Father of US Lockerbie victim concerned about Masud trial delays

[What follows is excerpted from a report published yesterday on the Devon Live website:]

The dad of a Lockerbie victim has called for greater transparency on the health of the alleged bombmaker - after revealing further delays to his trial.

Libyan Abu Agila Masud, 74, has been accused of making the bomb which killed 270 victims over Lockerbie on 21 December 1988 and was originally due to go on trial in Washington in May this year.

But Paul Hudson, who lost his daughter Melina in the bombing as she flew home to New York after a semester at a school in Exeter, Devon, said it has now been delayed until May next year "at the earliest."

He has now raised concern about the health of the defendant, which he says is being held back from the public under 'privacy grounds'.

And he fears his health could be being manipulated - citing the example of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, who was freed early in the UK under claims he had months to live - but survived for another three years.

Paul said he fears this could be being deployed as a delaying tactic for the trial, which has already been pushed back twice.

He said: "He seems to be stable as of now from what we know. But they are keeping secret his actual medical information. I find it a little strange as that is not something that is prejudicial. They are keeping it secret and the judge is saying it is based on medical privacy standards.

"It seems that should not really apply in cases like this.

"There was something similar in a different context with al-Megrahi. He was let out of prison in the UK prematurely based on claims he was going to pass away within six months. There was never any release of the medical information outside experts could evaluate. It turns out it was completely untrue and he went on to live a lot longer.

"I don't agree with that. There is not much I can do but there should be as much transparency as possible. If health of the defendant and medical issues is used to delay trial - or even accelerate it - it should not be kept secret to anyone.

"Even the judge doesn't have access to it I understand. There is only limited access to the prosecution but none at all for the public. (...)

Mr Hudson has since spent decades fighting for justice for the victims of Pan Am 103.

Masud was initially due to stand trial at a federal court in Washington in May this year accused of two counts of destruction of an aircraft resulting in death and destruction of a vehicle resulting in death.

He has denied all three charges and Paul was initially told of a delay due to his health.

After being told his health had improved and a target trial date was set for March next year, further delays have now been confirmed to the victim's families.

Paul added: "There have been more delays and I think we are probably looking at late spring or summer at the earliest for trial.

"I think it requires leadership at a higher level to make it all go forward in a good way.

"I don't trust the prosecutors, the police or judiciary, even if they wanted to.

"One of the things I am hoping for is a meeting with the US attorney general and with the chief prosecutor to make sure all the different parts are moving together to a proper conclusion and schedule.

"Reasons given for the latest delays include a change of personnel in prosecution and the defence law firms.

"They are also going through suppression hearings where the defence will try to exclude evidence the prosecution wants to present at trial.

"There is a confession the defence claims was improper and a bunch of other things they are going through.

"Motions are being filed back and forth. Hearings are mostly closed to the public and to the victims. It is really hard for any outsider to know the know to keep it from potential jurors what evidence is going to be excluded.

"I have read the paper motions but have not been able to go to the hearings before the judge to hear about the evidence in great detail.

"My feeling is I would like to see it happen sooner rather than later to never. However I would like to see it done correctly.

"So on the other hand a trial that begins prematurely could also be negative for prosecution and justice generally." (...)

Masud stands charged with two counts of destruction of an aircraft resulting in death and destruction of a vehicle resulting in death.

He has denied all three charges and claims his confession to building the bomb and taking it in a suitcase from Tripoli to Malta was made under duress.

Paul, who is now 79, said he would never stop fighting for justice. (...)

"I am hopeful, not only of a conviction here, but we may have a defendant who no doubt knows other people involved that could lead to further prosecutions."

Currently the only suspect convicted remains Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, who was jailed for life in 2001 but released by the Scottish government on compassionate grounds in 2009.

His co-defendant Lamin Khalifah Fhimah was acquitted but remains the subject of an active US arrest warrant.

Masud trial: both sides experiencing difficulties in preparing

[What follows is excerpted from an item posted today on the Intel Today website:]

The trial of Abu Agila Masud, the Libyan intelligence official accused of building the bomb that destroyed Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie in 1988, is likely to be postponed until at least April 2026. The proposed delay — requested jointly by US prosecutors and defense attorneys — must still be approved by a federal judge.

According to court filings, the main reason for the delay is the extraordinary complexity of the case. Much of the evidence is scattered across multiple countries, requiring extensive international cooperation, logistical planning, and legal coordination. This has made it difficult for both sides to prepare adequately for trial. [RB: A status hearing in the case is scheduled to take place on 5 June 2025 at 11.00 in Washington DC District Court.]

A central piece of evidence is an alleged confession Masud made in 2012 while imprisoned in Libya. Defense attorneys argue that the statement was obtained under duress and may be inadmissible in a US court. Legal arguments over whether that confession can be used at trial are expected to be contentious and potentially pivotal.

While the delay may frustrate families of the 270 victims — many of whom have waited decades for justice — it reflects the high stakes and legal sensitivities surrounding the case. Trying an international terrorism case involving decades-old evidence is inherently difficult. Political instability in Libya, the patchwork of international legal systems, and the reliance on potentially coerced testimony all complicate efforts to ensure a fair and thorough trial.

Adding another layer of complexity is the scheduled 2026 declassification of technical documents related to the Lockerbie disaster. These materials, believed to include engineering and forensic analyses of the explosion and aircraft damage, were reclassified after previously being slated for release — an unusual and controversial move. (...)

[Their] importance is underscored by the shadow of former FBI explosives expert [Tom] Thurman, a key figure in the original Lockerbie investigation. Thurman played a central role in identifying key forensic links — but his credibility was later seriously questioned. In 1997, he was removed from active casework after internal investigations found he had overstepped his authority by claiming scientific conclusions without proper credentials or peer review.

Knowing what is now publicly documented about Thurman’s methods, defense lawyers are expected to examine the forthcoming technical documents with particular intensity, looking for flaws, gaps, or contradictions in the forensic conclusions that originally shaped the indictment and public narrative.

Whether the timing of the trial delay and the documents anticipated release is coincidental or strategic, the outcome could be significant. If these documents (if released as planned) were to contradict past findings — or reveals alternative interpretations — it could reshape the courtroom dynamics entirely.

Ultimately, this is not just a legal trial, but a test of forensic accountability. Ensuring the evidence can withstand modern scrutiny is not a delay of justice — it may be the only way to achieve it.

[RB: A report also now appears on the BBC News website.]

The search for justice goes on and William Barr's actions are unlikely to help

[This is part of the headline over a long article by Kim Sengupta in The Independent. It reads in part:]

With great fanfare, on the anniversary of the Lockerbie bombing, the US has announced charges against the supposed bomb maker who blew up Pan Am flight 103, the worst act of terrorism in this country, with 270 lives lost.  

One of William Barr’s final acts as Donald Trump’s Attorney General, a deeply controversial tenure, is supposed to fit one of the final pieces of the jigsaw in the hunt for the killers.  

There are historic links between the Lockerbie investigation and the current, turbulent chapter of American politics. Barr was also the Attorney General in 1991, in the George W Bush administration, when charges were laid against two Libyans, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, and Lamin Khalifa Fhimah, over the bombing. The inquiry was led at the time by Robert Mueller, the head of the Department of Justice’s criminal division.  

Mueller, of course, became the Special Counsel who examined if Trump was the Muscovian candidate for the White House. Barr was the Attorney General, in his second term in the post, accused of distorting the findings of Mueller’s report to protect Trump from accusations of obstruction of justice, which he denies.  

The charges which have been laid against Abu Agila Mohammad Masud, another Libyan, are intrinsically connected to Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, who is the only person to have been found guilty by a court of the bombing.  

Megrahi is now dead. There are good reasons to hold that the investigation, trial and verdict which brought his conviction were flawed and a miscarriage of justice has taken place. This is a view shared by bereaved families, international jurists, intelligence officers and journalists who had followed the case.  

Last month, an appeal hearing began at the High Court in Edinburgh to posthumously clear Megrahi’s name. This was the third appeal in the attempt to prove that the verdict against him was unsound, with his legal team focusing on the veracity of the prosecution evidence at his trial. 

Much of the case against Masud, a former Libyan intelligence officer, now charged, comes from an alleged confession he made in jail, where he had ended up after the fall of the regime of Muammar Gaddafi. Masud, according to the FBI, named Megrahi and Fhimah as co-conspirators, who had together manufactured an explosive device using Semtex during a trip to Malta. Masud has said that he had bought the clothing which had been wrapped around the bomb, hidden in a radio-cassette player, before being placed in a Samsonite suitcase which was put on the flight.  

There are two points which are immediately relevant. The same trial which convicted Megrahi had acquitted Fhimah of all charges. And one of the key allegations against Megrahi, which the judges said made them decide on the verdict of guilt, was that it was he who had bought the clothing put around the explosive device.  

These contradictions are among many, big and small, which have marked the official narrative presented by the US and UK authorities of what lay behind the downing of the airliner.  

I went to Lockerbie on the night of the bombing, attended the trial of the two Libyan defendants, and met Megrahi at his home in the Libyan capital, Tripoli, where he had been allowed to return after suffering from cancer. I have followed the twists and turns of the case throughout.   

Soon after the downing of the Pan Am flight, American and British security officials began laying the blame on an Iran-Syria axis. The scenario was that Tehran had taken out a contract in revenge for the destruction of an Iranian civilian airliner, Iran Air Flight 655, which had been shot down by missiles fired from an American warship, the USS Vincennes, a few months earlier. The theory went that the contract had been taken up by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC), which specialised in such operations.  

But the blame switched to Libya, then very much a pariah state, around the time Iran and Syria joined the US-led coalition against Saddam Hussein in the first Gulf War. Robert Baer, the former American intelligence officer and author, was among those who held that the Iranian sponsored hit was the only plausible explanation for the attack. This was the firm belief held “to a man”, he stated, by his former colleagues in the CIA.  

After years of wrangling, Megrahi, the former head of security at Libyan Airlines and allegedly in the Libyan security service, and Fhimah, allegedly a fellow intelligence officer, were finally extradited in 1999. (...)

The two men were charged with joint enterprise and conspiracy. Yet only Megrahi was found guilty. (...)

So, deprived of finding a partner in crime for Megrahi, the prosecutor switched to claiming, and the judges accepting, that he had conspired with himself.  

The prosecution evidence was circumstantial; details of the bomb timer on the plane were contradictory; and the testimony of a key witness, a Maltese shopkeeper, extremely shaky under cross-examination. Five years on from the trial, the former Lord Advocate, Lord Fraser of Carmville – who had been responsible for initiating the Lockerbie prosecution – described the witness, Tony Gauci, as “an apple short of a picnic” and “not quite the full shilling”. Gauci was, however, flush in dollars: the Americans paid him for his testimony.  

The performance and evidence of a supposedly prime “CIA intelligence asset”, Abdul Majid Giaka, codenamed “Puzzle Piece” who turned up in a Shirley Bassey wig, was widely viewed as risible. It emerged later that important evidence had not been passed on to the defence lawyers. Ulrich Lumpert, an engineer who testified to the validity of a key piece of evidence, admitted later in an affidavit of lying to the court.  

It has also emerged that Giaka had been described by his CIA handler, John Holt, in an official report as someone who had a “history of making up stories”.

Holt was denied permission to appear at court. Earlier this month he reiterated in an interview that, like his CIA colleagues, he believes the Libyan connection was a concocted red herring and culpability lay with PFLP (GC). "I would start by asking the current Attorney General, William Barr, why he suddenly switched focus in 1991, when he was also Attorney General, from where clear evidence was leading, toward a much less likely scenario involving Libyans”, he said.  

The observer for the UN at the trial, Hans Kochler severely criticised the verdict. Writing later in The Independent, he described a case based on “circumstantial evidence”; the “lack of credibility” of key prosecution witnesses who “had incentives to bear false witness against Megrahi”; the fact that one was paid cash by the Americans; and that “so much key information was withheld from the trial”.    

Robert Black, a law professor born in Lockerbie, who played an important role in organising the Camp Zeist proceedings, later became convinced that a great injustice had taken place, as have many other eminent jurists.  

Some who were in Lockerbie on that terrible night and dealt with the aftermath also felt the same way. Father Patrick Keegans, the parish priest at the time, joined the “Justice for Megrahi” campaign after meeting the convicted man’s family and has backed appeals to clear his name.  

Many members of the bereaved families feel that justice has not been done, among them Jim Swire, who lost his daughter Flora in the bombing and became a spokesman for “UK Families 103”.  

When there were objections to the severely ill Megrahi being allowed to return to Tripoli, he pointed out “the scandal around Megrahi is not that a sick man was released, but that he was even convicted in the first place. All I have ever wanted to see is that the people who murdered my daughter are brought to justice.”  

After the charging of Masud, Dr Swire said: “I'm all in favour of whatever he's got to tell us being examined in a court, of course I am. The more people who look at the materials we have available the better.”  

He wanted to stress: “There are only two things that we seek, really. One is the question of why those lives were not protected in view of all the warnings and the second is: what does our government and the American government really know about who is responsible for murdering them.”  

Some bereaved families have criticised the presentation and motivation of the US move. The State Department had sent an invitation for livestreaming of the event.  

Reverend John Mosey, who lost his 19-year-old daughter Helga in the bombing, said the “timing and particularly the choice of this specific day, which is special to many of us, to be bizarre, disrespectful, insensitive and extremely ill considered”. He added: “Why exactly, when the Attorney General is about to leave office, has he waited 32 years to bring charges?”  

Behind the controversy over who carried out the attack, the political manoeuvres and legal actions, lay the human tragedy of Lockerbie, a scene which is difficult to forget, even after three decades, for many of us who went there.  (...)

There is also the memory of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, at his home in Tripoli in 2012. He lay in his bed attached to a drip, on red sheets stained by dark splashes of blood he had coughed up. An oxygen mask covered his skeletal face; his body twitched as he drifted in and out of consciousness. He was in the advanced stages of cancer: medicine he desperately needed had been plundered by looters; the doctors who had been treating him had fled. He died a few months later.  

The bitter accusations and recriminations over Lockerbie are unlikely to cease. But the search for justice for this terrible act of violence which took so many lives, and caused so much pain and grief, continues to remain elusive among the secrets and lies. 

Lockerbie bombing suspect in US custody

[This is the headline over a report published today on the BBC News website. It reads in part:]

A Libyan man accused of making the bomb which destroyed Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie 34 years ago is in United States custody, Scottish authorities have said.

The US announced charges against Abu Agila Masud two years ago, alleging that he played a key role in the bombing on 21 December, 1988.

The blast on board the Boeing 747 left 270 people dead.

It is the deadliest terrorist incident to have taken place on British soil. (...)

Last month it was reported that Masud had been kidnapped by a militia group in Libya, leading to speculation that he was going to be handed over to the American authorities to stand trial.

In 2001 Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was convicted of bombing Pan Am 103 after standing trial at a specially-convened Scottish court in the Netherlands.

He was the only man to be convicted over the attack.

Megrahi was jailed for life but was released on compassionate grounds by the Scottish government in 2009 after being diagnosed with cancer.

He died in Libya in 2012. (...)

A spokesperson for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) said: "The families of those killed in the Lockerbie bombing have been told that the suspect Abu Agila Mohammad Mas'ud Kheir Al-Marimi ("Mas'ud" or "Masoud") is in US custody.

"Scottish prosecutors and police, working with UK government and US colleagues, will continue to pursue this investigation, with the sole aim of bringing those who acted along with Al Megrahi to justice."

[What follows is excerpted from a report just published on the website of The New York Times:]

The arrest of the operative, Abu Agila Mohammad Mas’ud, was the culmination of a decades-long effort by the Justice Department to prosecute him. In 2020, Attorney General William P Barr announced criminal charges against Mr Mas’ud, accusing him of building the explosive device used in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, which killed 270 passengers, including 190 Americans.

Mr Mas’ud faces two criminal counts, including destruction of an aircraft resulting in death. He was being held at a Libyan prison for unrelated crimes when the Justice Department unsealed the charges against him two years ago. It is unclear how the US government negotiated the extradition of Mr Mas’ud.

Mr Mas’ud’s suspected role in the Lockerbie bombing received new scrutiny in a three-part documentary on “Frontline” on PBS in 2015. The series was written and produced by Ken Dornstein, whose brother was killed in the attack. Mr Dornstein learned that Mr Mas’ud was being held in a Libyan prison and even obtained pictures of him as part of his investigation. [RB: A critical commentary by John Ashton on the Dornstein documentary can be read here.] 

“If there’s one person still alive who could tell the story of the bombing of Flight 103, and put to rest decades of unanswered questions about how exactly it was carried out — and why — it’s Mr Mas’ud,” Mr Dornstein wrote in an email after learning Mr Mas’ud would finally be prosecuted in the United States. “The question, I guess, is whether he’s finally prepared to speak.”

After Col Muammar el-Qaddafi, Libya’s leader, was ousted from power, Mr Mas’ud confessed to the bombing in 2012, telling a Libyan law enforcement official that he was behind the attack. Once investigators learned about the confession in 2017, they interviewed the Libyan official who had elicited it, leading to charges.

Even though extradition would allow Mr Mas’ud to stand trial, legal experts have expressed doubts about whether his confession, obtained in prison in war-torn Libya, would be admissible as evidence.

Mr Mas’ud, who was born in Tunisia but has Libyan citizenship, was the third person charged in the bombing. Two others, Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi and Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah, were charged in 1991, but American efforts to prosecute them ran aground when Libya declined to send them to the United States or Britain to stand trial.

Instead, the Libyan government agreed to a trial in the Netherlands under Scottish law. Mr Fhimah was acquitted and Mr. al-Megrahi was convicted in 2001 and sentenced to life in prison. (...)

Prosecutors say that Mr Mas’ud played a key role in the bombing, traveling to Malta and delivering the suitcase that contained the bomb used in the attack. In Malta, Mr Megrahi and Mr Fhimah instructed Mr Mas’ud to set the timer on the device so it would blow up while the plane was in the air the next day, prosecutors said.

On the morning of Dec 21, 1988, Mr Megrahi and Mr Fhimah met Mr Mas’ud at the airport in Malta, where he turned over the suitcase. Prosecutors said Mr Fhimah put the suitcase on a conveyor belt, ultimately ending up on Pan Am Flight 103.

Mr Mas’ud’s name surfaced twice in 1988, even before the bombing took place. In October, a Libyan defector told the CIA he had seen Mr Mas’ud at the Malta airport with Mr Megrahi, saying the pair had passed through on a terrorist operation. Malta served as a primary launching point for Libya to initiate such attacks, the informant told the agency. That December, the day before the Pan Am bombing, the informant told the CIA that the pair had again passed through Malta. Nearly another year passed before the agency asked the informant about the bombing.

But investigators never pursued Mr Mas’ud in earnest until Mr Megrahi’s trial years later, only for the Libyans to insist that Mr Mas’ud did not exist. Mr. Megrahi also claimed he did not know Mr Mas’ud.

Father of victim says nothing reliable will come out of Lockerbie probe

[This is the headline over a report published in today’s edition of The National. The Rev’d John Mosey, as ever, speaks sound sense on Lockerbie. The article reads as follows:]

The father of a teenage Lockerbie victim yesterday said the new probe will not help “find the truth” after Libyan authorities offered prosecutors the chance to interview suspects.

Musician Helga Mosey was just 19 when Pan Am Flight 103 exploded over the Scottish town, killing her and 269 other people in 1988. Now Scottish prosecutors have been invited to Libya to interview two new suspects in the case.

Although the pair have not been officially named, it is understood that they are Mohammed Abouajela Masud and Abdullah al-Senussi.

Both are serving prison terms in Libya, with Masud thought to be serving 10 years for bomb-making and Senussi – the brother-in-law and intelligence chief of former dictator Colonel Gaddafi – on death row.

Jamal Zubair, spokesman for the self-declared National Salvation government which controls much of the country, said authorities would facilitate interviews with the men, telling the BBC: “They can send some investigators, they come here to see those guys and see what they can do.

“Always we are very helpful, we want to talk to people and we want to show what we have.

“We might have more evidence about other people or maybe those guys have more information about something else.”

However, Mosey’s father John has expressed doubt about the development, telling broadcaster West Sound: “I’m not quite sure whether I would accept as genuine or real anything that came out of troubled Libya just at the moment.

“I think that if you spread enough dollars around and make enough promises you could get almost anybody to say almost anything.

“I know that if I was on death row like Senussi is there, I would offer to make any confession they wanted in exchange for a centrally heated cell in Glasgow with Sky TV.”

Though Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, who died in 2012, is the only person ever convicted of the atrocity, it was always believed that he did not work alone and Scottish and US investigators announced that two new suspects had been identified last week.

The development follows the screening of a three-part documentary series by American Ken Dornstein, whose brother David died in the atrocity.

He said: “We went in with a list of names that had come from the original investigation, pulled out of the tens of thousands of pages of documents. I established many were dead or missing. “Ultimately, I concluded there may be three people left.”

Speaking about Masud, he added: “Figuring out simply that he existed would solve many of the unanswered questions to the bombing because he was attached to Megrahi according to the best information there was, including at the airport in Malta on the day that the bomb was said to have been infiltrated into the baggage system and ultimately on to Flight 103.”

However, Mosey, from Lancaster, who believes Megrahi was innocent, said: “I don’t think it’s a step forward, I think it’s an effort to delay forward movement.

“The Scottish Criminal Case Review Commission, an independent body, came up with six grounds on which there could have been a miscarriage of justice against Megrahi, who personally I don’t believe was involved at all.

“These are the things that need looking at really, not remote interviews with people that might or might not be involved.

“They need to look at the serious, serious questionings there are about the outcome of the trial, which I attended the whole of.

“I have no confidence that any good will come out of this. I think it’s a blind of some sort to delay facing the real facts.

“There’s certainly no closure for us. We think of our daughter every day and it’s something we carry til the day we die.

“If you mean closure in finding the truth, no I don’t think this is going to bring us any closure at all.”

Libyan Lockerbie suspect’s family urges international intervention

[This is the headline over a report published today on the website of Libya Review. It reads as follows:]

On Saturday, the family of Abu Ajila Masoud Al-Marimi, the Libyan intelligence officer accused of involvement in the 1988 Lockerbie bombing, called on international human rights organizations to intervene urgently, claiming he is being tortured and denied medical care while in US custody. They report that his health has deteriorated significantly and warn of the potential danger to his life.

Al-Marimi was extradited to the United States from Libya in December 2022, a move his family insists was illegal. They say they have been denied any contact or visitation since his transfer and are calling for legal and humanitarian guarantees to ensure his safety. The family is also demanding his immediate return to Libya, where they believe he would receive better care and a fairer legal process. [RB: Masud was not "extradited" to the USA: he was abducted by a Libyan warlord and sold to the US authorities: 

https://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2022/12/even-facade-of-legality-was-not.html]

Al-Marimi’s son revealed that evidence for the upcoming trial, set for May 12, 2025, in Washington DC, has already been submitted. However, he criticized the court for allowing families of Lockerbie victims to attend hearings via video link while denying the same access to Al-Marimi’s family. Al-Marimi, now 71, has consistently denied the allegations against him, declaring in court that he had no involvement in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103.

This is not the first time the family has raised alarm over his treatment. In June, they reported that he had been hospitalized due to multiple chronic illnesses. His nephew, Abdel Moneim Al-Marimi, expressed concerns about his uncle appearing in court without proper legal representation, as promised financial support for his defense has not materialized. Despite securing a lawyer at their own expense, the family claims they have received little assistance or updates from Libya’s Government of National Unity (GNU).

The 1988 Lockerbie bombing remains one of the deadliest terrorist attacks in history, killing 270 people. Al-Marimi is accused of being involved in constructing the bomb used in the attack, based on claims that he made a confession to Libyan authorities.

His extradition has been widely criticized within Libya, with opponents arguing that it violated the country’s constitution and sovereignty. Protests erupted across Libya following his handover, with many accusing the GNU of yielding to foreign pressure.

The family’s renewed plea draws attention to Al-Marimi’s worsening health and alleged mistreatment, underscoring broader concerns about human rights violations and the legality of his transfer. They are calling on international organizations to investigate his case and intervene to ensure his basic rights are protected.

The case has further strained Libya’s fragile political climate, while in the US, it has reignited interest in securing accountability for the Lockerbie bombing. Al-Marimi’s family continues to assert his innocence, insisting that any alleged confession was coerced under duress.

A second Scottish Lockerbie trial?

The following short piece by Marcello Mega appears in today's Scottish edition of The Mail on Sunday.

 

click on image for increased legibility

I am sceptical about the likelihood of another Scottish Lockerbie trial. In the first place, extradition of the suspects from Libya is highly unlikely. Secondly the evidential value of the alleged confession by Abu Agila Masud to making the bomb is highly questionable. Before relying upon it in support of an indictment and presenting it in evidence to a court the Scottish prosecutors would require to be satisfied (a) that it was in fact made and (b) that it was not obtained through torture or undue pressure or inducement. The cautionary experience of relying at the Zeist trial on a witness -- Majid Giaka -- supplied and vouched for by the US Department of Justice might indicate to the Lord Advocate and the Crown Office the wisdom of proceeding with great circumspection. 

Abducted Libyan "may have already left for America under guard"

[What follows is from a report published today on the Globe Echo news website:]

A Libyan official does not rule out deporting Abu Ageila to America

Thirty-three years after the terrorist bombing of the American Pan American plane over Scotland, American and Scottish investigators found what they wanted in Abu Ageila Masoud, a former officer in the Libyan intelligence service during the era of the late Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.

And after Abdel Hamid al-Dabaiba, head of the interim “unity” government, and his foreign minister, Naglaa al-Manqoush, announced, on various occasions, the desire to reopen the case again, the fate of Abu Ajila became unknown, as his family says that he was kidnapped by unknown gunmen.

According to Libyan sources, the kidnapping of Abu Ajila from his home took place in agreement between the security services of Al-Dabaiba and the kidnappers, who are likely to be American, to undergo the trial that remained open in the horrific accident, where the wreckage of the Pan Am 103 plane was scattered over the town of Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, and resulted in About 270 people were killed, most of them Americans. A Libyan official told Asharq Al-Awsat that he “does not rule out that he has already left for America under strict security guard.”

According to US official papers, US investigators received information about a confession that Abu Ageila made to a Libyan official in an interview on September 12, 2012.

Abu Ajila Muhammad Masoud Khair al-Marimi worked for the Jamahiriya Security Service, which was sometimes referred to as the External Security Service (Libyan Intelligence), which was accused of carrying out terrorist acts against other countries and suppressing the activities of Libyan dissidents abroad. He held various positions, including a “technical expert” in the construction of explosive devices since 1973, and received promotions to the rank of colonel during his tenure.

[RB: Here is what I replied to a query on the Friends of Justice for Megrahi Facebook page:]

If Masud has been handed over to the Americans for trial, that could be a good thing. Maybe an American jury court wouldn't be as gullible as the Scottish judges at Zeist. And a lot of evidence favourable to the defence has emerged since 2001.