Lockerbie Bomber: conviction unsafe?

[steakbake]

Anyone watching this documentary tonight?

I've always been fairly sure that Megrahi's conviction was unsafe. I don't believe he had anything to do with the bombing.

We'll never really know because he dropped his appeal, apparently as part of a deal.

I think the guy has been fitted up.

[Greentinted]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Anyone watching this documentary tonight?

I've always been fairly sure that Megrahi's conviction was unsafe. I don't believe he had anything to do with the bombing.

We'll never really know because he dropped his appeal, apparently as part of a deal.

I think the guy has been fitted up.

Got the book delivered this morning and its compelling reading so far but will reserve judgement until I've finished it and had a dig around online. http://www.megrahiyouaremyjury.net/

Didn't know about the documentary until about an hour ago. Do you know if Al Jazeera have an online replay function?

[Betty Boop]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Got the book delivered this morning and its compelling reading so far but will reserve judgement until I've finished it and had a dig around online. http://www.megrahiyouaremyjury.net/

Didn't know about the documentary until about an hour ago. Do you know if Al Jazeera have an online replay function?

The BBC documentary is available on the iPlayer.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...Lost_Evidence/

[Prof. Shaggy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The BBC documentary is available on the iPlayer.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...Lost_Evidence/

Cheers, I missed the documentary and haven't read the latest book.

I used to be worried about Megrahi's conviction. Then I read a bit of the stuff on the subject - starting with the Judges Opinion of why they found him guilty.
Today I am convinced he had nothing to do with the bombing and I believe the existing evidence strongly points in that direction. The case against him depends on so many inconsistencies, concidences and stunning flaws in logic that I am amazed it went to trial in the first place...

[Greentinted]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The BBC documentary is available on the iPlayer.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...Lost_Evidence/

Much obliged, cheers.

[Beefster]

If anyone wants a copy of Private Eye/Paul Foot's report on Lockerbie, let me know. Has all the information that you'll ever need.

[steakbake]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If anyone wants a copy of Private Eye/Paul Foot's report on Lockerbie, let me know. Has all the information that you'll ever need.

Can you pm it to me! I'd be very interested.

[Doddie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The BBC documentary is available on the iPlayer.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...Lost_Evidence/

This simply reinforces my conviction that Al-Megrahi's release was directly linked to the appeal he had lodged, and the fact that this evidence and more would be brought forward in support of that appeal. Easier to offer him a deal - go home, drop the appeal, and keep quiet - than have it all come out. His illness gave everyone a plausible reason for the release of a "mass-murderer".

It's not so much the probity of the Scottish judges that this brings into question as that of the CIA investigators and the information provided to the court by the prosecution based on the CIA inquiries.

Mind you - if the judges were encouraged to do the "right" thing from the government's point of view, I wouldn't hold my breath for them telling the government to get lost.

I've believed for a long time now that the truth about Lockerbie hasn't come out, and won't come out. Neither the US Government nor the UK Government want it to.

[Greentinted]

Found the Al Jazeera (English) version of the documentary. Very similar to BBC but 20 minutes longer.

[HKhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This simply reinforces my conviction that Al-Megrahi's release was directly linked to the appeal he had lodged, and the fact that this evidence and more would be brought forward in support of that appeal. Easier to offer him a deal - go home, drop the appeal, and keep quiet - than have it all come out. His illness gave everyone a plausible reason for the release of a "mass-murderer".

It's not so much the probity of the Scottish judges that this brings into question as that of the CIA investigators and the information provided to the court by the prosecution based on the CIA inquiries.

Mind you - if the judges were encouraged to do the "right" thing from the government's point of view, I wouldn't hold my breath for them telling the government to get lost.

I've believed for a long time now that the truth about Lockerbie hasn't come out, and won't come out. Neither the US Government nor the UK Government want it to.

Its very interesting to read the views on here about the Lockerbie bomber!, ofcoarse because Cameron has an opinion on it!. and why shouldnt he?, he is the PM of the U.K.! , or is it because he is English and Conservative and Educated at Oxford that the same old chip on their shoulder people will have a go at him!
If Blair or Brown said the same thing it would probably be ok then?, its because of Blair that you had the show piece trial with all the costs etc..!.
Megrahi is not as innocent as you think, he was involved, he might not have put the bomb on the plane!, and i like alot of people know he didnt! but was involved somewhere along the lines!, all the places he was at and the jobs he had add up!, good freind of mine...former Copper would tell you that!, but the real answers that no-one will ever know probably are in a very restricted archive accross the atlantic ocean from you somewhere!.

And dont be fooled by your Salmond guy! he was doing all that with the illness and releasing of the guy for political purposes!

[Prof. Shaggy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Its very interesting to read the views on here about the Lockerbie bomber!, ofcoarse because Cameron has an opinion on it!. and why shouldnt he?, he is the PM of the U.K.! , or is it because he is English and Conservative and Educated at Oxford that the same old chip on their shoulder people will have a go at him!
If Blair or Brown said the same thing it would probably be ok then?, its because of Blair that you had the show piece trial with all the costs etc..!.
Megrahi is not as innocent as you think, he was involved, he might not have put the bomb on the plane!, and i like alot of people know he didnt! but was involved somewhere along the lines!, all the places he was at and the jobs he had add up!, good freind of mine...former Copper would tell you that!, but the real answers that no-one will ever know probably are in a very restricted archive accross the atlantic ocean from you somewhere!.

And dont be fooled by your Salmond guy! he was doing all that with the illness and releasing of the guy for political purposes!

Cameron, Blair, Brown and Salmond have very little to do with it. The "case" against Megrahi was developed in the early 1990s when none of the above gentlemen were active in government.
I'm not interested in this "nod is as good as a wink" approach to locking someone up for most of the rest of their life. If there is real evidence which is reliable that Megrahi had anything to do with the bombing of Pan Am 103 we've yet to be told what is is!

"The real answers" are what this is all about. The relatives of those who died on the plane and the ground do have a right to know what the real answers are.

[Greentinted]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Its very interesting to read the views on here about the Lockerbie bomber!, ofcoarse because Cameron has an opinion on it!. and why shouldnt he?, he is the PM of the U.K.! , or is it because he is English and Conservative and Educated at Oxford that the same old chip on their shoulder people will have a go at him!
If Blair or Brown said the same thing it would probably be ok then?, its because of Blair that you had the show piece trial with all the costs etc..!.
Megrahi is not as innocent as you think, he was involved, he might not have put the bomb on the plane!, and i like alot of people know he didnt! but was involved somewhere along the lines!, all the places he was at and the jobs he had add up!, good freind of mine...former Copper would tell you that!, but the real answers that no-one will ever know probably are in a very restricted archive accross the atlantic ocean from you somewhere!.

And dont be fooled by your Salmond guy! he was doing all that with the illness and releasing of the guy for political purposes!

No personal disrespect to yourself, but being a polis doesn't automatically mean someone is honest and has impeccable judgement, in fact if he/she was employed by the Met, if they told me the sun had come out, I'd be checking the sky myself (and aye, before the usual accusation is mooted, I would tell them that to their face - happily).

[Doddie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Its very interesting to read the views on here about the Lockerbie bomber!, ofcoarse because Cameron has an opinion on it!. and why shouldnt he?, he is the PM of the U.K.! , or is it because he is English and Conservative and Educated at Oxford that the same old chip on their shoulder people will have a go at him!
If Blair or Brown said the same thing it would probably be ok then?, its because of Blair that you had the show piece trial with all the costs etc..!.

Megrahi is not as innocent as you think, he was involved, he might not have put the bomb on the plane!, and i like alot of people know he didnt! but was involved somewhere along the lines!, all the places he was at and the jobs he had add up!, good freind of mine...former Copper would tell you that!, but the real answers that no-one will ever know probably are in a very restricted archive accross the atlantic ocean from you somewhere!.

And dont be fooled by your Salmond guy! he was doing all that with the illness and releasing of the guy for political purposes!

I'm trying very hard to see what in MY post links up with anything in YOUR post.

I don't mention David Cameron, and I don't have a chip on my shoulder about him or Conservatives or even Oxford graduates. In fact, I believe that Oxford, like my own university (Edinburgh) actively encourages its students to employ accurate spelling, grammar and syntax in their writing, which I have to admit rather predisposes me in their favour.

And I've never been a fan of either Tony Blair or Gordon Brown - how that idea squares with the First Minister of Scotland being "MY Salmond guy" perhaps you could explain?

I'm happy to be so positively assured of Al-Megrahi's guilt - I have your word for it, and the word of your good friend the former copper, so that's completely settled, right? And of course, we have the "very restricted archive across the Atlantic Ocean" which you haven't seen, I haven't seen, neither of us will ever see or even know for sure exists. Maybe your good friend the former copper HAS seen it? Maybe he WROTE it? Will we ever know?

We should just have hanged Al-Megrahi when we had the chance - maybe your good friend the former copper would have obliged by pulling the lever?

In fact, why not just dispense with the whole judiciary and decide ALL criminal cases on the word of your good friend the former copper?

I don't have a chip on my shoulder about this - but I DO have serious reservations about the safety of Al-Megrahi's conviction on the specific counts upon which he was charged.

And if (as I suspect) political pressure was brought to bear on the court that tried Al-Megrahi, and then more political pressure was exerted to bring about his release to forestall his appeal for fear that that appeal might embarrass either the US government, or the UK government, or both, THAT is a VERY serious matter indeed.

But it doesn't matter whether witnesses lied in court, or the investigating agency twisted or even falsified the evidence to get a verdict, or even whether a prisoner was released early to forestall an appeal that might have embarrassed the governments of two of the three nations most intimately concerned in his conviction?

I hear a lot these days about the families of victims needing "closure" - and this need for closure seems to be regularly advanced as a reason for the courts coming to an "acceptable" verdict as quickly as possible. Find someone guilty - that'll allow the families closure, right? Except that one of the most prominent sceptics regarding the Al-Megrahi verdict is the father of one of the victims himself - Jim Swires. He appears to be even less convinced of Al-Megrahi's guilt than I am.

However, I see that you and I agree about one thing - it was very much a "show-piece trial". And we know how much justice a show-piece trial usually dispenses.

[steakbake]

PS this was Scotland's showpiece trial.

What do people think would be more embarrassing: going to all that effort of a show trial for a not guilty verdict? Releasing the man found guilty of he withdrew his appeal? Or the exposure of a potential enormous miscarriage of justice and year and years of cover up?