The text of the Lumpert affidavit

[It has been suggested to me by a regular reader of this blog that in the light of recent posts referring to the Lumpert affidavit and the alleged fabrication of timer fragment PT-35b, it would be useful to have the text of the affidavit available here on the blog. A copy of the original affidavit in German can be found here on the MEBO Ltd website. What follows is a translation by me, making some use of the English-language version also to be found on that website:]

AFFIDAVIT:

of Mr Ulrich Lumpert, electronic engineer,

ex-employee at company MEBO Ltd Telecommunication

8004 Zurich / Switzerland, between 1978 and 1994.

Ex a witness during the trial 'Fhimah, Al Megrahi'

(Lockerbie-case) 2000 in Kamp van Zeist NL.

Personal data

Name: Ulrich Lumpert;

Date of birth: 20 September 1942;

Occupation: electronic engineer;

Residence: (...), Kt. Zurich / Switzerland

°°°

AFFIDAVIT:

The following facts, which correspond to the truth, were signed by Mr Ulrich Lumpert on 18th July 2007.

1. During the examination by the Bundespolizei (Federal Police) "BUPO" Switzerland, FBI and Scottish Police present in Zurich in 1991

and

the examination of the Bundeskriminalamt (BKA) (Federal Bureau of Criminal Investigation) by Commissioner Fuhl in Konstanz / Germany 1991

as well as

in the "Lockerbie Trial" in Kamp van Zeist 2000,

I had testified as witness No 550 and stated in the record, that of the 3 pieces of hand-made prototypes MST-13 timer PC-boards the third MST-13 PC-board was broken and I had thrown it away;

ULRICH LUMPERT, 8122 Binz / Kt. Zurich / Switzerland

Page 2  U.L.

I built two functioning MST-13 Timers with the remaining 2 PC-Boards, which were delivered to the GDR State Security Service (STASI) by Mr Bollier;

The MST-13 PC-Boards consisted of 8 layers of fiberglass and were brown in colour.

2. These statements recorded by me were not correct.

I confirm today on 18th July 2007 that I stole the third hand-manufactured MST-13 timer PC-board consisting of 8 layers of fiberglass from MEBO Ltd and gave it without permission on *22nd June 1989 to a person who was an official investigator in the "Lockerbie case".

3.  At this *time I did not know that the MST-13 timer PC-board was used for a specific purpose in connection with the attack on PanAm 103, otherwise I would have requested permission from one of the owners of M/S Mebo Ltd (Meister or Bollier) to release the MST-13 PC-board.

4. In addition I handed over without permission a summary of the production films, hand-stuck templates and the blueprints of the MST-13 timer production in a yellow evelope to Det Superintendent James Gilchrist, Scottish Police during a *visit to Zurich in June1991.

(* according to Mebo: without the necessary sanction of the Swiss law enforcement).

5. Reason why I did not explain the true background before the court proceedings. I have been living in an indescribable condition of depression of and fear since my second examination by the police in 1991.

I got a shock and was in a significant state of anxiety when I was shown the photograph with the apparent MST-13 timer fragment by the "BUPO", FBI and the Scottish Police, surprisingly for the first time in *mid January 1991, which was apparently found in Lockerbie and they confronted me with the fact that this MST-13 timer fragment was found in Lockebie and was a part of the ignition device of the suitcase with explosives, which caused the Boeing 747 Pan Am Flight 103 to crash, killing 270 people.

ULRICH LUMPERT, 8122 Binz / Kt. Zurich / Switzerland

Page 3  U.L.

*According to Mr Bollier`s statement he was shown photographs of the MST-13 timer fragment (No.PT/35, PT/35(b) etc.) on 23rd April 1990 by "BUPO" and on 15th November 1990 by FBI and the Scottish Police.

Although the portrayed MST-13 fragment at this time itself, had been sawed into two pieces apparently for forensic reasons, it did not escape me that the MST-13 fragment on the police photograph (No. PT/35(b) came from the non-operational MST-13 prototype PC-board that I had stolen; this because there are clear characteristics e.g. on a specific soldering terminal, a relay had never been soldered.

The soldering terminal was flat and clean at this place.

Take note: I saw the photograph with the illustration of the non-processed originals, apparently the MST-13 timer fragment under "Evidence No. PT-35, image 9 from , for the first time at MEBO Ltd after the "Lockerbie- Appeal 2001", before my first Affidavit.

I clearly recognize the scratched remnants of the soldering tracts on this enlarged digital police photograph. I had nothing to do with the letter "M" (possibly an abbreviation of Muster 'sample'), which appears.

When I realized that the MST-13 PC-board, after it was handed over by me without permission was misused for deliberate politically criminal "action", it was clear to me that I was stuck "in the middle of it" and decided to keep quiet, for it could have been extremely dangerous for me as an unintentional "bearer of secrets".

I am sorry for the consequences of my silence at that time for the innocent Libyan Mr Abdelbaset Al Megrahi, sentenced to life imprisonment, and for the country of Libya.

ULRICH LUMPERT, 8122 Binz / Kt. Zurich, Switzerland

Page 4  U.L.

With the information known to me I would like to put an end to the accusation that Libya is responsible for the Lockerbie tragedy by "manufacturing" MST-13 timer-link with criminal intent.

6. The reason why I reveal this fundamentally important information only today:

I would like to use this opportunity to clear my conscience, because I cannot be prosecuted for stealing, delivering and making false statements about the MST-13 timer PC-board, on grounds of statutory limitation.

7. The time is right for this, because action for a 2nd appeal has been granted in the "Lockerbie Case" on account of "Miscarriage of Justice".

I would also like to apologize to Mr Meister and Mr Bollier, MEBO Ltd for the damage caused to their prestige.

I herewith declare that the contents of the Affidavit are true.

4 pages.

Zürich, 18.07.2007

Signature:

(U.L.)  Ulrich Lumpert

__________________________________________________________

Only valid for the German Affidavit

Official Certification

This is to certify that this copy corresponds exactly with the document (4 single pages) shown to us this day and declared to be the orginal.

Zurich, this 18. 07. 2007

B No. 2070

Fee: Fr. 35.-- NOTARIAT ALTSTETTEN- ZÜRICH

Signature:

Walter Wieland, certifying officer

A view from France

The website of the French news agency Alter Info today publishes a lengthy article on the Libyan political scene. It starts with a discussion of the Lockerbie affair and takes the view that Libya was framed. Much weight is given to the recent affidavit by MEBO engineer Ulrich Lumpert relating to the provenance of the fragment of MST-13 circuit board that was such an important link in incriminating Libya and Megahi. The relevant portion of the article reads as follows:

'Après l'attentat de Lockerbie, les USA ont prouvé la culpabilité de la Libye sur le fait qu'un élément de détonateur de fabrication Suisse avait été trouvé sur les lieux. Justement, la Suisse venait de vendre 20 détonateurs de ce modèle à la Libye. Cette dernière était néanmoins parvenue à présenter les 20 détonateurs à des émissaires. Mais "tout concordait". Cette cabale a coûté un libyen innoçent en prison à perpetuité et 2,7 milliards d'US$ d'indemnités aux familles de victimes. 10 millions de dollars à chacune des familles des 270 victimes de l'attentat.

'Coup de théatre, en 2007, un ingénieur Suisse du nom d'Ulrich Lumpert, ex-employé du fabricant des détonateurs, l'entreprise Suisse MEBO, avoue avoir menti et avoir volé le fragment de détonateur et l'avoir "donné" à un des enquêteurs écossais. La CIA a dès lors eu beau jeu de prouver la culpabilité de la Libye. Ce fragment était en fait issu d'un détonateur défectueux mis au rebut, n'ayant pas passé le contrôle qualité. Après "traitement" (après "l'explosion de l'avion") par la CIA, le fragment était difficilement identifiable comme tel. Ce qui a néanmoins été fait par Ulrich Lumpert!

'Ulrich Lumpert, ingénieur Suisse travaillant pour le fabricant des détonateurs à l'époque de l'attentat de Lockerbie, a donc "donné" (pour quel prix? Mystère) la preuve nécessaire à la CIA pour faire accuser la Libye. La CIA avait de bonnes raisons de conspirer contre la Libye, dont le fait que Kadhafi était le héros de la nation africaine parce qu'il visait le développement de l'Union Africaine qui stagnait, minée par les occidentaux. Mais aussi parce que Kadhafi avait eu le talent de joindre une démocratie populaire à une intégration de sa culture musulmane et l'éradication de l'islamisme dans son pays.

'Les USA dépensent des milliards pour rendre les musulmans belliqueux, ce n'est pas pour qu'un Kadhafi calme le jeu.

'L'attentat de Lockerbie, après des mois et des mois d'enquête, personne ne l'avait revendiqué et il n'y avait pas de coupable. Par conséquent, il était librement attribuable à n'importe qui. La Libye, gêneur de première grandeur dans les plans africains de l'occident, dont la "Révolution Verte", pour ne citer que ça, était le coupable idéal. La CIA a monté le dossier de toute pièce et s'est approchée d'Ulrich Lumpert.

'Durant des années la Libye s'est trouvée sous embargo de l'ONU sur exigence des Etats-Unis. Voyant son peuple privé de tous les éléments de première nécessité, nourriture, médicaments, Kadhafi s'est mis à genoux en avouant publiquement "la faute" de la Libye. L'embargo a été partiellement levé. Pour le lever complètement, il a été exigé de Kadhafi qu'il livre les "coupables", deux Libyens qui passaient par là justement ce jour-là et ont été filmés par les caméras de surveillance, et qu'il indemnise les familles.

'Kadhafi n'a pas eu d'autre choix que de s'exécuter. Les "coupables" se sont livrés, courageusement, pour leur pays. Ils sont allés d'eux-même se faire juger en Ecosse. Kadhafi à versé 10 millions de d'USdollars à chaque famille des 270 victimes, soit 2,7 milliards de dollars en tout. Un des libyens a été acquitté. Trop difficile à "prouver" sa culpabilité. L'autre a été condamné à vie alors qu'il est parfaitement innocent (il est toujours en prison en l'occurrence).'

MST-13 timer designer Ulrich Lumpert dies in Zürich

Edwin Bollier has announced on Facebook that Ulrich Lumpert died in Zürich this morning. Lumpert was the engineer employed by MEBO who designed the MST-13 timer that was allegedly used in the bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie. 

On 29 August 2007 an item was published on this blog that contained the following:

"Ulrich Lumpert, an engineer at one time employed by MEBO in Zurich, gave evidence at the Lockerbie trial that a fragment of circuit board allegedly found amongst the aircraft debris (and which was absolutely crucial to the prosecution contention that the bomb which destroyed Pan Am 103 was linked to Libya) was part of an operative MST-13 timer manufactured by MEBO. In an affidavit sworn in Switzerland in July 2007 [available here] Lumpert now states that the fragment produced in court was in fact part of a non-operational demonstration circuit board that he himself had removed from the premises of MEBO and had handed over to a Lockerbie investigator on 22 June 1989 (six months AFTER the destruction of Pan Am 103).

"If this is true, then it totally demolishes the prosecution version of how the aircraft was destroyed, as well, of course, as demonstrating deliberate fabrication of evidence laid before the court."

Further information relating to Ulrich Lumpert and the Lockerbie case can be found here. 

Ulrich Lumpert and the MEBO circuit board

[According to his affidavit dated 18 July 2007, it was on 22 June 1989 that MEBO employee Ulrich Lumpert handed over the MST-13 circuit board from which fragment PT/35(b) derived “to a person who was an official investigator in the Lockerbie case”. An English translation of this German-language affidavit can be read here. At the time that this affidavit became public knowledge, I commented as follows:]

Ulrich Lumpert, an engineer at one time employed by MEBO in Zurich, gave evidence at the Lockerbie trial that a fragment of circuit board allegedly found amongst the aircraft debris (and which was absolutely crucial to the prosecution contention that the bomb which destroyed Pan Am 103 was linked to Libya) was part of an operative MST-13 timer manufactured by MEBO. In an affidavit sworn in Switzerland in July 2007 (available on the website www.lockerbie.ch) Lumpert now states that the fragment produced in court was in fact part of a non-operational demonstration circuit board that he himself had removed from the premises of MEBO and had handed over to a Lockerbie investigator on 22 June 1989 (six months AFTER the destruction of Pan Am 103).

If this is true, then it totally demolishes the prosecution version of how the aircraft was destroyed, as well, of course, as demonstrating deliberate fabrication of evidence laid before the court. 

At the forthcoming appeal resulting from the SCCRC’s report on the Megrahi conviction, will the appeal court have an opportunity to assess the truth of Lumpert’s revised version of events? The hurdles are formidable. Section 106 (3C) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 provides that an appeal may not be founded upon evidence from a witness at the original trial which is different from, or additional to, the evidence that he gave at that trial, unless there is a reasonable explanation as to why the new evidence was not given by him at the original trial and that explanation is itself supported by independent evidence. In this context “independent evidence” means evidence which was not heard at the original trial; which comes from a source other than the witness himself; and which is accepted by the appeal court as credible and reliable. It might well be extremely difficult to convince a court that these conditions were satisfied in Lumpert’s case.

Obvious cover-up unacceptable for Scots citizens or international public

[The following is an excerpt from an item published on this blog on this date seven years ago:]

Ulrich Lumpert, an engineer at one time employed by MEBO in Zurich, gave evidence at the Lockerbie trial that a fragment of circuit board allegedly found amongst the aircraft debris (and which was absolutely crucial to the prosecution contention that the bomb which destroyed Pan Am 103 was linked to Libya) was part of an operative MST-13 timer manufactured by MEBO. In an affidavit sworn in Switzerland in July 2007 (available on the website www.lockerbie.ch) Lumpert now states that the fragment produced in court was in fact part of a non-operational demonstration circuit board that he himself had removed from the premises of MEBO and had handed over to a Lockerbie investigator on 22 June 1989 (six months AFTER the destruction of Pan Am 103).

If this is true, then it totally demolishes the prosecution version of how the aircraft was destroyed, as well, of course, as demonstrating deliberate fabrication of evidence laid before the court.

At the forthcoming appeal resulting from the SCCRC’s report on the Megrahi conviction, will the appeal court have an opportunity to assess the truth of Lumpert’s revised version of events? The hurdles are formidable. Section 106 (3C) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 provides that an appeal may not be founded upon evidence from a witness at the original trial which is different from, or additional to, the evidence that he gave at that trial, unless there is a reasonable explanation as to why the new evidence was not given by him at the original trial and that explanation is itself supported by independent evidence. In this context “independent evidence” means evidence which was not heard at the original trial; which comes from a source other than the witness himself; and which is accepted by the appeal court as credible and reliable. It might well be extremely difficult to convince a court that these conditions were satisfied in Lumpert’s case.

What follows is the text of a press release regarding Lumpert’s affidavit from Professor Hans Koechler, who was one of the official UN-appointed observers at the Lockerbie trial:

(http://i-p-o.org/lockerbie-report.htm)

I.P.O. Information Service

Lockerbie case: new accusations of manipulation of key forensic evidence

Statement of Dr. Hans Koechler, international observer appointed by the United Nations at the Scottish Court in the Netherlands (2000-2002), on a key witness’s admission of perjury in the Lockerbie Trial

Vienna, Austria, 28 August 2007 P/RE/20559c-is

On 4 August 2007 Dr Hans Koechler received from Mr Edwin Bollier, head of the Swiss-based company MEBO AG, a copy of the German original of an Affidavit, dated 18 July 2007 and signed by Mr Ulrich Lumpert, former employee (electronics engineer) of MEBO AG, Zurich, related to the Lockerbie case. In a statement released today, Dr Hans Koechler, who has followed the Lockerbie proceedings since the beginning of the trial in the Netherlands in May 2000, highlighted basic aspects and questions of this new revelation that appear to be of relevance not only in connection with the upcoming second appeal of the convicted Libyan national, but also for new prosecutorial action ex officio by the Scottish authorities.

In his affidavit Mr Lumpert implicitly admits having committed perjury as witness No. 550 before the Scottish Court in the Netherlands. He states (Par 2) that he has stolen a handmade (by him) sample of an “MST-13 Timer PC-board” from MEBO company in Zurich and handed it over, on 22 June 1989 (!), to an “official person investigating the Lockerbie case.” He further states (in Par 5) that the fragment of the MST-13 timer, cut into two pieces for “supposedly forensic reasons,” which was presented in Court as vital part of evidence, stemmed from the piece which he had stolen and handed over to an investigator in 1989. He further states that when he became aware that this piece was used for an “intentional politically motivated criminal undertaking” (vorsätzliche politisch kriminelle “Machenschaft”) he decided, out of fear for his life, to keep silent on the matter.

The rather late admission of Mr Lumpert is consistent with an earlier revelation in the British and Scottish media according to which a former Scottish police officer (whose identity has not yet been disclosed to the public) stated “that the CIA planted the tiny fragment of circuit board crucial in convicting a Libyan” for the bombing of the Pan Am jet (Scotland on Sunday, 28 August 2005).

Upon receipt of the document, Dr Koechler informed the owner of MEBO AG on 7 August 2007 that Mr Lumpert will have to submit his affidavit under oath before the competent judicial authorities of Scotland. In the meantime (22 August 2007), the owner of MEBO AG has requested the Scottish judicial authorities – by way of the Swiss Prosecutor’s office and on the basis of the agreement on mutual judicial assistance between the UK and Switzerland – to investigate the alleged criminal manipulations referred to in Mr Lumpert’s statement.

In his capacity as UN-appointed observer of the Lockerbie trial, Dr Hans Koechler has repeatedly raised the issue of the timer fragment and expressed his amazement at the Defense team’s refusal to look into the matter during Mr Megrahi’s appeal when questions as to the reliability of forensic evidence had already been raised. (See Dr Koechler’s appeal report, Par 10 [c] of 26 March 2002; his statement of 23 August 2003, Par 10; and his statement of 14 October 2005, Par 2.)

It is to be recalled that, as witness before the Lockerbie court, Mr Edwin Bollier had raised the issue of the manipulation of the timer fragments, but was brusquely interrupted in his testimony by the presiding Judge and prevented from giving further information in this matter.

In the meantime (information received on 26 August 2007), Mr Lumpert has revised part of his Affidavit (Par 5); he now states that the letter “M” on the timer fragment (supposedly for the German word Muster: sample), unlike previously stated, has been engraved by himself. In view of this and earlier statements, Mr Lumpert’s credibility will have to be assessed very carefully by the competent judicial authorities and he will have to be made aware of the consequences, in terms of criminal law, of lying to the Court.

At the same time, the credibility of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) is also at stake. In its News Release of 28 June 2007, in which it had announced the referral of Mr Al-Megrahi’s case to the Scottish High Court for a second appeal, the SCCRC found it necessary to “absolve” the investigating authorities of any suspicion of wrongdoing. Should Mr Lumpert’s confession be proven to be true, the SCCRC’s statement – “The Commission undertook extensive enquiries in this area but found nothing to support that allegation or to undermine the trial court’s conclusions in respect of the fragment” – will appear highly questionable, even dubious. The public will have to ask why a supposedly independent judicial review body would try to exonerate “preventively” officials in a case which is being returned to the High Court for a second appeal because of suspicions of a miscarriage of justice. If it is indeed the rule of law that governs the Scottish polity, the Scottish judicial authorities will have to deal with this new revelation ex officio– independently of how the appeal court in Mr Megrahi’s case will evaluate this witness’s confession of perjury.

Those responsible for the midair explosion of PanAm flight 103 will have to be identified and brought to justice. If there was any wrongdoing, criminal and/or due to incompetence, of the judicial authorities in the investigation and prosecution of the Lockerbie case, this will also have to be dealt with through proper procedures of criminal law. A continuation of the rather obvious cover-up which we have witnessed up until now is neither acceptable for the citizens of Scotland nor for the international public, Dr Koechler stated.

Dr Koechler's Lockerbie trial report: (http://i-p-o.org/lockerbie-report.htm)  

Dr Koechler's Lockerbie appeal report of 26 March 2002:

(http://i-p-o.org/koechler-lockerbie-appeal_report.htm)

Dr Koechler's statement of 23 August 2003 on the agreements between the UK, the USA and Libya: (http://i-p-o.org/koechler-lockerbie-statement-aug2003.htm)

Dr Koechler's statement on new Lockerbie revelations of 14 October 2005: (http://i-p-o.org/nr-lockerbie-14Oct05.htm)

Dr Koechler's statement on the referral of the case of Abdelbaset Ali Mohamed Al Megrahi to the High Court of Justiciary:

(http://i-p-o.org/koechler-lockerbie-referral-29June2007.htm)  

Web Site of the Lockerbie Observer Mission of Dr Hans Koechler:

(http://i-p-o.org/lockerbie_observer_mission.htm)

News at Ten broadcasts Lumpert interview

ITN's News at Ten programme this evening broadcast an interview with Ulrich Lumpert, the MEBO engineer who now claims that the fragment of MST-13 circuit board presented to the Lockerbie trial at Zeist as part of the timing mechanism of the bomb that destroyed Pan Am 103, in fact came from a non-operative prototype. The account on the News at Ten website reads as follows:

'An exclusive News at Ten interview has cast new doubt on who was to blame for the Lockerbie bombing.

'A witness who helped convict a Libyan secret service agent of bringing down Pan Am flight 103 has now changed his story.

'Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi was convicted of the bombing that killed 270 people, including 11 residents of the Scottish town of Lockerbie.

'But electronics engineer Ulrich Lumpert says what he told the trial about the timing device said to have detonated the explosives was wrong.

'A key part of the evidence in the case was a singed fragment of a timer traced to Swiss company Mebo, where Mr Lumpert worked.

'Mebo admitted selling timers to Libya but Mr Lumpert now claims the fragment found was part of a non-functional timer that could not possibly have helped to bring down Pan Am 103.

'Mr Lumpert now says the bombing could not have happened in the way prosecutors described it, leaving more questions unanswered about the Lockerbie bombing.'

[The back story can be obtained by typing "Lumpert" into the Search Blog box at the top of the page and the interview itself can be accessed by UK computers from the website mentioned above.]

The Lumpert Affidavit

Ulrich Lumpert, an engineer at one time employed by MEBO in Zurich, gave evidence at the Lockerbie trial that a fragment of circuit board allegedly found amongst the aircraft debris (and which was absolutely crucial to the prosecution contention that the bomb which destroyed Pan Am 103 was linked to Libya) was part of an operative MST-13 timer manufactured by MEBO. In an affidavit sworn in Switzerland in July 2007 (available on the website www.lockerbie.ch) Lumpert now states that the fragment produced in court was in fact part of a non-operational demonstration circuit board that he himself had removed from the premises of MEBO and had handed over to a Lockerbie investigator on 22 June 1989 (six months AFTER the destruction of Pan Am 103).

If this is true, then it totally demolishes the prosecution version of how the aircraft was destroyed, as well, of course, as demonstrating deliberate fabrication of evidence laid before the court.

At the forthcoming appeal resulting from the SCCRC’s report on the Megrahi conviction, will the appeal court have an opportunity to assess the truth of Lumpert’s revised version of events? The hurdles are formidable. Section 106 (3C) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 provides that an appeal may not be founded upon evidence from a witness at the original trial which is different from, or additional to, the evidence that he gave at that trial, unless there is a reasonable explanation as to why the new evidence was not given by him at the original trial and that explanation is itself supported by independent evidence. In this context “independent evidence” means evidence which was not heard at the original trial; which comes from a source other than the witness himself; and which is accepted by the appeal court as credible and reliable. It might well be extremely difficult to convince a court that these conditions were satisfied in Lumpert’s case.



What follows is the text of a press release regarding Lumpert’s affidavit from Professor Hans Koechler, who was one of the official UN-appointed observers at the Lockerbie trial:

(http://i-p-o.org/lockerbie-report.htm)
I.P.O. Information Service

Lockerbie case: new accusations of manipulation of key forensic evidence

Statement of Dr. Hans Koechler, international observer appointed by the United Nations at the Scottish Court in the Netherlands (2000-2002), on a key witness’s admission of perjury in the Lockerbie Trial

Vienna, Austria, 28 August 2007 P/RE/20559c-is

On 4 August 2007 Dr. Hans Koechler received from Mr. Edwin Bollier, head of the Swiss-based company MEBO AG, a copy of the German original of an Affidavit, dated 18 July 2007 and signed by Mr. Ulrich Lumpert, former employee (electronics engineer) of MEBO AG, Zurich, related to the Lockerbie case. In a statement released today, Dr. Hans Koechler, who has followed the Lockerbie proceedings since the beginning of the trial in the Netherlands in May 2000, highlighted basic aspects and questions of this new revelation that appear to be of relevance not only in connection with the upcoming second appeal of the convicted Libyan national, but also for new prosecutorial action ex officio by the Scottish authorities.

In his affidavit Mr. Lumpert implicitly admits having committed perjury as witness No. 550 before the Scottish Court in the Netherlands. He states (Par. 2) that he has stolen a handmade (by him) sample of an “MST-13 Timer PC-board” from MEBO company in Zurich and handed it over, on 22 June 1989 (!), to an “official person investigating the Lockerbie case.” He further states (in Par. 5) that the fragment of the MST-13 timer, cut into two pieces for “supposedly forensic reasons,” which was presented in Court as vital part of evidence, stemmed from the piece which he had stolen and handed over to an investigator in 1989. He further states that when he became aware that this piece was used for an “intentional politically motivated criminal undertaking” (vorsätzliche politisch kriminelle “Machenschaft”) he decided, out of fear for his life, to keep silent on the matter.

The rather late admission of Mr. Lumpert is consistent with an earlier revelation in the British and Scottish media according to which a former Scottish police officer (whose identity has not yet been disclosed to the public) stated “that the CIA planted the tiny fragment of circuit board crucial in convicting a Libyan” for the bombing of the Pan Am jet (Scotland on Sunday, 28 August 2005).

Upon receipt of the document, Dr. Koechler informed the owner of MEBO AG on 7 August 2007 that Mr. Lumpert will have to submit his affidavit under oath before the competent judicial authorities of Scotland. In the meantime (22 August 2007), the owner of MEBO AG has requested the Scottish judicial authorities – by way of the Swiss Prosecutor’s office and on the basis of the agreement on mutual judicial assistance between the UK and Switzerland – to investigate the alleged criminal manipulations referred to in Mr. Lumpert’s statement.

In his capacity as UN-appointed observer of the Lockerbie trial, Dr. Hans Koechler has repeatedly raised the issue of the timer fragment and expressed his amazement at the Defense team’s refusal to look into the matter during Mr. Megrahi’s appeal when questions as to the reliability of forensic evidence had already been raised. (See Dr. Koechler’s appeal report, Par. 10 [c] of 26 March 2002; his statement of 23 August 2003, Par. 10; and his statement of 14 October 2005, Par. 2.)

It is to be recalled that, as witness before the Lockerbie court, Mr. Edwin Bollier had raised the issue of the manipulation of the timer fragments, but was brusquely interrupted in his testimony by the presiding Judge and prevented from giving further information in this matter.

In the meantime (information received on 26 August 2007), Mr. Lumpert has revised part of his Affidavit (Par. 5); he now states that the letter “M” on the timer fragment (supposedly for the German word Muster: sample), unlike previously stated, has been engraved by himself. In view of this and earlier statements, Mr. Lumpert’s credibility will have to be assessed very carefully by the competent judicial authorities and he will have to be made aware of the consequences, in terms of criminal law, of lying to the Court.

At the same time, the credibility of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) is also at stake. In its News Release of 28 June 2007, in which it had announced the referral of Mr. Al-Megrahi’s case to the Scottish High Court for a second appeal, the SCCRC found it necessary to “absolve” the investigating authorities of any suspicion of wrongdoing. Should Mr. Lumpert’s confession be proven to be true, the SCCRC’s statement – “The Commission undertook extensive enquiries in this area but found nothing to support that allegation or to undermine the trial court’s conclusions in respect of the fragment” – will appear highly questionable, even dubious. The public will have to ask why a supposedly independent judicial review body would try to exonerate “preventively” officials in a case which is being returned to the High Court for a second appeal because of suspicions of a miscarriage of justice. If it is indeed the rule of law that governs the Scottish polity, the Scottish judicial authorities will have to deal with this new revelation ex officio– independently of how the appeal court in Mr. Megrahi’s case will evaluate this witness’s confession of perjury.

Those responsible for the midair explosion of PanAm flight 103 will have to be identified and brought to justice. If there was any wrongdoing, criminal and/or due to incompetence, of the judicial authorities in the investigation and prosecution of the Lockerbie case, this will also have to be dealt with through proper procedures of criminal law. A continuation of the rather obvious cover-up which we have witnessed up until now is neither acceptable for the citizens of Scotland nor for the international public, Dr. Koechler stated.


*
Dr. Koechler's Lockerbie trial report (http://i-p-o.org/lockerbie-report.htm)
*
Dr. Koechler's Lockerbie appeal report of 26 March 2002
(http://i-p-o.org/koechler-lockerbie-appeal_report.htm)
*
Dr. Koechler's statement of 23 August 2003 on the agreements between the UK, the USA and Libya (http://i-p-o.org/koechler-lockerbie-statement-aug2003.htm)
*
Dr. Koechler's statement on new Lockerbie revelations of 14 October 2005
(http://i-p-o.org/nr-lockerbie-14Oct05.htm)
*
Dr. Koechler's statement on the referral of the case of Abdelbaset Ali Mohamed Al Megrahi to the High Court of Justiciary
(http://i-p-o.org/koechler-lockerbie-referral-29June2007.htm)
*
Web Site of the Lockerbie Observer Mission of Dr. Hans Koechler
(http://i-p-o.org/lockerbie_observer_mission.htm)

END/Lockerbie case: new accusations of manipulation of key forensic evidence/2007-07-04/20559c-is

International Progress Organization

Enquiries: _info@i-p-o.org_ (mailto:info@i-p-o.org) , fax +43-1-5332962, postal address: A-1010 Vienna, Kohlmarkt 4, Austria
(http://i-p-o.org/lockerbie-report.htm)

Ulrich Lumpert’s recantation

[It was on this date in 2007 that Ulrich Lumpert, a former employee of Mebo Ltd in Zürich who had given evidence at the Zeist trial about MST-13 timers, swore an affidavit to the effect that his evidence had been false. An English translation of the affidavit can be read here. What follows is a comment that I made at the time:]

Ulrich Lumpert, an engineer at one time employed by MEBO in Zürich, gave evidence at the Lockerbie trial that a fragment of circuit board allegedly found amongst the aircraft debris (and which was absolutely crucial to the prosecution contention that the bomb which destroyed Pan Am 103 was linked to Libya) was part of an operative MST-13 timer manufactured by MEBO. In an affidavit sworn in Switzerland in July 2007 (available on the website www.lockerbie.ch) Lumpert now states that the fragment produced in court was in fact part of a non-operational demonstration circuit board that he himself had removed from the premises of MEBO and had handed over to a Lockerbie investigator on 22 June 1989 (six months AFTER the destruction of Pan Am 103).

If this is true, then it totally demolishes the prosecution version of how the aircraft was destroyed, as well, of course, as demonstrating deliberate fabrication of evidence laid before the court.

The Lumpert affair

[In autumn 2007 the Ulrich Lumpert story was still bubbling quietly away. What follows is an article by Olivier Schmidt published on 7 November 2007 on the Nachrichten Heute website:]

On 21 December 1988, a MST-13 timer-switch manufactured by the Zurich-based company MEBO detonated the cassette bomb which destroyed Pan Am flight 103 over the Scottish town of Lockerbie, killing 270 people. In mid-August, Ulrich Lumpert, a Swiss engineer and former MEBO employee, walked into a Zurich police station and asked to swear an affidavit before a notary confessing that he had lied about the specific MST-13 timer, fragments of which the prosecution claimed had been found at the Lockerbie crash site. 

Lumpert's testimony was crucial to implicating Libya in the conspiracy, which is exactly what the intelligence and military establishment in Washington wanted. Gray-suited officials speaking on behalf of various branches of the Reagan administration claimed Lockerbie was "an act of revenge" for the USAF bombing of Tripoli two years earlier. And former Libyan agent Abdulbaset al-Megrahi was the "scapegoat", sentenced to life by a Scottish court during the 2001 trial at Camp Zeist in Holland. He is currently serving his sentence at Greenock Prison, near Glasgow, in Scotland.

Mr Lumpert's former boss, Swiss businessman Edwin Bollier, supports the allegation. He has admitted that his company, MEBO, had sold a batch of twenty MST-13 timers to Libya in 1986. When FBI and Scottish detectives showed him a "fuzzy photograph" of the timer, which they claimed was found on the hillside and used to detonate the bomb in the forward luggage hold of Flight 103 from Heathrow to JFK, he confirmed that the fragments "looked as though they came from one of our timers". 

Ten years after the incident, he travelled to Dumfries, in Scotland, after finally being given permission to actually see the pieces of the badly burned brown circuit board, which matched MEBO's prototype. However, when the MST-13 went into production, the color of the circuit boards was changed to green, and the batch sold to the Libyans had green circuit boards, not brown, according to Mr Bollier.

At the trial in Camp Zeist, the 70-year-old businessman appeared for the defense, and claims the details about the circuit-board were ignored. [RB: Mr Bollier was in fact a prosecution witness.] The pieces which he asked to see again in court "were practically carbonized [and] they had been tampered with" since he had visited Dumfries. 

The pieces had been in the possession of FBI forensic laboratories which were later thoroughly discredited. Last June, this and other information resulted in the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) ruling that there was enough "new" evidence -- not including Lumpert's confession -- to suggest there had been a miscarriage of justice. Later this month, the Scottish Court of Appeal in Edinburgh will hear al-Megrahi's appeal against what is now regarded as a "deeply flawed" verdict.

MEBO went bankrupt after the Lockerbie incident. Threatened with a multi-million lawsuit by Pan Am, the company rapidly lost business, including a major contract to supply the German Kriminalpolizei (CID) and the Bundesgrenzshutz (Federal Border Police) with communications equipment.

COMMENT

It may finally be shown that the Libyan connection was part of a US/UK plot to demonize Kadaffi, which Intelligence has always maintained; see chapter 5, "The Trumped-Up Proof of Libyan Terrorism", in Olivier Schmidt, The Intelligence Files, 2005, Clarity Press. 

If this can be shown along with the fact that those responsible for the bombing were closer to the Syrian regime than Tripoli, Mr Bollier will expect to be financial compensated for the international, state-sponsored conspiracy. Unlike the financial compensation and apologies Abdulbaset al-Megrahi can expect if his appeal is successful, an unpublicized out-of-court settlement is likely in Mr Bollier's case. And he'll be satisfied with having cleared his name and that of the company he founded.

Timer fragment "has emerged as a probable fake"

[On this date seven years ago, the first of the British media picked up the story of Ulrich Lumpert’s affidavit stating that the evidence that he had given at Camp Zeist about the MST-13 timer fragment had been false. The report in The Observer of 2 September 2007, as reproduced on this blog, reads as follows:]

The key piece of material evidence used by prosecutors to implicate Libya in the Lockerbie bombing has emerged as a probable fake.

Nearly two decades after Pan Am flight 103 exploded over Scotland on 21 December, 1988, allegations of international political intrigue and shoddy investigative work are being levelled at the British government, the FBI and the Scottish police as one of the crucial witnesses, Swiss engineer Ulrich Lumpert, has apparently confessed that he lied about the origins of a crucial 'timer' - evidence that helped tie the man convicted of the bombing to the crime. 

The disaster killed 270 people when the London to New York Boeing 747 exploded in mid-air. Britain and the US blamed Libya, saying that its leader, Colonel Muammar Gadaffi, wanted revenge for the US bombing of Tripoli in 1986. At a trial in the Netherlands in 2001, former Libyan agent Abdulbaset al-Megrahi was jailed for life. 

He is currently serving his sentence in Greenock prison, but later this month the Scottish Court of Appeal is expected to hear Megrahi's case, after the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission ruled in June that there was enough evidence to suggest a miscarriage of justice. Lumpert's confession, which was given to police in his home city of Zurich last week, will strengthen Megrahi's appeal. 

The Zurich-based Swiss businessman Edwin Bollier, who has spent nearly two decades trying to clear his company's name, is as eager for the appeal as is Megrahi. Bollier's now bankrupt company, Mebo, manufactured the timer switch that prosecutors used to implicate Libya after they said that fragments of it had been found on a Scottish hillside. 

Bollier, now 70, admits having done business with Libya. 'Two years before Lockerbie, we sold 20 MST-13 timers to the Libyan military. FBI agents and the Scottish investigators said one of those timers had been used to detonate the bomb. We were shown a fuzzy photograph and I confirmed the fragments looked as though they came from one of our timers.' 

However, Bollier was uneasy with the photograph he had been shown and asked to see the fragments. He was finally given permission in 1998 and travelled to Dumfries to see the evidence. 

'I was shown fragments of a brown circuit board which matched our prototype. But when the MST-13 went into production, the timers contained green boards. I knew that the timers sold to Libya had green boards. I told the investigators this.' 

Back in Switzerland, Bollier's company was in effect bankrupt, having faced a lawsuit from Pan Am and having lost major clients, such as the German federal police to which Mebo supplied communications equipment. 

In 2001, Bollier spent five days in the witness box at the Lockerbie trial at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands. 'I was a defence witness, but the trial was so skewed to prove Libyan involvement that the details of what I had to say was ignored. A photograph of the fragments was produced in court and I asked to see the pieces again. When they were brought to me, they were practically carbonised. They had been tampered with since I had seen them in Dumfries.' 

Few people apart from conspiracy theorists and investigative journalists working on the case were prepared to believe Bollier until the end of last month, when Lumpert, one of his former employees, walked into a Zurich police station and asked to swear an affidavit before a notary.

[The Lumpert affidavit saga can be followed on this blog by clicking here. 

We now also know, of course, that the fragment of circuit board produced at the Lockerbie trial did not come from a MEBO MST-13 timer: its tracking coating was pure tin, whereas the timers supplied by MEBO to Libya all had a tracking coating of a lead/tin alloy, as confirmed by the manufacturer, Thüring. Read more here.]