The Herald runs an article by Lucy Adams with this title. The relevant portion reads:
'The father of a woman killed over Lockerbie yesterday vowed to stand in and continue the appeal of the Libyan convicted of the bombing if he dies "before justice is done".
'Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora, 23, died in the tragedy 20 years ago, has taken legal advice and believes he would be able to pursue the case if Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi cannot. (...)
'Dr Swire said he felt the court had missed a "golden opportunity" in not granting Megrahi bail and he would pursue the appeal personally.
'He told The Herald last night: "I understand that someone with a legitimate interest in the case can continue the appeal provided they apply within three months of the death of the person who lodged the appeal. So the Libyan Government or his family or one of the relatives could apply to pursue the appeal.
'"I very much hope Megrahi will live to see it completed but, if he does not, then I will look to pursue it. The defence has said there is new evidence and it sounds like pretty potent stuff. We would want to hear this in court. I have reason to believe there would be solicitors and advocates who would be willing to take this up on a pro bono free basis."'
[The issue of transfer of rights of appeal if an appellant dies before his appeal is determined is dealt with in this post in this blog. Here is what Mr Megrahi himself said in the statement issued yesterday on his behalf:
"I wish to reiterate that I had nothing whatsoever to do with the Lockerbie bombing and that the fight for justice will continue, regardless of whether I am alive to witness my name being cleared."]
The applicants entitlement to have the Court's adjudication upon the whole grounds of appeal together with the MEBO affidavit of eng. Lumpert will play the determining role in the second appeal and will reveal the truth about the conspiracy against Libya.
ReplyDeleteWinner this times is the truth and nothing but the truth!
by Edwin and Mahnaz, Bollier, MEBO Ltd, Switzerland
It will be extremely interesting if and when the seecond appeal takes place as to whether or not either Mr. Bollier of Mr. Lumpert's affadavit will be 'deployed' by the defence.
ReplyDelete1: Mr. Bollier, having adjuced evidence at the trail is not likely to be called again as a witness, unles THE DEFENCE feels that he may have new evidence to give.
2: In Mr. Lumpert's affadavit, published on the web by Mr. Bollier, Mr. Lumpert admits to lying on oath. This is a criminal offence under Scots Law and, were he to appear in Scotland Mr. Lumpert would be liable(Upon complaint by a third party) to immediate arrest and questioning under caution. Thereafter the matter would be reported to the Regional Procurator Fiscal and, given the nature of the offence would almost certainly be charged and brought before the court. IT will be interesting to see if this occurs.
It should also be noted that in the said affadvait Mr. Lumpert admits to lying on oath - is there any valid reason as to why the court would believe he is telling the truth a second time around?
Given Mr Bollier's exopectations of a $200 MILLION reward from the Libyans for assistance in getting Megrahi freed: his working with the CIA from December 1988 and his nonsensical activities on the internet, were I to be acting as Defence for Mr. Megrahi - Messrs Bollier and Lumpert WOULD BE THE LAST PERSONS I would seek to call to give 'new' evidence.
They are, in law, both irrevocably 'tainted'.
Point 5 in the document under national Security (no fragment from a Libya MST-13 timer) plus the support from the affidavit of ex MEBO engineer Ulrich Lumpert, result in a clear " miscarriage of justice"!
ReplyDeleteLibya and his official had nothing whatever to do with the Lockerbie bombing.
Further determining of facts: No luggage transfer (B-8849) from Air Malta, flight KM-180 onto PanAm, PA-103/A at Frankfurt airport > the feeder flight to Heathrow, (provably).
The security observation visit, of Mr Abdelbaset Al Megrahi, alias Ahmed Khalifa Abdusamad, to Malta (ordered by his chief) from the 20th to the 21th of December 1988, had nothing to do with a alleged infiltration of a "bomb bag" on AirMalta, flight KM-180 (provably).
by Edwin Bollier, MEBO Ltd, Switzerland
MOST interesting, Mr. Bollier - but, given that you are NOT part of the defence team for Mr. Megrahi, are NOT qualified to practice Scots Law and have admitted to working both with the CIA AND the Libyan Government, just HOW EXACTLY do you feel that you activities, discoveries and sensationalist postings on the internet can ASSIST in his seocnd appeal?
ReplyDeleteAs one who has stated from the moement of the verdicts announcement THAT I BELEIVE HIM TO BE INNOCENT - I really must ask you - are you trying to help his appeal or SERIOUSLY DAMAGE IT?
The ONLY people who may advise and conduct Megrahis second appeal ARE HIS LEGALLY APPOINTED AND PROPERLY QUALIFIED DEFENCE TEAM.
Despite extensive resarch and files going back OVER 20 years, I have failed to find any reason as to why you feel constrained to make such illjudged and mis-leading comments in public. Their Lordships, in Zeist took time to explain the situation in respect of your evidence and 'witness' at the conclusion of your perios under examinationn and cross-examination - you appear to have failed to grasp the realisties of the situsation then and, sadly, would appear to continue to do so presently.
I feel I should point out that your activities and pronouncements may well work AGAINST Megrahis interests...think long and well about his well being and the justice you profess to want.