I think both conscious and unconscious prompting, suggestions and gestures would be inevitable during Gauci's interviews. I think a complex mix of being involved in major Worldwide incident, knowledge of financial rewards possible, contemplation of the enormity of their evidence, fearful of consequences, and intense expectation from authority, could also all have had a major influence on Gauci's recollection, statements and eventual evidence.
I'm sure he'd be well aware of the eagerness for the investigators for him to remember. If not, as has been suggested he was not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer, I doubt the investigators would have any qualms in aiding and coercing in order to achieve, even if vaguely, a corroborating statement. Even unaware of 'Clever Hans', alas not even Tony would be ignorant of the gravity and consequences together with compensation available for his evidence. More -so when you're given 11 years to consider it. Nuances such rain, christmas lights and football games, could be changed again and again by Gauci, yet these inconsistencies were simply brushed aside by the investigators and judges.
Quite how anyone, let alone a court of law, could grant credibility to his evidence, given all these complexities and the lapses in recollection over the period, is jaw dropping.
Tying down a time line for the discovery, identification and evidence about the searching is also problematic. It does seem his first 'official' interview was late August '89. Here he mentions some items bought and provides a description for a sketch artist. This apparently suggests a resemblance to Abu Talb. And mentions rain and the Christmas lights.
I'm also pretty sure Megrahi didn't buy these clothes. There does seem to be some irregular stories around some of the items of clothing which were apparently discovered and those presented as evidence at the trial. Much like the 'timer fragment', there appears to be a veritable host of unexplained and unsatisfactory processes involved in recording and examination of some of the clothing. However, as it stands, I still feel the clothes wrapped around the bomb were bought from Mary's House.
I do also however, recognise that the fact the items that were sold were apparently inconsistent, therefore more memorable it was claimed. I would contend however It would appear this shop sold an assortment of items for a reason: they sold. Nine months after the fact, he may well have had some recollection of some of these items being sold – but to one specific individual whom he can identify and recall the entire purchase? Highly improbable. This could be where David Wrights evidence could be of crucial importance. Was it someone resembling Talb that Wright saw? Did he see someone leave the shop, at just before 7pm, raise an umbrella and hail a taxi on the 23rd?? It could quite easily have been 2, or 3 or even 4 different sales Gauci was recollecting all merging into one, he is very aware, very important sale.
The investigators seemingly were simply not interested eventually in Talb. Perhaps more importantly because the road to Talb also leads to Khreesat. And no one wants to go anywhere near Khreesat whatsoever.
The fact was at Zeist he ended up still not saying enough for the Judges to somehow find it rational without them declaring the absurd notion that someone who is unsure of an identity carries more reliability than that of someone who is absolute in their certainty!
or anyone, just for a little context and small-talk, I've been seeing in Lockerbie videos this shape in the woods that's a distinctly man-shaped clearing of some size. Perhaps I should know, but what is the story with that? First frame on this video, for example:
)