The BBC has learned that a Libyan man jailed for the Lockerbie airliner bombing in Scotland is expected to be set free on compassionate grounds.

 

Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, who has terminal prostate cancer, is serving a life sentence for blowing up a Pan Am airliner over Lockerbie in 1988, killing 270 people.

 

Detailed preparations are being made to return him to Libya by the end of next week, although the Scottish government says no final decision has yet been made.

 

Is it right to free Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds? Should he receive treatment in prison or be released to get care?

If he wasn't terminally ill, he should remain in prison until the result of his appeal is known. However, it seems fairly likely that he will not live long enough to see the result of his appeal.

 

His conviction always seemed highly doubtful. It rested to a large extent on a shopkeeper supposedly identifying a customer well over ten years afther selling him something. There was never any attempt to explain why this customer was so much more memorable than all the others.

 

In the first few days after the bombing the US, loyally followed as always by the UK, blamed Syria. That remained the case until 1990 when Iraq invaded Kuwait and Syria supported the US action against Iraq on the grounds that the Syrian leader Assad hated Saddam Hussein even more than he hated the US. Then, all of a sudden, the blame shifted to Libya. Who was really responsible? I haven't got a clue. But I don't think they have yet appeared in court on charges relating to Lockerbie.

To be honest, I've never accepted this ridiculous "lone bomber" theory anyway... Libya does seem the most logical suspect when you consider that Lockerbie followed on a couple of years later from illegal terrorist bombings that the US perpetrated on Tripoli.... What, you think just because a fukkin' state does it instead of a group, it should actually be considered anything other than what it is...? Fukk that.... The act of terrorism perpetrated by the US (in cahoots with Thatcher, surprise, surprise) resulted in the death of Ghadaffi's adopted daughter... Well, sorry, but who the hell would blame a grieving father for wanting some measure of revenge, I know I wouldn't.... But this guy is pretty much basically a pazzi, a fall-guy, just some convienient Libyan stooge who just happens to fit the profile, being a former Intelligence Officer, in the wrong place at the wrong time; well, even supposing that he even was there at the time, the "evidence" seems pretty shaky tbh....

 

I think that this relatively low-level guy was offered up as some 'sacrificial lamb' tbh, the real perpetrators are still out there..... Of course, now that we're all "best buddies" with Libya, no sod's gonna make any kind of effort to look for the real culprits are they....? <_<

 

 

To be honest, I've never accepted this ridiculous "lone bomber" theory anyway... Libya does seem the most logical suspect when you consider that Lockerbie followed on a couple of years later from illegal terrorist bombings that the US perpetrated on Tripoli.... What, you think just because a fukkin' state does it instead of a group, it should actually be considered anything other than what it is...? Fukk that.... The act of terrorism perpetrated by the US (in cahoots with Thatcher, surprise, surprise) resulted in the death of Ghadaffi's adopted daughter... Well, sorry, but who the hell would blame a grieving father for wanting some measure of revenge, I know I wouldn't.... But this guy is pretty much basically a pazzi, a fall-guy, just some convienient Libyan stooge who just happens to fit the profile, being a former Intelligence Officer, in the wrong place at the wrong time; well, even supposing that he even was there at the time, the "evidence" seems pretty shaky tbh....

 

I think that this relatively low-level guy was offered up as some 'sacrificial lamb' tbh, the real perpetrators are still out there..... Of course, now that we're all "best buddies" with Libya, no sod's gonna make any kind of effort to look for the real culprits are they....? <_<

 

I have never bought into the idea that Libya did it at all

 

I think it was Iran in retalliation for the shooting down of an Iranian 747 by American cruise missiles in the gulf not that long before Lockerbie so I have always seen it as Iran blowing up an American plane in revenge for America blowing up an Iranian plane

the blokes dying.... yep let him go home.... what good would it do to keep him in jail here?

I have never bought into the idea that Libya did it at all

 

I think it was Iran in retalliation for the shooting down of an Iranian 747 by American cruise missiles in the gulf not that long before Lockerbie so I have always seen it as Iran blowing up an American plane in revenge for America blowing up an Iranian plane

 

ive seen that on 'air crash investigation'... on discovery... according to that account it was the iranians fault for failing repeatedly to identify itself to the americans. tbh i dont blame the americans for shooting it down as it was looking like it was a hostile act.

 

 

that programme is made by americans though...so how accurate it actually is is open to doubt.

I think it was Iran in retalliation for the shooting down of an Iranian 747 by American cruise missiles in the gulf not that long before Lockerbie so I have always seen it as Iran blowing up an American plane in revenge for America blowing up an Iranian plane

 

I forgot about that, but there's one thing wrong with that theory though mate... UK really had no involvement in that affair, so why wouldn't the Iranians just blow up or hijack a plane on US soil... I think because the bombing of Tripoli involved both the US and UK (who acted as an accessory before, during and after the fact..), that perhaps Lockerbie could be seen as killing two birds with one stone (an American plane getting blown up over British soil), which would make Libya a more likely culprit.... Like I say though, I dont blame Ghadaffi even if he did do it, at the end of the day, we committed as much terror on his people during the Tripoli bombings, and no one ever held us or the Yanks to account for it, the UN being too gutless.... So, in a way, I guess one could see Lockerbie as being some kind of 'Karmic' retribution, same as 7/7 was retribution for Iraq....

For the same reason Ronnie Biggs was released I'd say yeah. Prison guards should not be required to look after terminally ill people and it's ridiculous to have guards sitting with him or Biggs in hospital when they should be looking after a much larger number of prisoners.

 

As for whether he did it - I have no idea.

For the same reason Ronnie Biggs was released I'd say yeah. Prison guards should not be required to look after terminally ill people and it's ridiculous to have guards sitting with him or Biggs in hospital when they should be looking after a much larger number of prisoners.

 

As for whether he did it - I have no idea.

 

I pretty much agree.

 

I certainly go along with the view that Libya were the most likely nation responsible for the atrocity. Whilst after what had previously happened in their country I can't say I can blame them for retaliating in this manner.

 

Whilst I think this bomber no more carried out this act (alone or otherwise) than Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK - i.e. I don't believe he did (I actually think the Red Dwarf theory was a lot more plausible :rofl:).

 

 

 

I always thought Iran or Syria were the more likely suspects. But who knows....

 

Not sure of the UK/US retaliation theory either. I remember reading somewhere (many years ago) that the bomb went off early and the plane was never supposed to blow up over the UK. It was actually supposed to blow up over the Atlantic where no evidence would be left.

 

I dunno. If the guy in prison was actually responsible then no, I definitely wouldn't release him. Terminally ill or not. But that's the big problem ain't it? Nobody really seems convinced that he did do it. And the conviction always seemed highly dubious.

 

On balance I would probably keep him in jail but I'm glad it's not my decision to make. :unsure:

But that's the big problem ain't it? Nobody really seems convinced that he did do it. And the conviction always seemed highly dubious.

 

IMO, it's as clear a case of "Not Proven" as any I have heard... And this is surely why in the Scottish courts we have this option.... The prosecution's case was weak, and certainly not beyond "reasonable doubt"....

 

I think, on balance, he should be released, because the case against him was flawed, and his IS going to die soon anyway....

Al-Megrahi 'pressured into abandoning appeal'

By Jerome Taylor

Independent.co.uk

Friday, 14 August 2009

 

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi could be free by next week

 

Supporters of the only man convicted of carrying out the Lockerbie bombing accused the Scottish officials today of pressurising him into abandoning his appeal against his conviction and called on the Government to hold a full public inquiry into Britain’s worst terrorist attack.

 

Lawyers for Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi announced this morning that the former Libyan intelligence officer would no longer pursue his second appeal against his conviction.

 

Megrahi is currently serving a life sentence for his involvement in Britain’s worst terrorist attack but only has months to live because he is suffering from terminal prostate cancer.

 

His decision to abandon the appeal will likely bring him even closer to being returned to Libya, either on compassionate grounds because he is dying or under a controversial prisoner exchange treaty signed between Britain and Libya earlier this year which would only allow him to return to Tripoli if he abandoned his appeal.

 

Speaking to The Independent today, Pamela Dix - whose brother Peter was on board Pan Am flight 103 when it exploded above the skies of Lockerbie in December 1988 - said Megrahi’s decision to abandon the appeal would mean that those relatives of victims who believe the truth about the bombing has yet to be ascertained will be even further from discovering what really happened.

 

“It’s a massive disappointment,” said Mrs Dix, whose organisation UK Families Flight 103 represents a number of British families that believe the full facts of the bombing have yet to be fully explained. “I’m always a little hesitant to speak for other people but I certainly know that a number of families who lost loved ones and were very keen for the appeal process to reach its full conclusion.”

 

She added: “The actual appeal itself had a rather narrow focus but we wanted it because we would hopefully find out more about what actually happened and whether Megrahi was innocent or guilty. At the moment only one man has supposedly been found guilty for an act which would have involved a number of people.”

 

Megrahi has always staunchly maintained his innocence, a view that is shared by a number of British families of those who died in the attack he was convicted of carrying out – a view which is in stark contrast to most American families who are convinced of his guilt. Last year, however, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission gave Megrahi permission to appeal his conviction after a four year review of the evidence against him.

 

But a statement released by Megrahi’s lawyers today revealed that the 57-year-old had applied to the High Court in Edinburgh on the 12th of August to abandon that appeal after his health took a “significant turn for the worse”.

 

MSP Christine Grahame, who has met Megrahi in prison on numerous occasions, said she believed the Libyan had been pressured into dropping the appeal.

 

"I saw Megrahi not so long ago and apart from his number one priority of seeing his family he was absolutely determined to clear his family’s name and prove his innocence,” she said.

 

“If he had found a way to do both I know he would have chosen that route. That’s why I’m highly surprised by his decision to drop the appeal and why I believe he has been leaned on.”

 

Mrs Grahame claimed she had seen an email from an official in the Scottish Justice Department warning that senior Scottish officials were exerting undue pressure to have Megrahi drop his appeal.

 

She added: “We will now absolutely do everything we can to push for a full public inquiry. There are six hundred pages of evidence from the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, much of which suggests Megrahi is innocent, which will no longer see the light of day and that is simply not right.”

 

Sources close to the Megrahi family say he is desperate to return to Triploi to spend the remainder of days with his wife and five children. The decision to abandon his appeal may stem from a hope that doing so could quicken his release. Although the BBC said earlier this week that Scotland’s Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill was about to release the Libyan on “compassionate grounds”, he is also potentially eligible for return to Tripoli under the prisoner exchange scheme as long as the appeal was abandoned or concluded.

 

In the statement Tony Kelly, Megrahi’s lawyer said: "As the appeal hearing has commenced... leave of the court is required before the appeal can be formally abandoned."

 

The Libyan’s decision to abandon his appeal has lead to fresh calls for a full independent inquiry into the Lockerbie bombing, a request which has been regularly rebuffed by the Government who have argued that an inquiry might prejudice Megrahi’s appeal.

 

“The next step we will have to take is to make sure a full inquiry is held if we are to ever find out the truth,” said Mrs Dix. “The ongoing criminal process surrounding Megrahi has always been used by the Government as an excuse not to hold an inquiry, but if that appeal is abandoned it is only right that a full inquiry should be held.”

 

I'm sorry, but the very fact he has been leaned on to give up his appeal suggests that Libya were justifiably the number one candidates for the Lockerbie bombing. Otherwise why give up an appeal if say Iran or Palestine were responsible?

I'm sorry, but the very fact he has been leaned on to give up his appeal suggests that Libya were justifiably the number one candidates for the Lockerbie bombing. Otherwise why give up an appeal if say Iran or Palestine were responsible?

 

You meant to say Syria, didn't you Rich....?

I rather get the feeling here that he's just looking for what is the best option to get him back to spend the remainder of his days with his family... Dropping an appeal and going for release on compassionate grounds seems to be the more sure-thing... Any appeal could take months, time he doesn't really have... It suits the establishment either way really, they can still say they "got their man", but then make out like they're being all nice and compassionate and release him because he's dying of cancer.....

 

oh dear... a huge mistake, he was given a heros welcome, why tf didnt we see THAT comming. so ive changed my mind, he is no hero and could well inspire others to follow his example. he should have rotted in jail.

oh dear... a huge mistake, he was given a heros welcome, why tf didnt we see THAT comming. so ive changed my mind, he is no hero and could well inspire others to follow his example. he should have rotted in jail.

It's not too surprising though and was clearly for domestic consumption. Not good PR internationally though.

I'm conflicted. The guy himself is likely innocent and was used to take the blame from the Libyan government. The air raids in Tripoli were indeed barbaric, but it has yet to mentioned in this thread they were in retaliation (on a much larger scale) for Libya's bizarre and unwarranted bombing of a German nightclub. Libya also hijacked an American jumbo jet in Pakistan in the 80s.

 

Anyway what concerns me most is the precedent it sets. Granted I don't know how Scottish law works (in the US, law is set by precedence), but is it customary for judges to override sentences to let people out of jail on such grounds?

 

To say nothing of the guy personally, I think when you sentence someone to life in prison... they're supposed to die in prison... isn't that the very idea?

Edited August 21, 200915 yr by Consie

Found this today. It makes interesting reading. I'd so like to know the truth about this whole affair. And the more I read, the more I'm convinced it was an absolute stitch up.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/mar/31/lockerbie.libya

 

 

<_<

And these

 

http://www.firmmagazine.com/features/590/T...justice%2C.html

 

http://www.firmmagazine.com/features/592/T..._Jim_Swire.html

 

 

:blink:

Edited August 21, 200915 yr by Jupiter9

It's my understanding that under Scots Law any prisoner (regardless of the crime) can apply for release on compassionate grounds if doctors confirm they are terminally ill (3 months or less to live I believe). The Justice Minister then takes expert advice from various sources and makes the final decision as to whether the person should be allowed home to die.

 

As far as I know this isn't anything new in Scots Law. Not sure if there's an equivalent in English Law (or indeed US Law). :unsure:

The guy was almost certainly stitched up I think - what other justification is there when Thatcher, Major AND Blair all refused a full public enquiry into the bombing despite repeated pleas by the bereaved families? Surely a full, no-stone-left-unturned enquiry would have been these people's right after what happened?