The Lockerbie Case: English barrister demolishes Crown's Lockerbie Megrahi evidence

Thursday, 8 March 2012

English barrister demolishes Crown's Lockerbie Megrahi evidence

The indefatigable David Wolchover, barrister and Head of Chambers Emeritus at 7 Bell Yard, has recently returned to the charge over Lockerbie and the Megrahi conviction in three articles in the Criminal Law & Justice Weekly. Synopses of the articles can be found here and here and here.

Mr Wolchover has also produced a magnificent 26,000 word, 24-page, monograph entitled Culprits of Lockerbie: Gaddafi or the Extemists of Palestine in which he dissects the evidence led at Zeist against Megrahi and Libya and explores (a) the evidence for Heathrow (rather than Malta-Frankfurt) insertion of the bomb suitcase and (b) the evidence pointing towards PFLP-GC responsibility. The monograph can be read here. It has now been revised and expanded (see especially pages 6 and 7) to take account of comments by baz on this blog.

Previous Lockerbie articles by David Wolchover are referred to on this blog here.

3 comments:

msadams08 March, 2012
Wow. What a fantastic piece. Should be mandatory reading for the entire Scottish Parliament.
ReplyDelete
Replies
baz13 March, 2012
"Magnifient" - "Fantastic" - I thought it was dire. In which parallel universe did Gaddafi renounce terrorism in November 1988in order to support Arafat's capitulation to the "extremists of Palestine." There were several errors of fact and a few wrong dates but I thought the attempt to prove the existence and identity of "Abu Elias" was risible. I cannot believe the author is a Barrister. He wrote "there can be little doubt Abu Elias exists." Well I doubt it becuase there is no credible evidence that he does exist. Excuse me if I don't take Marwan Khreesat's word for it!
ReplyDelete
Replies
Robert Black19 March, 2012
David Wolchover's monograph has now been revised and expanded (see especially pages 6 and 7) to take account of baz's (somewhat OTT?) comments.
ReplyDelete
Replies

Add comment

Comments

Readers are invited to comment on blog posts. All comments require to be pre-moderated by me, and I shall reject all (a) that are not related to the Lockerbie disaster or (b) that fail to meet my -- perhaps idiosyncratic -- standards of courtesy towards other contributors. Comments will not be rejected simply because I disagree with them or because I, or other contributors, find them irritating. But comments will be rejected if they distort or misrepresent the evidence; are defamatory; or if they risk embroiling me, as publisher, in defamation proceedings. I am perfectly relaxed about being sued in respect of material which I personally have posted -- but not in respect of material that others wish to post as comments and which, in any case, I often strongly disagree with.

Particularly during my sojourns in South Africa, it may not be possible for me to perform the moderation function speedily. I regret the necessity of moderation but it has been rendered inevitable by the behaviour of a particular commentator whose contributions will always and without exception be rejected.

No correspondence will be entered into regarding moderation decisions.