A documentary screened on BBC Scotland and Al Jazeera has seriously
questioned the veracity of the testimony of Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci, the
key witness who identified the Libyan man accused of the Pan Am Flight 103
bombing over the Scottish town of Lockerbie on 21 December, 1988.
Filmed in Malta and Scotland,
the documentary coincided with the publication of John Ashton's Megrahi: You Are My Jury, published on
Monday, which has alleged that the Crown Office, the Scottish police and UK
defence ministry scientists failed to disclose numerous pieces of evidence that
damaged their case against Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, 59.
The documentary delivered a
devastating judgment of the testimony of Tony Gauci, the key witness who
secured Megrahi's conviction by identifying him as the man who bought the
clothes from his shop Mary's House. The fragments of the clothes were later found
wrapped around the bomb fragments among the debris of the aircraft, and traced
back to Malta.
Gauci's initial description and
the resulting police drawing of the man who came to buy the clothes was found
to be nothing like the pale-skinned Megrahi: Gauci's man was six-foot tall, had
a big chest and large head, and his hair was very black.
But glaring discrepancies exist
in the dates Gauci gave of the alleged visit of Megrahi. He first told police
investigators the purchaser came on the 29 November because the Christmas
lights had not yet been switched on in Tower Road, Sliema.
Then he claimed Megrahi came to
the shop on 7 December, pointing out that as he left he opened a black umbrella
he had just purchased - and later found among the Lockerbie debris - because it
started to rain.
But the documentary consulted
former chief meteorologist Major Joseph Mifsud, who said there was no rain on 7
December, 1988 between 5pm and 7pm - disputing Gauci's claim that Megrahi left
as it started to rain.
And former Nationalist minister
for tourism Michael Refalo turned out to be a surprising witness: he switched
on the Christmas lights on 6 December, 1988 at 6pm, a fact proven by his own
diary entry for the day. And this fact alone puts into serious doubt Gauci's
claim that Megrahi must have purchased the clothes on 7 December.
Megrahi's conviction for the
Pan Am Flight 103 bombing went for a second appeal after the Scottish Criminal
Cases Review Commission found key aspects of Gauci's testimony seriously
undermined the prosecution's request. Before the retrial, now suffering from
cancer, Megrahi was released on compassionate grounds in August 2009 by the
Scottish justice minister, and flown back to Libya.
Gauci was found to have met
Scottish detectives as many as 50 times while the prosecution's case was being
prepared, making 23 formal statements. He repeatedly changed his account,
including identifying people who looked like known Middle Eastern terrorists.
The SSCRC said that by the time
Gauci picked out Megrahi in an identification parade in 1999, a decade after
the bombing, he had already seen Megrahi's face in an edition of Focus
Magazine, and felt this may have been a miscarriage of justice.
The documentary also insisted
that Gauci and his brother Paul may have been paid up to USD3 million by the US
Department of Justice to uphold their version of events and the identification
of Megrahi. No substantial evidence was presented in the documentary of this
claim.
Megrahi forgives
Gauci
The documentary featured
Megrahi, visibly approaching the end of his life, "forgiving" Tony
Gauci.
"Forgiving him, I am
facing my God very soon," Megrahi says. "I swear I have never been in
his shop or buy any clothing from his shop. I swear with my God, which is my
God and his God as well, I swear I have never been in his shop or buy any
clothing from his shop.
"He has to believe this,
because when we meet together before the God, I want him to know that before I
die. This is the truth."
Asked by his interviewer what
he would say to Tony Gauci if he were in the room, he says: "I'd say he
dealt with me very wrongly. I have never seen him in my life before he came to
the court. But I do forgive him."
Bomb timer evidence
Documents given to Megrahi's
defence lawyers a month before he dropped his appeal show that government
scientists had found significant differences between a bomb timer fragment
allegedly found after the attack and the type supplied to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's
former regime.
The evidence, published by
Megrahi defence lawyer John Ashton, shows that scientists at the Royal Armament
Research and Development Establishment, discovered there were key differences
in the metal coatings used in a timer fragment allegedly used in Lockerbie and
a control sample from the type supplied to the Libyans. One used a coating made
wholly of tin; the control sample used a tin/lead alloy. [RB: Is it defamatory to describe a lay person as a lawyer? Perhaps John Ashton should consult a solicitor.]
And evidence also shows that
the timer fragment had several differences from the Swiss-built devices sold to
Gaddafi's regime, including the type of circuit board it used.
Book disputes
prosecution's theory
Ashton's book states that if
the prosecution was right, Megrahi - a member of the Libyan secret service
stationed at Luqa as an employee of the Libyan Arab Airlines - carried out the
attack using his own passport, stayed in his regular hotel at the Holiday Inn
in Tigné, bought the clothes in a small shop rather than a large one, used
normal scheduled flights to and from Malta, planted the bomb on two feeder
flights before Pan Am 103, and used a timer the Libyans believed was
exclusively made for them. [RB: If Megrahi was a member of the Libyan secret service -- and the only evidence of this came from the witness Addul Majid Giaka whom the judges found wholly incredible on every other issue -- there was not a scintilla of evidence that he was stationed in Malta.]
I thought the documentary was pretty poor - having dealt with the issue of Gauci's ID in a previous film George Thompson (and my mate John Ashton) laboured the same points again.
ReplyDeleteIn the original version of the "Libyan solution" advanced by Vinnie Cannistraro (see Leppard) the clothing was purchased by an accomplice of the two (different) Libyan culprits in that scenario.
I thought the film should have dealt, as trailed, with the timer evidence. While the metalurgical analysis was of interest I would have liked to have seen more background, for example Hayes' supposed discovery of this fragment along with the fragment of Toshiba manual. After all the point of the metalurgical test was to demonstrate that the lead component of the alloy could not have boiled away!