Hold on, you're saying what, that this guy didn't actually do it, so that aided them in deciding to let him go?
Beerina, we've had this conversation before.
Essentially yes, what you say is true, but not in the way it might sound from that bare statement. In fact Kenny MacAskill was vehement in denouncing his appalling crime when he announced his release - not a whisper of an acknowledgment of the doubts about the safety of the conviction.
He didn't do it, which is horrendously embarrassing for everyone involved in the investigation and conviction, from the CIA to the Scottish criminal justice system. They'd been dragging their heels over getting the appeal to court for about seven years.
Everyone who has looked at the evidence agrees he didn't do it - with the exception of Richard Marquise, who has consistently refused to explain why he takes this view, merely falling back on the fact of the verdict. The US families who protest Megrahi's guilt also never give any reason and appear not to be familiar with the actual evidence.
It's perfectly clear that the identification evidence given by the Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci was - well, let's just say mistaken. It's easy to make a mistake like that, when it's been years since you served the customer in question. Especially if you know you stand to gain a couple of million bucks if your evidence leads to a conviction. Lacking that identification, the conviction couldn't stand. That was the inevitable outcome of the appeal, which had already started.
This was going to leave the justice system in the very, very embarrassing position of not having a conviction for the worst crime in Scottish history. They'd have had to re-open the enquiry, and what were the chances of finding who really did it after more than 20 years?
So much of middle east affairs for the past 20 years relies on Libya having agreed to take responsibility for Lockerbie. Not to mention the families of the victims having become multimillionnaires from the compensation money paid by Libya. Lots of reasons for not wanting to upset that particular apple cart.
Also, there was the matter of the documents the defence wanted to have produced in evidence, but the Crown wanted to keep secret. Don't know what that was all about. However, there seems to be evidence floating around in this case that the authorities didn't want to become public. Another good reason for not wanting the appeal to happen.
They couldn't have stopped it, of course. They were just doing their damndest to delay it. Seven years isn't bad going. Then Megrahi became terminally ill. This afforded the opportunity to use the carrot of getting back home to Libya to persuade Megrahi to withdraw the appeal. But it really had to be done before the appeal reconvened.
So yes. He didn't do it. This wasn't something the Crown wanted to be judicially confirmed. So it was convenient to let him go.
Rolfe.
