[The following are excerpts from an article under this headline in today's edition of The Independent on Sunday. The full article can be read here.]
A new witness is expected this week to undermine thoroughly the case against the only person to be convicted of the Lockerbie bombing. New testimony will call into question evidence linking the Libyan Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi to the bomb that blew up Pan Am Flight 103 in 1988, his lawyers claim. (...)
[Note by RB: In the first session of the appeal, which starts on Tuesday and runs until 22 May, there will be no new witnesses, just legal argument. Any new witnesses, if the Appeal Court allows them to be heard -- and the rules about fresh evidence in appeals are very restrictive -- will only feature in later sessions.]
Appeal hearings are due to begin on Tuesday, and Megrahi's lawyers insisted this weekend they will go ahead as planned, despite speculation that he may be returned to Libya under the terms of a controversial prisoner transfer agreement, due to be ratified tomorrow.
"We are turning up next week," said Tony Kelly, his solicitor. "We are seeking that the court upholds his appeal, admit that there has been a miscarriage of justice, and grant him his liberty. Whatever remedies come after that is for after the appeal."
Appeal documents seen by The Independent on Sunday reveal that testimony from a new witness is expected to undermine the evidence of a key prosecution witness, Tony Gauci, a Maltese shopkeeper. His testimony was vital in connecting Megrahi to the bombing at the trial in 2001.
Mr Gauci identified Megrahi as the person who bought the tweed suit, baby sleepsuit and umbrella found among the remnants of the suitcase that contained the bomb on board.
The new witness, not named in the documents, will provide an account the defence claims is "startling in its consistency with Mr Gauci's account of the purchase, but adds considerable doubt to the date the key items were purchased and identification of Megrahi as the purchaser".
All of this may be academic, as 56-year-old Megrahi, who was diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer in October 2008, has been reported as having less than a year to live and the appeal could take two years.
Increasingly, however, it seems likely that the Lockerbie suspect will spend his last days in Libya. This month, officials wrote to the families of victims of the bombing explaining the prisoner transfer programme, interpreted as a tacit agreement that Megrahi may be returned to Libya. Under the terms of the deal, if Megrahi participates in the transfer scheme, he will forfeit his right to appeal.
"If he goes back to Libya, it will be a bitter pill to swallow, as an appeal would reveal the fallacies in the prosecution case," said Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was killed on Flight 103. Dr Swire is a member of UK Families Flight 103, which wants a public inquiry into the crash. "I've lost faith in the Scottish criminal justice system, but if the appeal is heard, there is not a snowball's chance in hell that the prosecution case will survive."
Dear Mister David Ben-Aryeah
ReplyDeleteI do not know if your attempts to discredit me as a key witness in the Lockerbie affair are politically motivated. At every opportunity you claim that Megrahi is innocent and you admit that the investigation of the MST-13 fragment was not properly carried out but concerning MEBO and me you make every effort to discredit my sincere and unchallengeable evidence about the key evidence. Or is jelaousy the hidden motif of your slanderous comment on me given the prospect that my work for the truth in the Lockerbie case may be rewarded by the Libyans after Megrahi's release?
I want to clarify only point 8. All other points are pure defamation.
You mention reward up to US$ 400 million reward I would receive from Libya for my assistance in Megrahi's release.
I answered the question in the BBC movie The Conspiracy Files: Lockerbie: "So if Mr. Megrahi is released you get U$ 200 million?" with "Yes".
Many TV spectators may have wondered why I answered that question, usually people don't talk about money publicly.
The reason is that one sequence of my interview was cut out and my statement was only partially quoted leading so to a wrong connotation.
I was asked by BBC: "Will Libya pay you for your work in the Lockerbie case?"
My answer was: "No, if we win the case and the compensation for the victims (US$ 2.7 billion) is refunded I will get a success honorary of US$ 200 million."
Then BBC asked the next question: "So if Mr. Megrahi is released you get U$ 200 million?"
What should I answer? Staying close to my first answer I said. "Yes."
Better I should have insisted on my more precise first statement. But how could I know that my first statement was cut out later and my statement such distorted.
by Edwin Bollier, MEBO Ltd Switzerland
Dear Edwin,
ReplyDeleteIf it's any consolation, I believe the account you have given above in relation to the $200 million "reward".
And may I compliment you on the remarkable improvement in the written English of your recent posts - compared to the excruciating text you used to provide for us - on Prof. Black's blog?
Could I ask that you read the following comment I made on this blog several weeks ago, and then answer two questions that I will pose?
"Edwin Bollier's comment above has led me to reappraise who might have been behind the Lockerbie bombing.
Mr Bollier said: "Documents indicate that originally the CIA and another Western intelligence service planned also to involve Edwin Bollier (MEBO Ltd) together with Mr Abdelbaset Al Megrahi into the PanAm 103 plot! Edwin Bollier was told at the check-in at Tripoli airport that his already booked direct flight with Swissair to Zurich on December 20,1988 was fully booked, and he should travel via Malta to Switzerland on the same day - the same flight on which Abdelbaset Al Megrahi was booked (*flight KM 107, on December 20, 1988 from Tripoli to Malta). According to a new statement, Megrahi did not know that Bollier was planned to travel on the same flight as he was! Bollier was suspicious because he didn't see many people at the airport and went to the Swissair Station Manager who told him that there were many empty seats on the Swissair flight to Zurich. So he took the direct flight to Zurich on December 20, 1988. Only Abdelbaset Al Megrahi (alias Ahmed Khalifa Abdusamad) travelled with flight KM 107 from Tripoli to Malta on December 20, 1988. Therefore Bollier was not in Malta on the same day as Abdelbaset Al Megrahi. The CIA was confronted with a new situation and the same intelligence people decided to involve the station manager of ' Libyan Arab Airways', Mr Lamin Khalifa Fhimah, into the complot. Al Megrahi was instructed by his boss Ibrahim Bishari (alcoholic, also allegedly a CIA defector) to travel to Malta on December 20, 1988 for a security order (not in connection with the bombing of PanAm 103) ...On September 14, 1997 former foreign minister, Ibrahim Bishari, died in a car crash in Egypt..."
To which another correspondent, 'Baz', commented: "I thought Herr Bollier's second comment concerning the attempt to divert him to Malta on the 20.12.88 was really interesting. (I found his third comment quite unintelligible!) Somebody told me this story the previous day but I had never heard it in the previous twenty years. I am curious as to why these good folk would try to implicate a harmless gentleman such as Herr Bollier in a horrid act of mass murder or (unless they were involved in planning the atrocity) how they would know that flight PA103 on the 21.12.88 was targeted for destruction."
In the light of the above Bollier/Baz exchange, I am now revising my theory that apartheid South Africa was solely responsible for the Lockerbie bombing: British intelligence and the CIA must have been intimately involved. My modified theory proceeds as follows:
In a 1989 interview on Australian TV, uploaded in January 2008 to 'YouTube' (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wvaa2topM6E), Father Patrick Ryan is shown to have been a quartermaster for the IRA during the 1980s. Fr Ryan admitted obtaining 'memo park timers' as well as more sophisticated devices for the IRA, and to have had links with Gaddafi's Libya. A 'YouTube' commentator remarked: "33 years ago he was arrested in Switzerland and found to be carrying electronic timing devices". [Were these Mebo timers?]
The Brighton bombing took place on 12 October 1984. Targeted on PM Margaret Thatcher and her cabinet, the IRA bomb was planted in room 629 at the Grand Hotel over the weekend of 14-17 September 1984. It was triggered by a long-delay electronic timer. [Was this a Mebo timer?]
If Mebo had indeed supplied the IRA with timers or other bomb-making equipment (either directly or via Libya), British intelligence would be certain to take a keen interest in Edwin Bollier. Following the downing of Iran Air Flight 655 in July 1988 by the USS Vincennes, Iran insisted that inevitable revenge would be exacted against the United States. Western intelligence (comprising CIA, MI5 and MI6, Mossad and South African Military Intelligence) might have concluded that, since sooner or later an American aircraft was going to be downed as a result, they might therefore just as well select their own US aircraft, and then blame Libya for it.
I continue to believe that UN Commissioner for Namibia, Bernt Carlsson, was the prime target on Pan Am Flight 103 (see http://www.nytimes.com/1988/12/22/world/un-officer-on-flight-103.html). Carlsson was an obstacle to the way that the apartheid régime would relinquish its control of Namibia. He was a confirmed socialist for Ollie North and the CIA, a 'supporter' of terrorism (the ANC) for the Thatcher administration and, for the Mossad, a believer in the two-state solution in the Middle East. Thus the whole of Western intelligence would have been pleased to see the back of him.
In my opinion, the bomb arrived at Heathrow on 21 December 1988 on board the South African Airways flight bringing Pik Botha and his high-level South African delegation (including Defence Minister, Magnus Malan, and Military intelligence chief, C J Van Tonder) from Johannesburg. Direct air links were banned between South Africa and U.S. airports (under the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act 1986). So, Botha and five of his 23-strong team cancelled their bookings on PA103 and travelled on the morning Pan Am Flight 101 from Heathrow to New York. The remainder of the party skidaddled back to Johannesburg on SAA.
Of the 259 victims who died on board PA 103, Bernt Carlsson was the most prominent. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PatrickHaseldine3.jpg and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PatrickHaseldine3B.jpg).
I rest my case.
22 April, 2009"
Two questions for Edwin Bollier:
1. Did MEBO supply timers (or other bomb-making equipment) to Father Patrick Ryan?
2. Did MEBO supply the long-delay electronic timer for the Brighton bomb which nearly killed PM Margaret Thatcher on 12 October 1984?
Thank you in advance,
Patrick Haseldine
Dear Mr.Haseldine
ReplyDelete1. Did MEBO supply timers (or other bomb-making equipment) to Father Patrick Ryan? Answer: NO.
2. Did MEBO supply the long-delay electronic timer for the Brighton bomb which nearly killed PM Margaret Thatcher on 12 October 1984? Answer: NO.
Rregards Edwin Bollier
The Lockerbie-Appeal start on 28th April '09
ReplyDeleteJustice for Mr Abdelbaset Al Megrahi and Libya!
Resumée
1990: Having lunch at a restaurant in Zurich I was listening to the radio and hearing the news that my company MEBO had delivered timers to Libya which led to the explosion of PanAm 103 over Lockerbie.
Western intelligence was well informed of my business connections with Libya (delivery of timers) via a Libyan defector.
With all these informations not only about me but also about Megrahi it was easy to construct the "MST-13 timer (MEBO) - Libya - Malta - Megrahi-Story". A pure invention or in intelligence code: a script to cover up a false flag operation:
The brown MST-13 timer board Eng. Lumpert had given to the Swiss Federal Police was handed over to the Scottish Police and then to Dr.Hayes and Allen Feraday (RARDE) and only a polaroid photo (PI'995) was handed over to Thomas Thurman (FBI). He concluded wrongly that the timer (MST-13) came from Libya. He was one of the "technical experts" to make the script plausible by interpreting evidence purposely wrong.
With this purposely wrong interpreted evidence photo (PI'995) Libya was later indicted and finally banned by sanction of the UNO Security Council. Simultaneously the Bollier-Malta-Megrahi Story was concocted.
What was allegedly found (probably planted) in Lockerbie was a tiny piece of a Toshiba cassette recorder, another script to include the PFLP-GC in the plot. (See the picture of the fragment of the Toshiba recorder together with a collar of a T-Shirt from Malta and other remnants).
By simple photo montage this piece of a Toshiba Cassette recorder was replaced by the brown MST-13 timer fragment from Eng. Lumpert (from photo of the timer PI'995). When the Swiss Federal Police (BUPO) showed this photo to Meister and me in March 1990 we knew immediately that this brown prototype timer was not operable.
MEBO had delivered 2 of this prototypes to the Stasi but not to Libya. All my business with the STASI was conform to Swiss export regulations and legal. Later after the coming down of PanAm 103 these 2 timers were found in a Stasi storeroom after the collapse
of the GDR in November 1989.
Meanwhile our company was brought down by bad publicity and a complaint for compensation from PanAm over 32 mio. US$. So I started investigating.
Later when the Scottish police found out that they had a picture from a brown prototype timer who had not been sold to Libya (only the green machine made ones were supplied to Libya) they cut the original fragment from Eng. Lumpert in two pieces and replaced one part of it by a green MST-13 fragment. A manipulation Bollier was completely aware of when in September 1999 he was finally permitted to examine the MST-13 timer(s) in possession of the RARDE at the office of prosecutor Miriam Watson in Dumfries, Scotland.
With the cheap trick of a public immunity interest certificat (PII) this crucial piece of evidence is now under national security.
But there was also no bomb bag loaded in Malta and Megrahi was not the buyer of the cloths at Toni Gauchi's Mary-House.
All my investigation work is restricted to cover up the manipulations to blame Libya and Meghrahi for the massacre over Lockerbie. Who was really behind the massacre? Unfortunately it seems very unlikely that western intelligence agencies did not have their hands in the bombing of PanAm 103 over Lockerbie. The same group who ordered the cover up was very likely the same who ordered the bombing (different teams).
Lockerbie was a milestone in a planned serie of terror acts to switch over to a new paradigma of the enemy after bringing down communism. From now on and definitely after 9/11 the muslims were the "great danger". A malicious war on terrorism followed that attacked muslim countries. Pretty the same policy as during the cold war when communism was the source of all evil...
by Edwin Bollier, MEBO Ltd Telecommunication, Zurich Switzerland
Document. no. 496
The mysterious premature visit of an unknown UK Officer's to Malta in 1989
At the trial in Kamp van Zeist was revealed that an unknown UK Officer was in *July or August 1989, before Malta had granted international legal assistance to Britain in Malta. His investigations were in relation with the recovery of a babygrow which could be related back to the island of Malta. *(MEBO: It was center of july).
MEBO's inqueries show that this UK Officer visited the Yorkie Clothing Company in Malta. After their examination of a piece of a remnant from a Yorkie troucer (allegedly found in Lockerbie) he was told that 20 pairs of such troucers had been delivered on the 18th of Novermber 1988 to the boutique "Mary's House" . (Prod. delivery note 424)
If the unknown officer had visited Anthony und Paul Gauci before is at the moment unknown. Anyway afterwards the officer visited the whole sale company "Big Ben" with a blue remnant. This company said to have delivered such blue babygrows (from the company PVC) to Mary's House on the 22th of September 1988. (Label 439, Invoice Prod. 488) Paul Gauci was Managing Director of "Big Ben" at that time !
With great probability the unknown UK officer had covertly contacted the Gauci brothers to prepare the ground for the Gauci brothers collaboration in the "Lockerbie affair, prior the also very questionable interrogation of Police Officer Henry Woods Bell between September 1 - 8, 1989 ".
NB: In none of the court protocols the name of the unknown officer is mentioned and he question remains open: Was this unknown officer an agent of an intelligence agency?
Excerpt from the book Scotbom: Evidence and the Lockerbie Investigation by US Task Force and FBI Special Agent Richard A. Marquise :
+++
By late August 1989, RARDE had identified a number of "category one" items which they opined had been in or near the primary cause of the explosion.
These items included the baby's romper suit, some Yorkie brand trousers, a cardigan sweater, a herringbone patterned sport jacker and a pajama top.
Little information had been received from the intelligence community. While no one gave it much consideration at the time, no intelligence agency played an active role in this conference or the earlier one in Scotland...
+++
MEBO comment:
Allen Feraday/RARDE and FBI forensic agent Thomas Thurman (and others) conducted explosion-tests in the USA, using TNT and Semtex H, airfreight-containers, Toshiba radio-recorders type RT 8016/SF16-Bombeat and Samsonite Silhouette 4000 suitcases (made in Denver, Colorado) filled with the Malta clothing, etc. (perhaps using the brown MST-13 PC-board from Lumpert) that were subjected to the explosion, with most such activities being photographically recorded:>>>
1.) by FBI Polaroidphotos; (liable for: Thomas Thurman)
2.) by photos from Stephan Haines, the RARDE photographer.
According to statement of ex Witness no. 355, Mr. Allen Feraday, (RARDE, Defense Research Agency Division at Fort Halstead) (sworn statemements): Q- I believe you were accompanied to these tests by Stephan Haines, the RARDE photographer? A- that's correct sir. Yes. Q- Did he photograph the results of these tests? A- He did indeed, sir.Yes. Q- And do you know where these photographs are now, Mr. Feraday? A- well, they were certainly at Fort Halstead when I last saw them, and all the negatives are there. ----
Notabene: The court and the defense of Megrahi/Fhimah were not in the possession of the photos on this time! For the Court and the Defence legal proceedings, all these photosgraphs (negatives) are still kept under security closure at Fort Halstead!
In advance: It was an elaborated script with the help from scottish officials, to incriminate Libya with the bombing of Pan Am 103. Western intelligence services were involved into a conspiracy against Libya ...
Similarities with the document "under national security" are purely "accidental"...
by Edwin Bollier, MEBO Ltd, Zurich Switzerland
Document no. 498
Since August 1990, definitely a wrong date was created (7th of December, 1988) in order to accuse deliberately the libyan official Mr. Abdelbaset al Megrahi as the buyer of the cloths in "Mary's House".
A further proof from MEBO that the sale of dresses in Anhony Gauci "Mary's House" took undoubtedly place on Wednesday, 23th of November 1988 by a supposedly Libyan buyer:
Gauci told Bollier, that the 2 pieces of pyjamas, label "John Mallia", were the last two pyjamas he had sold to a Libyan in his shop. On the other day, the 24th of November 1988, he ordered at the company "John Mallia" additionally 8 pieces of the same pyjamas. The 8 pyjamas were delivered on the 25th of November 1988 with the calculation/delivery note, dated 25th of November 1988 to Gauci' s Mary' s House at Sliema Malta. Prod. 477-1.
The day after Wednesday, December 7, December 8, 1988 was an official public holiday (Immaculate Conception Day) and the "John
Mallia" company was closed.
But the day after November 23, November 24, 1988 was not an official public holiday, the company "John Mallia" was open.
MEBO:
Mr. Abdelbaset al Megrahi was not in Malta on Wednesday, 23th of November 1988, thus Mr. Megrahi is definetely not the buyer of the dresses !
by Edwin and Mahnaz Bollier, MEBO LTD, Switzerland
Document no. 497
At a meeting in June 1989 with Swiss Federal Police (BUPO) in Bern a piece of rectangle tissue was handed over to a Scottish Officer of the same blue baby-overall that Bollier had given to the "Car-Driver" Mr. Ali at Tripoli/Libya.
Bollier had bought this baby-overall in Zurich (Jelmoli). Additionally handed over to the same Scottish officer: a copie of Bollier's ticket from Tripoli to Malta/Luqa Airport at the 20th of December 1988 and a brown MST-13 timer PC-board from Eng. Lumpert. Bollier had not used the ticket because he managed to get a direct flight to Zurich on the same day.
MEBO information: The "subversively" use of an blue baby-overall (Babygrow) was developed from Swiss telephone conversation police monitoring, December 14-22, 1988 between Bollier and Mr. Ali, a driver in Tripoli and have nothing to do with the PanAm 103 attack! (It concerned Ali's order of a blue baby-overall, size for its 1.5-2 year old for his baby son.)
From the courts protocol in Kamp van Zeist, day 53, one can see that a unknown officer (presumably Detective Superintendent Jim Gilchrist, Scottish Police, or Allen Feraday RARDE) had in July 1989 started police investigations in Malta concerning i.a. a blue baby-overall.
Excerpts (Kamp van Zeist)
Day 53
September 29, 2000
--- Proceedings commenced at 9.45 a.m.
THE CLERK: Call the diet, Her Majesty's
Advocate against Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi and
Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah.Take your seat, gentlemen, please.
LORD SUTHERLAND: Advocate Depute.
MR. CAMPBELL: My Lords, I now move to recall number 344, Henry Woods Bell.
THE MACER: Number 344 on the Crown list,
My Lord, Henry Woods Bell.
WITNESS: HENRY WOODS BELL, recalled
LORD SUTHERLAND: Mr. Bell, you are still
under oath. Do you understand?
A Yes, My Lord.
LORD SUTHERLAND: Advocate Depute.
EXAMINATION IN CHIEF BY MR. CAMPBELL:
Q Mr. Bell, I think you told us on the
previous occasion when you gave evidence that you are
now a Detective Chief Superintendent in the Scottish
Criminal Records Office in Glasgow?
A That's correct, sir. Yes.
Q And were you involved in the
investigation into the destruction of Pan Am 103?
Q And what rank did you hold at that time?
A I was Detective Chief Inspector at that
time.
Q Did the investigation extend to Malta in 1989?
A That's correct.
Q And was contact made with the police
authorities in Malta in the course of 1989?
A Yes, that's correct.
Q As a result of that, on the 11th of September 1989, did you yourself attend at a meeting in
Malta?
A I did. Yes.
Q Who was present at that meeting?
A The deputy prime minister of Malta, Mr. de Marco, the police commissioner.
Q What was his name?
A Mr. Calleja.
The deputy police commissioner, and I can't recall his name at this time; the assistant police
commissioner, now police commissioner, George Grech;
Inspector Godfrey Scicluna, who is now a superintendent; Inspector Alphonse Gauci. And there
was two other inspectors, I believe, along with other
officers from abroad. These were -- Were there officers from other countries present?
A That's correct. Yes.
Q From which countries?
A There was two officers from the FBI, America; two officers from the BKA, Germany; and a number of officers from Lockerbie Inquiry Team.
Q What was the purpose of this meeting?
A The purpose of the meeting was to brief the Maltese authorities and to seek permission and authority to make inquiry in Malta regarding the air disaster.
A There had been a previous inquiry the *month before, or in July of that year, by another
officer, in relation to the recovery of a Babygro which
could be related back to the island of Malta.
*(MEBO: It was center of july).+++
This *visit in July, as the visit of officer Henry Woods Bell before the 11th of September 1989 by Scottish or UK investigators in Malta (concerning the blue baby-overall) were not authorized by international legal assistance and were therefore illegal. It was also not fair opposite to other investigation teams, from the FBI or the BKA Germany for example. Also if they have been approved later by Maltese Deputy Prime Minister Mr. de Marco.
The same thing with the handing over of evidence to the Scottish Police in June 1989 in Bern. The Scottish demand for international legal assistance (19th of September 1990) was granted officially on the 30th of October 1990 by the Swiss Police Administration. The handing over of evidence was illegal, in other words: intelligence style !
The blue baby-overall had not been fabricated in Malta and at a visit at Tony Gauci's "Mary House" none such baby-overall was found. But 5 other blue babygrows instead were taken which had been fabricated and sold in Malta .
Why did an unknown offizier because of a baby-overall not originating from Malta (Swiss mark) travel of all things to Malta?
To create a link from allegedly found evidence in Lockerbie to Malta?
Eventually also to connect Bollier's und MEBO's business relations with Libya to the bombing of PanAm 103? With fabricated evidence of a blue baby-overall, a brown MST-13 timer handed over by Eng. Lumpert (unfortunately not the same green one's Bollier had delivered to Libya and a flight ticket from the 20th of December Bollier fortunately had not used (although urged to use it). Imagine he would have used it ! Megrahi and Bollier would have sitten on the dock.
Later from the 11th of September 1989 on the illegal "investigations" of the Scottish officials were integrated into the international legal assistance granted by Malta !
This sequence shows clearly that the whole Malta story is an invention and was fabricated with falsified intelligence "evidence" !
by Edwin Bollier, MEBO Ltd, Switzerland
Document no. 502
The contrary statement from the managing director of the company PCV Plastics Limited, Mr. Satariano, against Paul Gauci (ex Witness no. 598).
Ex Witness, Mr. Dennis Satariano, sworn, number 607, at Kamp van Zeist. Excerpts:
+++
Q--Mr. Satariano, what is your full name? A--Dennis Satariano. Q--And your address? A--It's 131, Flat 4, Spinola Road, St. Julians. Q--That's in Malta? A--In Malta.
Q-- Were you formerly the managing director of a company called PCV Plastics Limited in San Gran [phonetic] Industrial Estate in Malta?
A--Yes, I was a manufacturing director. Q--For how long were you with that company? A--Since 1972 -- '71, '72. Q--And when did you leave the company? A--I left the company in 1993. Q--And did that company produce a range of clothing for babies? A--That's right. Q--Did that include Babygro-type garments? A--That's right, yes. Q--And did you manufacture these? A--That's right. Yes, we manufactured these.
Q--What was the distribution of these items? A--We produced mainly for the export market. Mainly for the British market. Q--And was that for any particular companies in Britain? A--We had our distribution company in London under the name of Hellane, where Hellane used to bring us orders, we manufactured, and we exported to destination as advised by Hellane. Q--Were you also familiar with a company in Malta called Big Ben? A--Yes. Q--And were they a wholesale company? A--That's right.
Q-Did you supply 'BIG BEN' with Babygros? A-We did not supply it,
but we had acontract with Big Ben, where he was the only purchaser to buy all our leftovers or seconds from the factory and resell according to his requirements. Q--And would that include Babygros? A--Everything.
Q--Everything. Would you look, please, at Label Number 439. A--Yes.
Q--Do you see that that's a Babygro type of garment? A--That's right, yes. Q--What colour is it? A--This is blue. This is a blue garment.
Q--Could we have on the screen, please, Production 181, at photograph 139. We can see on the screen a photograph of a blue Babygro with some kind of symbol on the front of it. Looking at the Babygro that's physically in front of you, is that the same Babygro we are looking at in
the photograph? A--It looks the same, yes. Q--And if you look at the police label that's attached to the Babygro, do you see on it the number DC 34? A--That's right.
+++
MEBO commentary:
Even the confusing interrogation of Examination in Chief, Mr. Campell, could not prevent that witness Dennis Satariano clearly confirmed that the company PVC-Plastics Limited had not supplied blue Babygrows with label no. 439 to the wholesale company 'BIG BEN' !
Confrontation:
Mr. Paul Gauci, ex Witness number 598, sworn, made the following untrue testimonies! Court Kamp van Zeist. Excerpts:
Q--(Paul Gauci) Are you the managing director of a company in Malta?
A--Yes, I am. Q--What's the name of that company? A--BIG BEN.--------
Q--Did you, as a wholesaler, distribute baby garments? A--Yes, we have distributed those garments. Q--Did you have an arrangement to receive
these garments from a particular company? A--Yes, we did. Q--What was that company called? A--PCV. Q--Was the arrangement that they
manufactured these garments and exported them, but that
they would supply you with leftover or excess amounts which they had?
A--We had agreements as distributors for the local market.------------
Q--Would you look, please, at an item that will be shown to you, Label 439. Do you recognise that? A--Yes, I do. Q--What is it? A--This is a Babygro we used to distribute. Q--Is that the type of Babygro that you
received from the company PCV ? A-- One of the types, because we used to have many of these.--------
Q--Was one of the shops to which you distributed a shop called Mary's House in Tower Road in Sliema? A--Yes, it was. Q--What was the name of the proprietor of that shop? A--I don't understand what you are saying. Q--What was the name of the owner of the shop? A--The name was Edward Gauci (MEBO: Gauci's father!).
Q--Could we have Production No. 488 on the screen, please. Could we move on to the next image, please. Do you see on the screen before you an invoice? A--Yes, I do.
Q--And is that an invoice from your company, Big Ben Wholesale, to
Edward Gauci of Mary's House, 63 Tower Road, Sliema? A--Yes, it is the same invoice. Q--And is it dated 22 September '88? A--Yes, it is.
Q--And does it include an order from you to Mr. Gauci for a quantity of baby goods, fleecy? A--Yes, it is.
Q--And was the order for 12 such items? A--Yes, it was. Q--Were these baby goods, fleecy, the type of Babygro that you've been looking at today? A--Yes, they were the same. Q--Could we have Production 181, image 139, please. Do you see that that's a photograph of a Babygro of a similar type to the one you've been shown? A--Yes, I do. Q--Could you close that, please, and look at photograph 140.
Q--Do you see that that's a close-up of the collar of the Babygro in the photograph? A--Yes, I do. Q--Do you still have before you the Babygro
itself? Will you just open it up and look at the collar and at the label that's attached to the collar? A--Yes.
Q--Will you confirm that the Babygro that you have before you has these details? It's the same Babygrow?
A--Yes, I do confirm. Q--You can see that it's a Primark label. Age, 12 to 18 months; height, 86 centimetres. A--Yes.------- Q--Thank you. You can close that now, please.
°°°
MEBO: Another doubtful Paul Gauci statement concerns with a invoice (Production 489) from company BIG BEN, about "Abanderado" T-shirt' s, which allegedly were supplied to the same fashion shop Mary' s House.
To the memory:
The Paul Gauci's brother, Anthony Gauci gave as ex Witness no. 595, sworn, at Kamp van Zeist among other things the following statement:
+++
Q--Mr Gauci, Would you look at an item of clothing, Label No.459, please. Do you recognise Label 459? A--It's underwear, T-shirt. Q-- What make is it? A--It's Abanderado make. Q--Did you, in 1988, stock T-shirts of that kind? A--Yes. Yes. When I sold this one, I didn't sell T-shirts. Perhaps sombody else was there. I never sold him a T-shirt. Q--You never sold the Libyan gentlemen a T-shirt? A--On that day, no. On that particular order, no, that we are talking about, no. He could have come another day.
+++
His brother Paul Gauci say as Witness no. 598, sworn, among other things, at Kamp van Zeist. Excerpts:
+++
Did you also, as wholesalers, distribute Abanderado T-shirts? (in company BIG BEN) A--We did. Q--Did you distribute these for Underwear Limited? A--Yes, we did. Q--Look, please, at Label Number 457. Is that an Abanderado T-shirt? A--Yes, it is. Q--And is that the type of T-shirt that
you distributed? A--Yes, it is.
Q--You told us earlier that you supplied goods to the Gaucis' shop in Sliema? A--Yes, I did. Q--Would you look now, please, at an invoice which is Production 489. If you go to the next image, please. Do we see on the screen an invoice from Big Ben, again to Gauci, Edward, Mary's House, 63 Tower Road, Sliema? A--Yes, I do. Q--And is this one dated 22 April '87? A--Yes, I do.
Q--Do we see that it's for a number of different types of clothing? A-- I did not understand the question. Q--Does the invoice include several
different types of items of clothing? A--Yes, it does. Q--If we look at number 5, do we see that that is an item which is described as "Gents
T-shirts"? A--Yes. Q--And is it referred to as item number 196?
A--Yes, I confirm.
Q--And if we look across to the quantity delivered to Mr. Gauci's shop of these T-shirts, is it given as 18? A--Yes, it does. Q--You can close that, please, now, and open Production No. 490. If Your Lordships would allow me a moment. Do we see that that's an invoice from your company to the same shop: Gauci, Edward, Mary's House, 63 Tower Road, Sliema?
A--Yes. Q--And again, do we see that this one is dated 29 March 1988?
A Yes. Q--And is it item 196 again? A--Yes, it is. Q--And is it for "Gents T-shirts"? A--Yes, it is. Q--Is the quantity on this occasion 132?
A--Yes, it is. Q--Thank you.
+++
MEBO commentarry:
1.> From Invoice Prod. 488 can not be conculded that the specific blue babygrow was delivered to the boutique Mary's House!
2.> From Invoice Prod. 489 can not be concluded that T-shirts label "Abanderado" were delivered to the Boutique Mary's House!
These invoices/delivery notes from the company 'BIG BEN' were all fake!
In this light the following questions have to be answered:
Were the Gauci brothers bribed for giving wrong evidence and manipulating evidence?
Did Paul Gauci as Managing Director of the Company 'BIG BEN' and participator of boutique "Mary's House" in Malta belately produce the desired invoices on behalf of Detective Superintendent of Scottish Police, Henry Woods Bell ?
Was the babygrow and the "Abanderado T-shirt" actually bought in London and belately by an unknown UK offizier in July 1988 subversively linked to "Mary's House" ?
°°°
Mr. Abdelbaset al Megrahi and Libya are intitled to get their honour back by a clear decision of the appeal court due to start on the 28th of April 2009 !
Mr. Megrahi said: "This is the real way to clear my name before I go back to my homeland Libya." Mr. Al-Megrahi has consistently maintained his innocence and has vowed to stay in Scotland and win his freedom through the appeal courts.
MEBO has already disposed of all the needed exonerating evidence to the Defence Team and the High Court.
Please watch the film documentation from 3news comes shortly
in full length via a Link of this webpage.
Brings the Gauci brothers 10 years in the prison!
by Edwin and Mahnaz Bollier, MEBO Ltd. Telecommunication Switzerland