "psychological" boost from returning to his homeland and being reunited with his family.
"It's stimulated him to have a remarkable [short-term] recovery," he said. "It's difficult. The choice offered by the letter of the law was either three months to live, or nothing. You couldn't have a sliding scale."
Some prostate cancer patients have lived for years longer that their doctors predicted.
Prof Sikora said it was just possible that Megrahi would be alive in several years time but added: "It's highly unlikely. There is a 90 per cent chance he will die in the next few weeks.
"He is relatively young and has very aggressive, fast-moving disease."
Megrahi has always denied any involvement in the Lockerbie bombing. He withdrew his second appeal against conviction just two days before he was allowed to return to Libya.
Those close to him say he did so reluctantly because he was convinced it would improve his chances of being freed from a Scottish jail.
Megrahi could have been released on compassionate grounds without dropping his appeal – but he could not have been freed under a prisoner exchange programme if legal action was ongoing.
Until the last moment, the authorities made it clear they were considering both options.
Professor Sikora had a message to the relatives of the Lockerbie tragedy who are angered by Megrahi's release: "The quality of his life is not good – he is a dying man.
"Quite frankly, as an act of mercy, it is better that he dies at home rather than in prison."
However, one source involved in monitoring Megrahi's health suggested the bomber's condition has got no worse in the past six months.
The source said: "Megrahi is still the same as ever. His condition has not deteriorated. There is no sign of him dying any time yet but who knows? It's totally unpredictable."
I, Donald Swarbrick would like to thank the persons involved in the research, and printing of this article, on behalf of all those who care.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=3914e4e9-ae55-48b6-a44f-2535ae683133)
I hope all those who had a hand in Megrahi's release suffer downfall and failure, as their sin is very big.
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing the information about the murderer's condition.
But you ignorant man, Mr Megrahi had nothin to do with Lockerbie whatsoever. He was framed by the CIA. Your anger is synthetic and unforgivable.
ReplyDeleteFor U reasons of state - the need to get the second worst president in US history elected the Wagnerian farce was enacted on a Scottidh hillside in which Iranian demands for a reprisal for the Vincennes downing if IR-655 were met in the unblievable cruel destruction of Pan Am 103, a joint operation between the secret services of two dirigiste powers, usually thought of as enemies.
Charles Norrie
I agree with you Duta, the people responsible for the bombing, and the release of Megrahi's should suffer.
ReplyDeleteWell Charles if you are so sure of Megrahi's innocence you should have stood up for him at his trial, when he was "CONVICTED," by solid evidence of mass murder, or at the very least, come up with evidence to prove your accusations the way the courts who convicted him did.
ReplyDeleteYour loyalty towards a MASS muderer is unforgivable.
Another thing I would like to point out to Charles Norrie is, that although we do not accept Megrahi was working alone, he was handed over as the fall guy for trial by Gadaffi, and the Lybian government has agreed to pay millions in compensation.
ReplyDeleteIs that not a strange way for innocent parties to react.
Before you accuse me of being ignorant, I suggest you have a long hard look at your own intelligence first.
Mr Swarbrick,
ReplyDeleteYou talk of "convicted" as though no one has ever been wrongly convicted through the courts. Surely you would accept that, on occassions throughout history, innocent people have been 'convicted'of crimes they had not committed?
You also talk of "solid evidence". Which evidence would this be exactly?..the evidence that was presented at trial?
Like the evidence that Megrahi inserted the 'bomb bag' at Luqa Airport Malta?
Such was the absence of evidence amassed over 11 years of investigation that even the judges at Zeist remarked, "the absence of an explanation as to how the suitcase was taken into the system at Luqa is a major difficulty for the Crown case".
So, at the very first point of this cunning plot by super spook Megrahi, not shred of evidence was to be found by all the investigative minds that the UK and US could muster over 11 years.
It is worth noting that Granada TV was successfully sued by Air Malta when the TV company claimed the airline had been the source for the bomb before being transferred onto 103A at Frankfurt.
That would appear to present a problem I'm sure you'll agree in the official events we are led to believe led to the bombing of PanAm103? Unless you can clairfy this, and perhaps expand on the other areas of "solid evidence" the court was presented with showing Megrahi's conclusive guilt for us mere ignoramuses?
The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission found six separate reasons for concluding that Megrahi's conviction might have been a miscarriage of justice. One of these reasons was that, on an issue of fact absolutely central to that conviction, no reasonable court, on the evidence, could have reached the conclusion that the trial court did. "Solid evidence" indeed!
ReplyDeleteWell my two latest Megrahi lovers, his appeal failed, and taking everything into consideration there is no smoke without fire.
ReplyDeleteHe was the sacrificial lamb, no doubt, covering for his associates, without whom the slaughter would never have taken place.
Gadaffi sacrified Megrahi and has agreed to pay compensation as I already mentioned, not the actions of the innocent.
Of course there has been miscarriages of justice in the courts before, but they are few and far between, and the innocent parties in these cases were not handed over like lambs to the slaughter.
It is well seen that the three readers who seem to favour the release of Megrahi did not lose any loved ones in the Lockerbie bombing or their opinion of such an atrocity would be totaly different.
So, that'll not only be "No" to any insight or advance on the supporting evidence for your original conclusion? 'it was him who dunnit, cause the court said so!'.
ReplyDeleteHave you forgotton his 'associate' that the diligent US and UK investigators had pinpointed as Megrahi's accomplice was acquitted at Zeist on a technicality. That technicality being there was no evidence whatsoever against him!
No only that, but you now agree he was actually innocent, and simply covering for his government while abandoned in a Scottish prison. I am confident you have no evidence of this little conspiracy either bar the caterwauling about compensation paid.
What we have here Mr Swarbrick, is all the usual tedious drive-by assertions without any foundation or evidence by the 'Megrahi is guilty' brigade.
It's understandable really that you're not sure what to think about Megrahi's actual guilt or Libya's guilt, or Gadaffi's or some other er, associates guilt, since you have zero or acutely limited knowledge of the investigation or trial.
I have no doubt he was guilty along with others, as he was convicted on evidence over and above the technicalities you mention.
ReplyDeleteThe fact of the matter is he WAS sacrificed to pay the penalty for a crime he WAS connected to, its a pity the investigation did not carry on to find other guilty parties, but then again, why bother if the excuse for a justice system in this country releases them out of false compassion.
The Megrahi case is only one of many cases where our justice system has failed the victim and favoured the criminal, hidding behind the stupid "European Human Rights Law" a law that so far has only benefited the criminals, and made a fool of our courts.
Anyone connected with our justice system should be hanging their heads in shame and start trying to right these wrongs instead of supporting Megrahi.
The only tedious thing we have here is people like you, who have still to come up with proof that he is innocent.
Erm, you are the one who is utterly incapable of providing support as to this "solid evidence" you have conjured up.
ReplyDeletePerhaps the lack of this "solid evidence" and the fact that there is no evidence of the bag going on at Malta, is because it never actually happened?
You don't seem to understand how the courts and justice system operates and the small matter of 'presumption of innocence'. The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate "solid evidence" of guilt, not for me to prove "innocence".
Yes, those connected with the Scottish justice system should hang their heads in shame: for dragging Scottish justice through the most shameful episodes in it's history, allowing a corrupt and disgraceful verdict, while conducting a multi-million pound trial functioning at the behest of real politik, rather than for truth and justice.
I do not need to prove Megrahi's guilt eddie, the courts already did that for me, with more evidence than the bag you mention.
ReplyDeleteAfter being tried and found guilty, the onus is on the accused, (or friends like you) to prove otherwise, a matter which failed in his appeal, so rather than asking ME to provide solid evidence, YOU provide me with your facts that prove him innocent, facts, that if they exsisted should have been produced at any of his court appearances, or if they have only come to light recently should be made public, then the families of the slaughtered victims might find some compassion for him, but leave them wondering if justice will ever be done, their INNOCENT loved ones murdered by whom, if not Megrahi and his associates.
I think your job is harder than mine eddie, as the facts I need to produce are out there, whereas yours are as mystical as Megrahi's accomplices.
I have to comment on this. My husband had no pain with prostate cancer, but suffered greatly from surgery and will have life-long effects from radical radiation treatments.
ReplyDeleteI remember the day this monster was released and the outrage we felt for the families. He deserves to spend his last dying day behind bars for his dastardly deed. Where is the compassion for the families of those who died?
All the best - Maxi
Mr Swarbrick,
ReplyDeleteNow you're being disingenuous. You asserted that the evidence presented at Zeist was "solid evidence". The evidence against Megrahi was far from that, being tenuous at best and at worst completely fabricated. As, quite clearly, your reluctance to provide any sort of defence of this 'evidence' is testimony to.
It would appear that nobody has any real clue how the bomb was introduced into the baggage system.
There is no evidence of Megrahi buying a radio.
There is no evidence of him buying an MST timer used in the bomb.
There is no evidence of him buying, or ever owning, the distinctive samsonite suitcase used to house the bomb.
But somehow, contrary to all the evidence, he did all this and set the timer in Malta to detonate 50mins into a 7/8 hour flight.
And that's only after his unacompanied bomb bag had managed to circumvent 3 airport security systems, all pre-warned of a Toshiba radio-bombs, during the busy Christmas period, in a northern european winter, subject to regular weather delays, and as fate would have it, the bag to be loaded in the only exact precise position within the luggage container in order to puncture the aircrafts fuselage.
Yeah, and pixies live at the bottom of my garden!
I am asking how those who support the court's verdict, as YOU DO for still unsubstantiated reasons, rationalise all these aspects?
How can YOUR belief in Megrahi's guilt be sustained?
How do YOU explain the impermeable nature of the Air Malta baggage records?
You talk of "solid evidence" and yet offer none, not even a defence of the courts evidence, all the while seemingly refusing to weigh up the evidence for YOURSELLF.
Where did the bomb go on the plane? The evidence from Heathrow is immeasurably more convincing than Malta. Who made it and who put it there? What the hell was going on at Frankfurt (destroying evidence)? Was that timer fragment really part of the bomb, (according to the UN explosives expert, it was "highly unlikely") and if so, how does that square with the very early detonation?
Won't even one solitary soul of all the people who believe Megrahi to be guilty (and want to boycott Scotland and so on) please explain their reasoning and the basis for this belief?
This debate could go on forever eddie, the fact is that Megrahi WAS found guilty with evidence accumulated at the time, and even at the time of his appeal no NEW evidence appeared to clear his name, and YOU have done nothing to convince anyone either.
ReplyDeleteIf anything, evidence was distorted to suit the shambolic justice system here to achieve the release of Megrahi by the powers that be in government positions who, for the sake of political gain, or in other words, suck up to a country or countries involved it the slaughter because they now want to use their resources.
Neither YOU nor other Megrahi sympathizers in or outside the law society knows what really went on behind the scenes to contort the "solid evidence" first produced.
At the end of the day Megrahi has been found guilty, never been proven innocent, and the slaughter of all those innocent lives will go unpunished, not only because Megrahi, one of the instigators was released, but because all his accomplices have never come to light.
NOT a very good image for any country, or their legal system, and a disgrace in the eyes of the victim's families, not to mention the majority of the American nation.
Just ask Maxi who's opinion on the matter is in a comment above.
One last thing. Say hello to your pixies for me next time you are at the bottom of your garden.
ReplyDeleteMr Swarbrick,
ReplyDeleteWith blind party political fervour you seem to want to deplore the Scottish judicial process and the release of Megrahi, and for reasons of revenge as opppose to justice, would have been clearly satisfied for him to rot in a Scottish prison. You seem to want to advocate this stance while knowing almost nothing of the affair you're commenting on, which I rather think compounds the problem.
If you are going to use this case to attack the SNP govt and the decision to release him, the question of the certainty or otherwise of this man's guilt in the first instance is absolutely paramount. You may disagree with me, but please inform yourself of the facts and disagree from an informed position on the facts of the conviction, rather than baying for this man's blood simply because the Camp Zeist judges turned in what many perceive was a perverse verdict. Or do you believe that innocent people never get convicted?
The "beyond reasonable doubt" criterion in determining a 'guilty' verdict didn't come close to being met (and the SCCRC broadly agrees with this, on the evidence of its support for the appeal process), but that the evidence actually indicates Megrahi's innocence.
The actual real world is the one where Megrahi's guilt has been called into serious question, and it is saddening to see people who are content to criticise from afar and when challenged, exhibit the equivalent of sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting 'la-la-la'. That's their prerogative I suppose.
Dear Mr Swarbrick,
ReplyDeleteAt the time of Mr Megrahi's trial I could bot prove Mr Megrahi was not guilty to my standards. That only came about when I obtained in English the case papers of UT-772 in 2004.
Anybody who tries to prove that Mr Megrahi was guilty has a hopeless case, and all the evidence is so compromised.
You may insult me by saying I am defending a MASS MURDERER (your capitals), but you can't prove he is othet than by relying on a shoddy court process, the ex cathedra position of Mr Marquise or the sycophantically pro CIA Mr Duggan, who has described my position as if I were a Holocaust denier.
Now go back to fishing Mr Swarbrick and leave thinking to your betters.
Dear Charles, (yawn) Megrahi was convicted, and proved to be guilty, you and his sympathizers have YET to prove otherwise. If it is so easy DO IT!
ReplyDeleteThere was film of him in Malta at the shop where parts of the device was purchased, plus other evidence you tend to ignore.
If you are supposed to be an example of my betters then pity help us, at least when I was at the fishing I was good at my job, more than I can say for you, it seems.
You and your kind have been suckered by powers high above you into thinking that way, and you haven't the brains to figure it out.
The bomb was not supposed to detonate over Scotland, it was because of the delays, that the people of Lockerbie were killed, bringing in the inept Scottish law society which added to the shambolic state the case has been left in.
If it had been detonated over the Atlantic as planned, out of the clutches of Scotland we might have reached a satisfactory conclusion by now, which would have brought comfort to the relatives involved, another aspect you seem to ignore.
And so to eddie AGAIN. The la la la is something you seem to do also. I have responded to your repetitive argument, but the case you put comes up with nothing new, just like Megrahi's appeal. The general public know more than you give them credit for, and if you are so sure Megrahi is innocent, don't let the fact that he is home and dry deter you from providing us with evidence you seem to think will clear his name.
ReplyDeleteYou do not have to prove it in court, costing money, there are other ways of enlightening the public, who only ever wanted justice.
Its a pity the case landed in the clutches of a country where justice has been swallowed up by the European Law of Human Rights and has become almost non-exsistent as far as victims are concerned.
It would be nice to end this with a positive conclusion, but that appears to be outwith your control.
You are more in the dark than the public, you are too blinkered to see the truth, and failing see what it is really all about.
Megrahi on film? Well, this is a reveleation indeed! You, and you alone Mr Swarbrick must have that killer evidence, because Mr Megrahi on 'film' is not something anyone has ever presented!
ReplyDeleteClipper 103 was not delayed. It was due to leave Heathrow at 1800hrs, which it did +/- a few minutes. The taxi to the runway meant takeoff occured at approx 1820 +/- 2minutes. All quite normal, and if anything given the time of the year at Heathrow, is 'on-time'. 38minutes later the hull was punctured by an explosion carefully positioned within the baggage container. The bag placed anywhere else in the container would have been unsuccessful in it's mission.
After being loaded and unloaded no less than 5 times durings it's unacompanied journey from er, Malta, through Frankfurt and London, the bag, just by luck, was exactly where the explosion would have it's desired effect.
With a 7/8hr flight and the supposed timer that we're told super spook Megrahi used, which can be set anywhere in this time frame, Megrahi decided to ignore any possible holiday season congestion or european winter weather delays, and that 1hr after 103's scheduled departure would suffice.
Seem plausible? No, not in the slightest.
Or perhaps someone, not Megrahi, inserted the bomb bag in London, as the Heathrow baggage handler testified having spotted an erroneous unaccountable samsonite in the baggage container, subsequently known to contain the explosive device, in precisely the position the AAIB determined the explosion occurred?
Exploding 38 minutes after it's departure from Heathrow at about 1900hrs. Not the device Megrahi is supposed to have used, but this matches identically to the timers used in the devices captured in Neuss six weeks before Lockerbie?
During the investigation, film of Megrahi in the shop in Malta was shown on TV, maybe another piece of evidence disposed of to suit the powers that be. You are using too much supposition as to when or where the bomb was planted, with no proof of the innocence of Megrahi. The Christmas rush is a good time to carry out such an atrocity with security attention at a strech, also in the eighties it was easier to plant such a device, it was only after this incident that security was tightened.
ReplyDeleteHowever,this is all very well eddie, we have strayed from the point I was making at the beginning.
Megrah was convicted,given life sentences, and has to this day never been proved innocent.
For the sake of all the victims and their families he should never have been released until he was proved to be innocent, and if you or any other Megrahi sympathizer has the means to do this, why don't you.
There will never be any comfort for those concerned until this case has been put to rest, and releasing him on false compassionate grounds was the last thing these people wanted.
Every day he lives over his three months, living in splendor will make those bereaved families cringe even more.
Being convicted of mass murder, and given life sentences, means he should have stayed in jail until he died, that was hs punishment.
He had the chance of another appeal and turned it down because he was being released anyway,(on the advice of the powers that be who contorted everything to suit) NOT the road I would have taken if I were a convicted killer trying to clear my name, and with the proof positive on hand that you and Charles are trying to convince me is out there. I think clearing my name would be first and foremost.
As it is, guilty as charged (innocent as far as a few are concerned)this man will go to his grave "EVENTUALLY" still being branded as "THE LOCKERBIE BOMBER," and always the Lockerbie bomber in the eyes of the majority of the population.
If I were innocent and had symathizers like you on my side, standing on the sidelines, withholding such important evidence as would clear my name, I know I would want my name cleared once and for all, and go to my grave with some respect, and wouldn't think much of you for keeping it under wraps.
He is a hero in his own country, living a life of luxury, so perhaps he is happy to eventually go to his grave with the title "The Lockerbie Bomber," his innocence never having been proved.
It all comes down to the fact that the majority of the Scottish people did not want him released on compassionate grounds, and wanted him to stay in jail until he died or was proven innocent.
The same applies to the American nation, and its these people who should have been considered, not a few politicians who used Megrahi as a pawn in their political game.
It did harm the SNP as was shown in the recent election, and only if they do something special before the Scottish election next year, and the people forgive and forget, it will show in that election too.
I among many people I know DID vote SNP, and it was this inconsiderate decision that prevented me from doing so again.
THAT was my original point, plus the lack of consideration for all those close to the victims, points that seem to have got lost with all the banter lately, something like the evidence against Megrahi perhaps.
Mr Swarbrick,
ReplyDeleteI can assure you, there is and never was any 'film' or footage or Megrahi near or in the shop in Malta. If there had been any sort of footage of Megrahi it certainly wouldn't have been necessary for the CIA to "compensate" the Maltese shop owner and his brother to the tune of $3m (revealed in the SCCRC decision) for their statements and testimony at Zeist! The weakness of the evidence from the shopkeeper Tony Gauci was the main plank of the SCCRC report.
In contrast to your assumption, European airports, and specifically Frankfurt Main and London Heathrow, and their baggage x-rayers and examiners were actually on heightened alert for during December 1988 for bombs disguised as "Toshiba radios", as they were known to be of the kind of device discovered in Germany in late October 1988 by the BKA - 6 weeks before Lockerbie.
Please also consider the families of those who died, from the US and primarily from the UK, who believe Megrahi was wrongfully convicted.
Therefore, his release on compassionate grounds was welcomed by many of the families, although they were clearly disappointed at the dropping of the appeal.
And that Mr Swarbrick, is what this is all about. Not oil or any other fatuous peripheral reason, but in the eye's of the US, UK and Scottish government, that appeal cannot be allowed to continue under any circumstances.
If you really want to get into the political motives behind Megrahi's release, you also have to consider the question of the appeal proceedings.
Megrahi applied for leave to appeal in 2003. Leave was not granted until 2007, a ridiculously long delay. It's fairly clear that the likelihood of the appeal being successful was rather high.
At the time(2007) it was anticipated that the appeal would come to court in 2008, however this didn't happen. Part of the reason was legal wrangling over a particular document or documents the defence wanted access to, which they believed would assist their client, and which the prosecution had known of and agreed not to disclose to the court or defence since 2001. Despite a court order ruling for disclosure, the government refused, invoking a "public interest immunity" (PII) clause.
We never did find out what this document contained, but it was clearly something the government is extremely anxious should not be revealed - and we all know how the past criminal and corrupt New Labour govt operated.
While this arguing over this document was still going on, Megrahi was diagnosed with cancer in September 2008. The appeal finally got to court in about March 2009, however one of the judges fell ill, and the appeal was adjourned. By this time Megrahi himself was apparently quite ill, however instead of appointing a replacement judge to hurry things along, the court elected to adjourn until November 2009 to allow the sick judge to recover. The whole business with the compassionate release happened in August.
However, compassionate release wasn't the only possible vehicle for sending him back to Libya - the other was the prisoner transfer agreement negotiated by Tony Blair in the "deal in the desert" in May 2007. Again however, that was only possible if there was no outstanding appeal.
By dangling both possibilities for Megrahi (application of the PTA and compassionate release), without making it clear to him that compassionate release was the way the government was likely to go, he was "persuaded" to formally abandon his appeal just before the compassionate release was announced.
There is thus no easy way the affair can be further examined in court, no realistic possibility that the government will find itself in the embarrassing position of having nobody convicted of the Lockerbie atrocity, faced with the awkward questions of the original investigation, the 'evidence' presented, and no possibility that these contentious documents, whatever they are, will have to be made public.
cont..
The prisoner transfer possibility wasn't ever really attractive to Megrahi, because he wanted to clear his name. But when he realised he only had a short time to live, his priorities changed, and he became amenable to persuasion in order to maximise the possibility of getting home by one means or another.
ReplyDeleteI think we can all be confident that the 'deal in the desert' made by Blair, was with Megrahi in mind, that initially oil deals would have been a priority too. However, as it became clear that the appeal would very likely reveal some very embarrassing details, not too mention finding a miscarriage of justice had occurred, the priorities on the matter changed.
To confound things for New Labour, almost simultaneously with all this, the Labour party lost the Scottish election to the SNP, and Blair found himself with a non-compliant SNP government in Holyrood instead of "how high?" Jack McConnell. The SNP were outraged at the disposition of Megrahi - a matter for the Scottish government alone - being horse-traded by Tony Blair. For this reason, it was never likely they would accede to a prisoner transfer, but the cancer development brought compassionate release onto the table as a more palatable solution.
As I said, the solution sought by all despite the public outrage shown by the US govt., here being the dropping of that appeal process by Megrahi.
How Kenny MacAskill managed to go down the compassionate release route but at the same time secure the great prize - the withdrawal of the appeal - is a piece of political finesse worthy of Machiavelli. At one stroke, he both stymied the Westminster government's plans to force through a prisoner transfer (it was politically important the SNP not be seen to be doing what Westminster wanted), and got the appeal process halted.
However, ultimately, and most crucially, if you are going to use this particular case to call for a new precedent to be set in determining eligibility for 'compassionate release', and allow the severity of the crime to influence the decision, you can't escape facing the question of the certainty or otherwise of this man's guilt. And in order to question someone's guilt and the evidence established in court seemingly showing this, it is not a prerequisite to show 'innocence', merely that the evidence of guilt is so tenuous, inconsistent, irrational and contradictory, that it should be viewed with great scepticism.
You have hit the nail on the head this time eddie in your paragraph; We never did find out what this document contained, but it was clearly something the government is extremely anxious should not be revealed - and we all know how the past criminal and corrupt new labour government operated.
ReplyDeleteThe SNP were influenced by the labour government to come to that conclusion, both parties were guilty.
If I remember right, witness changed their statements after the trial, the shop keeper being one of them and his testimony deemed as unreliable.
After all this time other factors could have been hidden or distorted by the powers that be, and I am quite sure by now, if anyone wanted to prove Megrahi's innocence they well could, but it still would never convince the majority.
While I agree that some Americans doubt that Megrahi is guilty, the majority, as I said do not.
All the conflicting reports in the media played a part in that,using supposition to sell newspapers, but as long as the government withholds evidence the matter will never be settled, and as I also said "If it were me I would rather be proven innocent, than go to my grave branded as "The Lockerbie Bomber."
In this case he is guilty until proven innocent, rightly or wrongly.
I thank you for your correspondence in the matter and for bringing up your points, it seems, like the Megrahi case we also will never come to a reasonable conclusion.
It makes no difference to us but I do feel for those directly involved, as the case has been shambolic from the start.
One thing we do agree on is the input the corrupt labour government had in the matter, and I am sure subsequent governments will benefit from the unscrupulous deal made at the time, whatever it was, whether they admit to knowing anything about it or not.
Its just a pity that so many other people involved had to suffer for their gain.
Let me see if I have this right. Innocent lives were sacrificed at the hands of the secret service of two nations because Iran demanded reprisal?
ReplyDeleteThere will always be doubters, but the overwhelming majority here in America believe Megrahi is guilty and the outrage continues at his release.
Stick to your guns, Donald, you know that you're right.
All the best - Maxi
Thank you for confirming my statement Maxi,and for your support.
ReplyDelete