They still think they rule the world

[Rolfe]

In Scotland, the applications for compassionate release that have been refused, have been refused because they "haven't met the criteria". In other words, the prisoner's health wasn't actually as bad as was being claimed. Every one where the medical evidence has agreed that the prisioner's life span was estimated to be around three months, was granted.

Of course, if you have a very sensitive and embarrassing case, where there is an outstanding appeal which is being subjected to delay after delay so as to avoid some extremely embarrassing revelations coming out, this takes on a different perspective. You can't even rely on the appeal process ceasing when the prisoner dies, because there are a number of people saying publicly that they will continue the appeal in the hope of getting to the truth.

So if you can persuade the prisoner that his chances of getting home will be significantly improved if he abandons the appeal, well, it's all very useful, isn't it?

Rolfe.

 

[Cainkane1]

'..A US senator has written to Gordon Brown, demanding the immediate return of the Lockerbie bomber to prison. ...'

From http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/

Tsk tsk - demanding the poodles do what they are told.

It seems that USAN senators still think they run the world. They haven't got the message yet that the USAN empire is over and that they can't order other countries about as they wish.

The Official UK answer is - Go and get stuffed.

The unofficial answer is much longer and much much fruitier.

Pip pip to Schtumer.

I think the Senator was ill advised to so called demand that the bad guy be turned over to the USA but I can understand his sentiments. The man was tried and convicted of blowing up an airplane that killed some Americans. The man deserved to be punished if not with death at least life in prison.

 

[dtugg]

In Scotland, the applications for compassionate release that have been refused, have been refused because they "haven't met the criteria". In other words, the prisoner's health wasn't actually as bad as was being claimed. Every one where the medical evidence has agreed that the prisioner's life span was estimated to be around three months, was granted.

Does the law state they have to release a prisoner who fits the criteria? Or is it just convention?

Of course, if you have a very sensitive and embarrassing case, where there is an outstanding appeal which is being subjected to delay after delay so as to avoid some extremely embarrassing revelations coming out, this takes on a different perspective. You can't even rely on the appeal process ceasing when the prisoner dies, because there are a number of people saying publicly that they will continue the appeal in the hope of getting to the truth.

So if you can persuade the prisoner that his chances of getting home will be significantly improved if he abandons the appeal, well, it's all very useful, isn't it?

Rolfe.

Are you saying that you think they released him at least partly so they would never have to admit that he never should have been there in the first place? If so, this reflects even more poorly on the Scottish government than if he were guilty but was released because it's supposedly the right thing to do.

 

[Rolfe]

Does the law state they have to release a prisoner who fits the criteria? Or is it just convention?

The decision is for the Justice Secretary to make. However, the decision he made was entirely in line with previous decisions of that nature.

Are you saying that you think they released him at least partly so they would never have to admit that he never should have been there in the first place? If so, this reflects even more poorly on the Scottish government than if he were guilty but was released because it's supposedly the right thing to do.

I'm suggesting that part of the shenanigans surrounding the release was the use of the prospect of release as a carrot to persuade Megrahi to drop his appeal. So yes, basically.

The odd thing is that the present Scottish government has only been in power since 2007. They had nothing to do with the farce at Camp Zeist in 2000. I think it's more about lawyers and lawmakers sticking together than about the present government specifically covering its own backside.

I genuinely think "it's the right thing to do" was part of what was going on, possibly the major part of what was going on. But hey, if we can maybe finesse this to get the appeal dropped, even better.

It worked.

Yes, it's disgusting.

Though, having said that, I don't know what's being concealed. There's a history surrounding this case going back to the early 1990s of judges taking one look at "secret" documents and immediately reversing their rulings that these had to be disclosed. This started in the USA, when Pan Am tried to get hold of documents they required, and it was still going on in Scotland in 2008. Maybe the imperative for keeping the lid on something really is compelling.

Rolfe.

 

[Rolfe]

I think the Senator was ill advised to so called demand that the bad guy be turned over to the USA but I can understand his sentiments. The man was tried and convicted of blowing up an airplane that killed some Americans. The man deserved to be punished if not with death at least life in prison.

You never heard of miscarriages of justice? They don't happen on your planet, maybe?

Report of the official UN observer to the trial
Official UN observer's report on the first appeal
SCCRC press release on the decision to grant the second appeal on the grounds of evidence of a miscarriage of justice

And there's plenty more where that came from. Any assertion that Megrahi was guilty because that kangaroo court said so, is just sticking your head in the sand.

Rolfe.

..

 

[Darth Rotor]

You never heard of miscarriages of justice?

Yes, I have. Does not Scotland have an appeals process? Is not the Scottish Justice system well respected for its make up, including an appeals system? Indeed, it was appealed. Just because the appelant asserted a miscarraige of justice does not make it so. Were that the case, if the evidence of a miscarr1age of justice presented, you'd think the appelate court would have so ruled.

Your appeal to UN fallacy is a disappointment.

We are derailing a bit, and you have a few threads on this topic already.

DR

 

[Tricky]

Derail about what to call people from the United States split to the thread in Social Issues where this has been discussed ad nauseum. Please confine such discussions of that topic to the appropriate thread.

Posted By: Tricky

 

[Rolfe]

Yes, I have. Does not Scotland have an appeals process? Is not the Scottish Justice system well respected for its make up, including an appeals system? Indeed, it was appealed. Just because the appelant asserted a miscarraige of justice does not make it so. Were that the case, if the evidence of a miscarr1age of justice presented, you'd think the appelate court would have so ruled.

Your appeal to UN fallacy is a disappointment.

We are derailing a bit, and you have a few threads on this topic already.

DR

Doesn't seem to be a derail to me.

I fail to see where pointing out that the official UN observer to the trial beileved it was a farce is a fallacy.

You may note that I also linked to the report of the SCCRC, which gave leave to appeal noting

The Commission is of the view, based upon our lengthy investigations, the new evidence we have found and other evidence which was not before the trial court that the applicant may have suffered a miscarriage of justice.

I think the problems surrounding the repeated foot-dragging in getting the appeal to court have been highlighted above.
2003 - Permission to appeal sought
2003-2007 Deathly silence
2007 Permission granted
2007-2009 Repeated and prolonged haggling over documents the defence wishes to have disclosed, and which the court orders should be disclosed, but which become the subject of public interest immunity certificates (that is, no we won't disclose these). This is still going on in late 2008, when the defendant is diagnosed as terminally ill.
2009 Appeal hearings begin
Six weeks later - appeal adjourned due to one of the judges falling ill, possible date of resumption of hearings given as November 2009.
August 2009 - defendant estimated to have only about 3 months to live.
August 2009 - Appeal abandoned because defendant has been led to believe this will facilitate his return to Libya.

Do you call that justice? Because I don't. Hide your head in the sand and refuse to investigate the matter if you like, but don't pretend this was an open-and-shut case.

Rolfe.

 

[Beerina]

'..A US senator has written to Gordon Brown, demanding the immediate return of the Lockerbie bomber to prison. ...'

From http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/

Tsk tsk - demanding the poodles do what they are told.

It seems that USAN senators still think they run the world. They haven't got the message yet that the USAN empire is over and that they can't order other countries about as they wish.

The Official UK answer is - Go and get stuffed.

The unofficial answer is much longer and much much fruitier.

Pip pip to Schtumer.

You realize, of course, "go and get stuffed" is exactly the response he was looking for, don't you?


Also, is there nobody there who's ashamed of that attitude? Nobody who thinks it was a grave disservice to free the guy? Or does big brother America-hatred rule the world there, to the extent Pat Condell regularly expresses?

 

[Tricky]

Derail about what to call people from the United States split to the thread in Social Issues where this has been discussed ad nauseum. Please confine such discussions of that topic to the appropriate thread.

Posted By: Tricky

I did not notice that the thread I moved these to had been closed. However, it makes sense that the same sort of argument and incivility that caused it to be closed applies to the posts I had moved there. I will be moving the entire thread to AAH. Let us just agree to drop that topic.

Posted By: Tricky

 

[Darth Rotor]

Doesn't seem to be a derail to me.

I fail to see where pointing out that the official UN observer to the trial beileved it was a farce is a fallacy.

You may note that I also linked to the report of the SCCRC, which gave leave to appeal noting

I think the problems surrounding the repeated foot-dragging in getting the appeal to court have been highlighted above.
2003 - Permission to appeal sought
2003-2007 Deathly silence
2007 Permission granted
2007-2009 Repeated and prolonged haggling over documents the defence wishes to have disclosed, and which the court orders should be disclosed, but which become the subject of public interest immunity certificates (that is, no we won't disclose these). This is still going on in late 2008, when the defendant is diagnosed as terminally ill.
2009 Appeal hearings begin
Six weeks later - appeal adjourned due to one of the judges falling ill, possible date of resumption of hearings given as November 2009.
August 2009 - defendant estimated to have only about 3 months to live.
August 2009 - Appeal abandoned because defendant has been led to believe this will facilitate his return to Libya.

Do you call that justice? Because I don't. Hide your head in the sand and refuse to investigate the matter if you like, but don't pretend this was an open-and-shut case.

Rolfe.

Curious logic you have there, Rolfe:

I appeal, therefore I am innocent.

It isn't my nation's justice system that is or isn't balled up, so your "hide head in sand" silliness belongs on your side of the pond. Senator Shumer's protest was most likely something to score political points with his constituency. The fact is your pet cause is back in Lybia, and not likely to go much of anywhere else.

Show me who you hang around with, I'll tell you who you are.

Didn't your mom teach you that one?

DR

 

[Rolfe]

Curious logic you have there, Rolfe:

I appeal, therefore I am innocent.

DR

No. The SCOTTISH CRIMINAL CASES REVIEW COMMISSION says

the applicant may have suffered a miscarriage of justice

therefore the applicant may be innocent.

Try reading up on the case and forming your own opinion. The threads in CT could do with someone supporting the Official Version - distinct absence of that PoV at the moment.

Rolfe.

 

[Darth Rotor]

No. The SCOTTISH CRIMINAL CASES REVIEW COMMISSION says
therefore the applicant may be innocent.

That is what the SCC says, I am referring to your position.

1. Do you call that justice? Because I don't.
2. The applicant may have suffered a miscarriage of justice

Two statements that are not the same. You have made your position quite clear.

Dr

 

[Rolfe]

My position, when I said "do you call that justice?" was intended to invoke the well-known saying "justice delayed is justice denied".

Delaying an appeal beyond the life expecancy of the appellant is, as I said, not my idea of justice. Your mileage may differ.

Rolfe.

 

[Rolfe]

I see you added a bit.

It isn't my nation's justice system that is or isn't balled up, so your "hide head in sand" silliness belongs on your side of the pond.

Don't be so sure. You might like to look up the role of your own government in this one. If the idea of posting from a position of actually being informed about the facts isn't too much of a novelty for you.

The fact is your pet cause is back in Lybia, and not likely to go much of anywhere else.

Pet cause? My pet cause is figuring out how that bomb got on that plane. Since it quite evidently didn't get there the way the Camp Zeist narrative said it did. And figuring out how much of the surrounding obfuscation is genuine coincidence and happenstance, and how much deliberate cover-up and misdirection.

It's awfully easy just to take out all your outrage on Megrahi, and stick your fingers in your ears and hum real loud if anyone points out that the real culprits got clean away. That's what he's for, after all.

If you have actual reasons for taking a contrary point of view, as I said, there are live threads in the CT forum that would welcome a voice on that side of the argument. Reasons, that is, based on familiarity with the actual evidence, you know?

Rolfe.

 

[lionking]

Meanwhile Megrahi continues to exceed his "three months maximum" life expectancy.

 

[Rolfe]

And so long as Ronnie Biggs continues to do the same, there's not much political capital to be made out of it.

Rolfe.

 

[Skeptic]

You really don't appear to get it yet - we don't apologise to Usan governments for anything. We don't want or need Usan approval for anything.

Except survival during the cold war, victory in WWI, WWII, and a few other minor issues.

 

[Dorian Gray]

'..A US senator has written to Gordon Brown, demanding the immediate return of the Lockerbie bomber to prison. ...'

From http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/

Tsk tsk - demanding the poodles do what they are told.

It seems that USAN senators still think they run the world. They haven't got the message yet that the USAN empire is over and that they can't order other countries about as they wish.

The Official UK answer is - Go and get stuffed.

The unofficial answer is much longer and much much fruitier.

Pip pip to Schtumer.

Your argument is that if the UKans release dangerous and violent criminals and someone from the US protests, the issue is "don't tell me what to do" rather than the wisdom, or lack thereof, of releasing the prisoners? It makes it seem like you support the release of terrorists. Do you?

 

[Rolfe]

Let me know when a dangerous and violent criminal is actually released, will you? Just sayin.

Oh sorry, forgot about Ronnie Biggs.

Rolfe.