More Megrahi materials released
A second batch of materials has been released on Abdelbaset Megrahi’s website. These take the form of Grounds of Appeal numbers 3.1 to 3.3 (which would have been argued at the second stage of the – now abandoned – appeal that had been due to start on 2 November 2009) along with two expert reports and the US Department of Justice publication Eyewitness Evidence: A Guide for Law Enforcement.
These materials relate principally to the evidence emanating from Malta.
1. The credibility and reliability of the evidence of “identification” of Megrahi by Maltese shopkeeper, Tony Gauci, is challenged by reference to (a) new evidence about the circumstances in which Gauci’s various “resemblance” statements came to be made, including improper conduct by investigators; (b) failure by the Crown to disclose to the defence statements by Gauci that undermined or contradicted his “identification”; (c) failure to disclose to the defence the existence of, and a police statement by, a witness who may have been present when the purchase of the clothes in Gauci’s shop took place; (d) the expectation of money from US official sources on the part of Tony Gauci and his brother, Paul, and its subsequent payment to them; (e) evidence from two leading psychologists and experts on facial recognition of the unreliability of Gauci’s “identification” of Megrahi.
2. The Lockerbie court’s acceptance of 7 December 1988 as the date of purchase of the clothes and other items in Tony Gauci’s shop is challenged. Even on the material before the court at Zeist, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission had concluded that it was strongly arguable that no reasonable court could have reached the conclusion that this was the date. The materials released today disclose the existence of new evidence that confirms that the date of purchase was not 7 December 1988 (and hence that the purchaser was not Abdelbaset Megrahi).
The importance of this is, of course, that if the court at Zeist had not decided that Mr Megrahi was the purchaser of the clothes in Malta, they would not in law have been entitled to convict him.
Living with the "Lockerbie Affair", 2014 (google translation german/english):
ReplyDeletePublic call to Mr Päsident Markus Metz, Swiss Federal Administrative Court St. Gallen.
The LAW-DELAY CASE "Lockerbie".
Switzerland trying obviously through a renewed "law delay" the truth in the "Lockerbie affair" to block for the benefit of Scotland's. An authorization to carry out a criminal investigation into a federal officer, in connection with the Lockerbie bombing (1988) - was ordered by the Swiss justice and police (FDJP) after more than two and a half years, issued on 17 March 2014, to the except ordinary Prosecutor Felix Bänziger granted.
After It was subsequently announced that the federal official make before an objection against the Federal Administrative Court order on 8 May 2014 and against the authorizing disposal, although the decision of 17 March 2014 is given by law doctrine: that this decision is final, (iSV Art.15 para. 4 VG) !
Since the dubious appeal, the criminal investigation is almost sins 5 months on stand by...
In regard to the legal basis, it is difficult to understand why until today still no decision about the questionable appeal of federal official was issued ?
Edwin Bollier & MEBO AG, is the impression can not help thinking that the purpose of this appeal, must block the still needed criminal investigation - among others for entering the European Court (ECHR). With such an approach is the search for truth in connection with investigations of the Lockerbie plane crash (270 victims) - prevent deliberately - SCANDAL!
by Edwin Bollier & MEBO Ltd
+++
Orginal in german language:
Offentlicher Aufruf an Herrn Päsident Markus Metz, Schweizerisches Bundesverwaltungsgericht St. Gallen
Der Rechtsverzögerungs Fall "Lockerbie"
Die Schweiz versucht offensichtlich durch erneute "Rechts Verzögerung" die Wahrheitsfindung in der "Lockerbie Affäre" zu Gunsten Scotland's zu blockieren. Eine Ermächtigung zur Durchführung einer Strafuntersuchung gegen einen Bundesbeamten, im Zusammenhang mit dem Lockerbie-Attentat (1988) - wurde vom Schweizerischen Justice- und Polizeidepartement (EJPD) nach über zweieinhalb Jahren, am 17. März 2014, dem ausser ordentlichen Staatsanwalt Felix Bänziger erteilt.
Felix Bänziger wurde von der 'Aufsichtsbehörde über die Bundesanwaltschaft' (AB-BA) eingesetzt, da der damals amtierende Staatsanwalt des Bundes Peter Lehmann, wegen Befangenheit von der Durchführung der durch ED. Bollier & MEBO AG, eingereichten Strafanzeige vom 10. November 2011, zurück trat.
Felix Bänziger eröffnete in der Folge gegen einen Bundesbeamten am 9. Mai 2014, eine Strafuntersuchung.
Nachträglich wurde bekannt, dass der Bundesbeamte zuvor, am 8. Mai 2014, die Ermächtigungsverfügung beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht angefochten hatte, obwohl der Verfügung vom 17. März 2014 nach Rechtsbelehrung zu entnehmen ist, dass dieser Entscheid endgültig ist, (iSV Art.15 Abs. 4 VG) !
Seit dem anstössigen Rekurs ist die Strafuntersuchung seit fast 5 Monaten in Wartestellung...
Im Hinblick auf die gesetzliche Grundlage ist nur schwer verständlich, weshalb bis heute noch kein Entscheid über die Beschwerde des Bundesbeamten erging ? Edwin Bollier & MEBO AG, können sich des Eindrucks nicht erwehren, dass durch diesen Rekurs bezweckt wird, weiterhin eine dringend notwendige Strafuntersuchung - u.a. für die Eingabe beim Europäischen Gerichtshof (EGMR) - beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht zu blockieren. Mit einem solchen Vorgehen wird die Wahrheitssuche im Zusammenhang mit Abklärungen des Lockerbie- Flugzeugabsturzes (270 Opfer) - vorsätzlich verhindert - SKANDAL !
by Edwin Bollier & MEBO AG, Telecommunication Switzerland. Webpage: www.lockerbie.ch
The legal delays in the "Lockerbie case" - will prove herself shortly, as law-crime !
ReplyDelete+++
Die Rechts Verzögerungen im "Lockerbie Fall" - werden sich in Kürze, als Rechts-Verbrechen erweisen !