"Mr. Megrahi, I've got some good news and some bad news: the good news is that the Scottish CCRC is considering your case, and you'll likely be a free man in 3 months time. The bad news is ... you might not live 3 months. But I can maybe get you home before then, if you'll just agree to drop your appeal. What do you say?"
Of course, the Scottish government vehemently denies any such implication, and if they did say that, MacAskill covered his tracks very well....
Actually, the timing of your tale is a bit off.
Megrahi's appeal started in the spring of 2009, and a fair chunk of evidence had already been heard by the court. However, despite the fact that he had a terminal prognosis, hearings were scheduled to be spread over at least three sessions - in the summer they were in recess and not scheduled to start again until November. (One of the judges was ill and couldn't sit, but I'm not sure how much this affected the timetable.) The final session wasn't scheduled to be heard until early in 2010, with the verdict expected in early spring.
Megrahi seems to have been getting a bit desperate, and was actually pushing for a short prognosis to support compassionate release. But there does seem to have been something of a consensus at the time that he was unlikely to see 2010 anyway. Of course, there was no necessity for him to drop the appeal to be granted compassionate release, and initially I and I think everyone else assumed he would go home, the appeal would continue with his lawyers presenting his case, and we'd get the verdict in 2010 whether he was still alive or not.
Then there was a categorical announcement one evening that Megrahi
would drop his appeal the next day, and
then he would be granted compassionate release. That was when I wanted to go after Kenny with the thumbscrews. It seemed an absolutely blatant
quid pro quo.
Then the politicos and the legal eagles started talking as if the SCCRC report never existed, and when challenged stated blandly that Megrahi chose to withdraw his appeal when he didn't have to, so all that was moot. He would die a guilty man. Some even claimed that his withdrawal of the appeal was tantamount to a confession.
I think Megrahi has been played for a sucker by the Scottish legal system for over 20 years. For whatever reason, the official line is that there is no doubt of his guilt, and anyone pointing out the absence of evidence and the plethora of evidence pointing elsewhere is a mad conspiracy theorist.
Of course, the biggest conspiracy theory in all this is the allegation that an unaccompanied suitcase was smuggled on board KM180, with the implied and suggested collusion of the entire staff of Air Malta and Luqa airport, the production of a complete set of entirely fictitious loading documents for the plane, and nobody ever squealed in 23 years, despite the ensuing carnage. If a CTer produced that theory, with no supporting evidence and a lot of evidence suggesting it's not true, they'd be laughed out of court. It only stands up because it's the cops saying so.
Rolfe.
