This is the title of an article by Afaf Geblawi, writing from Tripoli, on the website of Middle East Online. It reads in part:
'For Libyan analyst Mustapha Zeidi, the country has been the victim of "injustice and an irrational stubbornness on the part of Western countries," squeezing Tripoli with economic and political pressures.
'"This confrontation with the West had serious repercussions on the country's development," said Zeidi, a prominent politician in Libya. It was only "wisdom of Libyan policies" that allowed both sides not to lose face.
'For Zeidi, intelligence agent Abdel Baset Ali Mohammed al-Megrahi who was jailed for the 1988 plane bombing over the Scottish village of Lockerbie is a "political hostage" who has been "sacrificed for his country".
'Mahmud Bussifi, editor-in-chief of Oea newspaper which is close to Gathafi's influential son Seif al-Islam, says it is high time for the West to tell the truth of Megrahi's innocence on the basis of new evidence which has emerged.
'Megrahi, handed over by the Libyan authorities in 1999, was two years later condemned to a life prison term with a minimum 27 years behind bars for the December 21, 1988 bombing which killed 270 people.
'The Libyan agent, who has terminal cancer, is behind bars in Scotland awaiting an appeal scheduled for next year.
'"Although we are certain of his innocence, the only thing that interests us now is for him to be able to spend his remaining days with us, even if it is in Scotland," said wife Aisha, warning of his "critical" condition.
'She thanked the efforts of Libyan authorities to have him released and "the compassion and support of victims' families who also believe in his innocence."'
The full text can be read here.
Friday, 19 December 2008
Lockerbie’s quiet dignity
In the little town where children should have been settling down to a deep and dreamless sleep, the townsfolk, doctors, farmers and emergency services were out combing the fields and hills for survivors and finding 270 dead bodies. It was a vision of hell and the flashbacks and sickening memories would torment many of them for years. Yet through the grim aftermath their response was practical, caring and dignified. They offered hospitality to bereaved relatives, many from the US; police and army personnel meticulously combed hundreds of square miles for scraps of evidence; the women of the town washed and ironed clothes to return to grieving families, quietly shedding a tear over the baby garments. Some relived the harrowing details as they gave careful evidence to the fatal accident inquiry or the court case.
Professor Robert Black, who was involved in setting up the legal mechanism which allowed Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi and his co-accused to be tried under Scots law on neutral ground in the Netherlands, is also a son of Lockerbie and says that after the initial shock, the people of the area simply got on with their lives. That is the Scottish way. In recent years, it has been increasingly disparaged as repressed and unhelpful, but is a legacy from generations of our forebears who stubbornly met disaster with fortitude and it has been matched by generosity from Syracuse University in setting up a scholarship for Lockerbie students. In remembering Lockerbie on Sunday, we should salute the determination of all those who continue to counter terrorism by building something positive from death and destruction.
[From today's edition of The Herald. The full editorial can be read here.]
Professor Robert Black, who was involved in setting up the legal mechanism which allowed Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi and his co-accused to be tried under Scots law on neutral ground in the Netherlands, is also a son of Lockerbie and says that after the initial shock, the people of the area simply got on with their lives. That is the Scottish way. In recent years, it has been increasingly disparaged as repressed and unhelpful, but is a legacy from generations of our forebears who stubbornly met disaster with fortitude and it has been matched by generosity from Syracuse University in setting up a scholarship for Lockerbie students. In remembering Lockerbie on Sunday, we should salute the determination of all those who continue to counter terrorism by building something positive from death and destruction.
[From today's edition of The Herald. The full editorial can be read here.]
Peter Fraser pins colours to the mast
In an article in The Times, the Lord Advocate at the time that charges were brought against Abdelbaset Megrahi and Lamin Fhimah for the destruction of Pan Am 103, Lord Fraser of Carmyllie QC, expresses his confidence in the evidence that led to the conviction of Megrahi. Here are excerpts:
'Lord Fraser does not discount the involvement of other states, but he points out that no definitive evidence has been produced to link them to the attack. The Libyans, on the other hand, were traced through the diligence of Scottish detectives, who managed to identify the manufacturers of clothing found in the suspect suitcase that had held the bomb. By proving that the clothing had been bought in Malta, and then establishing that the purchaser was al-Megrahi, they laid the foundations of the Crown case. “For me that was the most significant breakthrough,” Lord Fraser says now.'
'Tam Dalyell, the former MP, has argued that the CIA may have known about the attack beforehand. Lord Fraser rejects that. “I told Tam Dalyell: if there was a conspiracy, then I am in it up to the neck. I have to be involved. The only other possibility is that I have been so naive that bits of evidence have been planted, and I have swallowed it hook, line and sinker. But four other Lord Advocates have also examined the evidence and they have all concurred with it.”'
On the issue of the provenance of the MST-13 circuit board fragment which was crucial to the establishment of a link between Libya and the destruction of the aircraft, Lord Fraser hedges his bets somewhat:
'The discovery of a fragment of circuit board from a timer made by a Swiss company with links to Libya was critical to the prosecution. But accounts of how, where and by whom it was found varied. The original fragment was found several miles from the wreckage, and some weeks after the disaster.
'It was not until very much later that the CIA claimed to have identified it and matched it with a circuit board manufactured by Mebo of Zurich, a company run by Edwin Bollier, who had supplied timers to the Libyan Government. Some experts have argued that the find was just a bit too convenient to the US investigators, since, by targeting the Libyans, they could avoid falling out with Iran and Syria, important allies at the time of the Gulf War. So could the CIA have planted the evidence? “I don’t know,” says Lord Fraser. “No one ever came to me and said, ‘Now we can go for the Libyans’, it was never as straightforward as that. The CIA was extremely subtle. For me the significant evidence came when the Scottish police made the connection with Malta.” Pressed for his own view, he cites a Scottish murder case, that of Patrick Meehan, in which, it was alleged, the prosecution case had been “improved” by the planting of evidence. Was there a similarity? “I don’t know,” he said again, “but if there was one witness I was not happy about, it was Mr Bollier, who was deeply unreliable.”'
'Lord Fraser does not discount the involvement of other states, but he points out that no definitive evidence has been produced to link them to the attack. The Libyans, on the other hand, were traced through the diligence of Scottish detectives, who managed to identify the manufacturers of clothing found in the suspect suitcase that had held the bomb. By proving that the clothing had been bought in Malta, and then establishing that the purchaser was al-Megrahi, they laid the foundations of the Crown case. “For me that was the most significant breakthrough,” Lord Fraser says now.'
'Tam Dalyell, the former MP, has argued that the CIA may have known about the attack beforehand. Lord Fraser rejects that. “I told Tam Dalyell: if there was a conspiracy, then I am in it up to the neck. I have to be involved. The only other possibility is that I have been so naive that bits of evidence have been planted, and I have swallowed it hook, line and sinker. But four other Lord Advocates have also examined the evidence and they have all concurred with it.”'
On the issue of the provenance of the MST-13 circuit board fragment which was crucial to the establishment of a link between Libya and the destruction of the aircraft, Lord Fraser hedges his bets somewhat:
'The discovery of a fragment of circuit board from a timer made by a Swiss company with links to Libya was critical to the prosecution. But accounts of how, where and by whom it was found varied. The original fragment was found several miles from the wreckage, and some weeks after the disaster.
'It was not until very much later that the CIA claimed to have identified it and matched it with a circuit board manufactured by Mebo of Zurich, a company run by Edwin Bollier, who had supplied timers to the Libyan Government. Some experts have argued that the find was just a bit too convenient to the US investigators, since, by targeting the Libyans, they could avoid falling out with Iran and Syria, important allies at the time of the Gulf War. So could the CIA have planted the evidence? “I don’t know,” says Lord Fraser. “No one ever came to me and said, ‘Now we can go for the Libyans’, it was never as straightforward as that. The CIA was extremely subtle. For me the significant evidence came when the Scottish police made the connection with Malta.” Pressed for his own view, he cites a Scottish murder case, that of Patrick Meehan, in which, it was alleged, the prosecution case had been “improved” by the planting of evidence. Was there a similarity? “I don’t know,” he said again, “but if there was one witness I was not happy about, it was Mr Bollier, who was deeply unreliable.”'
The Herald on the approaching anniversary
Today's edition of The Herald features a series of articles on the town of Lockerbie as we approach the twentieth anniversary of the event that brought it for the first time in centuries to the attention of the world. In addition, Lucy Adams contributes an article entitled "Discredited evidence that convicted al Megrahi leaves relatives no nearer finding out the truth", which is both self-explanatory and manifestly true.
Thursday, 18 December 2008
"A sacrificial lamb"
The wife of the Lockerbie bomber claims that her husband became a sacrificial lamb for the whole of Libya when he agreed to be tried for a crime that he says he did not commit.
Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi surrendered his freedom so that his country could free itself from United Nations sanctions and improve its global image, his wife Aisha said.
Mrs al-Megrahi gave a rare interview at the family home near Glasgow, close to the prison where her husband is serving a life sentence for the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 that claimed the lives of 270 people in 1988.
“He sacrificed himself for the sake of an entire nation,” she told The Times, in an interview conducted in Arabic. (...)
At times she appears optimistic, then she is overcome by sombre thoughts. “I’ve lost hope,” she said. “Even if they tell me he’ll be released I won’t believe it until I see it with my own eyes. Because we’ve been let down again and again.”
Asked how her husband feels about Lockerbie’s 20th anniversary – on Sunday – she said: “He wants the world to know that he’s innocent and that he feels for those innocent lives lost in the bombing . . . because he too has a family and parents.”
[From an article by Richard Kerbaj in The Times of 19 December. The complete article can be read here.]
Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi surrendered his freedom so that his country could free itself from United Nations sanctions and improve its global image, his wife Aisha said.
Mrs al-Megrahi gave a rare interview at the family home near Glasgow, close to the prison where her husband is serving a life sentence for the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 that claimed the lives of 270 people in 1988.
“He sacrificed himself for the sake of an entire nation,” she told The Times, in an interview conducted in Arabic. (...)
At times she appears optimistic, then she is overcome by sombre thoughts. “I’ve lost hope,” she said. “Even if they tell me he’ll be released I won’t believe it until I see it with my own eyes. Because we’ve been let down again and again.”
Asked how her husband feels about Lockerbie’s 20th anniversary – on Sunday – she said: “He wants the world to know that he’s innocent and that he feels for those innocent lives lost in the bombing . . . because he too has a family and parents.”
[From an article by Richard Kerbaj in The Times of 19 December. The complete article can be read here.]
Alternate Ending
"Terror and Tears, Part 4, Alternate Ending", the fourth instalment of the series on the Lockerbie disaster being broadcast by Syracuse NY news channel News10Now, can be viewed here, as can the written article that accompanies it. A sceptical eye is cast over the "official" version of events that led to the conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi.
Proceedings at tenth (public) procedural hearing
Today’s procedural hearing was largely concerned with fine-tuning the protocol drafted by the court regarding the appointment, powers and duties of the special counsel to be appointed in connection with the document relating to timers in respect of which the UK Foreign Secretary has asserted public interest immunity on grounds of national security and international relations.
This document has not been made public and so it is difficult for observers to form an opinion as to its contents or, indeed, to follow the submissions made by the appellant’s counsel and the Advocate General on behalf of the Foreign Secretary. However, the document has now been finalised and the person suggested by the appellant’s legal team has been appointed by the court to perform this function, subject to his (or her) successfully undergoing the necessary security vetting. The court urged the relevant authorities to carry out the vetting of the special counsel (and any solicitor appointed by him to assist in the performance of his duties) with the very highest urgency. The Crown and the Advocate General were instructed to prepare summaries of the submissions made by them at the closed hearing (from which the appellant’s lawyers were excluded) so that they can be handed over to the special counsel as soon as his vetting is successfully concluded. The appellant’s legal team indicated that they would be in a position fully to brief the special counsel by 23 January 2009.
The remaining issue discussed was the timing of the next procedural hearing (to consider the further petitions for disclosure lodged on behalf of the appellant before the ninth procedural hearing on 27 and 28 November). Maggie Scott QC for Mr Megrahi proposed that it should be on a date between 21 and 23 January, it having been indicated by the court administrative office that all three of the judges were available then. Ronnie Clancy QC argued that this was, for various reasons, far too early for the Crown and that a date should be fixed in February or March. The Advocate General concurred. The court indicated that it would consider these submissions and intimate its decision on the date of the next hearing “in early course”.
Still no obvious sign, therefore, that either the Crown or the Advocate General have revised their Fabian tactics in the light of the appellant's medical condition or any other factors.
This document has not been made public and so it is difficult for observers to form an opinion as to its contents or, indeed, to follow the submissions made by the appellant’s counsel and the Advocate General on behalf of the Foreign Secretary. However, the document has now been finalised and the person suggested by the appellant’s legal team has been appointed by the court to perform this function, subject to his (or her) successfully undergoing the necessary security vetting. The court urged the relevant authorities to carry out the vetting of the special counsel (and any solicitor appointed by him to assist in the performance of his duties) with the very highest urgency. The Crown and the Advocate General were instructed to prepare summaries of the submissions made by them at the closed hearing (from which the appellant’s lawyers were excluded) so that they can be handed over to the special counsel as soon as his vetting is successfully concluded. The appellant’s legal team indicated that they would be in a position fully to brief the special counsel by 23 January 2009.
The remaining issue discussed was the timing of the next procedural hearing (to consider the further petitions for disclosure lodged on behalf of the appellant before the ninth procedural hearing on 27 and 28 November). Maggie Scott QC for Mr Megrahi proposed that it should be on a date between 21 and 23 January, it having been indicated by the court administrative office that all three of the judges were available then. Ronnie Clancy QC argued that this was, for various reasons, far too early for the Crown and that a date should be fixed in February or March. The Advocate General concurred. The court indicated that it would consider these submissions and intimate its decision on the date of the next hearing “in early course”.
Still no obvious sign, therefore, that either the Crown or the Advocate General have revised their Fabian tactics in the light of the appellant's medical condition or any other factors.
The "punishment part" of a life sentence
'Since the adoption of the European Convention on Human Rights, a murderer is now also told the "punishment part" of the sentence, that is the number of years which must be served before any application can be made for release on licence.
'Only the life term is set by statute, and judges are free to decide the appropriate punishment part in each case.
'In a benchmark judgment in 2002, the appeal court, then headed by Lord Cullen, the Lord Justice-General, reduced from 30 to 27 years the punishment part imposed on Andrew Walker, a former Royal Scots corporal who had shot dead three people in an army payroll robbery.
'Although it was never spelled out why a top line should be drawn, or why it ought to be set at 30 years, sentencing judges began to apply such a ceiling and also latched on to another part of the judgment to use 12 years as the "norm" in murder cases, the period going up or down depending on the aggravating or mitigating features of the individual case.
'It had been anticipated following the Walker ruling that 30 years would be reserved for Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, as being guilty of the worst possible case of murder, but he was given 27 years.
'The sentencing judges in his case used 30 years as the maximum, but decided they could go below it because of his age, then 51, and because he would be serving his sentence in a foreign country and, as they understood it, in solitary confinement.
'The sentence was condemned by relatives of some of the 270 Lockerbie victims, and the Crown announced at that time that it would use the case to challenge the notional 30-year upper limit, but the sentencing issue has been held up while Megrahi pursues an appeal against his conviction.'
[From an article by John Robertson in today's edition of The Scotsman.]
'Only the life term is set by statute, and judges are free to decide the appropriate punishment part in each case.
'In a benchmark judgment in 2002, the appeal court, then headed by Lord Cullen, the Lord Justice-General, reduced from 30 to 27 years the punishment part imposed on Andrew Walker, a former Royal Scots corporal who had shot dead three people in an army payroll robbery.
'Although it was never spelled out why a top line should be drawn, or why it ought to be set at 30 years, sentencing judges began to apply such a ceiling and also latched on to another part of the judgment to use 12 years as the "norm" in murder cases, the period going up or down depending on the aggravating or mitigating features of the individual case.
'It had been anticipated following the Walker ruling that 30 years would be reserved for Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, as being guilty of the worst possible case of murder, but he was given 27 years.
'The sentencing judges in his case used 30 years as the maximum, but decided they could go below it because of his age, then 51, and because he would be serving his sentence in a foreign country and, as they understood it, in solitary confinement.
'The sentence was condemned by relatives of some of the 270 Lockerbie victims, and the Crown announced at that time that it would use the case to challenge the notional 30-year upper limit, but the sentencing issue has been held up while Megrahi pursues an appeal against his conviction.'
[From an article by John Robertson in today's edition of The Scotsman.]
National Geographic admits Lockerbie documentary mistakes
'The National Geographic channel has admitted that it made mistakes in a controversial television documentary on the Lockerbie disaster.
'Air Crash Investigation: Lockerbie, which used computers to recreate the impact on the Scottish town, stated in its opening line that two years prior to the bombing, the sabotage of Air India flight 182 had happened off the coast of Scotland.
'However, the channel now has to "rectify" the narration to explain the Air India explosion was off the south coast of Ireland, three-and-a-half years before the bombing over Lockerbie of Pan Am 103 - which caused 270 deaths on December 21, 1988.
'Just days before the 20th anniversary of the tragedy, National Geographic apologised for the mistakes and said they would be rectified.'
[From an article by Lucy Adams in The Herald. It is a pity that National Geographic did not also apologise for its gullibility in peddling an explanation of the disaster that has been seriously challenged (amongst others by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission) and that is likely to be comprehensively discredited in the current appeal by Abdelbaset Megrahi.]
'Air Crash Investigation: Lockerbie, which used computers to recreate the impact on the Scottish town, stated in its opening line that two years prior to the bombing, the sabotage of Air India flight 182 had happened off the coast of Scotland.
'However, the channel now has to "rectify" the narration to explain the Air India explosion was off the south coast of Ireland, three-and-a-half years before the bombing over Lockerbie of Pan Am 103 - which caused 270 deaths on December 21, 1988.
'Just days before the 20th anniversary of the tragedy, National Geographic apologised for the mistakes and said they would be rectified.'
[From an article by Lucy Adams in The Herald. It is a pity that National Geographic did not also apologise for its gullibility in peddling an explanation of the disaster that has been seriously challenged (amongst others by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission) and that is likely to be comprehensively discredited in the current appeal by Abdelbaset Megrahi.]
Wednesday, 17 December 2008
Time for Reflection
Presented by Father Patrick Keegans at the Scottish Parliament on 17th December 2008 at 2.30 pm
And I will lead the blind in a way they know not;
in paths they have not known I will guide them.
I will turn the darkness before them into light,
and rough places into level ground. (Is. 42, 16)
These words from the Prophet Isaiah have great significance in my life.
When I was the Parish Priest of Holy Trinity Catholic Church, Lockerbie, I was in my house at 1 Sherwood Crescent on the evening of the 21st December 1988. My mother, Mary Keegans, was with me.
The darkness came. At 7.04pm PanAm flight 103, destroyed by a bomb on board the aircraft, crashed into the town of Lockerbie.
The darkness came. The lights went out. The house shook violently. An almighty explosion tore Sherwood Crescent apart; and then there was a silence and stillness and still the darkness.
Then another kind of darkness took over: the thick, suffocating darkness that comes from extreme grief: the darkness that invades the human spirit, that threatens to crush and destroy. 270 people had been murdered, eleven residents of Sherwood Crescent and 259 passengers on Pan Am 103.
And into that darkness there came light. That light came from the people of Lockerbie. It was the light of genuine love, care and concern for all who were suffering. The people of Lockerbie, shocked to the core, looked not to themselves but to others. They are a shining jewel in the Crown of Scotland. The words of John’s Gospel speaking about Christ come to mind: “A light shines in the darkness, a light that darkness could not overpower”. (John 1, 5.) The love, light, and compassion of Christ were shining through the people of Lockerbie as it does to this very day.
Approaching the 20th Anniversary of the Lockerbie air Disaster our thoughts and our prayers turn to those who died; and we remember our friends in the USA, our UK families, all other nationalities, and all who, in some form or another, are victims of the disaster.
At a time of great sorrow I was asked by Dr. Jim Swire whose daughter Flora died on the plane to conduct a service for the UK families. The words of Isaiah came to me. I pray and reflect on these words every day:
And I will lead the blind in a way they know not;
in paths they have not known I will guide them.
I will turn the darkness before them into light,
and rough places into level ground. Is. 42, 16
I pray that each day God will lead us and guide us.
I am elated and honoured to be with you in what is a very special place and to speak these words to you.
Thank you
And I will lead the blind in a way they know not;
in paths they have not known I will guide them.
I will turn the darkness before them into light,
and rough places into level ground. (Is. 42, 16)
These words from the Prophet Isaiah have great significance in my life.
When I was the Parish Priest of Holy Trinity Catholic Church, Lockerbie, I was in my house at 1 Sherwood Crescent on the evening of the 21st December 1988. My mother, Mary Keegans, was with me.
The darkness came. At 7.04pm PanAm flight 103, destroyed by a bomb on board the aircraft, crashed into the town of Lockerbie.
The darkness came. The lights went out. The house shook violently. An almighty explosion tore Sherwood Crescent apart; and then there was a silence and stillness and still the darkness.
Then another kind of darkness took over: the thick, suffocating darkness that comes from extreme grief: the darkness that invades the human spirit, that threatens to crush and destroy. 270 people had been murdered, eleven residents of Sherwood Crescent and 259 passengers on Pan Am 103.
And into that darkness there came light. That light came from the people of Lockerbie. It was the light of genuine love, care and concern for all who were suffering. The people of Lockerbie, shocked to the core, looked not to themselves but to others. They are a shining jewel in the Crown of Scotland. The words of John’s Gospel speaking about Christ come to mind: “A light shines in the darkness, a light that darkness could not overpower”. (John 1, 5.) The love, light, and compassion of Christ were shining through the people of Lockerbie as it does to this very day.
Approaching the 20th Anniversary of the Lockerbie air Disaster our thoughts and our prayers turn to those who died; and we remember our friends in the USA, our UK families, all other nationalities, and all who, in some form or another, are victims of the disaster.
At a time of great sorrow I was asked by Dr. Jim Swire whose daughter Flora died on the plane to conduct a service for the UK families. The words of Isaiah came to me. I pray and reflect on these words every day:
And I will lead the blind in a way they know not;
in paths they have not known I will guide them.
I will turn the darkness before them into light,
and rough places into level ground. Is. 42, 16
I pray that each day God will lead us and guide us.
I am elated and honoured to be with you in what is a very special place and to speak these words to you.
Thank you
Tenth (public) procedural hearing
From my report of proceedings at the procedural hearing held on 28 November 2008:
"The court indicated that, after having considered the submissions of the parties [regarding the appointment and rôle of the special (security-vetted) counsel], it would draft a protocol which would settle these issues of principle. The parties, at a hearing yet to be fixed, would be given an opportunity to make representations on matters of detail, but not on the principles enshrined therein."
The hearing to consider submissions on the protocol drafted by the court is to be held on Thursday, 18 December 2008 at 10.15 am.
"The court indicated that, after having considered the submissions of the parties [regarding the appointment and rôle of the special (security-vetted) counsel], it would draft a protocol which would settle these issues of principle. The parties, at a hearing yet to be fixed, would be given an opportunity to make representations on matters of detail, but not on the principles enshrined therein."
The hearing to consider submissions on the protocol drafted by the court is to be held on Thursday, 18 December 2008 at 10.15 am.
Tuesday, 16 December 2008
The Long Thunder
"Terror and Tears, Part 2, The Long Thunder", the second instalment of the series on the Lockerbie disaster being broadcast by Syracuse NY news channel News10Now, can be viewed here, as can the written article that accompanies it.
A response to Richard Marquise
[I am deeply grateful to Peter Biddulph for allowing me to post the following response written by him to Richard Marquise's recent broadcast and print contributions to Lockerbie lore.]
1. It would appear that Mr Marquise never handled the fragment [of circuit board allegedly from the MST-13 timer that allegedly detonated the bomb], never saw the fragment. All his forensic information appears to have come from Thomas Thurman, proven to be a manipulator of prosecution reports by the US Department of Justice in 36 out of the 52 Thurman cases that they investigated.
And yet Thurman too never saw the fragment or handled it. When challenged by journalists, he admitted that he had worked solely on photographs supplied by the Scottish police and Thomas Hayes. And the evidence he gave on US TV about identifying the fragment was given as a voice-over using photographs of a sample from the CIA's own laboratory in Langley, Virginia.
Thurman, by resigning and "leaving" the employ of the FBI avoided being a witness at the trial, and his claims and record regarding the fragment were never tested in court. All references to Thurman in the trial transcript took "a priori" that he was on the team who found the fragment that proved Libya did it. His questionable history was never challenged by the defence. Were they negligent?
2. Mr Marquise's senior FBI colleague Oliver Revell never saw the fragment, never handled the fragment. In a televised discussion in 1995 on UK Channel Four TV he claimed :
". . . And we were operating on the premise that [Iran] was the responsible party. But we simply could not bring to bear all of the information we had, and the evidence, and make it fit. And then when the item – the microchip – was found and was identified – and by the way it was through both RARDE and Tom Thurman of the FBI laboratory – independently – that we found the other connection, and then we started working on that." (My italics).
So, whatever might be said by the FBI now, their case in 1991 centred entirely upon the provenance of the fragment of the bomb said to have been found in July 1989 by Dr Thomas Hayes. Should Hayes' evidence be in any way suspect, the case would collapse.
Mr Marquise has claimed elsewhere that the retirement of the CIA's Vincent Cannistraro took place before the key evidence was found. He has said that to for us to say otherwise is wrong.
Well, it's not wrong. Cannistraro was busy as head of the Lockerbie team when Hayes claimed to have found the fragment. Cannistraro retired a year and a half later, in November 1990.
3. The chief identification witness, Tony Gauci, was exposed in 2005 by the very man who - in 1991 - helped with the indictments against Megrahi and Fhimah, former Lord Advocate Peter Fraser. In Fraser's own words, Gauci could not be trusted.
And now a Mr Clancy [Ronnie Clancy QC] of the Scottish Crown team has conceded in a recent Scottish High Court hearing in Edinburgh that even if Gauci's evidence is discredited, it would not significantly affect the prosecution case. A strange claim and admission indeed. Are they already conceding the case in total? [RB: What Mr Clancy said was that the Crown’s view was that there was sufficient evidence to justify Megrahi’s conviction even if Gauci’s evidence were discounted.]
4. Marquise's information regarding the British forensic tracing of the fragment came from Dr Thomas Hayes.
At the time of the trial, Hayes' record in the case of the IRA Maguire Seven (Guildford bombing) was never discussed in court. All that the judges heard was an oblique reference to "deliberate falsehoods" told by his former colleague and supervisor Dr Higgs in another IRA case, that of Judith Ward.
Since Hayes had not been part of that particular Higgs episode, he could - and did - deny all connection or knowledge of that particular Higgs conspiracy. The trial then moved on without further comment or question.
And yet Hayes was central to a Higgs conspiracy in another IRA trial, that of the Maguire Seven, in which the Hayes and Higgs were proved by Parliamentary investigation to have conspired to with-hold evidence that might assist the defence case.
But since the Maguire Seven story was not rehearsed in the Lockerbie trial, none of this could be considered by the Lockerbie judges.
I believe that if Hayes' history in the case of the Maguire Seven had been examined in court, his testimony in the case of Lockerbie would have been discredited in the same way as that of Majid Giaka, the double CIA and Libyan agent.
In his book Scotbom, and since, Mr Marquise gives the impression that American investigation was led and controlled by the FBI. In fact it was controlled overall by the CIA, and by certain people with much blood and lies on their hands. Among the White House team around that time were people proven by declassified documents to understand well the technique of the manufacture of evidence to destabilise Middle Eastern governments. These documents are now freely available. But nobody - including the media in both countries - seems to care any more. It's old news, unwelcome news. People die, so what? Life must go on etc.
All of this, naturally, never came to the attention of the Lockerbie judges. Hopefully the second appeal will offer a long overdue opportunity for the true back-story of Lockerbie to emerge.
If Mr Marquise wishes to challenge any of the above, I will gladly supply the document dates and references with appropriate quotations. I will also arrange for sections of the film and television records to be put on the web. And I will ensure that relevant sections of the trial transcript are also put on the web. People can then judge for themselves where this story might go over the next six months.
1. It would appear that Mr Marquise never handled the fragment [of circuit board allegedly from the MST-13 timer that allegedly detonated the bomb], never saw the fragment. All his forensic information appears to have come from Thomas Thurman, proven to be a manipulator of prosecution reports by the US Department of Justice in 36 out of the 52 Thurman cases that they investigated.
And yet Thurman too never saw the fragment or handled it. When challenged by journalists, he admitted that he had worked solely on photographs supplied by the Scottish police and Thomas Hayes. And the evidence he gave on US TV about identifying the fragment was given as a voice-over using photographs of a sample from the CIA's own laboratory in Langley, Virginia.
Thurman, by resigning and "leaving" the employ of the FBI avoided being a witness at the trial, and his claims and record regarding the fragment were never tested in court. All references to Thurman in the trial transcript took "a priori" that he was on the team who found the fragment that proved Libya did it. His questionable history was never challenged by the defence. Were they negligent?
2. Mr Marquise's senior FBI colleague Oliver Revell never saw the fragment, never handled the fragment. In a televised discussion in 1995 on UK Channel Four TV he claimed :
". . . And we were operating on the premise that [Iran] was the responsible party. But we simply could not bring to bear all of the information we had, and the evidence, and make it fit. And then when the item – the microchip – was found and was identified – and by the way it was through both RARDE and Tom Thurman of the FBI laboratory – independently – that we found the other connection, and then we started working on that." (My italics).
So, whatever might be said by the FBI now, their case in 1991 centred entirely upon the provenance of the fragment of the bomb said to have been found in July 1989 by Dr Thomas Hayes. Should Hayes' evidence be in any way suspect, the case would collapse.
Mr Marquise has claimed elsewhere that the retirement of the CIA's Vincent Cannistraro took place before the key evidence was found. He has said that to for us to say otherwise is wrong.
Well, it's not wrong. Cannistraro was busy as head of the Lockerbie team when Hayes claimed to have found the fragment. Cannistraro retired a year and a half later, in November 1990.
3. The chief identification witness, Tony Gauci, was exposed in 2005 by the very man who - in 1991 - helped with the indictments against Megrahi and Fhimah, former Lord Advocate Peter Fraser. In Fraser's own words, Gauci could not be trusted.
And now a Mr Clancy [Ronnie Clancy QC] of the Scottish Crown team has conceded in a recent Scottish High Court hearing in Edinburgh that even if Gauci's evidence is discredited, it would not significantly affect the prosecution case. A strange claim and admission indeed. Are they already conceding the case in total? [RB: What Mr Clancy said was that the Crown’s view was that there was sufficient evidence to justify Megrahi’s conviction even if Gauci’s evidence were discounted.]
4. Marquise's information regarding the British forensic tracing of the fragment came from Dr Thomas Hayes.
At the time of the trial, Hayes' record in the case of the IRA Maguire Seven (Guildford bombing) was never discussed in court. All that the judges heard was an oblique reference to "deliberate falsehoods" told by his former colleague and supervisor Dr Higgs in another IRA case, that of Judith Ward.
Since Hayes had not been part of that particular Higgs episode, he could - and did - deny all connection or knowledge of that particular Higgs conspiracy. The trial then moved on without further comment or question.
And yet Hayes was central to a Higgs conspiracy in another IRA trial, that of the Maguire Seven, in which the Hayes and Higgs were proved by Parliamentary investigation to have conspired to with-hold evidence that might assist the defence case.
But since the Maguire Seven story was not rehearsed in the Lockerbie trial, none of this could be considered by the Lockerbie judges.
I believe that if Hayes' history in the case of the Maguire Seven had been examined in court, his testimony in the case of Lockerbie would have been discredited in the same way as that of Majid Giaka, the double CIA and Libyan agent.
In his book Scotbom, and since, Mr Marquise gives the impression that American investigation was led and controlled by the FBI. In fact it was controlled overall by the CIA, and by certain people with much blood and lies on their hands. Among the White House team around that time were people proven by declassified documents to understand well the technique of the manufacture of evidence to destabilise Middle Eastern governments. These documents are now freely available. But nobody - including the media in both countries - seems to care any more. It's old news, unwelcome news. People die, so what? Life must go on etc.
All of this, naturally, never came to the attention of the Lockerbie judges. Hopefully the second appeal will offer a long overdue opportunity for the true back-story of Lockerbie to emerge.
If Mr Marquise wishes to challenge any of the above, I will gladly supply the document dates and references with appropriate quotations. I will also arrange for sections of the film and television records to be put on the web. And I will ensure that relevant sections of the trial transcript are also put on the web. People can then judge for themselves where this story might go over the next six months.
A Lockerbie-style solution to Gitmo?
The Exploring International Law blog hosted by Georgetown University has an interesting contribution from Dr Catherine Lotrionte* on the possible relevance of the Lockerbie model of judicial tribunal to cover the situation that will arise when President-Elect Obama closes the detention facility at Guantanamo, as he has pledged to do.
Dr Lotrionte writes:
“One option that has been overlooked is trying these prisoners at The Hague in a hybrid international/domestic court. (…)
“The precedent for such trials is Lockerbie. In April 1999, under diplomatic pressure from the U.S. and UN-imposed sanctions, the Libyan government handed over two intelligence officers to Scottish police in the Netherlands to stand trial for the murder of civilians killed when Pan Am 103 exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland. Through an agreement between the U.S., the U.K. and Libya**, the Libyans were transferred into Scottish custody to stand trial before a Scottish Court made up of three Scottish judges using Scottish law. The Dutch provided the premises to the Scottish and all expenses related to the trial were paid by the United Kingdom. At the trials international observers from the UN were present as well as representatives from other states, lending the already transparent process further credibility and favorable world opinion. The U.S. government also supported the trials, providing Scottish prosecutors with intelligence that was used as evidence in the trials. On January 31, 2001, one defendant was convicted of murder and sentenced to 20 years minimum in prison in Scotland. The second defendant was found not guilty and sent back to Libya.”
*"Dr. Catherine Lotrionte is a visiting assistant professor and the Associate Director of the Institute for International Law & Politics at Georgetown University. She previously worked as an assistant general counsel at CIA and as the general counsel for the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board at the White House (2002-2006)."
**Note by RB: There was no such agreement. The United Kingdom (with the concurrence of the United States) put forward a scheme on 24 August 1998. Libya was not consulted or involved in its formulation, though the Libyan Government, and the legal team representing the two Libyan suspects, had earlier (four years and seven months earlier) approved of a neutral venue, non-jury, proposal formulated by me.
Dr Lotrionte writes:
“One option that has been overlooked is trying these prisoners at The Hague in a hybrid international/domestic court. (…)
“The precedent for such trials is Lockerbie. In April 1999, under diplomatic pressure from the U.S. and UN-imposed sanctions, the Libyan government handed over two intelligence officers to Scottish police in the Netherlands to stand trial for the murder of civilians killed when Pan Am 103 exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland. Through an agreement between the U.S., the U.K. and Libya**, the Libyans were transferred into Scottish custody to stand trial before a Scottish Court made up of three Scottish judges using Scottish law. The Dutch provided the premises to the Scottish and all expenses related to the trial were paid by the United Kingdom. At the trials international observers from the UN were present as well as representatives from other states, lending the already transparent process further credibility and favorable world opinion. The U.S. government also supported the trials, providing Scottish prosecutors with intelligence that was used as evidence in the trials. On January 31, 2001, one defendant was convicted of murder and sentenced to 20 years minimum in prison in Scotland. The second defendant was found not guilty and sent back to Libya.”
*"Dr. Catherine Lotrionte is a visiting assistant professor and the Associate Director of the Institute for International Law & Politics at Georgetown University. She previously worked as an assistant general counsel at CIA and as the general counsel for the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board at the White House (2002-2006)."
**Note by RB: There was no such agreement. The United Kingdom (with the concurrence of the United States) put forward a scheme on 24 August 1998. Libya was not consulted or involved in its formulation, though the Libyan Government, and the legal team representing the two Libyan suspects, had earlier (four years and seven months earlier) approved of a neutral venue, non-jury, proposal formulated by me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)