Lockerbie documentary demolishes Maltese key witness’s testimony

[This is the headline over a report published today on the website of Malta Today.  It reads in part:]

A documentary screened on BBC Scotland and Al Jazeera has seriously questioned the veracity of the testimony of Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci, the key witness who identified the Libyan man accused of the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing over the Scottish town of Lockerbie on 21 December, 1988.

Filmed in Malta and Scotland, the documentary coincided with the publication of John Ashton's Megrahi: You Are My Jury, published on Monday, which has alleged that the Crown Office, the Scottish police and UK defence ministry scientists failed to disclose numerous pieces of evidence that damaged their case against Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, 59.

The documentary delivered a devastating judgment of the testimony of Tony Gauci, the key witness who secured Megrahi's conviction by identifying him as the man who bought the clothes from his shop Mary's House. The fragments of the clothes were later found wrapped around the bomb fragments among the debris of the aircraft, and traced back to Malta.

Gauci's initial description and the resulting police drawing of the man who came to buy the clothes was found to be nothing like the pale-skinned Megrahi: Gauci's man was six-foot tall, had a big chest and large head, and his hair was very black.

But glaring discrepancies exist in the dates Gauci gave of the alleged visit of Megrahi. He first told police investigators the purchaser came on the 29 November because the Christmas lights had not yet been switched on in Tower Road, Sliema.

Then he claimed Megrahi came to the shop on 7 December, pointing out that as he left he opened a black umbrella he had just purchased - and later found among the Lockerbie debris - because it started to rain.

But the documentary consulted former chief meteorologist Major Joseph Mifsud, who said there was no rain on 7 December, 1988 between 5pm and 7pm - disputing Gauci's claim that Megrahi left as it started to rain.

And former Nationalist minister for tourism Michael Refalo turned out to be a surprising witness: he switched on the Christmas lights on 6 December, 1988 at 6pm, a fact proven by his own diary entry for the day. And this fact alone puts into serious doubt Gauci's claim that Megrahi must have purchased the clothes on 7 December.

Megrahi's conviction for the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing went for a second appeal after the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission found key aspects of Gauci's testimony seriously undermined the prosecution's request. Before the retrial, now suffering from cancer, Megrahi was released on compassionate grounds in August 2009 by the Scottish justice minister, and flown back to Libya.

Gauci was found to have met Scottish detectives as many as 50 times while the prosecution's case was being prepared, making 23 formal statements. He repeatedly changed his account, including identifying people who looked like known Middle Eastern terrorists.

The SSCRC said that by the time Gauci picked out Megrahi in an identification parade in 1999, a decade after the bombing, he had already seen Megrahi's face in an edition of Focus Magazine, and felt this may have been a miscarriage of justice.

The documentary also insisted that Gauci and his brother Paul may have been paid up to USD3 million by the US Department of Justice to uphold their version of events and the identification of Megrahi. No substantial evidence was presented in the documentary of this claim.

Megrahi forgives Gauci

The documentary featured Megrahi, visibly approaching the end of his life, "forgiving" Tony Gauci.

"Forgiving him, I am facing my God very soon," Megrahi says. "I swear I have never been in his shop or buy any clothing from his shop. I swear with my God, which is my God and his God as well, I swear I have never been in his shop or buy any clothing from his shop.

"He has to believe this, because when we meet together before the God, I want him to know that before I die. This is the truth."

Asked by his interviewer what he would say to Tony Gauci if he were in the room, he says: "I'd say he dealt with me very wrongly. I have never seen him in my life before he came to the court. But I do forgive him."

Bomb timer evidence

Documents given to Megrahi's defence lawyers a month before he dropped his appeal show that government scientists had found significant differences between a bomb timer fragment allegedly found after the attack and the type supplied to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's former regime.

The evidence, published by Megrahi defence lawyer John Ashton, shows that scientists at the Royal Armament Research and Development Establishment, discovered there were key differences in the metal coatings used in a timer fragment allegedly used in Lockerbie and a control sample from the type supplied to the Libyans. One used a coating made wholly of tin; the control sample used a tin/lead alloy. [RB: Is it defamatory to describe a lay person as a lawyer? Perhaps John Ashton should consult a solicitor.]

And evidence also shows that the timer fragment had several differences from the Swiss-built devices sold to Gaddafi's regime, including the type of circuit board it used.

Book disputes prosecution's theory

Ashton's book states that if the prosecution was right, Megrahi - a member of the Libyan secret service stationed at Luqa as an employee of the Libyan Arab Airlines - carried out the attack using his own passport, stayed in his regular hotel at the Holiday Inn in Tigné, bought the clothes in a small shop rather than a large one, used normal scheduled flights to and from Malta, planted the bomb on two feeder flights before Pan Am 103, and used a timer the Libyans believed was exclusively made for them. [RB: If Megrahi was a member of the Libyan secret service -- and the only evidence of this came from the witness Addul Majid Giaka whom the judges found wholly incredible on every other issue -- there was not a scintilla of evidence that he was stationed in Malta.]

Megrahi book raises new questions over Lockerbie

[This is the headline over an article by Lucy Adams, chief reporter, in today’s edition of The Herald.  It reads as follows:]

"This book," said Reverend John Mosey, who lost his 19-year-old daughter in the Lockerbie bombing, "is the tipping point."

The book, Megrahi: You Are My Jury, raises many questions about the investigation and conviction of Libyan Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi. It covers a range of information in detail and draws on eight key areas.

1. The allegation

It is claimed pressure was applied to Megrahi to drop his appeal in August 2009 in order to return home. In the book Megrahi says it was a "terrible" decision to make but he felt he had no choice.

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill refuted Megrahi's claims again yesterday. [RB: Kenny did not refute the claims: he denied them.]

2. The timer fragment

At the Camp Zeist trial, it was agreed a fragment of circuit board found at the Lockerbie crash site came from an MST-13 board manufactured by Swiss company Mebo and Thuring. Mebo revealed it had sold 20 such timers to the Libyans and this became a significant part of the case against Megrahi. However, the book claims the fragment found at Lockerbie was covered in 100% tin, while the timers sent to Libya were made from an alloy of tin and lead. It is alleged the Crown failed to disclose this discrepancy.

3. The Iranian connection

Megrahi says he does not want to "point the finger of blame at anyone else", but much of the material drawn together will lead readers to believe Iran funded the PFLP-GC [Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command] to carry out the bombing, in retaliation for the USS Vincennes shooting down an Iranian passenger jet and killing all 300 people on board in 1988.

The initial investigation into Lockerbie in 1989 all pointed towards the culpability of a German cell of the PFLP-GC. There is much within the book, including a statement by bomb-maker Marwen Khreesat which appears to confirm this view. Much of the evidence incriminating the PFLPC-GC was not disclosed at the trial or appeal.

4. Reward money and the reliability of witnesses

The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) was concerned that Tony Gauci – the Crown witness who said he saw Megrahi buy clothes which were later identified as having been near the bomb – was offered a reward by the US Justice Department. We now know his witness statements were more inconsistent than previously disclosed. The book also reveals that Edwin Bollier, who ran Mebo and testified against Megrahi, was very interested in "the reward money".

5. Undisclosed evidence

The SCCRC unearthed statements, police reports and other documents which had never been shared with the defence team. Part of the reason the case was referred back for a fresh appeal was the non-disclosure of evidence. Two of the documents still remain a secret because the UK Government claims publicising them would be a threat to national security.

Since the trial, Scots law has been challenged at the Supreme Court and the policy of non-disclosure has been changed.

6. Forensics anomalies

The forensics case against Megrahi was critical. The book reveals anomalies, contradictions, and arguments between police, the forensics team, the CIA, and the FBI. It claims information was withheld by the CIA and says anomalies later found in the forensic evidence from the Ministry of Defence Royal Armaments Research and Development Establishment "cast doubt on the overall reliability" of some of the forensics reports.

Other items were not contained within the forensics reports, including a small piece of circuit board from a radio cassette bomb found in a car belonging to Hafez Dalkamoni, of the PFLPC-GC, in Germany – something the defence team only learned about years later.

7. The Bedford suitcase

The Crown claimed forensic analysis of the Pan Am jet's fuselage showed the suitcase containing the bomb was in the second layer of luggage – indicating it had come from a feeder flight, rather than Heathrow.

However, the defence's review of the evidence focused on a brown suitcase seen by Heathrow baggage loader John Bedford before the Frankfurt feeder flight arrived. The trial judges described Mr Bedford as a "clear and impressive witness" but said there were many items of luggage not dealt with in detail in the evidence.

A police document, not disclosed to the defence, suggests the Bedford suitcase could have been the primary suitcase.

Subsequent to the trial and appeal, evidence emerged of a break-in at Heathrow the night before the bombing. Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was killed in the tragedy, has campaigned for a full inquiry into that break-in.

8. Why Megrahi used a coded passport when in Malta

The Crown has always made much of Megrahi's use in Malta of a false passport under the name Abdusamad. Chapter 2 of the book, entitled Before the Nightmare, explains Megrahi's work importing embargoed cars, soap, cigarette lighters and aviation parts. He says it was government practice to issue coded passports to those involved in importing embargoed goods.

Lockerbie bombing: We need an objective Holyrood inquiry

[This is the headline over an article by Dr Jim Swire in today’s edition of The Scotsman. It reads as follows:]

What we have heard in the last 24 hours is further, extremely significant scientific evidence. It appears to show that the evidence found in the third quarter of 1989 – the circuit board fragment – was not consistent with the digital timer that the prosecution alleged to have been used.

That timer was crucial to the prosecution case.

However, at the heart of this case is this extraordinary coincidence:

We know that Heathrow was broken into 16 hours before the explosion over Lockerbie. That break-in occurred in Terminal Three close to where Pan Am flight 103 would be boarded up with suitcases.

Whoever broke in may have left a bomb. It’s speculation, but it is entirely feasible.

Nothing is known about it, because it was not investigated.

We also know that people working for Ahmed Jibril, a Palestinian who broke away from most other Palestinian groups, had manufactured timers that could be triggered by flying above a certain altitude for three-quarters of an hour.

The Lockerbie bomb exploded 40 minutes after it left the terminal at Heathrow.

That bomb could not have been flown by Mr al-Megrahi from Frankfurt, let alone Malta, as it would have exploded en route.

All of this leads me to believe that Mr al-Megrahi was not the Lockerbie bomber.

I saw him in December and he is a very sick man. He finds it difficult to speak, but he is clear in his own mind.

What I would like to see now is an objective inquiry that I can trust, and that must be by the Scottish Government.

Have a look at the facts, have a look at the evidence, and come to a conclusion.

This can be done in this country, in Scotland.

Many pieces of evidence now point to the Crown Office having withheld things that should have been disclosed.

[The same newspaper contains an opinion piece (in my view, distinctly odd), by former Chief Inspector of Prisons, Clive Fairweather.  It reads in part:]

When Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi and his co-accused were in Kamp van Zeist, I met with both in the process of examining the conditions they were being held in.

This afforded me an additional opportunity to attend large parts of the trial where, as a former soldier trained to handle explosives and familiar with barometric timing devices, I was particularly fascinated by the compelling evidence given by a Swiss arms dealer working for Mebo. [RB: Whatever else he may have been, Edwin Bollier was not an arms dealer.]

He was closely questioned about tiny electronic circuit boards supplied to the Stasi and to the Libyan intelligence services, describing how each was slightly different in its components.

The variations were clearly depicted on the court television screens, one of which was traced, step by step, from Libya via Malta to luggage from the wrecked Flight 103. [RB: Colonel Fairweather is mistaken. There was no such evidence led at Zeist.]

This left me convinced of strong (though not necessarily sole) Libyan involvement.

It also became clear that al-Megrahi was a high-ranking intelligence officer and almost certainly “head of station” in Malta. [RB: Colonel Fairweather is once again mistaken. Megrahi was never stationed in Malta in the course of his career and there was certainly no evidence that he was Libyan intelligence’s head of station there.]

This was consistent with the highly cultured individual I found him to be during our exchanges.

His involvement in the baggage transfer arrangements and the explosive device, as proven by Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary, therefore seems conclusive. [RB: Colonel Fairweather’s certainty on this matter should be contrasted with the trial court’s caution and its recognition that the evidence relating to how the fatal suitcase was ingested at Luqa Airport was very weak.]

But I now believe he may have been mistakenly identified by the Maltese shopkeeper, Tony Gauci, and as he continues to vehemently insist.

No high-ranking intelligence officer would have exposed himself in such an indiscreet way.

My suspicions are that, instead, it may have been a Palestinian who made the purchases later found amongst the debris at Lockerbie.

So, guilty as charged, but some subsequent doubts remain on the line-up evidence.

[Also in today's edition of The Scotsman is a long and useful article headlined Lockerbie bombing: forensic expert's crucial test results 'were not made available to the court'.]

MacAskill under pressure over Megrahi appeal claim

[This is the headline over a report by Lucy Adams in today’s edition of The Herald.  It reads as follows:]

Scotland's Justice Secretary is under pressure to explain claims he advised the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing to drop his appeal against conviction to smooth the way for his compassionate release.

The allegation levelled against Kenny MacAskill – and denied by the Scottish Government – is contained in a new book, entitled Megrahi: You Are My Jury, in which Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi says he was "the innocent victim of dirty politics, a flawed investigation and judicial folly". It also makes claims about new evidence it says could have cleared the Libyan, but which the Crown Office failed to disclose to the defence.

Mr MacAskill is claimed to have made the offer to Megrahi through a Libyan official.

Scottish LibDem leader Willie Rennie called for Mr MacAskill and Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland to make a statement to Holyrood. He said: "Allegations of suppression of evidence and a Greenock Prison release deal between the Justice Secretary and Megrahi make it essential for a statement to be made to Parliament - it is important the Justice Secretary answers serious questions."

Tory leader Ruth Davidson said: "This is a staggering claim and implies the Scottish Justice Minister was offering legal advice to help a convicted killer escape prison."

Scottish Labour's justice spokesman, Lewis Macdonald, said Mr MacAskill may have "knowingly misled Parliament".

The new book details previously unseen evidence not disclosed to the defence, including forensics reports that suggest the fragment of circuit board found in the Lockerbie debris did not match those sold to the Libyans – as per the prosecution case at trial.

The book claims that the metal content did not match – but reports referring to this were not shared with the defence until 2009.

Megrahi dropped his appeal shortly before Mr MacAskill said he would be released on "compassionate grounds" on August 20, 2009. The book states that Mr MacAskill met Libyan officials, including Foreign Minister Abdulati al Obeidi, 10 days earlier.

Megrahi claimed: "After the meeting, the Libyan delegation came to the prison to visit me. Obeidi said that, towards the end of the meeting, MacAskill had asked to speak to him in private.

"Once the others had withdrawn, he stated that MacAskill gave him to understand that it would be easier to grant compassionate release if I dropped my appeal.

"He said he was not demanding that I do so, but the message seemed to me clear.

"I was legally entitled to continue the appeal, but I could not risk doing so."

Mr MacAskill has categorically denied the claim. A Scottish Government spokesman branded the book, as "third-hand hearsay".

The spokesman added: "These claims are wrong – and officials were present at all meetings the Justice Secretary had on this matter at all times. The minutes of this meeting and indeed all other meetings, including with Mr Megrahi in Greenock Prison, were published by the Scottish Government and have been in the public domain since September 2009.

"We can say categorically that neither did the Scottish Government have any involvement of any kind in Mr Megrahi dropping his appeal, or indeed any interest in it. That was entirely a matter for Mr Megrahi and his legal team."

The Crown Office said the decision was taken by Megrahi and his lawyers.

The book's author, John Ashton, who spent three years as a researcher with Megrahi's legal team, described the Crown's failure to disclose key information as a "scandal".

Professor Robert Black, one of the architects of the original trial, said the book appeared to have "put the final nail in the coffin of the conviction."

Prime Minister David Cameron described the book as "an insult to the families of the 270 people who were murdered".

[In today's edition of the Daily Express there is another report on this issue.]

"...the evidence against him has collapsed and the Crown had all of that..."

[The following are excerpts from an article published today in the UK edition of The Huffington Post:]

Less than 12 hours after [John] Ashton published his book on Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, opposition leaders were calling for a debate in the Scottish parliament based on its revelations and its publication had already been condemned by the prime minister as an "insult".

For Ashton, however, the claim that Scottish justice secretary Kenny MacAskill had indicated to a Libyan delegation Megrahi would be "more likely" to be released on compassionate grounds from prison if he dropped an appeal against his conviction is not the most important revelation in his book, entitled Megrahi: You Are My Jury.

For him, the real scandal is he believes Megrahi is innocent - and he thinks he has the evidence to prove it.

"It's Britain's worst mass murder and the real terrorist has got away with it," he told The Huffington Post UK on Monday.

As for MacAskill's alleged message, which has prompted the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats to call for a debate in the Scottish parliament, Ashton says Megrahi was "very clear" that MacAskill was not "making a demand" the appeal should be dropped.

In his book Ashton claims there is new forensic evidence which shows the timing device used in the Lockerbie bomb was not from Libya, alleging evidence withheld by the Scottish crown office. "There's not one element of his case that hangs together," he says. (…)

Speaking of Megrahi now, he claims there was "nothing in his demeanour" which suggested he was responsible for the 1988 terror attack which killed 270 people.

"How many mass murderers if they were let out of prison would spend their final days writing a book about why they were innocent? He can tell his family and they will believe him that he didn't do it but why go the extra mile?" he asks."I only met him in these dire circumstances. He was very dignified in the way he conducted himself, he is a very devout Muslim but not a fundamentalist and he was very much a family man."

The furore about Megrahi's release from prison on compassionate grounds based on his cancer is, he says, "borne of ignorance".

"None of the political parties in Scotland or indeed in England will indeed look at the evidence. They're all playing petty games. The scandal is the evidence against him has collapsed and the Crown had all of that. That's the scandal."

So what does he want? "I want the book to force the Scottish government to call an inquiry," he says. "Everybody should be jumping up and down about this. The book is based primarily on evidence that the police gathered and the crown gathered. It's not things that I am claiming. I was working on the legal team and it was disclosed to us."

The book's publishers Birlinn have said Megrahi will not receive "financial profit" from the book. MD Hugh Andrew said in a statement on Monday: "Any person charged with a criminal offence has the right to defend himself. This is the first time that Abdelaset Al-Megrahi has given that defence. As a publisher we make no judgement as to the rights or wrong of that defence."

The Prime Minister speaks

[This is the heading over an item posted by John Ashton this evening on the Megrahi: You are my Jury blog. It reads as follows:]

A number of press reports of the book launch, such as this one, on the Daily Record’s website, carry the following quote by the Prime Minister:

“This is yet another reminder that Alex Salmond’s government’s decision to free the UK’s greatest mass murderer was wrong. Writing a book three years after he was released is an insult to the families of the 270 people who were murdered.”

As well as being factually inaccurate – Abdelbaset didn’t write the book, I did – the statement begs a huge question: how can Cameron possibly comment upon a book that he hasn’t read? If he did read it, he would learn that Abdelbaset was convicted on shaky evidence; that the Crown failed to disclose many items of exculpatory evidence from the defence; that the real Lockerbie bombers evaded capture; and that the Libyan people endured 12 years of UN sanctions on the basis of evidence that ranged from shaky to concocted. Of course, those are things that he would rather not know, because they expose the hypocrisy and vacuity of his position on Lockerbie. Maybe I should send him a copy (I assume he can read, after all, he had an excellent education).

Lockerbie: Author claims new evidence proves timer did not come from Libya

[This is the headline over a report published this afternoon on the STV News website.  It reads in part:]

New evidence allegedly proves the timer used in the Lockerbie bombing could not have come from Libya. The claims have been made in Megrahi’s book (...) launched on Monday.

The author, John Ashton, claims the evidence he has uncovered "destroys the case" against both Abdelbaset al-Megrahi and Libya.Mr Ashton has written the book based on exclusive interviews with Megrahi.

He is a writer, researched and TV producer who spent three years as a researcher with Megrahi’s legal team.

At the launch on Monday, Mr Ashton showed a picture of a circuit board which was found in the wreckage of Pan Am flight 103. It is allegedly part of the timer from the bomb on board the plane.

He said the judges at Megrahi’s trial accepted it was identical to timers sold in Libya.

Just 20 timers were supplied to Libya by Swiss company Mebo. They had been made to order by another company. The fragment was found in a shirt collar linked to Megrahi and examination found the pattern patched the circuit boards sold to Libya.

But, Mr Ashton claims the coating on the fragment was not the same as that applied to the Libyan circuit boards. He says this means the timer could not have come from the country.

The author claims the Crown were told this in a 1992 report but the scientists did not "appreciate its significance".

Mr Ashton said: "Had this evidence been explored at Mr Megrahi’s trial, it’s very hard to see how he could have been convicted."

He claims there is other evidence contained in the book, some of which was not handed over to the Crown. (…)

In response to the book, a spokesperson for the Crown Office said: "The Crown has defended Mr al-Megrahi’s conviction including the appeal proceedings resulting from the SCCRC referral. The decision to discontinue the appeal proceedings was taken by Mr al-Megrahi and his legal team. In light of his abandonment of his appeal, the conviction for the murder of 270 people and the judicial determination of his guilt stand.

"The only appropriate forum for the determination of guilt or innocence is the criminal court. Mr Megrahi was convicted unanimously by three senior judges following trial during which the evidence was rigorously tested and his conviction was upheld unanimously by five judges, in an Appeal Court presided over by the Lord Justice General, Scotland’s most senior judge.

"As the investigation remains live, it would not be appropriate to offer further comment."

[It is sad, but regrettably not unexpected, to see the Crown Office trotting out the worn old canard that the Zeist verdict was supported by the five-judge appeal court. As I have said before on this blog:]

This is, of course, wholly false. As the appeal judges state in paragraph 369 of their Opinion:

“When opening the case for the appellant before this court Mr Taylor [senior counsel for Megrahi] stated that the appeal was not about sufficiency of evidence: he accepted that there was a sufficiency of evidence. He also stated that he was not seeking to found on section 106(3)(b) of the 1995 Act [verdict unreasonable on the evidence]. His position was that the trial court had misdirected itself in various respects. Accordingly in this appeal we have not required to consider whether the evidence before the trial court, apart from the evidence which it rejected, was sufficient as a matter of law to entitle it to convict the appellant on the basis set out in its judgment. We have not had to consider whether the verdict of guilty was one which no reasonable trial court, properly directing itself, could have returned in the light of that evidence.”

The true position, as I have written elsewhere, is this:

"As far as the outcome of the appeal is concerned, some commentators have confidently opined that, in dismissing Megrahi’s appeal, the Appeal Court endorsed the findings of the trial court. This is not so. The Appeal Court repeatedly stresses that it is not its function to approve or disapprove of the trial court’s findings-in-fact, given that it was not contended on behalf of the appellant that there was insufficient evidence to warrant them or that no reasonable court could have made them. These findings-in-fact accordingly continue, as before the appeal, to have the authority only of the court which, and the three judges who, made them."

Lockerbie relatives urge inquiry into 'suppressed evidence'

[This is the headline over a report published this afternoon on the website of The Guardian.  It reads in part:]

Lockerbie bombing victims' relatives have urged the Scottish government to stage a public inquiry into allegations that "vital" evidence about the bombing was suppressed.

Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was among 270 people killed in the bombing, said the withheld evidence raised profound doubts about the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the Libyan man released from jail on compassionate grounds in August 2009.

Documents given to Megrahi's defence lawyers a month before he dropped his appeal show that government scientists had found significant differences between a bomb timer fragment allegedly found after the attack and the type supplied to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's former regime, Swire said.

A new account of the bombing and Megrahi's conviction, Megrahi: You Are My Jury, published in Edinburgh on Monday, alleges that the Crown Office, the police and Ministry of Defence scientists failed to disclose numerous pieces of evidence that damaged their case against the Libyan. Speaking at the book's launch with [Rev] John [Mosey], a fellow campaigner, Swire, chairman of UK Families Flight 103, said there were "mountains of evidence that doesn't seem to be right and that needs to be examined".

The timer evidence was "a vital clue", he said. "It's an anomaly that stands out plain for all to see." He said he had also pressed Frank Mulholland, the lord advocate and Scotland's chief prosecutor, to investigate evidence that the bomb could have been put on Pan Am Flight 103 after an undisclosed break-in at Heathrow airport and not in Malta as claimed, when they met last Thursday.

Opposition leaders quickly intensified the pressure by demanding that Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish justice secretary who released Megrahi, make an "urgent" statement to the Scottish parliament after the book alleged he had privately urged Megrahi to drop his appeal.

The book, written in close collaboration with Megrahi by a former member of his defence team, John Ashton, said MacAskill had made the suggestion in a private conversation with Libya's then foreign minister, Abdulati al-Obedi, after a formal meeting between the two governments on 10 August 2009 in Edinburgh. Quoting Obedi, Megrahi said MacAskill had asked to speak to the minister alone. "Once the others had withdrawn, [Obedi] stated that MacAskill gave him to understand that it would be easier to grant compassionate release if I dropped my appeal. He said he was not demanding that I do so, but the message seemed to me to be clear. I was legally entitled to continue the appeal, but I could not risk doing so."

Although significant doubts about his conviction had been raised by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, the next day Megrahi told his lawyer Tony Kelly that he was dropping his appeal "with huge reluctance and sadness".

Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Tory leader, said "these grave allegations" suggested the justice secretary wanted Megrahi released to avoid a potentially embarrassing appeal. (…)

A Scottish government spokesman dismissed the allegations about the conversation between MacAskill and Obedi as wrong and based on "third hand hearsay". He added: "We can say categorically that neither the Scottish government had any involvement of any kind in Mr Al-Megrahi dropping his appeal, or indeed any interest in it."

He continued: "The Scottish government do not doubt the safety of Mr Al-Megrahi's conviction, who was found guilty of an act of state-sponsored terrorism and did not act alone."

New interviews with Megrahi to be broadcast by the BBC and Al-Jazeera on Monday suggest the Libyan, who is in the final stages of advanced terminal prostate cancer, is extremely weak. Swire said he expected Megrahi to die soon. They last met in December. "He is so sick that he can't say more than a few phrases" and is "wracked with pain", Swire said.

The book, originally intended to be the Libyan's autobiography, includes the most detailed testimony from Megrahi so far about the trial and his campaign against his conviction. A journalist specialising in the Lockerbie bombing, Ashton was a researcher retained to help prepare Megrahi's appeal and paid indirectly by the then Libyan regime.

Ashton discloses that in the months leading up to Megrahi's incomplete appeal, the defence team was given large volumes of prosecution material on the forensic reports, the chief witness against Megrahi and the police's behaviour, which was not disclosed at Megrahi's trial in Camp Zeist in the Netherlands.

Claiming there was an "industrial-level failure to disclose", Ashton said the new material, which was not given to the defence or at the trial, included:

• Documentary evidence that scientists at the Royal Armament Research and Development Establishment, now part of the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, discovered there were key differences in the metal coatings used in a timer fragment allegedly used in Lockerbie and a control sample from the type supplied to the Libyans. One used a coating made wholly of tin; the control sample used a tin/lead alloy.

• Evidence that the timer fragment had several differences from the Swiss-built devices sold to Gaddafi's regime, including the type of circuit board it used.

• That Tony Gauci, a Maltese shopkeeper who claimed Megrahi had bought clothes allegedly used in the bombing from his shop, was offered a US reward of $2m or more, while Gauci's brother Paul could have received $1m, with the help of Dumfries and Galloway police.

• That Gauci met Scottish detectives as many as 50 times while the prosecution case was being prepared; while making 23 formal statements. Four of the statements were not disclosed.

Gauci repeatedly changed his account, including identifying people who looked like known Middle Eastern terrorists and giving different dates on which the clothes were bought, seriously undermining the prosecution case against Megrahi.

The book quotes Megrahi insisting he was framed for the attack. He does not blame Dumfries and Galloway police, saying they were only doing their jobs, but accuses the Crown Office of a blatant breach of its obligation to disclose all the evidence in the case. "If I was a terrorist, then I was an exceptionally stupid one," Megrahi said.

If the prosecution was right, he carried out the attack at times using his own passport, stayed in his regular hotel, bought the clothes in a small shop rather than a large one, used normal scheduled flights to and from Malta, planted the bomb on two feeder flights before Pan Am 103, and used a timer the Libyans believed was exclusively made for them. Officials for MacAskill and the lord advocate are studying the new allegations but have not yet responded.