[On 9 February Dr Jim Swire wrote to the Lord Advocate expressing concern that the three experts most involved in defining the significance of the discrepancy over the metallurgy of the alleged timer fragment PT35b had never been approached by the Crown Office or the Dumfries and Galloway police during the whole of the time since publication in 2012 of John Ashton’s book Megrahi: You are my Jury in which the discrepancy was made public. Here is the reply dated 19 February 2013 which Dr Swire received from the Crown Office:]
Thank you for your letter of 9th February to the Lord Advocate in relation to the provenance timer fragment PT-35. The Lord Advocate has asked me to reply on his behalf.
As you will be aware this is a live investigation and it is not appropriate to put into the public domain the nature and results of the inquiries. The nature of the inquiries are confidential. However I can assure you that if during the investigation any evidence which is exculpatory comes to light it will be disclosed in accordance with our disclosure obligations.
[It is perhaps comforting that the reply acknowledges the Crown’s disclosure obligations, particularly in the light of their apparent failure in the past to comply with them, as disclosed in the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission’s Statement of Reasons in the Megrahi case and in John Ashton’s book.]
However I can assure you that if during the investigation any evidence which is exculpatory comes to light it will be disclosed in accordance with our disclosure obligations.
ReplyDeleteThis rather begs the question, "to whom do you imagine you will be obliged to disclose such evidence, Mr. Mulholland?"
There is no on-going legal process. There is no defence team. What sort of disclosure is he talking about? And what does that have to do with the original question anyway?
The matter under discussion is in fact the defence team (when there was one) having uncovered exculpatory evidence, which the Crown has apparently not taken on board. This makes that reply one of the more confusing and convoluted non-sequiturs of this entire affair.
The Crown seems determined to press on with their original assumption, regardless of any information that comes to light showing it to be mistaken. Blindly charging down the wrong path while solemnly assuring those who are trying to show you the way to the right path that if you do see any indications they may be right you'll be sure to tell someone about it (while carrying right on in your original direction) is not very sensible.