The Herald
Lucy Adams, the paper’s chief reporter, provides a lengthy report on yesterday’s proceedings and quotes reactions from Jim Swire, Tam Dalyell and US relative Robert Monetti. The paper also prints a letter from Dr Swire and an editorial on the subject.
The Scotsman
John Robertson and Michael Howie jointly contribute a report on the outcome of the interim liberation application. The article incorporates with short pieces by Jim Swire arguing that Megrahi should be released and by US relative Daniel Cohen arguing that he should not.
The Times
Charlene Sweeney provides a lengthy article on the court hearing and reaction to it. She quotes the statements from Megrahi’s lawyer, Tony Kelly, and from Jim Swire that were reproduced yesterday on this blog. I am quoted as saying: “It would have required something really exceptional by way of injury to his health to overcome the fact he murdered 270 people. The court is of the view that his health has not reached that state.” What I actually said was “It would have required something really exceptional by way of injury to his health to overcome the fact he stands convicted of murdering 270 people.” I do not believe that Abdelbaset Megrahi had anything whatsoever to do with the Lockerbie atrocity. The paper also runs a feature entitled “Should the Lockerbie bomber's appeal succeed?” which contains a “pro” piece by me and a “con” piece by Daniel Cohen.
The Guardian
This paper confines itself, disappointingly, to a brief narration of the outcome of the hearing.
No comments:
Post a Comment