[What follows is excerpted from a review by Alan Taylor in the Scottish Review of Books of John Ashton’s Megrahi: You are my Jury:]
For the police, the key breakthrough in this many-tentacled investigation came on 15 February 1991 when they put twelve photographs in front of Tony Gauci and asked him if any of them showed the man who had come into his shop. Gauci, writes Ashton, ‘studied all the photographs, then told [DCI Harry] Bell, “They are all younger than the man who bought the clothes.” Bell asked him to try to allow for any age difference and to judge which most closely resembled the man. Gauci looked again, at one point picking up the card. He studied Abdelbaset’s photo three times. [DC] Crawford subsequently described thinking to himself, “He’s gonna pick him.” And sure enough, Gauci did. “I would say that the photograph at No. 8 is similar to the man who bought the clothing,” he said, adding, “the hair is perhaps a bit long. The eyebrows are the same. The nose is the same and his chin and shape of his mouth at are the same. The man in the photograph No 8 is in my opinion in his thirty years. He would perhaps have to look about ten years or more older and he would look like the man who bought the clothes. It’s been a long time now [two and a quarter years] and I can only say that this photograph No. 8 resembles the man who bought the clothing, but it is younger.” At the end of the statement he added, “I can only say that of all the photographs I have been shown this photograph No. 8 is the only one really similar to the man who bought the clothing…other than the one my brother showed me.”’
This, adds Ashton, is a reference to Mohamed Abu Talb, another suspect whose photograph had appeared in the Sunday Times and which Paul had shown to Tony. But the police were not interested in that. They had their man, or so they supposed. (...)
It would be wrong to suggest that it was only Tony Gauci’s testimony which led to the conviction of Abdelbaset Al-Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing. Equally it would be wrong to say that his conviction would have been obtained and upheld without it.
DOSSIER LOCKERBIE, 2017 >> google translation, German/English:
ReplyDeleteOnly who ask about the deliberately used "illegal aspects" in the chronologically arranged career of an MST-13 Timerfragments (PT35) - why was at 'RARDE', three (3) different date, of an MST-13 Timerfragment found in at a 'slalom' shirt - can present a fraud of proof and its backgrounds. MEBO can do it!
First, of all: with a document from the German Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) from May 9, 1990. Its shows that in the case of the Scottish jurisdiction in Kamp van Zeist (1999/2000) the true "date of discovery" of the MST-13 timer fragment (20th of January 1990) has been embezzled - therfore a wrong verdict is constantly still legal present til today!
++
Nur wer den Fragen über die vorsätzlich gesetzten "kriminellen Aspekte" im chronologisch verlaufenden Werdegang eines MST-13 Timerfragments (PT35) nachgeht - weshalb bei RARDE, an drei (3) verschiedenen Datum, ein MST-13 Timerfragment in einem 'Slalom'Shirt aufgefunden wurde - kann einen Beweisbetrug und seine Hintergründe klarlegen - MEBO kann es !
Vorab: Ein Dokument des Deutschen Bundeskriminalamt (BKA) vom 9. Mai 1990, beweist, dass der Schottischen Gerichtsbarkeit, in Kamp van Zeist (1999/2000) das wahre "Funddatum" des MST-13 Timerfragments (20. Januar 1990) unterschlagen wurde und dadurch bis heute, ein falsches Urteil rechtsgültig präsentiert wird !
by Edwin Bollier, MEBO LTD. Telecommunication Switzerland. Webpage: www.lockerbie.ch
If Alan Taylor had extended his research a little further, he would have discovered a telling piece of evidence never disclosed during the trial or first appeal.
ReplyDeleteOn 15th February 1991 Gauci did indeed produce his uncertain identification of al-Megrahi. But he did it against a background of offers of "unlimited monies, with $10,000 available immediately" from the US Department of Justice, in a letter to chief police investigator Harry Bell. The question at that stage might be asked, for what or for whom was the $10,000 "available immediately"?
Just six days after the above identification of al-Megrahi, in a memo dated 21st February 1991 to DSIO Gilchrist, Bell stated: "Tony Gauci expressed an interest in receiving money at recent meetings" and that "if a monetary offer was made, this may well change his view". We may ask, change his view from what, to what?
At the conclusion of the trial, Gauci received $2m, and his brother Paul received $1m. When the press discovered that Gauci and his father had on several occasions been entertained by the police with luxury holidays in Scotland, the advice from the police to both was, in the event of comments by media or others, to say that they had won money on the European Lotto. This point is also recorded in Bell's police diary. Again, this was not revealed to the court during the trial or first appeal.
Corruption at the highest level, with criminal activities by senior policemen and others. Yet still, today, nothing has been done to correct it. The Scottish government ignores it, and the Scottish police delay, delay, delay.
All the above is clearly recorded in Harry Bell's police diary, and in the report prepared by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission. All is in the public domain, available for reporters to read and research. Yet none seem interested. Two years ago the deputy editor of a Sunday national newspaper said to me "It is not news any more". All is evidence of a national government and society sick to its very core.