Lockerbie - Time for the Truth

"In the early 1990’s I was being shown around some of the more affluent parts of Damascus. One particular building complex seemed to be under heavy guard by numerous men. I asked my guide what the building was, thinking it was an embassy or consulate. He shook his head and asked me 'Do you remember your Lockerbie air crash?' I said that I did. My guide nodded towards the building and simply said, 'He organized it.' I asked my guide who the 'he' in question was, but only received a pair of raised eyebrows and a tilt of the head as a response."

This is an excerpt from an article by Julian Worker on suite101.com subtitled "Revenge was the reason but the wrong country was blamed". See
http://middleeasternaffairs.suite101.com/article.cfm/lockerbie_time_for_the_truth

US confidence

The United States Consul-General in Edinburgh, Lisa Vickers, during a recent visit to Lockerbie, indicated that the US was confident in the ability of the Scottish criminal justice system to answer the remaining questions about the disaster.

"We are looking very interestedly at what is happening with the appeal," she said.

"Of course we have full faith and confidence in the Scottish judicial system to resolve the remaining questions."

See
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/south_of_scotland/7067085.stm

19 years on and Lockerbie plane debris is rotting away in a scrapyard

This is the self-explanatory title of an article in today's Daily Mail. It contains a striking photograph of the scrapyard in question. See
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=490284&in_page_id=1770

An assiduous blogger, however, got there two months before the Daily Mail:
http://thesplund.blogspot.com/2007/08/graveyard-of-flight-103.html

The story has now been picked up by various organs of the press, including the New York Post:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10302007/news/worldnews/lockerbie_junk_pile.htm

Juval Aviv

For a hatchet-job on Juval Aviv, author of the Interfor Report on the destruction of Pan Am 103 and a contributor to Allan Francovich's film The Maltese Double Cross, see
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/10/secret-agent-sc.html

For a somewhat different view of Aviv, see http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/lockerbie/resources/story_aviv.html

Wikipedia and Lockerbie

This is a link to an interesting commentary, based on the researches of Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer, asserting that Wikipedia articles on Pan Am 103 and Lockerbie have been systematically altered by a Wikipedia editor (pseudonym "SlimVirgin" but allegedly identified as Linda Mack -- a well-known name to Lockerbie buffs, and strongly suspected to be a MI5 asset or plant) in order more closely to reflect the "official" UK and US line on the Lockerbie disaster. See
http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/russmag.html

Is Washington With Us?

Just out of interest, here's an example (and by no means the most virulent that could be provided) of the attitude of the right wing in the United States towards Libya and Lockerbie. It comes from a -- relatively -- mainstream American conservative publication.
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/28863.html

Convicted Bomber of Pan Am Flight 103 May Have Been Wrongly Sentenced

One article emanating from the United States which does not blithely assume the guilt of Megrahi and of Libya for the Lockerbie bombing appears on the Media Monitors Network website. It is written by Ambassador Andrew Killgore, publisher of the influential Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (http://www.wrmea.com/). Dr Jim Swire is quoted, as am I. Perhaps unfortunately, the article places a great deal of stress on the revelations by "the golfer" about evidence fabrication which, of course, were dismissed by the SCCRC. See
http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/46864

Libya, Once Pariah, Turns From Terror

This is a link to an Associated Press article discussing Libya's international rehabilitation, as witnessed by her recent election to the UN Security Council. As with so many articles on the subject from US sources, it simply assumes that Libya was responsible for the Lockerbie bombing and fails even to mention that Megrahi's conviction has been referred back to the Criminal Appeal Court by the SCCRC on the basis that it may have amounted to a miscarriage of justice. See
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h9_xmTWmTNBiFd2_DF__HfpF2X3wD8SDOB900

For a similar article, also ignoring the SCCRC's reference-back, this time from The Daily Orange, the student newspaper of Syracuse University, NY, thirty-five of whose students died in the Lockerbie disaster, see
http://media.www.dailyorange.com/media/storage/paper522/news/2007/10/22/News/Pan-Am.103.Families.Speak.Out.Against.Un-3046775.shtml

Conspiracy against a Libyan

This is the translated title of a fairly lengthy article (in German) about the Lockerbie case by Martin Alioth in the Neue Zürcher Zeitung on Sunday, 21 October. It quotes Dr Jim Swire and myself and is, perhaps, of particular interest because written primarily for a readership in the Swiss city where MeBo and Edwin Bollier are based. See
http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/international/verschwoerung_gegen_einen_libyer_1.572509.html

And here is a link to a recent French article also raising doubts about Megrahi's conviction:
http://www.editoweb.eu/Attentat-de-Lockerbie-Khadafi-blanc-comme-neige-_a3240.html

Libya's new look

Here is an op-ed piece from The Guardian by Ian Williams on Libya's election to the Security Council:
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/ian_williams/2007/10/libyas_new_face.html

More on Libya's election to Security Council

Here is Lucy Adams's story in The Herald:
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/foreign/display.var.1767898.0.0.php

And the Jerusalem Post's coverage:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1192380587595&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Neither the print nor the internet edition of The Scotsman ("Scotland's National Newspaper") appears to carry the story, though there is a Reuters news agency report at
http://news.scotsman.com/latest_international.cfm?id=1654512007

From The Post-Standard of Syracuse, NY

This article about reaction to Libya's election to the UN Security Council is of particular interest since it comes from the main newspaper serving Syracuse, NY. Thirty-five students from Syracuse University died aboard Pan Am 103. The article records the views of relatives of victims, and does not focus on those who have been most in evidence in other media reports.
http://www.syracuse.com/articles/news/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1192611459187500.xml&coll=1&thispage=2

American Cassandra - Susan Lindauer’s Story

The fascinating story of Susan Lindauer and her connection to the Lockerbie case, as told by Michael Collins in Scoop Independent News at http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0710/S00266.htm

By Michael Collins
“Scoop” Independent News
Washington, D.C.

Above all, you must realize that if you go ahead with this invasion, Osama bin Laden will triumph, rising from his grave or seclusion. His network will be swollen with fresh recruits, and other charismatic individuals will seek to build upon his model, multiplying those networks. And the United States will have delivered the death blow to itself. Using your own act of war, Osama and his cohort will irrevocably divide the hearts and minds of the Arab Street from moderate governments in Islamic countries that have been holding back the tide. Power to the people, what we call “democracy,” will secure the rise of fundamentalists. Susan Lindauer’s last letter to Andrew Card, January 6, 2003*

Susan Lindauer sent her eleventh and last letter on the Iraqi political situation to then Bush chief of staff Andrew Card on January 6, 2003, just two months before General Franks gave the command to invade on March 20, 2003. She’d sent ten other letters on Iraq to Card, her second cousin, over a two year period.

In her final letter she made a prophetic plea to head off the war. Through Lindauer’s back channel contacts at the Iraqi United Nations mission, Lindauer said that she’d gathered a great deal of information. She had good reasons to believe that the Iraqis were ready to offer huge concessions on inspectors and on other United States demands.

As the opening quotation shows, she correctly predicted what other knowledgeable observers believed. While the U.S. efforts in Afghanistan had al Qaeda on its knees, an Iraqi military defeat would lead to a civil chaos. This would provide the basis for a resurrection of bin Laden’s operation and then revive the al Qaeda terrorist risk to the United States.

Lindauer was arrested on March 17, 2004, fifteen months after the last letter to Andy Card and two years after the trip to Baghdad referenced in the indictment. She was charged with “conspiring to act and acting as an unregistered agent of the government of Iraq” and “forbidden financial transactions” with Iraq totaling $10,000 relating to those acts. The charges cover the period of October, 1999 through February 2004.

She denies acting as an Iraqi agent and says that she’d been recruited by the CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency to open a back channel for contact with Middle Eastern nations that lacked formal diplomatic ties the U.S. She asserts that CIA was overseeing her contacts with Iraq and that the U.S. government was fully informed of her activities.

She was very specific when she said that she had no knowledge of or contact with the two Iraqis named in her indictment. In his final ruling on the case, Judge Mukasey observed that:

It bears emphasis here that it was never the government's theory that Lindauer participated in such conduct, or indeed that she even knew the Al-Anbuke brothers. Rather, she and they were charged together only because both allegedly conspired with IIS. Judge Michael B. Mukasey, Opinion and Order, September 6, 2006.

At her preliminary hearing, she was remanded for trial in federal court, Southern District, New York, and placed on $500,000 bail

Another 18 months passed without action until the prosecution requested that Lindauer undergo a psychiatric evaluation. The prosecution argued that she was unfit to stand trial for two reasons: she believed that she was not guilty and she was therefore unable to contribute to her defense since she didn’t understand that she might be convicted. Her failure to accept guilt by denying what the prosecution called delusions somehow proved mental incompetence.

Based on the psychiatric evaluation, Judge Mukasey ordered Lindauer to the U.S. Bureau of Prisons, Federal Medical Center (Carswell FMC), Ft. Worth, located on the grounds of Carswell Air Force Base. Lindauer reports considerable distress at confinement and the condition of her fellow female inmates.

Lindauer has consistently maintained her innocence throughout this entire affair. After seven months at FMC Carswell, she had a hearing with Judge Mukasey in early May 2006. The psychiatrists at the federal prison facility wanted to force her to take psychotropic medication, a position strongly supported by the U.S. Attorney prosecuting the case. She vigorously objected to this, which was the basis for the May hearing. The government’s rationale for forced medication and the treatment at Carswell FMC will be discussed in more depth in the second part of this series.

Rather than being sent back to the prison facility, she spent four months at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan. Finally, on Sept. 8, 2006 she was released by order of Judge Mukasey. He flatly denied the U.S. Attorney’s request for forced medication, noting contradictory opinions on diagnosis and poor support for the efficacy of the medication recommended by court appointed and prosecution experts.

His opinion and order implied that there was not much of case against her: “There is no indication that Lindauer ever came close to influencing anyone, or could have.” Opinion and Order, Judge Michael B. Mukasey, Sept. 6, 2006

The Judge ordered that Lindauer be released from jail. She remains free to this day. Through former U.S. Attorney Brian Schaunnessy of Washington, D.C., she is seeking a trial on the charges levied and sees that as a public forum to verify her story and clear her name.

Susan Lindauer’s Story

After seeing an article I wrote on Attorney General nominee Mukasey, Susan Lindauer emailed Jeff Tiedrich, publisher of the political web site that carried the story. She complimented my analysis of Mukasey, which had mentioned her case. I received the email, contacted her, and requested an interview. She agreed.

Susan Lindauer and I met on two occasions for a total of about six hours. In addition, there was an additional two hours of phone contact to assure that I accurately represented her story. She says this is the first time anyone contacted her for an in depth interview on her story and experience.

She was engaging, articulate, and energetic during the interviews and follow up calls. In this article, I present her story as she told it to me. In part two of the series, I cover her confinement at FMC Carswell, examine how the initial round of her case was handled, including Judge Mukasey’s dismissive remarks about the merits of the case against her. I will also present information from individuals who support her character and knowledge of Lockerbie and Iraq and offer some speculation on motives and handling of her arrest.

What follows is neither a brief in favor of her case, nor is it a fishing expedition to generate cheap shots regarding her claims. It’s simply her story.

Susan Lindauer seeks a trial on the charges to prove her innocence.

She says that:

• She worked for United States intelligence to create back channel communication with key Middle Eastern states and all of her actions were under the supervision of U.S. intelligence.
• She was recruited by U.S. intelligence to perform this function in 1994 due to her anti sanctions position and the belief that the targeted states would find someone with her position and contacts appealing.
• She made significant contributions through her U.N. diplomatic contacts with Libya for the hand over of accused Lockerbie bombers to Scottish authorities. After Lockerbie, she worked as a back channel to Iraq on resuming weapons inspection.
• She is innocent of all charges filed.

Lindauer reports that her role as a back channel operative for the U.S. resulted from a 1994 meeting with Dr. Richard Fuisz in Chantilly, Virginia. He approached Lindauer who was then on the staff of Representative Ron Wyden (D-OR), now a U.S. Senator. She says that Fuisz, reportedly a CIA operative, wanted to get out information on terrorist threats from Syria and its proxies who he said were responsible for the Lockerbie bombing. Fuisz claimed that he could identify the specific culprits behind the Lockerbie – Pan Am 103 bombing.

She noted that her knowledge of Arab culture and her positions as an anti sanction, pro peace advocate positioned her for service as a conduit to nations hostile to United States. This put her in a position, “to open a back channel to receive terrorism information from those nations under sanctions.”

Lockerbie, Scotland and the Bombing of Pan Am 103

The Clinton administration was interested in using her as an entrée to communicate with Libya officials, according to Lindauer. Her specific task was to help obtain the hand over of two suspects in the Lockerbie bombing to stand trial for the destruction of the Pan Am flight and deaths of 259 passengers and 11 Lockerbie citizens

Lindauer described playing an instrumental role in negotiating the handover of the two suspected bombers from Libya through her Libyan contacts at the U.N. mission. She performed the liaison role through the Libyan mission at the U.N. As a result of her work and other efforts, she reports that Libya turned over two male suspects, al-Megrahi and Fhimah, to Scottish authorities. They were indicted and tried for the bombing and 270 deaths. Scottish prosecutors convicted Al Megrahi but not Fhimah.

During the lead up to the trial, Lindauer had serious questions about the guilt of the Libyans that she helped secure for trial. She says, “Other Arab contacts told me that Mohammed Abu Talb, Abu Nidal, in addition to Ahmed Jibril were the key to this awful crime.”

In 1998, she provided U.N. General Secretary Kofi Annan with a deposition containing information that she obtained from Dr. Richard Fuisz. This was prior to Annan’s visit to Libya which Lindauer says was for a meeting to discuss the Lockerbie trial with Gadaffi. In the deposition, she offered this: “(Fuisz) says freely that he knows first hand that Libya was not involved in any capacity whatsoever. It's my understanding that he can provide further details regarding his part in the investigation, or details identifying the true criminals in this case.”

However, Fuisz was the subject of a 1990’s gag order and required specific permission from the U.S. in order to give a sealed deposition for the Lockerbie trial.

Lindauer’s statement on Lockerbie caught the attention of the Scotland’s Sunday Herald:

[In 1994] One month before a court order was served on him (Fuisz) by the US government gagging him from speaking on the grounds of national security, he spoke to US congressional aide Susan Lindauer, telling her he knew the identities of the Lockerbie bombers and claiming they were not Libyan. Sunday Herald May 28, 2000

The Herald discussed her role in negotiations with Libya:

Congressional aide Lindauer, who was involved in early negotiations over the Lockerbie trial, claims Fuisz made "unequivocal statements to me that he has first-hand knowledge about the Lockerbie case". In her affidavit, she goes on: "Dr Fuisz has told me that he can identify who orchestrated and executed the bombing. Dr Fuisz has said that he can confirm absolutely that no Libyan national was involved in planning or executing the bombing of Pan Am 103, either in any technical or advisory capacity whatsoever.” Sunday Herald May 28, 2000

Her position was not that different than an analysis offered in Time Magazine in 2002. Both she and Time speculate that Ahmed Jibril, a Palestinian resistance leader allied with Syria, was responsible for the bombing. Time magazine even suggested that the terrorist act was a “hit” on a special U.S. military group seeking to free American hostages held in Lebanon.

Just recently, Time ran another article on findings by investigators raising factual questions that cast doubt on the guilty verdict of the one suspect actually convicted in the case.

On June 28, 2007, Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) made a referral of the al Megrahi conviction for further review due to a critical flaw in the case. Evidence from a Maltese shopkeeper that helped convict al Megrahi was accepted by trial judges without a “reasonable basis”. The SCCRC is empowered to refer flawed decisions to Scotland’s Supreme Court, which must hear the case.

Just recently, October 2, 2007, The Scotsman reported that “Fresh doubt has been cast over the conviction of the Lockerbie bomber after it emerged a document containing vital evidence about the bomb timer has never been shown to the defense.”

In addition, The Scotsman, Oct. 6, 2007, reported that two key witnesses, the Maltese shopkeeper and the head of the company that manufactured the timing devise for the bomb, were offered $2 million and $4 million respectively by U.S. officials to tilt their testimony for a conviction of al Megrahi.

Lindauer said that her work on Lockerbie started in 1995, “I was being used aggressively at this point for positive things.” She didn’t see any inconsistency between her activism and her work with the intelligence community. She opposed both sanctions by the United States and violence by terrorist states.

Thus, by her logic, her work for U.S. intelligence was no different than her activism – the goals were the same. She said, “From the perspective of my life, I was able to work against sanctions” and also work against terrorism emanating from rogue states. Noting the global reach of the events and the stakes, she now says, “This work makes you know how small you are.”

An Opening to Iraq

After Lockerbie, Lindauer says her work focused exclusively on Iraq, although she’d started contact with Iraqi diplomats at the U.N. in August, 1996. She followed her previous approach and sought out diplomats at the Iraq mission to the U.N. Her assignment was to help gain a resumption of weapons inspections based on the rigorous standards outlined by the U.S. She also made a trip to Iraq one year before the U.S. invasion.

During 2000, Lindauer began her efforts to cultivate Iraqi contacts for better relations with the U.S. She described an extraordinary opportunity that might have changed the entire direction of U.S. - Iraq relations. As the secular dictator of an Arab state, Hussein was not fond of Islamic terrorists. Lindauer reported to her U.S. contacts that the Iraq government would welcome an F.B.I. taskforce into Baghdad. She reported further, that “The F.B.I. would be able to interview witnesses and make arrests.” Further, she says that:

Iraq also offered banking records and proof of financial transfers that would prove Middle Eastern involvement in the Oklahoma City bombing and the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993.

The program met with a frosty reception from the newly installed Bush administration. Lindauer said, “I was told that the new administration was evaluating its position on Iraq, in light of collapsing international support for sanctions.” There was no action on the plan. In fact, based on what we know now, improved relations with Iraq were not on the agenda from the beginning of the Bush-Cheney era.

This leads to the second phase of her activities regarding Iraq, the events that ended with Lindauer’s arrest, indictment, and incarceration at FMC Carswell, Ft. Worth, Texas.

Cassandra

A year before the invasion, in March 2002, Lindauer took a trip to Iraq to meet with government officials. She smiled broadly as she affirmed the value of that mission: “It would be regrettable if the US government lied about its knowledge of this trip.” She paused and smiled again, “We can prove their total awareness.”

Lindauer sent 11 letters to Card staring in 2001 leading her to pose this question: “If he wanted to discourage me to stop talking to the Iraqis, all he had to do was say so.”

In the final letter sent to Card, Lindauer delivered her accurate prediction of the results of the invasion she worked to avoid – a disaster in Iraq fueling resistance groups hostile to the U.S. along with a revival of al Qaeda.

She accurately estimated the true value of the exile groups cultivated by the Bush administration and, in the case of Ahmed Chalabi, used almost exclusively by New York Times writer Judith Miller as the basis for her discredited claims in New York Times that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

Once U.S. bombing starts, the Iraqi exiles will have no credibility as leaders. None whatsoever. They will be hated as pawns of the United States, and my God, let me tell you Arabs can hate. A U.S. victory will never be sweet for long. Lindauer letter to Card, January 6, 2003*

She argued passionately, with dramatic emphasis, that there was a deep well of hostility towards the U.S. as a result of deaths caused by U.S. supported U.N. sanctions from 1990 through March 22, 2003. This is a story not well covered in the U.S. press but one with palpable results for the people of Iraq.

That hatred has kindled deeply because of the sanctions, Andy. Sanctions have killed 1.7 million human beings, including almost one million little children. Stop and think. What would an American father do to the man who killed three of his children, once that father could finally lay hands on the aggressor? Would he throw candy in the streets? No, he’d beat him to death and stab him 100 times until his arms were sore. And then he’d look for the next man, stalking until the right moment. In Baghdad, I met a man who lost 8 members of his immediate family in one year. That’s right, eight dead in ONE year. Multiply that by 20 million people.” Lindauer letter to Card, January 6, 2003*

While the Department of Justice questions Lindauer’s role as a cooperator with U.S. Intelligence and a question was raised about her ability to “influence anybody,” there can be little doubt about her analysis and predictions concerning post-war Iraq. Just in this final letter, she nailed down the myth of the exiles and their role in building a new Iraq, the extreme hostility of Iraqis toward the U.S. presence and personnel, and the resurrection of al Qaeda and other terrorist groups.

Whatever her sources and inspiration, Susan Lindauer is truly an American Cassandra.

Note by RB: The Judge Michael B Mukasey mentioned above is President George Bush's nominee for the position of Attorney General of the United States to replace Alberto Gonzales. He is currently undergoing nomination hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-7003532,00.html
and
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-7047261,00.html
and
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,,-7053610,00.html
He has now been confirmed as Attorney General by the US Senate:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-mukasey9nov09,1,3685347.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

A Dutch perspective

For those who can read Dutch, here is a link to de Volkskrant's article "Lockerbie relatives angry about Libya's election to Security Council". It is interesting for quoting the reactions of American relatives other than Susan Cohen.
http://www.volkskrant.nl/buitenland/article470947.ece/Nabestaanden_Lockerbie_boos_over_toetreding_Libie_tot_Veiligheidsraad

UN council seat spells end of Libya’s wilderness years

Here is The Times's take on the election of Libya to the United Nations Security Council. I find it interesting that, in the timeline at the end of the article, there is no mention that in June 2007 the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission found that Megrahi's conviction might have been a miscarriage of justice and referred his case back to the High Court of Justiciary for a further appeal.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article2674164.ece

Lockerbie's indelible stain

[What follows is a letter published in The Scotsman from Iain McKie, father of one of Scotland's recent miscarriage of justice victims. The comments at
https://www.scotsman.com/news/lockerbie-s-indelible-stain-1-695949
are also well worth reading:]

"As Lockerbie is once again thrust into the public conscience, I challenge everyone who aspires to a true and just Scotland to ensure that this tragedy is constantly at the forefront of his or her mind.

The dissembling dishonesty that cast a shadow over every aspect of the Lockerbie investigation has left an indelible stain on Scottish justice and remains an insult to the memory of the 270 souls who perished over 18 years ago.

It has corrupted a once respected system of jurisprudence forged over the centuries from the Scottish Enlightenment and demeans the worldwide legacy of Scots like David Hume and Robert Burns.

We now live in a culture that favours political expediency, lying and mediocrity, over openness and accountability. As governments at home and abroad pledge to fight terrorism at every turn, their silence on the biggest outrage ever perpetrated in the UK is truly terrifying.

As Burns put it, 'There's nane ever fear'd that the truth should be heard, but they whom the truth would indite.' As a Scot, I believe it is my duty to fight for the truth about Lockerbie to be heard because that single injustice encapsulates everything that I loathe and despise about our otherwise great country.

US relative's reaction to Libya gaining seat on UN Security Council

Libya has been elected to membership of the Security Council of the United Nations. The United States did not propone an alternative candidate.

'Susan Cohen, of Cape May Court House, N.J., who lost her 20-year-old daughter, Theodora, in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, said the United States should oppose Libya's candidacy for a seat because Libyan leader Moamar Gadhafi was responsible for the attack.
' "I feel that the U.S. has totally lost its moral compass,'' she told The Associated Press. "Gadhafi blew up an American plane.'' '
See http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-7000972,00.html

Now, there's a surprise!

Lucy Adams in The Herald of 15 October has a story to the effect that Richard Marquise, the FBI special agent who led the US joint task force on Lockerbie (and author of the book Scotbom: Evidence and the Lockerbie Investigation, 2006, ISBN-13: 978-0875864495) remains of the view that Megrahi was responsible for the bombing of Pan Am 103 and regrets only that the will is lacking to bring other more senior Libyans to trial.

He confirms that there were discussions about about monetary payments to the Maltese shopkeeper, Tony Gauci, but is unable to say whether any money was in fact paid over.

See "Ex-FBI agent: no will to keep up Lockerbie investigation"

Lockerbie witness 'given £2m reward'

This is the title of an article by Marcello Mega in today's Scotland on Sunday. In it he states, quoting a source "close to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission" that the Maltese shopkeeper, Tony Gauci, was paid $4m by "US investigators" as a reward for his testimony in the Lockerbie case. The money was described as compensation for the dislocation to his personal and business life caused by his involvement in the Lockerbie case, but was in fact simply a reward for giving testimony favourable to the prosecution.

The same source indicated that the SCCRC had discovered that MST-13 timers were "all over the place" and were not, as the prosecution contended, supplied only to Libya (with a few also going to the East German Stasi). See
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1641412007

Robert Fisk: Do you know the truth about Lockerbie?

This is the title of an article in The Independent in response to a very moving letter to Robert Fisk from the sister of one of those killed on Pan Am 103. In the letter she asks if there is anything at all that can be done, that has even a slight possibility of success, to discover the truth about who was responsible for the Lockerbie disaster. Robert Fisk's response is to say that there must be government officials, present or past, who know the truth about Lockerbie. He invites any such persons to communicate with him privately and, if his invitation should be construed as amounting to an incitement to those officials to breach the Official Secrets Act, then so be it. The relatives of the victims of Lockerbie deserve, after almost nineteen years, to know why their loved ones died and who was responsible, especially when this information is already in the hands of their government which, however, chooses not to divulge it. See
http://news.independent.co.uk/fisk/article3055834.ece

An Israeli and a French perspective

This is a link to a long, immensely detailed and very well-informed article by David Horovitz on the Jerusalem Post website:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=1&cid=1191257285759&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Pierre Prier, who has recently written a number of well-researched articles on Lockerbie and who attended the procedural hearing, has published the following article (in French) in Le Figaro:
http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/20071012.FIG000000229_lockerbie_la_piste_libyenne_perd_de_sa_credibilite.html

The Guardian's coverage of the procedural hearing

Here is the account of the procedural hearing provided by The Guardian's Scotland correspondent, Severin Carrell:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Lockerbie/Story/0,,2189685,00.html

More about the procedural hearing

From what was said at yesterday's procedural hearing, it appears that Mr Megrahi's Grounds of Appeal will cover, at the very least, the following issues:

1. Whether there was sufficient evidence in law to justify a conviction.

2. Whether, on that evidence, any reasonable tribunal could have reached a verdict of guilty.

3. Whether the appellant received a fair trial, within the meaning of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This could embrace, amongst other things, the question of non-disclosure by the Crown of material potentially favourable to the defence; and defective or inadequate representation by Mr Megrahi's original legal team.

4. New evidence, not reasonably discoverable at the time of the original trial. It was indicated that this might include forensic scientific evidence challenging the methodology of the forensic scientists who gave evidence at the trial; and evidence relevant to the credibility and reliability of the Maltese shopkeeper, Tony Gauci, who was regarded by the trial court as having identified Megrahi as the purchaser of the clothes that were in the Samsonite suitcase along with the bomb that destroyed Pan Am 103.

Both the Crown and the presiding judge indicated that the issue of whether Grounds of Appeal relating to matters that were rejected by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission and excluded by it from its reasons for referring the case back for a further appeal should be allowed to be argued at the full appeal hearing, would require to be addressed. It appeared to be accepted that this was not an issue of the legal competency of advancing such Grounds of Appeal, but rather an issue of the court's exercising its power under section 107 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 to exclude grounds of appeal that are unarguable. The implication seemed to be that Megrahi's counsel would require to persuade the court that, even though the SCCRC found no substance in a particular ground of appeal, that ground was nevertheless still arguable.

The Herald and The Scotsman on the procedural hearing

Here are links to the coverage of the procedural hearing by The Herald (Lucy Adams) and The Scotsman (John Robertson):
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.1754798.0.0.php
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1628862007

Lockerbie lawyers demand secret foreign evidence

Here is a link to the Reuters Africa report of the procedural hearing, the most detailed (apart from my own) that has so far appeared:
http://africa.reuters.com/wire/news/usnL11531443.html

The procedural hearing

The hearing at the High Court of Justiciary in Edinburgh this morning lasted just under one hour. The judges were the Lord Justice General (Lord Hamilton), Lord Kingarth and Lord Eassie. (For brief biographies, see http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/session/judges.asp.) Mr Megrahi was represented by a team headed by Maggie Scott QC and the Crown by a team headed by Ronnie Clancy QC. For technical reasons of no particular interest in the overall scheme of the Lockerbie case, the Advocate General for Scotland was also represented; as also was the Chief Constable of Dumfries and Galloway (because copies of the documents that Megrahi's lawyers are seeking to have disclosed to them are in that police force's possession).

The principal subject of debate was Megrahi's application to have disclosed a document relating to timers that is in the possession of the Crown and that was seen by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, and the non-disclosure of which to the defence was one of the Commission's reasons for holding that a miscarriage of justice might have occurred. The only major surprise in the hearing was the Crown's revelation that the foreign country from which the document in question emanated was not the United States of America. The general assumption amongst commentators (myself included) had been that the source of the document was the CIA or the FBI. Mr Clancy indicated that the Crown was seeking the consent of the foreign country in question for the release of the document to the appellant's legal team He asked for, and was granted, a six week period to lodge written answers to Megrahi's application for an order for the document to be disclosed. His hope was that within that period the foreign country would agree to its release and that the court would not therefore have to consider whether to make a formal ruling on the matter.

The other issue ventilated at the hearing was the timetable for Megrahi's legal team to lodge his Grounds of Appeal (as distinct from the "outline of proposed grounds of appeal" that had already been provided to the court). Ms Scott indicated that a vast amount of new material had become available to Megrahi's team from the SCCRC and also from the Maltese authorities and that this had to be considered and assessed before grounds of appeal could be finalised. The court ordered that the Grounds of Appeal be lodged before the end of the legal term on 21 December 2007, but on the understanding that additions and amendments might be required thereafter. A separate set of grounds of appeal on the issue of inadequate representation by Megrahi's original legal team was ordered to be lodged in advance, so that the lawyers criticised in them should have the opportunity of commenting on the allegations without further delay to the proceedings as a whole.

The appeal proceedings will be held in Edinburgh, but Ms Scott indicated concerns about arrangements for Mr Megrahi's repatriation to Libya in the event of his release. It is to be expected that satisfactory arrangements will be evolved, perhaps involving the United Nations (as happened in respect of Mr Fhima, the co-accused who was acquitted at the original trial).

The public benches of the courtroom were by no means full, though a number of Lockerbie relatives did attend, along with a substantial contingent of representatives of the media. The most common complaint from those attending was the difficulty in hearing what was being said. The acoustics were appalling and this was not helped by the tendency of the speaking participants (with the honourable exceptions of Ms Scott and Mr Clancy) to whisper or mumble.

Lockerbie bomber in fresh appeal

Here's what BBC Scotland News says about today's procedural hearing:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7037821.stm

Lockerbie bomber to go free on appeal

This is the confident headline over an article by David Horovitz in today's Jerusalem Post. It quotes the well-known views of Hans Koechler, Jim Swire and myself. See

http://www.jpost.com/International/Lockerbie-bomber-to-go-free-on-appeal

A longer version of the article will be published in the weekend edition of the newspaper.

Procedural hearing on Thursday, 11 October

I understand that the first procedural hearing in Megrahi's new appeal will take place at 10am on Thursday, 11 October 2007 in the Justiciary appeal court (Court 3) in the Court of Session building (Parliament House) in Edinburgh.

Here is a map:
http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/locations/index.asp?crt=sup_cos&val=map

Swire offered cash help to al-Megrahi

Scotland on Sunday has a story by Marcello Mega to the effect that Dr Jim Swire, father of one of the victims aboard Pan Am 103, offered a substantial sum of money in 2005 to Megrahi's defence team, at a time when Libyan funding for the continuing fight to overturn his conviction appeared to be drying up:

http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1600882007

More from Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer

The following article appears on the OhmyNews English-language website:

Lockerbie Investigator Disputes Story

Richard Marquise led the U.S. task force that investigated the bombing

Ludwig De Braeckeleer

Published 2007-10-06 17:02 (KST)

"Proper judicial procedure is simply impossible if political interests and intelligence services -- from whichever side -- succeed in interfering in the actual conduct of a court … The purpose of intelligence services -- from whichever side -- lies in secret action and deception, not in the search for truth. Justice and the rule of law can never be achieved without transparency."
--Hans Koechler, U.N. observer at the Zeist trial

On Sept. 6, OhmyNews International published a story related to a sensational document known as the Lumpert affidavit. (See "Key Lockerbie Witness Admits Perjury.)

Ulrich Lumpert was a key witness (No. 550) at the Camp Zeist trial, where a three-Judge panel convicted a Libyan citizen of murdering 270 persons who died in the bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie.

"I confirm today on July 18, 2007, that I stole the third hand-manufactured MST-13 Timer PC-board consisting of 8 layers of fiberglass from MeBo Ltd. and gave it without permission on June 22, 1989, to a person officially investigating in the Lockerbie case," Lumpert wrote.

On Sept. 7, the agent who led the Lockerbie investigation for the FBI wrote to me and criticized the article on several grounds, but most importantly, he alleged that the Lumpert affidavit was a "total fabrication."

Richard Marquise led the U.S. task force that investigated the Lockerbie bombing. He has authored a book on the subject: Scotbom: Evidence and the Lockerbie Investigation. He wrote to me:

"Lumpert's new statement is a total fabrication. He was interviewed several times, including at a judicial hearing in Switzerland as well as the trial itself and he never wavered in his story. His statement that he gave a 'stolen timer' to a Scottish officer in 1989 does not even fit the timeline since we had no idea about the origins of PT-35 at that time. We identified MeBo in the summer of 1990."

With all due respect, I must state very unambiguously that I remain convinced that the document is authentic and that the story is not a hoax. Moreover, I have obtained a document that strongly suggests that the timeline of the events related to the identification of the MST-13 timer has been fabricated.

Since the publication of the article, a well-informed source has told me that Lumpert has signed four affidavits. The documents were certified by notary Walter Wieland under Nr. 2069 to 2072.

I am now in possession of one of these four documents and I have received confirmation from the proper Swiss authority that Wieland indeed certified these documents on July 18 and that he is competent for doing so.

Although I was initially very skeptical of the Lumpert affidavit, I came to the conclusion that I have no reason to doubt its authenticity or the truthfulness of its content.

Indeed, both the timing of Lumpert's admission of perjury, his motivation for doing so as stated in the affidavit, as well as the content of the document led me to believe that the story is not a fabrication.

Lumpert wrote that he wishes to clear his conscience and that he can no longer "be prosecuted for stealing, delivering and making false statements about the MST-13 Timer PC-board, on grounds of statutory limitation."

Moreover, as I explained at length in the Sept. 6 article, the Lumpert affidavit, in just seven paragraphs, elucidates all of the longstanding mysteries surrounding the infamous MST-13 timer, which allegedly triggered the bomb that exploded Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie on Dec. 21, 1988.

Conspiracy Theory?

I wish to add that I am obviously not the only one who had reached such a conclusion. The possibility that evidence has been fabricated in order to secure the conviction of the Libyans has gained support among many people who could hardly be described as conspiracy theorists.

Jim Swire, Robert Black and Hans Koechler are among the best-informed people about the extremely complex Zeist trial.

Black QC FRSE (Queen's Council and Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh) has been Professor of Scots Law in the University of Edinburgh since January 1981, having previously been in practice at the Scottish Bar. He is now professor emeritus.

For various periods he served as head of the Department of Scots Law (later Private Law). He has been an advocate since 1972 and a QC since 1987. From 1987 to 1996 he was general editor of The Laws of Scotland: Stair Memorial Encyclopedia (25 volumes). From 1981 to 1994 he served as a temporary sheriff (judge).

He has taken a close interest in the Lockerbie affair since 1993, not least because he was born and brought up in the town, and has published a substantial number of articles on the topic in the United Kingdom and overseas. He is often referred to as the architect of the Lockerbie trial at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands.

Black's support for the story is obvious from the fact that he posted my article on his Web site. In a comment posted on OMNI, Black went out of his way to express his agreement with the 18-page analysis of the consequences of the Lumpert affidavit. "A masterly review of the weaknesses in the Lockerbie court's conviction of [Abdelbaset Al] Megrahi," Black wrote.

In April 2000, professor Koechler was appointed by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan as international observer at the Lockerbie bombing trial that was held at Camp Zeist, Netherlands.

Koechler has also posted the article on his Web site. He wrote this comment on OMNI:

“This is a well-researched analysis which precisely reveals the serious mistakes and omissions by the official Scottish investigators as well as the carelessness and lack of professionalism of the judges in the Lockerbie case. The Scottish judicial authorities are under the obligation to investigate possible criminal misconduct in the investigation and prosecution of the Lockerbie case.On July 4, 2007, Koechler wrote to Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond, reiterating his call for a "full and independent public inquiry of the Lockerbie case."

Dr. Swire, who lost his daughter in the Lockerbie bombing, is a founder and the spokesperson of the U.K. Families 103, which campaigns to seek the truth about the worst act of terror ever committed in the U.K. In a letter addressed to my editor, he wrote that the article was "one of the best informed and most realistic" he had seen.

I promised Richard Marquise that I would make an effort "to see things from the other side." And I will. But for now, we must agree to disagree. I leave him with a comment posted by Iain McKie -- someone who knows all about the consequences of forensic mistakes.

Another Lockerbie mystery is why, given this latest opportunity [Megrahi's second appeal] to uncover the truth about this terrorist outrage that claimed the lives of people from 21 countries (including 189 Americans), and given the U.S. and British high profile "war on terror," is the political silence so deafening?

I find it increasingly difficult to argue with Dr. De Braeckeleer's conclusion: "Shame on those who committed this horrific act of terror. Shame on those who have ordered the cover-up. Shame on those who provided false testimony, and those who suppressed and fabricated the evidence needed to frame Libya. And shame on the media for their accomplice silence."The McKie's know best than most the cost of injustice. Shirley McKie was a successful policewoman until her life was shattered in February 1997 when four experts from the Scottish Criminal Records Office incorrectly identified a thumbprint from a crime scene as hers.

Marquise has made other comments about the article that I will discuss at a later time. However, I wish to point out that Marquise is right to state that the quotes attributed to Michael Scharf, formerly of U.S. State Department's Office of the Legal Adviser for Law Enforcement and Intelligence, although correct do not represent exactly his opinion, as they have been printed out of context by the British media. (Scharf helped draft the sanctions against Libya.)

Scharf wrote to me,

“The text of the quotes is more or less accurate but is out of context, giving the misimpression that I thought that the two Lockerbie defendants were innocent and the U.S. government knew this all along. In fact, I referred to them as "fall guys" because I felt the case should not have focused exclusively on them, but rather should have gone up the chain of command all the way to Khadaffi [Muammar al-Qaddafi], and should also have focused on the possible involvement of third countries.

“It is true, as your quote indicates, that I felt the evidentiary case presented at Camp Zeist was not as strong as the Department of Justice had led the Department of State to believe it would be at the time we were pushing for sanctions against Libya in the U.N., but that is not to say that I thought the defendants were actually innocent of wrong doing, which is the impression left by the quotes.If there is one thing we can all agree on, it is the fact that no one except the judges is satisfied with the Lockerbie trial.”

Meanwhile, new extraordinary revelations have surfaced that support my view that the Lockerbie trial was engineered by Western intelligence services to frame Libya.

'Secret' Lockerbie Report Claim

Crucial information in the possession of the CIA that is related to the timer issue was withheld from the defense. The Heraldof Glasgow revealed on Oct. 2 that "a top secret [CIA] document vital to unearthing the truth about the Lockerbie bombing was obtained by the Crown Office but never shown to the defense team."

"The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) has uncovered there is a document which was in the possession of the crown and was not disclosed to the defense, which concerns the supply of MST-13 timers. Moreover, the commission has determined the decision to keep the document from the defense may have constituted a miscarriage of justice," the paper reported a source as saying.

The prosecutors have refused to make public the ultra secret document on the basis of national security. Many have been wondering what national security has to do with the Lockerbie bombing. "It is shocking to me that after 19 years of trying to get to the truth about who murdered my daughter national security is being used as an excuse," said Swire.

After having seen the CIA document, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission team that investigated the conviction of Abdelbaset Al Megrahi decided to grant him a second appeal. The document has not yet been seen by the defense. The document is thought to dispute the pivotal fact that the bomb was triggered by the MST-13 timer that linked the case to Libya.

The non-disclosure agreement was signed by Norman McFadyen, then one of the leading members of the prosecution, on June 1, 2000.

In an exclusive interview earlier this week, Koechler told Gordon Brewer of the BCC's "Newsnight Scotland,"

The withholding of evidence by the investigators and the prosecution from the defense at the Lockerbie court is a serious breach of the fundamental norms of a fair trial. If such action occurs on the basis of a written commitment given to a foreign intelligence service, as has now been revealed concerning crucial evidence related to the timer that allegedly triggered the explosion of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, the judicial nature of the entire proceedings is to be put into question.

If a foreign intelligence service is allowed to determine what evidence may be disclosed in court and what not, judicial proceedings before a court of law are perverted into a kind of intelligence operation the purpose of which is not the search for the truth, but the obfuscation of reality.Black has said,

If a foreign intelligence agency says they would be prepared to give the crown access only if they promise to keep the information secret, then it is the responsibility of the crown to say we cannot do that. They have an ethical responsibility not to sign such agreements.

This tends to indicate that the crown has not changed its fundamental stance that says they will decide what the public interest is and what information should or should not be disclosed. That is fundamentally wrong.The source in the Herald's report agrees: "The commission was unable to obtain authority for its disclosure. Without access to this document, the defense is disabled from putting before the court full and comprehensive grounds of appeal as to why the conviction should be quashed."

CIA Offered $2m to Lockerbie Witnesses

It now appears that huge amounts of money were offered by U.S. officials to at least three key witnesses. The defense was never told that the CIA had offered millions of dollars to their star witnesses.

"We understand the commission found new documents which refer to discussions between the U.S. intelligence agency and the Gaucis [Tony and his brother Paul] and that the sum involved was as much as $2m," a source close to the case told The Herald, according to an Oct. 3 report. "Even if they did not receive the money, the fact these discussions took place should have been divulged to the defense." Tony Gauci was an instrumental witness in the case.

On Oct. 5, Edwin Bollier, head of the Zurich-based company MeBo, told Koechler that during a visit to the headquarters of the FBI in Washington, D.C., at the beginning of 1991, he was offered an amount of up to $4 million plus a new identity in the U.S. if he would testify in court that the timer fragment that was allegedly found on the crash site around Lockerbie stemmed from a MST-13 timer that his company had delivered to Libya.

Media Silence

Will the media finally cover this extraordinary affair? Perhaps. In France, Le Figaro has published a couple of stories, one of which was entitled: "And if Libya Was Innocent …" Television channel France 3 reported the story of the Lumpert affidavit.

In the U.K., The Herald has picked up the latest developments in the story. The BBC has published a few lines about it. The London journal Private Eye is rumored to be running the story in its next edition. U.S. media remain amazingly silent.

Quo Vadis?

"In view of all these revelations and serious allegations, Koechler renewed his call for an independent international investigation of the handling of the Lockerbie case by the Scottish and British authorities," wrote Gordon Brewer of the BCC's "Newsnight Scotland."

"It remains to be seen whether the Scottish judicial and political system will live up to the challenge and whether the authorities will allow a full and objective inquiry," Brewer said. I have very little hope that the Scottish judicial and political system will allow an independent international investigation.

For now, I encourage my readers to reflect upon a Persian saying. "Shame on those who committed the deed. Shame on those who allowed the deed to be committed."

Ludwig De Braeckeleer has a Ph.D. in nuclear sciences. He teaches physics and international humanitarian law. He blogs on "The GaiaPost.”

©2007 OhmyNews

http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?menu=A11100&no=380601&rel_no=1&back_url=

Bollier: I was offered money by FBI to implicate Libya

The Scotsman of Saturday, 6 October has a story to the effect that Edwin Bollier (of MeBo, the Swiss company that manufactured the timer that is alleged to have detonated the bomb that destroyed Pan Am 103) was offered $4m (and a "new life" in the United States) by the FBI in Washington if he would give a statement identifying fragments found in the wreckage as coming from a timer supplied to Libya. Bollier says that he rejected the offer. See
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1597732007

More pressure on Crown over Lockerbie bomb timer

This is the the headline over an article in today's issue of The Herald. The article consists largely of reactions from Scottish politicians to the articles published on 2 October regarding the Crown's alleged failure to disclose to the defence a CIA report that seemingly cast doubt on the Libyan link to the MST-13 timer that, according to the Crown scenario, detonated the bomb that destroyed Pan Am 103. Most of the politicians quoted call upon the Lord Advocate to make a statement to the Scottish Parliament explaining the Crown's stance. The article also discloses that the forthcoming appeal will be chaired by Lord Hamilton, the Lord Justice General, Scotland's most senior judge. The first appeal was chaired by his predecessor, Lord Cullen

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.1734108.0.0.php

For information on Lord Hamilton, see
http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/biographies/hamilton.asp?dir=session

More from The Herald

Lucy Adams has two further stories about Lockerbie in today's issue of The Herald. They concern Tony Gauci, the Maltese shopkeeper who was treated by the trial court as having identified Megrahi as the person who bought the clothes that were in the Samsonite suitcase along with the bomb that destroyed Pan Am 103, and who was described by the trial judges as a credible and highly important witness. (In fact, the most that Gauci was ever prepared to say was that Megrahi "resembled a lot" the person who bought the clothes, a phrase that he also used in relation to Abu Talb, a convicted terrorist bomber, who was alleged by the defence to have been the purchaser.)

Today's stories allege that before he gave evidence at the Lockerbie trial, Tony Gauci was offered 2m US dollars, and participation in a US witness protection scheme, by the CIA. This was apparently known to the Scottish police investigating Lockerbie and, hence, presumably also to the prosecutors, but was never disclosed to the defence though its relevance to the judges' assessment of the witness's credibility is surely undeniable.

See
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.1730667.0.0.php
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/focus/display.var.1730562.0.0.php

The same newspaper publishes a comment on these matters by Ian Ferguson, whose knowledge of the Lockerbie case is encyclopaedic:
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/focus/display.var.1730572.0.0.php

The Guardian also has a short article on the subject. See
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2182329,00.html

Procedural Hearing

Megrahi's legal team have now lodged written Grounds of Appeal with the High Court of Justiciary. These will go before a single judge (the "sifting judge") who must decide if any of them are unarguable, in which case only those which remain will be argued before the Appeal Court.

His lawyers have also lodged a specification of documents calling upon the court to order the Crown to disclose to the defence documents in their possession which were made available to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission but which were never disclosed to the defence. The Crown's failure to do so formed the basis of one of the six reasons for the SCCRC's deciding that Megrahi's conviction might have been a miscarriage of justice. See today's earlier post Top secret Lockerbie report not disclosed by Crown.

It is understood that a procedural hearing on these matters will be held in the High Court of Justiciary in Edinburgh on Thursday 11 October. It is unlikely that Mr Megrahi will be present at this hearing, which may also fix a provisional timetable for the proceedings.

Pan Am 103 and the mysterious sewing-machine needles

Robbie the Pict, a doughty Scottish campaigner against injustice, has a different perspective on the cause of the Lockerbie disaster. See

http://www.firmmagazine.com/members/feature.php?id=324

Top secret Lockerbie report not disclosed by Crown

This is the title of an article in The Herald on 2 October 2007 by Lucy Adams, the paper's Chief Reporter. It contends that the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission during its investigation of Megrahi's conviction discovered that the Crown had been accorded access to a secret CIA report that cast doubt on a Libyan connection to the MST 13 timer that allegedly triggered the Lockerbie bomb. This was not disclosed to the defence because the Crown had signed a confidentiality agreement binding themselves not to do so. If this is true, it is a grave breach of the Crown's legal and ethical obligations. 

The article reads as follows:

A top secret document vital to unearthing the truth about the Lockerbie bombing was obtained by the Crown Office but never shown to the defence team, The Herald can reveal today.

Prosecutors have refused to make public the report, which is classified as confidential under national security guidelines and could apparently fatally undermine the case against Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi.

The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) team that investigated Megrahi's conviction is understood to have discovered the existence of a document about the MST13 timer which allegedly detonated the bomb over Lockerbie in 1988, killing 270 people.

Using its enhanced powers, the commission compelled the Crown to show it the highly confidential document and decided the contents - still unknown to the defence - were sufficiently disturbing for a court to have believed the conviction could have been a miscarriage of justice.

Proving the MST13 timer found at the site was purchased by the Libyans was pivotal to the conviction at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands. It is thought the document originally came from the CIA and questions the validity of claims the timer was bought by the Libyans.

It is also thought to dispute whether it was the same timer used to detonate the bomb and suggests other countries and terrorist networks would have had access to such a device.

Members of the Crown Office are understood to have signed an agreement with the US security agencies at the time to say that, if they viewed certain confidential documents, they would not disclose the details. The defence team is expected to cite the secret report and the Crown's continued refusal to make it available, as grounds for a special hearing later this month.

A source close to the case said: "The SCCRC has uncovered there is a document which was in the possession of the Crown and was not disclosed to the defence, which concerns the supply of MST13 timers. Moreover, the commission has determined the decision to keep the document from the defence may have constituted a miscarriage of justice.

"The commission was unable to obtain authority for its disclosure. Without access to this document, the defence are disabled from putting before the court full and comprehensive grounds of appeal as to why the conviction should be quashed."

Megrahi, serving 27 years in HMP Greenock, and his lawyers are expected to lodge a court order to compel the Crown to hand over the document later this month. Grounds for his appeal are expected to be put before the courts later this year.

Professor Robert Black QC, one of the architects of the Lockerbie trial at Camp Zeist, said: "If a foreign intelligence agency says they would be prepared to give the Crown access only if they promise to keep the information secret, then it is the responsibility of the Crown to say we cannot do that. They have an ethical responsibility not to sign such agreements.

"This current refusal tends to indicate that the Crown has not changed its fundamental stance that says they will decide what the public interest is, and what information should or should not be disclosed. That is fundamentally wrong."

A spokesman for the Crown Office said: "It would be wholly inappropriate for us to comment while the case is before the appeal court." Megrahi's solicitor, Tony Kelly, refused to comment.