Tuesday 20 October 2009

Lockerbie victims' families seek answers

[This is the headline over a report on the Voice of America website. It recognises that some Lockerbie families harbour grave doubts that the Zeist trial came anywhere near to the truth regarding the destruction of Pan Am 103. Yet another sign, perhaps, that even in the United States the problems with the "authorised version" are at last being raised. The report reads in part:]

In 1988, an American airliner flying from London to New York exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 270 people. A Libyan man was the only person convicted of involvement, and he was released in late August by Scottish authorities because he is suffering from cancer. Abdelbaset Ali Al-Megrahi dropped his appeal before he was released, and some thought that might be the end of the 21-year Lockerbie saga. Some victims' relatives believe there are still unanswered questions and are seeking legal avenues to raise them. (...)

Scottish authories freed Abdelbaset Ali Al Megrahi on compassionate grounds, because he has terminal cancer. Many families are angry because Megrahi served only eight and a half years of his 27-year sentence, others because they hoped he would be proven innocent.

Reverend John Mosey's 19-year-old daughter Helga was killed. He didn't object to Megrahi's release, but is upset because the Libyan decided to abandon the appeal of his conviction.

"I'm pleased he's gone home because my opinion is colored by my feeling that he was almost certainly not guilty, but the important thing was that he dropped his appeal and that is [the] great tragedy in this," Mosey said. (...)

But some of the relatives say the trial was unsatisfactory. Among them is Dr. Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the bombing. Swire wants to know more about an alleged break-in in the baggage area of London's Heathrow airport hours before Pan Am 103 took off. It wasn't addressed in the trial. (...)

Every year families on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean commemorate their loved ones on the anniversary of the bombing. Some blame Libya, others hope they will be able to find answers through their own legal appeal, possibly through the United Nations, a British government public inquiry or a legal case in the European Court of Human Rights.

"It's very easy to lose sight of the foundations of why we've been fighting for 20-odd years. All we want to know is who murdered our family members and why they were not prevented from doing so and it's that - why they were not prevented from doing so - that is causing a great deal of difficulty for us now because of what we do know which suggests that a causation of this was probably very different from what's been presented to the world," Swire said.

Libyan authorities allowed a television camera into the hospital to show that Megrahi was clearly very ill, and unwilling or unable to answer questions.

His release put the Lockerbie bombing firmly back in the public eye. Victim's families hope their quest to learn more about the attack will not die with him.

3 comments:

  1. Jim Swire wants to know more about the alleged break-in at Heathrow on the night of the 20-21/12/88. What is it that he wants to know and who does he think can provide this information?

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Crown Office informed Dr Swire that it was not aware of the Heathrow break-in at the time of the Zeist trial (or, it follows, at the time of the Fatal Accident Inquiry). One of the things that Dr Swire wishes to know is whether it is in fact the case that the Metropolitan Police did not pass this information on to those investigating Lockerbie and, if not, why not; if the Met did pass it on, did the Lockerbie investigators omit to inform the Crown Office about it and, if so, why; or if the Crown Office is simply mistaken about not having been privy to this information.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for that resaponse on Dr Swire's behalf. I thought perhaps Dr Swire wanted someone to tell him the significance of the "break-in."

    I raised the point because in 1996 I pointed out to Dr Swire (and a number of other parties) that contrary to the official version of events and contrary to the alternate theories published in the press notably by Paul Foot and his associates the primary suitcase was introduced at Heathrow.

    Dr swire did not seem to be particularly interested and indeed in 1996 was collaborating with the charlatan Alan Francovich in making his blatantly fabricated documentary "The Maltese Double Cross".

    This fraud gave credence to the wrong conclusion of the Fatal Accident Inquiry that the primary suitcase arrived at Frankfurt on flight PA103A. We all make mistakes but Dr Swire continues to be associated with the intellectual heirs of this dimwit.

    The "break-in" is of no significance unless the primary suitcase was introduced at Heathrow.

    ReplyDelete