Again.

Didn't do bad considering he only had 3 months to go about 2 years ago.

Good riddance!

 

Well good riddance... if he was guilty. I've got a little theory about his release, and it's nothing to do with oil...

 

Hope he enjoys his time in hell

 

Go on Gles, I'm all ears

 

The new regime could't let him live with all the hassle of sending him back to Scotland.......easier for him to join the ranks of collateral damage.

Like the new regime will try and hand over the killer of PC Yvonne Fletcher..

Shaun

 

i am not saying you're wrong shaun, but jaysus man, conspiracy theory or what.

 

it my take a while but he will be proved innocent in time

no one who has been involved in the case, from his scottish prison guards to most of the scottish lawyers used in the case have any doubt he is 100% innocent

 

Bigsinky

Not a conspiracy theorist........ just a plain cynic LOL

Shaun

 

And this is my theory. From all accounts it seems to have been a bit of a kangaroo trial, and that is putting it mildly. So I reckon that he was released in the hope that he would then be, to a certain extent, forgotten about. If he had died in a Scottish jail, it would be there glaring everyone in the face, and I think there would be strong calls for a proper inquiry. If he was proved innocent, it wouldn't just be a massive political embarrassment, it could also have legal consequences for the people involved. Obviously these spineless c*nts want to avoid that at all costs.

That's what I think. Possibly that combined with other political factors resulted in his release.

 

it was an (unstated) condition of his release that he drop his second appeal -- which most observers are convinced would have seen his conviction overturned and him walk away free

even the UN observers at his original trial saw it as the kangaroo court it was

so i suspect your theory is pretty close to the actualité

 

very few up here in scotland think hes guilty - crucifying a random guy makes us no better than the ones who planted it ( and never forget somebody somewhere DID plant it)

 

For all the likelihood of AaM actually being innocent of the Lockerbie bombing, it's pretty safe bet that as a high-ranking officer in the Libyan security service, he will have got his hands equally dirty in some way or other at some point in his career.

 

what is the evidence for this?

all I have read is that he was head of security for Tripoli Airport - hardly a Libyian 007

and it is the same smear tactics that said that the Guildford 4 or Birmingham 6 "were guilty of something" -- apart from being Irish Catholics off course

 

I've often heard it said that "He was innocent". What's the basis of this?

I don't mean "Was it a kangaroo court", I mean, "What was the evidence heard at court"?

 

He wants the UK taxpayer to fund his £3000 / month medication bill.

Let me consider that for a moment.....














Denied.

 

The father of one of the Lockerbie victims, a doctor as it happens, was interviewed on TV over the weekend.
He said that, having been so close to the disaster, and having listened to much of the evidence from both sides, he was absolutely convinced that AaM was innocent.
An interesting point of view from one with every reason to wish this guy dead.

 

good the sh**t head

 

in a word none

the main evidence was identification evidence produced by man paid 2 million dollars by the US govt

(the above was just one of the grounds on which the case was referred back to the appeal court)


the UN observer monitoring the trial said the guilty verdict incomprehensible

and if you think yo need evidence to convict someone, just look at the evidence used to convict Barry George, which was, in the cold light of the appeal court, zero

 

It is certainly worth remembering that his trial was very badly and incompetently conducted and he was about to appeal against conviction due to new evidence.

I understand that he was offered release if he dropped the appeal.

Les

 

when politicians and secret service agencies get involved in justice - the results are rarely satisfactory

 

And related to a fleeting meeting seven years earlier when he served the bomber in his shop. Amongst all his other customers. And apparently remembered this.


The more knowledgeable experts always said that the attack was carried out by the Syrians, and paid for by the Iranians, in revenge for the shooting down of Air Iran flight 655 by the USS Vincennes. But at that time the Syrians were supplying intelligence to the Americans (although the US was fully aware that they were the biggest state sponsor of terrorism), whilst the Libyans were then Public Enemy Number One. So guess who get fitted up.


M

 

Download "Lockerbie - Private Eye's special report into the Lockerbie disaster (Originally published in 2001)" from DIGITAL DOWNLOADS for some interesting (and ten year's ago) reading!

mb

 

Way I see it, sod him, whether he did it or not he is knackered, he knows whether he did or not, even if he did he may have been coerced into it, his family threatened etc, I am sure that Gadafi was the one who authorised Lockerbie and it is his head I want to see detached from his shoulders and used as a football.

Really want to see them get the ******* and Mugabe as well.

 

Nice to see a balanced thread on this. As has been said, many in Scotland always felt he was innocent of this attrocity, which is why he Scottish government have a lot of support here for releasing him, and not bending over and taking it up the **** from America the way Blair and Brown (and presumably Cameron too) have done.

 

What can we expect from the weak, self serving politicians we are stuck with these days whose major ambition is to cozy up to other world leaders at our expense!

Les

 

If anyone wants to know why some think/believe that Al-Megrahi could be/is innocent, pre-order Dr. Jim Swire's book: http://www.lockerbietruth.com/ForFloraDetails.html

I did go and see Benson's play (inspired by Swire's campaign) in search of the truth. It was thought provoking.