Abdelbaset Al-Megrahi dies

[tig]

Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the only person ever convicted in connection with the 1988 Lockerbie bombing, has died at his home in Tripoli from cancer.

BBC News - Lockerbie bomber Megrahi is dead

[Pictish Scot]

It was a long time coming and I am sure there are many who won't be sad at his passing. However, its scary to think that the whole question of exactly who was responsible for the Lockerbie bombing will die with him. Note that I am not saying al-Megrahi was innocent, but I certainly don't think he was the only one that was guilty - and anyone who actually cares about true justice should want to know the truth!

[tig]

ye id agree with that

given he was only released on the grounds he wouldnt appeal,(well and he was dying) i suspect his guilty verdict wasnt very sound

Originally Posted by tig

ye id agree with that

given he was only released on the grounds he wouldnt appeal,(well and he was dying) i suspect his guilty verdict wasnt very sound

It was so unsound that the SCCRC had referred it to appeal on the basis of 5 key issues and one other, as can be seen in the Herald's leaked version of the Statement of Reasons BBC News - Lockerbie questions remain following Megrahi's death In my view, it was also unsound because of the fact that the trial judges referred to "a number of uncertainties and qualifications" in the prosecution's case but, more importantly, because of the quiet, persistence of Jim Swire, someone who became a close friend and confidant of the man who allegedly murdered his daughter.

[Duthill]

As I recall , the USA had Iran and Syria in the frame for the Lockerbie atrocity , and only shifted their attention onto Libya when they were building up to the Iraq debacle , and needed allies in the region .

[Magistra]

My understanding is that it is strongly believed Iran organised the bomb, but Libya held their hands up to it so trade could resume. Even the father of one of the tragic victims never believed it was Megrahi who carried out the murderous crime.

[ANDY-J3]

When you look at the prosecution case against Megrahi it's clear the key evidence that convicted him shouldn't have been admissible. The only man who picked him out in an identity parade subsequently admitted that he had already read a press article naming Megrahi as a suspect and no one bothered to tell the defence lawyers that fact. The witness was then subsequently paid a substantial sum of money for testifying. I don't know if he was guilty or not but I do know that the evidence wouldn't have been sufficient to convince a jury and I would question whether the judges who arrived at the verdict weren't put under pressure from politicians.