The fiction of Crown Office integrity in Lockerbie prosecution

[On this date two years ago, I reproduced on this blog an article written by Dr Jim Swire for Scottish lawyers’ magazine The Firm. It reads as follows:]

Lockerbie and Hillsborough: the deliberate diversion of blame

[This is the headline over an article by Dr Jim Swire published today on the website of Scottish lawyers’ magazine The Firm.  It reads as follows:]

Dr Jim Swire writes exclusively for The Firm, following the revelations in the Hillsborough papers, and sees the thread linking the common behaviour of the legal and political institutions that bind the Pan Am 103 affair with the tragic deaths at Hillsborough.

In the world confrontation between the terrorists and the developed communities of the West, the complex structures that regulate our societies have intelligence, high technology, well orchestrated military might and the precepts and respect of our peoples for the rule of law as their main resources.

From the nature of terrorism and the front line responses of Western intelligence springs a great temptation: to use the innately secretive culture of intelligence to react to terrorism in ways which their defended populations might denounce, were they only privy to them. 'Extraordinary rendition' is a good example of this. Yet reliance upon secrecy from their own populations can only ever be a temporary protection for those who overstep the line and use that privileged secrecy in ways that defy the rule of law, which they ostensibly support.

To cross that line and use our State resources in ways that are illegal is in the end to hand a moral victory to the terrorists. To divert blame away from the actual perpetrators is to protect them and to increase the chances of them striking again. The American response to terrorism has been profoundly different from the British. America has turned to intelligence/military responses in 'the war on terror'. Britain has striven to use intelligence/criminal law. Except where our leaders have got carried away by enthusiasm for the 'special relationship' with the US and dragged us, the people protesting, into military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But State pressure upon our law to produce politically desired convictions has produced terrible distortions of that law such as detention without trial and the warped trials of alleged terrorists such as the Maguire and other IRA related cases.

It is my belief that in the case of Lockerbie the law of Scotland has been subsumed into the priorities of American foreign policy.

Douglas Hurd, a man deserving of great respect for his personal intelligence and integrity has said to Tam Dalyell and Robin Cook, referring to Lockerbie: "I do ask you two to believe that as Foreign secretary I cannot tell the Scottish Crown Office (which was in charge of the Lockerbie case) what to do, nor does the Foreign Office have detailed access to evidence which they say they have. You must understand that law officers really are a law unto themselves."

Yet I have come to believe over the past 25 years that not only did the US manipulate the Scottish criminal legal process, but that the Scottish Crown Office has ever since, fought a battle to maintain the fiction that it acted with integrity throughout the legal prosecution process.

In so doing they are in effect protecting the perpetrators of the dreadful terrorist massacre of the innocents that was Lockerbie in 1988, and damaging positive responses to better protect the future (such as making it a criminal offence for an airport not to report and take immediate appropriate action over break-ins perhaps?). I believe that in the long run it will be less damaging to the reputation of the West, and certainly for my favourite country, Scotland, to address these issues, and to take corrective action ourselves for the future, rather than allow our failures to be eventually exposed at the bar of history.

In a democratic society the more citizens who assess such matters for themselves, the greater is likely to be the integrity of the decisions which their politicians must eventually take to resolve the issues.

[A much longer and more detailed piece by Dr Swire can be read in the same blogpost from 2012.

Aspects of the conduct of the Crown Office in the Lockerbie prosecution form the basis of some of Justice for Megrahi's allegations of criminal misconduct in the Lockerbie investigation, prosecution and trial that are currently under investigation by Police Scotland.]

Scotland's shame, the failure to resolve the disgrace that is the Lockerbie prosecution

[What follows is excerpted from a letter from Iain A J McKie published in today’s edition of The Herald:]

I have a great deal of sympathy with your correspondent Neil McPherson (Letters, September 13) and can understand his using the Scottish Government's track record to fuel his cynicism about independence resulting in a fairer society.

Like him I believe that to date our Government has proved to be a somewhat negative force in terms of social justice in its favouring of the system at the expense of the individual. In support of his argument he highlights regressive measures like the removal of the need for corroboration, unaccountable policing and Scotland's shame, the failure to resolve the disgrace that is the Lockerbie prosecution. To that I could add the Government's increasingly incestuous relationship with the Crown Office and police which has resulted in what Lord McCluskey has referred to as the "blurring of important boundaries" and the arrogant and obstructive "wha's like us"' approach to human rights principles espoused in the Supreme Court and European Court.

As a justice campaigner and supporter of independence, however, I have been encouraged to approach the referendum confident that a vote for independence will result in a new Scottish constitution which not only enshrines these principles of justice and equality but produces a government committed to that cause. (...)

Above all we require visionary voices offering escape from the old systems and self-serving values which have suffocated dissent and devalued justice. We need to develop the political will to ensure that our justice system and its institutions serve justice for all and not the self-interest of a minority elite.

I would be the first to accept that my Yes vote will be a considerable act of faith and that difficult times lie ahead, but at least it echoes Nelson Mandela's hope: "May your choices reflect your hopes, not your fears."

An American conservative on Scottish independence, Megrahi and Lockerbie

[What follows is an excerpt from an article by San Francisco Chronicle conservative columnist Debra J Saunders published yesterday on the newspaper’s SFGate website:]

In June, President Obama spoke against an “aye” vote when he spoke of America’s “deep interest in making sure that one of the closest allies that we will ever have, the United Kingdom, remains strong, robust, united and an effective partner.” Obama should have used stronger language, as he will need a strong United Kingdom in the war (yes, war) against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

It can be no accident that a masked Islamic State henchman engaged in the brutal beheading of aid worker David Haines, a Brit and a Scotsman, as the big vote looms. [Cabinet Secretary for Justice Kenny] MacAskill has told Sky News that a “yes” vote would bring the very liberal Scotland freedom from decisions made under the coalition government of conservative Prime Minister David Cameron — that is, freedom from British defense spending and any wars into which the United Kingdom is drawn.

But it’s not that easy to opt out of war when terrorists are willing to export it — as MacAskill well should know. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 270, including 11 Scots on the ground. A Scottish court found Libyan intelligence agent Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi guilty. He received a life sentence that left him eligible for parole after 20 years, but served a mere eight years in a Scottish prison. On the dubious ground that prostate cancer left Megrahi with less than three months to live, MacAskill granted Megrahi “compassionate” release in 2009. The son of the late Moammar Khadafy flew the terrorist home to a hero’s welcome on a tarmac in Tripoli, where Scotland’s worst mass murderer lived into 2012. [RB: That son's account of the "hero's welcome" can be read here.] Salmond explained, “Sometimes someone has to break the cycle of retribution with an act of compassion.” It’s a shame his Scottish National Party doesn’t feel the same way about Great Britain.

The Scottish independence referendum, Lockerbie and Megrahi

[What follows is a brief extract from a long article about the Scottish independence referendum on the widely-followed US news and comment website News Junkie Post by John Goss, one of the site’s editors:]

Should the Yes campaign succeed, Alex Salmond, the Leader of the Scottish National Party (SNP) and Member of the Scottish Parliament, will almost certainly head the new government. Mr Salmond appears to be quite an establishment figure. Like David Cameron and all prime ministers since the Lockerbie bombing, Salmond has opposed a public inquiry into a tragedy for which Abdelbaset al Megrahi was blamed and imprisoned when it is widely believed today that Megrahi was in no way involved. Though Salmond will get his assured place in history with a Yes vote, he will not be head of parliament indefinitely, and one day the Scottish people might choose to elect another Kier Hardie to bring real justice to the impoverished.

[A report in today’s edition of The Herald on the referendum voting intentions of people in the traditionally Labour stronghold of Kilmarnock contains the following:]

Marie Clowes, 56, is a good example of the kind of Labour voter who is voting "Yes". (...)

She said: "What changed my mind was Mrs Thatcher died and it awakened feelings of anger about the Tories and I thought to myself: 'While Nelson Mandela was being decried down there as a terrorist by the Iron Lady, he was getting the freedom of Glasgow'.

"And then the next thing I thought was that when the whole world was against us, Kenny MacAskill freed Abdelbasset al-Megrahi to international condemnation. It was these two things that made me stop and say: 'Wait a minute, we can be different'. I think there is a different culture in Scotland. We cannot save the English working class - they have got to save themselves."

Because of Megrahi US intelligence "wouldn't cooperate with independent Scotland"

[What follows is an excerpt from one of many articles in today’s edition of The Mail on Sunday explaining how the sky will fall if Scotland is so foolish as to vote to become an independent country:]

An independent Scotland will leave the rest of the UK exposed to acts of terrorism from groups such as Islamic State, security experts warned last night.

They say that on the day of independence Scotland will lose the services of MI5, MI6 and GCHQ and the rest of the UK’s intelligence-gathering operations.

Its newly created Scottish security and intelligence agency is expected to be left with just 720 spies to defend the new state – and it will no longer be able to rely on the cooperation of the American agencies, who view Scotland with deep suspicion after the release of Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi. (...)

And former security minister Lord West warned that Britain and America could be forced to spy on Scotland, which will be considered an alien state. If Scotland doesn’t have the resources or wherewithal to guard against Islamic extremists who have returned from Syria and Iraq then the UK will have no choice but to treat Scotland as hostile.

He said: ‘From the moment they separate they become a foreign country. As far as MI6 is concerned, they’re aliens. They haven’t thought this through. It’s deeply worrying.’

The disgrace that is the Lockerbie prosecution

[The following is an excerpt from a letter by Neil McPherson published in today's edition of The Herald:]

The Scottish legal system, which I was brought up to believe was something to be proud of and the envy of the world, is being dismantled. The cornerstone of that system is corroboration, a concept which virtually all the leading authorities, and the judiciary considered a crucial element within our (now loosely termed) common law system.

With the disgrace that is the Lockerbie prosecution already secured for history, our First Minister was furious that the Cadder decision (by the Supreme Court, to rule that suspects be offered legal advice prior to and during interview become part of Scots law). His reaction was to secure the opinion of one of the few members of the judiciary who did not believe that corroboration was a necessary safeguard to minimise miscarriages of justice and to ensure fairness, and the Lord Justice Clerk provided the First Minister with the findings he hoped for.

Scotland today is being told that a vote for independence will lead to a fairer society. The evidence so far is that those advocating this change have produced and continue to produce a legal system where fairness plays no part and where right-wing ideology rules supreme.

[It should be pointed out that “the disgrace that is the Lockerbie prosecution” was perpetrated under a Labour-Liberal Democrat Scottish administration, both of which parties are campaigning against independence for Scotland.]

Discredited forensic science at heart of Lockerbie conviction

What follows is an item posted on this blog on this date five years ago:

Gareth Peirce calls for independent inquiry into Lockerbie bombing

[This is the headline over a report in today's edition of The Times. It reads in part:]

An independent inquiry into the Lockerbie bombing was called for last night by a leading human rights lawyer.

Gareth Peirce, who has represented a string of high-profile victims of miscarriage of justice, said that the forensic evidence on which the Lockerbie bomber, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, was convicted was flawed.

The finding itself was “very, very worrying” and based the same kind of discredited forensic science that was at the heart of several notable miscarriages of justice in the '70s and '80s, she said.

“The [Lockerbie] case was founded on twin pillars: one, that al-Megrahi was linked to a charred fragment of a bomb timer; and second, his identification was ‘claimed’ by a man who could not be sure of his evidence.

“Has everyone forgotten the lessons learned of flawed scientific evidence and identification?

“The point being made by the families over 20 years is that they want to know the cause of the Lockerbie disaster. And at every turn, limitations have been put on their ability to discover it.” (...)

She said that there had been a Fatal Accident Inquiry in 1999, which was limited to the immediate cause of the explosion so as not to prejudice future prosecutions, she said.

Some 15 years later there was the prosecution in the Hague of two Libyans, where the family could only be present and observe. But there had never been a “proper explanation of what they want to hear.”

But a UN assessor appointed to the trial had been scathing of the judges’ verdict, she added, and of the “atmosphere of political interference that permeated the trial”.

It was now down to ministers to set up an independent inquiry, whether Scottish or UK ministers, she said.

“I completely endorse what the families say, that this country, Britain, bears the responsibility for there being an adequate investigation into what actually occurred.”

She added that the fact that the case was referred back to the Court of Appeal by the Scottish Criminal Cases Appeal Commission showed the huge obstacles that al-Megrahi had surmounted.

“It is very difficult to get a case referred back. “He then had a choice of abandoning it and going home to die, or staying a fighting it,” she added.

But it was crucial that the evidence assembled came out. “The families had believed that after 20 years there was about to be a proper investigation. But their wishes have been frustrated.”

Eleven years since removal of UN sanctions against Libya

[Today marks the eleventh anniversary of the removal by the United Nations Security Council of the sanctions against Libya imposed in the wake of Lockerbie. Here are some extracts from the report published at the time by the United Nations News Centre:]

After several delays in recent weeks, the United Nations Security Council today finally lifted decade-old sanctions imposed against Libya over the deadly bombing in 1988 of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, after Tripoli agreed to pay up to $10 million each to the families of the 270 victims.

The vote on the resolution, adopted by 13 in favour with two abstentions – France and the United States – had been postponed repeatedly while Paris negotiated with Libya to improve a settlement of $34 million it had already reached over the similar bombing of a French UTA plane over Niger in 1989, which killed 170 people.

Welcoming the vote, Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in a statement he hoped this "important step, along with the settlement arrangements agreed following many years of intensive negotiations, will help bring some comfort to the families of the victims of the tragic events" over Scotland and Niger "as the international community strives to bring this tragic chapter to a close."

The sanctions, which included a ban on military sales, air communications and certain oil equipment, had already been suspended by the Council in 1999 after Libya agreed to hand over two nationals for trial before a Scottish court sitting in the Netherlands in connection with the bombing. One of them, Abdel Basset Al-Megrahi, was convicted and jailed for his role.

The United Kingdom and Bulgaria cosponsored the resolution after Libya told the Council in August of its readiness to cooperate in the international fight against terrorism and compensate the families of those killed at Lockerbie, as demanded by Council resolutions 748 of 1992 and 883 of 1993.

Earlier this week, UK Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry, who is Council President for the month of September, said Libya’s current compliance with the terms of the earlier resolutions could allow it to move back into the international community.

[A flavour of the current situation in Libya, eleven years after the removal of sanctions and approaching three years after the death of Muammar Gaddafi, can be gleaned here and here and here.]

Story breaks of Heathrow baggage area security breach

[What follows is a report from The Mirror newspaper published on this date in 2001:]

Pan Am's Heathrow baggage area was broken into hours before Flight 103 was blasted apart over Lockerbie, The Mirror has found. But a statement on the incident made to police by security guard Ray Manly 12 years ago was lost and the crucial information never revealed in court. Mr Manly found a padlock cut open, leaving the way clear for a bomb to be planted in an area where luggage was ready to be loaded. The lock, which could yield clues, is also missing. Mr Manly, 63, said: "I can't believe the statement was lost. It's just incredible."

The new evidence throws doubt on the murder conviction of Libyan Abdelbaset Al Megrahi, 49. Prosecutors said the Flight 103 bomb was flown from Malta to Heathrow. The defence said it was more likely the bomb was introduced at Heathrow. Heathrow security guard Mr Manly was stunned when his evidence of a potential bomb threat to Pan Am's Flight 103 was ignored by the Lockerbie trial. The reason was simple - a statement he made to police disappeared and his information was overlooked. As a result, neither prosecution or defence knew a break-in had taken place. Shocked Mr Manly discovered a professional had sliced through a heavy duty padlock protecting Pan Am's baggage area at Heathrow's Terminal Three hours before the doomed flight took off.

It left the way clear for terrorists to steal a luggage tag and plant a suitcase bomb among baggage already X-rayed and ready for loading. Although Mr Manly reported the break-in, it was NOT investigated before take-off. Anti-terrorist police only questioned him about the incident the next month and never questioned him again. And, 12 years later, there is no sign of the statement or padlock which could hold vital forensic clues. The new evidence could now play a crucial role in the appeal of convicted bomber Abdelbaset Ali Mohamet Al Megrahi, 49, who is serving life for the outrage which killed 270. Mr Manly, 63 - who has since been questioned for three hours by prosecutors - told a friend: "I can't believe my evidence was not part of the trial and my statement went missing.

"A terrorist who wanted to put a bomb on that plane would have gained access to the perfect place. The luggage would not be checked again before being loaded on the plane. "Although police took a statement, I never heard from anyone afterwards. When there was no mention of my evidence at the trial I rang police who put me in touch with the defence. "They told me no one knew about my statement or the break-in. I find that just incredible. "My statement has disappeared and so has the padlock. No one can even tell me if it was tested for fingerprints. "This has been weighing on my mind for over 12 years. At last someone is taking it seriously." The Mirror has obtained copies of two sworn affidavits Mr Manly, who has arthritis, made to defence lawyers.

They will form a key part of Al Megrahi's appeal next year. Mr Manly may be called to give evidence. The guard discovered the security breach at 12.30am on December 21, 1988, seventeen and a half hours before Flight 103 was ripped apart at 31,000ft. At the time, he was in charge of four staff stationed at numbered control posts on the public side of the airport to ensure only those authorised could enter the airside section. One control post - CP2 - was on the ground floor of the terminal, less than 50ft from the Pan Am check-in desk. It was next to the entrance to a Pan Am baggage area on the airside used for luggage too big to be processed by normal check-in procedures. There was a door in a corridor linking the check-in area and the control post. But it was never locked. A guard would be posted outside the rubber doors of the baggage entrance at all times when they were unlocked. When there were no more bags to check in, the doors would be locked and a padlocked metal bar placed across. Mr Manly, of Surbiton, Surrey, was making his rounds when he found the broken padlock.

He said in his statement to lawyers: "Position CP2 had been interfered with. The doors were closed. "However, the padlock was on the floor to the left of the doors and had been cut through in a way which suggested bolt cutters had been used. I reported my discovery to my night duty officer, Phil Radley and stayed at the post until I could be relieved. "I did not search the area or enter into the airside through the door. No other person came to the scene. "In the area airside of CP2, baggage containers for use inside aircraft were left. Loose baggage tagged for loading on to flights would also be left. "In the check-in area Pan Am baggage labels of various types were left unsecured in desks. "I believe it would have been possible for an unauthorised person to obtain tags for a particular Pan Am flight then, having broken the CP2 lock, to have introduced a tagged bag into the baggage build up area."

Now retired Mr Manly told his friend: "It was the most serious security breach that I came across in 17 years at Heathrow. "This was a professional job. It would have allowed an intruder direct access to the area where Pan Am bags were stored. "The bags had come from other flights and would already have been tagged and X-rayed." Mr Manly - who recorded the incident in a log book and an incident report form - reported back to his supervisor who alerted police at the airport. He was told to stay at CP2 until he was relieved two hours later. In that time, neither his supervisor or police arrived. Amazingly, Mr Manly was not interviewed by anti-terrorist police until the following month. He said: "I was interviewed by a Mr Robson who took a statement. He had the broken padlock in his possession."

After learning that his evidence was lost, Mr Manly was quizzed in March by a lawyer from Scottish prosecutors. He said: "He wanted to know why I hadn't come forward before. I told him I'd given my evidence to police and assumed it had gone forward to the court. "No one has been able to explain why that didn't happen. "It was lucky the airport authorities were able to find the log book and incident form I'd filled in. Otherwise I doubt anyone would have believed me."

Al Megrahi was jailed for a minimum 20 years in January by a Scottish court sitting in Camp Zeist in the Netherlands. Alleged accomplice Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah, 44, was cleared. Prosecutors claimed the Libyans placed a suitcase bomb on a flight from Luqa airport, in Malta, to Frankfurt. The case was then "interlined" on to a connecting flight to Heathrow where it was stored before being loaded on Flight 103. But Al Megrahi's defence, Bill Taylor QC, insisted there was no direct evidence of this. Instead, he said, a terrorist could have introduced the bomb at Heathrow as there would be less risk of the device being lost.

Peter Walker, Pan Am baggage supervisor at Heathrow, told the £66million hearing six interline bags were loaded on the flight along with luggage from Frankfurt and Heathrow passengers. At the time, Heathrow did not have guards based inside the airside baggage build-up area. There was also no system to prevent unaccompanied bags being loaded on planes. At first, it was believed Palestinian terrorists carried out the attack on the orders of Iran. Suspicion fell on Megrahi and Fhimah after the CIA received information from a Libyan spy. The Procurator Fiscal's Office in Edinburgh, which brought the case, said last night: "As an appeal is pending it is inappropriate to comment."

[The concealment from Megrahi’s defence team of the evidence relating to the Heathrow break-in is the subject of one of Justice for Megrahi’s allegations of criminal misconduct in the Lockerbie investigation, prosecution and trial that are currently under investigation by Police Scotland.]

Malaysia Airlines flight 17 and Pan Am flight 103 contrasted

[The following are excerpts from a long report published today on the World Socialist Web Site:]

The Dutch Safety Board’s (DSB’s) preliminary report into the crash of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17) is being portrayed by imperialist governments and their media spokesmen as confirmation that anti-Kiev rebels in eastern Ukraine shot the plane down with a Russian-supplied Buk surface-to-air missile.

While claims of indirect Russian responsibility for the destruction of MH17 are at the heart of the US-NATO propaganda over Ukraine, the report says nothing of the sort. In fact, it does not even state that the aircraft was shot down. MH17 crashed on July 17, in the war zone of eastern Ukraine. All 298 passengers and crew members lost their lives.

The DSB’s report states that, in accordance with the stated “sole objective” of “the prevention of similar accidents and incidents,” it does not “apportion blame or liability in respect of any party”—something that the capitalist media downplays or ignores.

The only basis on which the media can again repeat their assertions that pro-Russian separatists were responsible is the report’s statement that “The damage observed in the forward section of the aircraft appears to indicate that the aircraft was penetrated by a large number of high-energy objects from outside the aircraft” (emphasis added).

But the report never once identifies what it means by “high-energy objects.” It also claims that, even though enough of the wreckage was recovered to confirm that the aircraft appears to have been particularly badly hit above the level of the cockpit floor, DSB investigators supposedly failed to recover or study any of the objects that penetrated the plane.

The report as issued is equally compatible with radar and satellite data presented July 21 by the Russian military, indicating that a Ukrainian SU-25 fighter jet was in the immediate vicinity and ascending towards MH17 as it was shot down. Missiles and machinegun rounds fired by an SU-25 are also “high-energy objects.” This possibility has not been addressed, let alone refuted by Kiev, Washington or anyone else involved in the investigation.

On August 9 [RB: the correct date is August 7], the Malaysian New Straits Times published an article effectively charging the Kiev regime with shooting down MH17. It stated that evidence from the crash site indicated that the plane was shot down by a Ukrainian fighter with a missile followed by heavy machine gun fire. The report was subsequently ignored by the world’s media. (...)

The DSB does not address the absence of any satellite imagery or radar data, or any other evidence supplied by US intelligence agencies, which operate the most powerful global surveillance network. It is implausible, to say the least, to imagine that Washington’s vast apparatus was paying no attention to the war zone of eastern Ukraine, which is also a regular flight path for many commercial airline flights. (...)

In sharp contrast, following the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, photographs of the area taken by a French satellite were delivered to the investigators within hours. The US Department of Defence and NASA also provided the investigation with high-resolution photographs from spy satellites.

Despite Russia continually requesting that the US administration supply the investigation with the images and data it obviously possesses relating to the MH17 crash, it has refused to do so.

[Further posts on this blog about MH17 as compared with, or contrasted to, Pan Am 103 can be found here.]

Recruitment of the FBI's Lockerbie "golden informant"

[What follows is taken from an article headed Richard Marquise and his "Golden Informant" Majid Giaka - An Extract from "Enemies - A History of the FBI" by Tim Weiner posted yesterday on baz’s blog The Masonic Verses:]

Tim Weiner's recent book Enemies - A History of the FBI is a fascinating story of the creation of the FBI within the US Justice Department following American entry into the Great War, not for the purpose of criminal investigation but to counter the threat of radicals, anarchists and communists by means of dubious constitutionality. (...)

The author devotes six pages to an uncritical account of the Bureau's involvement in the Lockerbie case focusing on the role of the leader of the FBI taskforce (of 7 persons) Richard Marquise. (Tom Thurman is not mentioned.)

Marquise was recently quoted in the Dutch media in a story titled "The Lessons of Lockerbie" in relation to the shooting down of flight MH17 over the Ukraine. Marquise advocated the recruitment of a "Golden Informant" to solve the case just as he had done in the Lockerbie case (and by ignoring the actual evidence). Weiner's book gives a very interesting summary of how this "Golden Informant" Majid Giaka was recruited (page 372).

"Marquise needed to turn intelligence into evidence.  He needed a witness who would link Megrahi to the Samsonite suitcase with the Semtex.  He needed to find someone who knew that the suitcase carried the bomb from Air Malta to Pan Am 103.  He went back to the CIA. The Agency told him, belatedly, that it had once had a Libyan informant named Abdul Majid Giaka. He had gone on the CIA's payroll four months before Lockerbie. He was on it the night Pan Am 103 was bombed. But the Agency had dropped him a few months later, deeming him a fabricator milking his interrogators for money.

Marquise was dying to talk to Majid, no matter how dubious he seemed to the CIA.  In June 1991 the Agency flew him from a navy ship off the coast of Malta to give the FBI the chance to interview him in Virginia.  Justly wary of its informant, the CIA imposed one condition: don't tell anybody."  (Marquise immediately phoned Stuart Henderson.)  

"Majid was debriefed for at least two weeks during September 1991. He insisted that he knew three facts. He identified Megrahi as an intelligence officer serving as Libya's airline security chief. He said that Megrahi's subordinate in Malta had a cache of Semtex. And he said he had seen Megrahi with a large brown suitcase at the airport in Malta during the weeks before the Lockerbie bombing. Majid was without doubt an unreliable witness. But the FBI had faith that he was telling the truth on those three points. Marquise thought he had the foundation of a case that would stand up in court."

Giaka's account did stand up unchallenged before a patriotic US Grand Jury leading to the November 1991 indictment. However, it crumbled before even the Mickey Mouse Camp Zeist tribunal when in the defence team's finest hour they had admitted in evidence a large number of CIA cables regarding Giaka. What is astonishing is that Megrahi was actually convicted despite Giaka being discredited, a fact not mentioned in Mr Weiner's book.

Perhaps some of the parties to the MH17 atrocity will, (or have already) recruited their own "Golden Informant".

Marquise's wrote his own account of the Lockerbie investigation in his book Scotbom.  (Which I have never read.) Giaka of course never wrote his memoirs and has never been heard of since the close of the Camp Zeist trial.

I am afraid the only "Lesson of Lockerbie" for the families of those murdered on flight MH17 is how Governments fabricate evidence to suit their own political objectives regardless of the facts.

Forthcoming performance of Lockerbie play

[There is to be a performance of Lee Gershuny’s play Lockerbie: Lost Voices at the Beacon Arts Centre in Greenock on 3 October 2014. The play was first performed, to considerable acclaim, at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival in 2013. The online advertisement for the forthcoming production reads as follows:]

Friday 3 October at 7:30pm in The Beacon Studio Theatre. Tickets £10 (Concessions £8)

Meet six hypothetical passengers on Pan Am Flight 103 on 21 December 1988 before and after the plane explodes over Lockerbie. A mother and her stepdaughter argue about the roots of injustice; a retired couple clash over family versus personal dreams; and a US intelligence agent tries to convince a Scottish journalist to risk her life for the “scoop of the century.” With humour, love and courage, they challenge each other to either accept the unacceptable or take a stand for their personal truth. After the explosion, they speak from the neutrality of death, witnessing and questioning events as they unfold on the ground.

Beacon Arts Centre | 01475 723723