Merged [Ed] Convicted Lockerbie bomber released

Delscottio said:
Where the hell does a Libyan get a Scottish flag from?
Click to expand...


They're very easy to get, if you have a few days notice. Which of course they had.

Delscottio said:
I haven't followed the story that much but is there going to be any further investigation for who actually did it?
Click to expand...


Well, that's for the CT section, but the thread there keeps going dead.

Rolfe.
 
I think most Middle East countries must have a very popular shop that just sells international flags, for the purposes of waving or burning, depending on latest news.
 
RandFan said:
I'm not certain there is much good to keeping most people who are in jail, in jail. If you take them on a case by case basis.
Click to expand...

Well, exactly.

The whole system is broken.

I never thought much of that particular argument. I don't think the justice system is so precise.
Click to expand...

Why shouldn't it be?
 
Radio 5 is currently reporting that 76% of Scots think the decision was wrong, and damaged the reputation of the Holyrood government. Salmond is on in an hour, "putting a brave face on it"...
 
volatile said:
The whole system is broken.
Click to expand...
My point has little to do with whether or not the system is broken. It has to do with complex dynamic systems (namely humans and human societies) and the inability to know with any certainty the potential for rhebilitation and recidivism. ​

Why shouldn't it be?
Click to expand...
We've not yet (were not even close) been able to analyse every contributing factor that is the foundation of criminal behavior nor are we able to predict with any precision the likelihood of any random individual re-offending. ​

As a thought experiment imagine if we arbitrarily picked two inmates for comparison and shortened one inmates stay in prison by 1 day. Would we expect a statistical difference in re-offense rates between the inmates? No, Now imagine if we divided two groups of convicts arbitrarily and shortened one groups stay in prison by 1 day. Would we expect a statistical difference in re-offense rates between the groups? Not as difinitive but unlikely. ​

Ok, let's save millions and shorten every one's stay by one day. ​
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
I phrased that badly. I was irritated by Cicero's habit of posting as if his was the only valid opinion. My bad.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...
I should have looked at your post in context. I make that mistake a lot. My bad.
 
volatile said:
Radio 5 is currently reporting that 76% of Scots think the decision was wrong, and damaged the reputation of the Holyrood government. Salmond is on in an hour, "putting a brave face on it"...
Click to expand...

latest yougov poll I saw was 52% IIRC
 
It's going to depend on who you ask. If you ask people who haven't been paying attention for the past 20 years, and have just heard people like Ian Grey bursting a blood vessel about Scotland's name being dragged through the mud, then you'll get a slice of negativity.

Radio Scotland had a phone-in about it, and one of the strikingly common comments from people who had taken the trouble to phone was that they'd been against the decision at the beginning, when they'd taken an interest and found out what was going on, they'd changed their minds.

Assuming the Herald is printing letters in reasonable proportion to what it's receiving, the score as of yesterday's paper was 36 in favour, 5 against - with only two of those 5 being from addresses in Scotland. However, most of the 36 seem to have more than a few days familiarity with the case.

Rolfe.
 
However, most of the 36 seem to have more than a few days familiarity with the case.
Click to expand...

And were probably wrapped up in conspiracy theories about the CIA supposedly paying a key witness 2m with no evidence, not whether the decision to release a convicted mass murderer on "compassionate grounds" was a good one or not.
 
Having downloaded and read Paul Foot's Private Eye report on Lockerbie, I'm pretty much in a state of shock.

Not only is there zero evidence that the suitcase/bomb flew out of Malta, there is powerful evidence that it could not have. Meanwhile, there is strong evidence (first recorded 2 weeks after the atrocity itself) that the suitcase was loaded at Heathrow.

And the above is just a small part of this vile miscarriage of justice --

https://secure2.subscribeonline.co.uk/PEYE/digital_downloads.cfm

Anybody with a serious interest in the subject should download the article.
 
Last edited:
This afternoon Radio 4 repeated their dramatised account of the trial, first broadcast shortly after it finished. To be honest, I was running around hanging out washing at the time, and I didn't follow every word, but I had the distinct impression that they had one, possibly two people who might have done it, in the witness box. I remember most people who followed the trial being seriously shocked by the guilty verdict, including a couple of top legal eagles.

I always tended to the view that it was a cock-up along the lines of so many others, where the cops were unable to lay a glove on the real culprit and fitted up someone who happened to be handy in order to get a conviction. And that the rest of it was probably CT. I started a thread in the CT forum about it over two years ago, wondering if anyone else had any opnions, but got nothing, really.

The CTs aren't going away, and I don't really know how much credence to give them. It's just as unreasonable to declare that it's inconveivable the CIA could ever have bent the legal process for their own ends, as it is to chase after every CT that rears its head.

Today's letters column is three for three.

G McCulloch said:
The idea, if mooted, that Megrahi was released on a subjective interpretation of the facts by our Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill is fanciful. There is a well-established protocol that must be met for such a release to be considered. Many of us are proud of the fact that compassion is so enshrined in the notion of what it is to be Scottish that such an option is open.

Then there is the associated question of people who live in glass houses not throwing stones. America moralising to all and sundry? Let's just not go there.

Finally, we are not naively believing that all is good, pure and clean in the world of international deal and counter-deal. Nor are we blind to the notion of economic reality and world stability where the Middle East is concerned. And there are those politicians who will use any means to try to get their own ends met. However, when pushed, we have an inherent instinct to push back.

In short, over here, although not everyone would agree, I believe that as a nation we're relatively happy with the way the Megrahi affair has been handled.
Click to expand...


I suppose the Herald could be writing the letters itself....

Rolfe.
 
Last edited:
There is a long inteview with Megrahi in today's paper.

“I was supposed to receive a fair trial and I was supposed to be subject to fair procedure. From day one of the trial there were delays and delays from the Crown Office. I was supposed to receive the documents and the papers. Regarding the indictment, by law I was supposed to receive it within 110 days, but I was waiting more than 400 days. It was abnormal.

“The SCCRC found at least six grounds of appeal and said there were six grounds on which it may have been a miscarriage of justice. From that point we asked the Crown for more documents and more papers. We received only some of them and they were still redacted. Most of the pages were black and I think this is shameful. They were supposed to give us everything.”

Referring to the revelation by former MP Tam Dalyell that police notebooks recording the bombing’s aftermath were destroyed, he said: “It is very strange that the police forces that dealt with the case – and there were more than 400 officers – it is very strange that their notebooks went missing. When one officer was asked about the notebooks, he said they were all destroyed. I find this very strange. Surely the decision to destroy the notebooks of so many people is a decision that someone must have made? This is not fair and a big question mark about the case.”

He is also deeply critical of the Court of Session proceedings, where a special advocate was appointed to represent him because of the confidential nature of many pieces of evidence.

“I met the special advocate just one time and when I met him he said he doesn’t know anything about the documents and he said that he is not entitled to get in touch with me once he does know about it. Where is the justice in that? He is meant to represent my interests yet he cannot talk to me about a piece of crucial evidence. It could be of benefit to me and to the case, but they just say it is top secret and I am not entitled to see it or to see him again.
Click to expand...


Mind you, I suspect it's stretching it to describe him as "innocent", given his job. But I thought punishment on the basis that "well, you must have done something" was illegal after the age of 15. And all that stuff about "beyond reasonable doubt" was supposed to be taken seriously.

Rolfe.
 
The release is, of course, justified on humanitarian grounds. Not the humanness of the hundreds of dead this man deliberately caused, of course; his own humanness, such as it is.

Cicero (I think) says somewhere words to the effect that "the softness and kind-heartedness of the population is the hope of evil men". He doesn't mean the kind-heartedness is in itself bad, only that it is the evil men's hope it will be misused.

He knew what he was talking about, obviously.
 
Braveheart was considered a great film by Scottish audiences, even with the large number of historical inaccuracies it contained.
Its irrelevant whether Magrahi is innocent or guilty as far as the SNP are concerned.
Magrahi is their braveheart now.:)
 
Last edited:
Professor Yaffle said:
IIRC one of the suspects (Abo Talb, I think) who appeared in the witness box was given lifelong immunity from prosecution in return for his testimony.

ETA: After a search, I find that this was widely believed to be true, but turns out not to be the case.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.1510175.0.0.php
Click to expand...


That's interesting, I missed that one at the time.

I hoped there might have been some discussion of all this in the CT forum - it wasn't beyond the bounds of possibility that some of the 9/11 looneytunes mob might have picked up on it, and if so, some counterarguments might have been dug out. But there doesn't seem to have been any examination of this one over there.

Maybe I should give Private Eye that fiver and see what they have to say.

Rolfe.
 
Maybe I should give Private Eye that fiver and see what they have to say.
Click to expand...

A fiver?
Surely you can manage that?
Surely private eye should be giving it away for free though, given its supposed importance.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom