tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1073021351804532798.post1016746427495989722..comments2024-03-15T06:02:30.623+00:00Comments on The Lockerbie Case: Lockerbie relatives to appeal Megrahi convictionRobert Blackhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03606456028430261555noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1073021351804532798.post-70875376589845263022014-03-14T16:35:54.229+00:002014-03-14T16:35:54.229+00:00I quite agree that the Heathrow origin is irrefuta...I quite agree that the Heathrow origin is irrefutable and have said so for a long time. I am also dubious that a further Appeal would ever happen. <br /><br />I also pointed out to the Director of the SCCRC (who wasn't much interested) that the SCCRC Statement of Reasons was quite wrong in concluding (despite the evidence of the Forensic Document Examiner) that page 51 of Dr Hayes notes dated 12th May 1989 was genuine. Simply by comparing page 51 with another exhibit photograph 117 (also the subject of the SCCRC Statement of Reasons) it is beyond doubt, irrefutable, blindingly obvious that page 51 could not legitimately have been created before this photograph was taken.<br /><br />This is not grounds for a further Appeal. It renders Mr Megrahi's conviction completely unsafe and it should be quashed immediately. bazhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02338162927520376063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1073021351804532798.post-16740156821702709202014-03-12T21:46:58.304+00:002014-03-12T21:46:58.304+00:00That's why I think the suitcase jigsaw is real...That's why I think the suitcase jigsaw is really important. I'm currently being given the cold shoulder by so many people who seem to think I'm just an egomaniac trying to promote a book that it's beginning to get to me. I don't think it's egotistical to believe the suitcase jigsaw is the most important piece of ammunition we have at the moment.<br /><br />It is agreed by pretty much everybody involved that if it could be proved that the bomb was introduced at Heathrow rather than Malta, that would be completely exculpatory. The other points, while important, leave Megrahi with a false passport right there when the crime was supposedly committed. In that event, even if they had to give up the clothes purchase, they could conceivably go on saying they "weren't looking for anyone else" (figuratively speaking, as of course they would go on looking for his supposed accomplices).<br /><br />Move the scene of the crime to Heathrow, in the afternoon when Megrahi was verifiably in Tripoli, and he is "provably innocent". Not only that, the entire investigation is shown to have been monumentally incompetent pretty much from the get-go. Never mind the political ramifications.<br /><br />If the press decide to go along with a whitewash even in the face of the suitcase jigsaw placing the crime at Heathrow, they will be placing themselves on the wrong side of history, that's for sure.Rolfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17849975010197698907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1073021351804532798.post-66151913522499875412014-03-12T18:15:58.901+00:002014-03-12T18:15:58.901+00:00"...the fig-leaf of saying that it was all re..."...the fig-leaf of saying that it was all really technical, and in fact they're still pursuing the same line of inquiry that Libya did it at Luqa."<br /><br />Yes. However absurd, that might just be their best option.<br /><br />If the press would let them get away with it? Why not? I think nothing about the press will surprise me ever again. sfmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02127645052255935678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1073021351804532798.post-53740342891730478632014-03-12T14:29:55.713+00:002014-03-12T14:29:55.713+00:00sfm, I agree with you about the risks of faking up...sfm, I agree with you about the risks of faking up new evidence. They would have to be absolutely certain that it contradicted nothing that was already avilable, and that it would never, ever be detected as being fake. Considering that it would inevitably be <i>suspected</i> of being fake, this would be difficult to achieve.<br /><br />I also harbour some thoughts that there will be no new appeal before the court. The strength of the new material is such that any rational judicial authority would throw in the towel and decide not to contest the appeal. What's the betting?<br /><br />In fact it's not as crazy as it may seem at first sight. Indeed the Crown Office is currently insisting that it will defend any new appeal vigorously. But it would say that wouldn't it? Things may change when they have to look closely at what they are defending. Conceding the appeal would prevent all that being paraded through the court, and might allow them the fig-leaf of saying that it was all really technical, and in fact they're still pursuing the same line of inquiry that Libya did it at Luqa. It's anybody's guess whether the press would let them away with that.Rolfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17849975010197698907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1073021351804532798.post-32467185885705101642014-03-12T13:37:49.912+00:002014-03-12T13:37:49.912+00:00Anyone who hoped that the recent quietness meant t...Anyone who hoped that the recent quietness meant that the issue had started going away, can stop hoping.<br /><br />It is too serious, too criminal, too inexcusable, too rotten and too present.<br /><br />It is not even enough to fool most of the people all the time. <br /><br />A strong minority with an unanswerable case can cause so many problems that the rulers will start thinking whether the safest way could be to wash their hands, and try to detach themselves from those buddies having caused the trouble.<br /><br />The risk of asking current people to fake up new evidence instead is glaring. While the full disclosure of Lockerbie scandal might be survivable for the top, involvement into new crimes will be a very risky game.<br /><br />My guess is that we will never see that retrial. But I hope I am just so wrong.<br />sfmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02127645052255935678noreply@blogger.com