Kenny MacAskill secures deal to write Lockerbie book

[This is the headline over a report by David Leask published in today’s edition of The Herald. It reads as follows:]

Kenny MacAskill is set to publish a book revealing details about his own investigation into the Lockerbie bomb attack.

The former justice secretary has signed a deal with a major London publisher that will focus on far more than just Mr MacAskill's own personal involvement in the case.

In 2009, he released Libyan security operative Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the only man ever convicted of the crime, on compassionate grounds.

The veteran politician - who stands down as an MSP next month - will use years of experience, insight and contacts to shed light on Scotland's biggest crime of the modern era.

Mr MacAskill said: "I can confirm I have a contract with Biteback to publish a book on Lockerbie and that I am represented by Caroline Michel."

Biteback, which is owned by tycoon Brian Ashcroft and Conservative commentator Iain Dale, specialises in major political books.

Recent publications include Lord Ashcroft's controversial biography of David Cameron Call Me Dave, the autobiography of UKIP leader Nigel Farage and the independence referendum memoires of Alan Cochrane, the Scottish editor of the Daily Telegraph.

The book will be the latest to try and unravel why Pan Am Flight 103 crashed in to a Scottish town, killing 243 passengers, 16 crew and 11 people on the ground, in December 1988.

It will view the single event as part of a far wider process that began long before the bombing and continues to the present day.

Mr MacAskill was tight-lipped about details to be revealed in the book. But Lockerbie-watchers will look out for hints of diplomatic intrigue surrounding Lockerbie and the remarkable effort to have Mr Megrahi brought to justice.

Mr Megrahi died in Libya in 2012 continuing to protest his innocence. Scottish and US law enforcement agencies are convinced Libya was responsible for the mass murders.

Libyans target embassy in Lockerbie protest

[This is the headline over a report that appeared in The Guardian on this date in 2001. It reads as follows:]

More than 4,000 angry Libyans protested outside the British embassy and the UN building in Tripoli today, as they continued to press for the conviction of the Lockerbie bomber to be overturned.

The demonstrators clashed with police and carried coffins bearing the phrases "these are the victims of the American raid" and "American civilisation means killing children", referring to the 1986 US airstrikes on Libya that killed 37 people, including the adopted daughter of the country's leader Muammar Gadafy.

The Foreign Office confirmed that there was a demonstration outside the building in Tripoli, but a spokeswoman declined to comment on reports that Libyan riot police beat protesters and sprayed tear gas at the crowd who were trying to break into the building.

She said: "At no time was the embassy breached. Staff safety is our first priority and we made clear to the authorities the need to ensure the security of our diplomatic premises was maintained."

The Foreign Office now plans to revise its advice on travel to Libya, although no specific changes were revealed.

Today's protest was the latest demonstration of the public outrage that followed the conviction of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi on Wednesday for the bombing Pan Am Flight 103.

The Libyan intelligence agent was jailed for life for murdering the 270 people who died when the New York-bound airliner exploded over the Scottish town in 1988.

His co-accused, Al-Amin Khalifah Fhimah, was cleared of the atrocity and returned home to Libya to a hero's welcome from Colonel Gadafy.

Since then, Col Gadafy and Mr Fhimah have been insisting that Megrahi is innocent, while his countrymen have taken to the streets to protest against his conviction.

Last week, Col Gadafy promised that he would come forward with new evidence yesterday, which, he said, would leave the three judges who unanimously convicted Megrahi with three options - to resign, admit the truth or commit suicide.

But Col Gadafy's rambling speech in Tripoli yesterday produced no new evidence. Instead, he hit out at the judges, Britain and the United States, and he accused British police of planting evidence to secure the conviction.

In a speech lasting more than two hours, he described Megrahi, who was ordered to spend a minimum of 20 years in a Scottish prison, as "a kidnapped hostage", adding:"Keeping him is a terrorist act."

Was this really the best we had to offer?

[What follows is the text of a letter from Dr Jim Swire that was published in The Herald on this date in 2010:]

Flaws in evidence at Lockerbie trial

The Chilcot Inquiry has examined the role of the Blair government’s Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, allegedly converted to believing the Iraq war to be legal following “consultations in the USA”.

Should not the Lockerbie inquiry, when we get it, examine why the government of the day chose to ignore the words of its Lord Chief Justice, and appointed [Alan] Feraday to supply the forensic input to the Lockerbie trial?

Mr Feraday was criticised by the Lord Chief Justice in the case of R v Berry (1991). He declared that the nature of his evidence was dogmatic in the extreme and that he should not be allowed to present himself as an expert in this field. Also, the Home Office has paid compensation from the public purse to Mr Berry because he was jailed on the erroneous evidence of Mr Feraday.

The Lockerbie case depended heavily upon a piece of timer circuit board allegedly recovered from the wreckage and labelled “PT35B” presented to the court by the same Mr Feraday, who also had consultations with the USA.

Assuming the British Government wanted the Lockerbie trial to reach a fair verdict, was this really the best we had to offer?

Architect of Lockerbie trial attacks guilty verdict

[This is the headline over a report by Jenny Booth that was published in The Sunday Telegraph on this date in 2001. It reads as follows:]

The Scots law professor who masterminded the Lockerbie trial in the Netherlands has launched a scathing attack on the judges for finding the defendant guilty on "very, very weak" evidence.

Professor Robert Black described the decision by three Scottish judges to convict Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, a Libyan secret serviceman, of the murder of 270 people when Pan Am flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie as "astonishing". He warned that the bomber stands a better-than-average chance of being acquitted on appeal.

Professor Black, a former judge with 13 years' experience and Scotland's leading expert on criminal procedure and evidence, said that in his view the Crown case had failed to comply with strict Scottish legal rules - tougher than English law - that evidence be corroborated.

Professor Black said: "I thought this was a very, very weak circumstantial case. I am absolutely astounded, astonished. I was extremely reluctant to believe that any Scottish judge would convict anyone, even a Libyan, on the basis of such evidence." Professor Black's reservations will fuel the concerns of bereaved families that, despite the criminal trial, the truth is yet to emerge about the

Lockerbie bombing.

At a hushed press conference in London the day after the verdict, Martin Cadman, whose son Bill died in the bombing, said: "We have our doubts about the guilt of Megrahi and that will have to remain the subject of any appeal to come. The appeal will hold uup for another year or so before we can have an inquiry into the truth of who was responsible and what the motive was."

The chief spokesman for the families, Dr Jim Swire, a former army explosives expert, produced a bomb timer to illustrate why he found it hard to believe the Crown's version of events. He said that the timing of the explosion, 38 minutes after the aircraft took off from Heathrow and while the jet was still over land, made the bomb more likely to have been detonated by a crude pressure-activated timer, such as those used by the Palestinian terror group operating
in Germany under the command of Ahmed Jibril, than by a sophisticated 999-hour electronic timer of the type bought by Libyan secret services from MeBo, a Swiss arms firm.

Professor Black's concerns are likely to be seized upon by Colonel Muammar Gaddafi to back claims of Libya's innocence of the bombing.  Professor Black devised the unique format of the Lockerbie trial, which was held in a neutral country without a jury, and campaigned alongside the bereaved families for its acceptance by Libya, America and Britain.

Megrahi has a further 11 days to lodge an appeal, which would probably be heard in the same courtroom in Camp Zeist, in front of a bench of five judges, over about two weeks in late summer. The appeal bench is expected to be chaired by Lord Cullen, Scotland's second most senior judge. Under ordinary circumstances, barely a handful of appeals against conviction ever succeed in the Scottish courts, but Professor Black said that the unique circumstances of
the trial meant that Megrahi stood a better chance.

Fhimah speaks about his acquittal and Megrahi's conviction

[What follows is the text of a report published on the BBC News website on this date in 2001:]

The Libyan man acquitted of murder in the Lockerbie trial has been speaking out in his home town of Tripoli.

Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah told the Arabic satellite TV channel Al-Jazeera that he viewed his release as a gift from God.

He said he was convinced that his co-defendant, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, will soon be released as well.

Chanting "they've brought back Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah, and we will bring back Abdelbaset," Libyans attending organised rallies do not feel justice was done.

They have been celebrating the return of their acquitted citizen, but they say the convicted Lockerbie bomber Al Megrahi is also innocent.

Speaking to a crowd of well-wishers at his house in Tripoli, Mr Fhimah said he sees his acquittal as God's will, and feels no gratitude to the court that freed him.

"If it had not been a gift from God, I would have stayed with my colleague. I would have continued the time with him and returned here together," he says.

"It's only a matter of time. Soon Abdelbaset will come back home," he adds.

At a politically charged sermon for the faithful, at Tripoli's main mosque, the prayer leader told worshippers that the Lockerbie verdict was unjust and had no legal basis.

And all over Tripoli, the message is the same: Libyans expect both their citizens to be acquitted.

They do not believe the guilty verdict was free from western political pressure and cannot accept that one of their people could have murdered 270 people in cold blood.

Al Megrahi's father says that if anyone has an insight into the mind of the convicted Lockerbie bomber, he does.

"I know my son 100%. I swear to God, if I thought my son had planned this, I would have handed him over to justice myself," he says.

"It's a political issue. They're looking for something to blame him for, the Americans and I don't know who else," he added.

Unsafe and unsatisfactory

[On this date in 2001, I contributed to TheLockerbieTrial.com an article headed The Reasons for Convicting Megrahi. It reads as follows:]

In paragraph 89 of the Opinion of the Court the judges say: “We are aware that in relation to certain aspects of the case there are a number of uncertainties and qualifications.  We are also aware that there is a danger that by selecting parts of the evidence which seem to fit together and ignoring parts which might not fit, it is possible to read into a mass of conflicting evidence a pattern or conclusion which is not really justified.”

The danger may have been recognised.  But it has not been avoided.

i.    Who was the purchaser of the clothing and when did he do it?

The judges held it proved (a) that it was Megrahi who bought from Mary’s House in Malta the clothes and umbrella which were in the suitcase with the bomb and (b) that the date of purchase was 7 December 1988 (when Megrahi was on Malta) and not 23 November 1988 (when he was not).

As regards (a), the most that the Maltese shopkeeper, Tony Gauci, would say (either in his evidence in court or in a series of police statements) was that Megrahi “resembled a lot” the purchaser, a phrase which he equally used with reference to Abu Talb, one of those named in the special defence of incrimination lodged on behalf of Megrahi.  Gauci had also described the purchaser to the police as being six feet tall and over 50 years of age. The evidence at the trial established (i) that Megrahi is 5 feet 8 inches tall and (ii) that in late 1988 he was 36 years of age.  On this material the judges found in fact that Megrahi was the purchaser.

As regards (b), the evidence of Tony Gauci was that when the purchaser left his shop it was raining (or at least drizzling) to such an extent that his customer thought it advisable to buy an umbrella  to protect himself while he went in search of a taxi. The unchallenged meteorological evidence established that while it had rained on 23 November at the relevant time, it was unlikely that it had rained at all on 7 December, and if it had it would have been only a few drops, insufficient to wet the street.  On this material, the judges found in fact that the clothes were purchased on 7 December.

ii.    Did the bomb start from Malta?

The judges held it proved that there was a piece of unaccompanied baggage on Flight KM 180 from Malta to Frankfurt on 21 December 1988 which was then carried on to Heathrow.  The evidence supporting that finding was a computer printout which could be interpreted to indicate that a piece of baggage went through the particular luggage coding station at Frankfurt used for baggage from KM 180 and was routed towards the feeder flight to Heathrow, at a time consistent with it’s having been offloaded from KM 180.  Against this, the evidence from Malta Airport was to the effect that there was no unaccompanied bag on that flight to Frankfurt.  All luggage on that flight was accounted for.  The number of bags loaded into the hold matched the number of bags checked in (and subsequently collected) by the passengers on the aircraft.  The court nevertheless held it proved that there had been a piece of unaccompanied baggage on Flight KM 180.

iii.   Where did the fragment of timer come from?

An important link to Libya in the evidence was a fragment of circuit board from a MST-13 timer manufactured by MeBo.  Timers of this model were supplied predominantly to Libya (though a few did go elsewhere, such as to the Stasi in East Germany).  This fragment is also important since it is the only piece of evidence that indicates that the Lockerbie bomb was detonated by a stand-alone timing mechanism, as distinct from a short-term timer triggered by a barometric device, of the type displayed in the bombs and equipment found at Neuss in the Autumn Leaves operation.  The provenance of this vitally important piece of evidence was challenged by the defence, and in their written Opinion the judges accept that in a number of respects this fragment, for reasons that were never satisfactorily explained, was not dealt with by the investigators and forensic scientists in the same way as other pieces of electronic circuit board (of which there were many).  The judges say that they are satisfied that there is no sinister reason for the differential treatment.  But they do not find it necessary enlighten us regarding the reasons for their satisfaction.

These are some of the many factors that lead me to be astonished that the court found itself able to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the guilt of Megrahi, and which equally convince me that his conviction is unsafe and unsatisfactory.

US Libya intervention "smart power at its best"

[What follows is excerpted from an article by attorney Bruce Fein headlined Hillary Clinton’s appalling enthusiasm for war that was published in yesterday’s edition of The Washington Times:]

Hillary Clinton exhibits an appalling enthusiasm for United States wars not in self-defense, i.e., legalized murders on an industrial scale that create enemies while destroying our liberties and prosperity at home.

To William Tecumseh Sherman, war was “hell.” To Abraham Lincoln, war was a “scourge.” But to Hillary Clinton, war is a coveted instrument of foreign policy in which the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.

If she is elected president, the United States will be fighting gratuitous wars every hour of every day of her presidency. That should give pause. (...)

Despite such hallowed wisdom, Mrs. Clinton has supported every war initiated by the United States not in self-defense for more than twenty three years since she first occupied the White House as first lady: Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Yemen, Somalia, and international terrorism generally. (...)

In 2011, then-Secretary of State Clinton championed a “humanitarian” war against Libya to overthrow Muammar Gaddafi after he had abandoned WMD, Libya had been removed as a state sponsor of terrorism, he had handsomely compensated the victims of the Lockerbie bombing, and he posed no threat to the United States. She has fiercely defended the war as “smart power at its best.”

Megrahi book published

On this date in 2012 John Ashton’s book Megrahi: You are my Jury was published by Birlinn. Reviews of the book on the UK Amazon website can be read here. Reviews on the US Amazon website can be read here. John Ashton’s website can be found here.

Libya may compensate Lockerbie families

[This is the headline over a report published on the website of The Guardian on this date in 2001, the day after the conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi and the acquittal of Lamin Fhimah. It reads as follows:]

The Libyan government is today considering compensation payments to the families of victims of the Lockerbie bombing, as a group representing the British families of those who died in the tragedy gathered in London to press for an independent public inquiry.

The Libyan ambassador to London, Mohammed al-Zwai, said today that his government will consider both compensation payments and agreements reached with the UN security council if Abdel Baset al-Megrahi's appeal against his conviction for the bombing fails. The security council agreements include the requirement that Libya offer compensation and accept responsibility for the bombing.

Megrahi, a Libyan citizen, was sentenced yesterday to life imprisonment for the murder of 270 people in the 1988 bomb attack on Pan Am flight 103. Scottish judges accepted that he was a special agent for the Libyan government, thereby implicating Tripoli in the attack. According to Libyan television reports, Megrahi will lodge an appeal against his conviction within 14 days.

Mr Zwai's comments seem to contradict statements out of Tripoli that the Libyan government bears no responsibility for the bombing. Libyan foreign minister Abdel Rahman Shalgam has insisted that Tripoli will never accept responsibility for the attack.

Colonel Muammar Gadafy's government has not been indicted in the bombing, but the Lockerbie blast was alleged to have been committed to "further the purposes" of Libyan intelligence. The prosecution has charged that the attack was carried out to avenge the US bombing of Tripoli and Benghazi in 1986.

Following the verdict, Libya called for an end to the UN sanctions imposed after the Lockerbie bombing.

"The sanctions imposed on Libya must be lifted completely because the Lockerbie case was used as a pretext to delay their lifting," foreign ministry spokesman Hassouna Chiouch told a news conference. "Now that the court has ended the case, the sanctions must be lifted completely."

"We extend our hand to the United States to build relations based on mutual respect and benefit for the two parties," Chiouch said. "Now that the Lockerbie case is behind, we look forward with interest to improving our relations with the United States in the interests of both countries and of peace worldwide."

Foreign secretary Robin Cook said Britain and the United States both agreed Libya "must" fulfil the UN security council resolutions before the sanctions will be lifted. Mr Cook stressed that Libya is barred from offering "no fault" compensation.

"Libya has in the past said it would pay compensation if there was a guilty verdict. There has been a guilty verdict, and a guilty verdict against a very senior official of Libyan intelligence," said Mr Cook.

"Libya can't walk away from their responsibility for the act of their official," he added.

In Washington, President George Bush praised the conviction and said the Libyan government must take responsibility for the attack. After less than two weeks in office, the Bush administration faces a major foreign policy decision on how hard to squeeze Libya.

State department spokesman Richard Boucher laid down four demands with which the United States said Libya must comply.

"That means revealing everything they know about the Lockerbie bombing, paying reparations, a clear declaration acknowledging responsibility for the actions of the Libyan officials and clear unambiguous actions which demonstrate the Libyan government understands its responsibilities," Mr Boucher said.

Meanwhile, the British families of those who died in the Lockerbie bombing are gathering in London today to press for further inquiries into the disaster. The group, which includes high profile campaigners Dr Jim Swire and the Rev John Mosey, will call for an independent public inquiry into unanswered questions surrounding the circumstances of the bombing.

The families have always maintained they want a public inquiry into issues not fully explored in the Fatal Accident Inquiry which was completed in 1991 or in the criminal trial which ended yesterday.

Most crucially, they want the failure of the intelligence services and the aviation authorities to stop the bomb getting on board to come under the spotlight.

Several bomb warnings were circulating at the time of the disaster including the so-called 'Toshiba warning' which advised that a bomb hidden inside a radio cassette recorder could be smuggled on to a plane. The bomb which blew up the Pan Am flight was hidden inside a Toshiba radio cassette recorder.

Previous calls for a public inquiry have been rejected on the grounds that such a move would prejudice the long-awaited criminal trial. Now that the trial is finally over, the families will argue that there are no grounds for rejecting a public inquiry.

Scotland's top law officer said today that insufficient evidence exists at this time for more prosecutions over the Lockerbie bombing. Colin Boyd QC, the Lord Advocate, added that it is clear that the man convicted yesterday for the outrage was not acting alone.

Following the announcement of the verdict yesterday, Al-Amin Khalifah Fhimah, Megrahi's co-accused who was acquitted, left the court at Camp Zeist, a former US military base in the Netherlands, a free man.

Taken to a safe house last night, he was expected to leave the Netherlands for home today. The time and place of his departure are closely guarded secrets. Megrahi remained in the specially built prison where he and Fhimah had been held since Tripoli handed them over in April 1999.

An official source said Megrahi's mother had been taken to a Tripoli hospital after collapsing, overwhelmed by news that her son had been jailed for life.

An appeal would be heard at Camp Zeist, except in the highly unlikely event Megrahi chose not to be present - in which case it would be held in the Scottish capital, Edinburgh.

And under the terms of the groundbreaking deal under which the Libyans were brought for trial, Megrahi stays at the camp until the entire legal process is complete.

Any appeal would take months to get under way, legal experts say. There is no automatic right of appeal in Scottish law, and that alone complicates and delays the process significantly.

Megrahi injustice unrectified after fifteen years

Fifteen years ago today the Scottish Court at Camp Zeist convicted Abdelbaset al-Megrahi of the murder of 270 people in the Lockerbie disaster (and acquitted Lamin Fhimah). The unjustness of the Megrahi conviction has been demonstrated in two of the earliest postings on this blog: see Lockerbie: A satisfactory process but a flawed result and The SCCRC Decision. The conviction has also since then been fatally undermined by John Ashton’s Megrahi: You are my Jury and Dr Morag Kerr’s Adequately Explained by Stupidity?

Maltese Lockerbie witness involved in unfolding scandal

[This is the headline over a report published in The Malta Financial & Business Times on this date in 2002. It reads as follows:]

Shopkeeper Tony Gauci certainly got more than he had bargained for when he made a sale to a certain Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi back in 1988. Now, UK papers are claiming, he might be the downfall of the Lockerbie trial prosecution’s case.

The Maltese Lockerbie key witness, whose evidence had helped to convict the Lockerbie bomber, is under a bright spotlight after having disclosed he had enjoyed lavish trips to Scotland with top notch hospitality organised by police officers.

Secret tape recordings obtained by the UK’s The Mail on Sunday, reveal witness Tony Gauci boasting about being taken from his home in Malta to Scotland by police for fishing, hill walking and bird-watching trips.

The Mail on Sunday had been given the tapes by a Scottish undercover investigator who was recently in Malta and secretly taped conversations with Gauci, owner of now famous Mary's House clothes shop in Sliema, and a Strathclyde Police officer apparently based in Malta.

On the tapes Gauci claimed he had been taken to Scotland by police on five or six occasions since the bombing.

Some weeks after the plane fell on the small Scottish town, he says he was taken there to be shown the devastation - a highly unusual move as the Scottish justice system frowns upon taking a witness to a crime scene before a trial.

Gauci also said that the hospitality of the Scottish police was also extended to four other members of his family and on the tapes he talks of being taken into the mountains, visiting the Aviemore ski resort, fly-fishing for salmon and bird-watching.

Furthermore, on at least one occasion he has stayed at the luxury GBP150 a night Hilton Hotel in Glasgow.

Speaking to this newspaper on Monday, The Mail on Sunday said it believes that Gauci is currently in Scotland under an assumed name, as a trip was being prepared for him when the investigator, a former detective, left Malta two weeks ago.

Meanwhile, MP Tam Dalyell, said yesterday he wanted the government to respond to reports that police had organised holidays for Gauci in Scotland.

Robert Black, professor of Scots Law at Edinburgh University, said the matter of Gauci's trips would now have to be fully investigated during Megrahi's appeal.

Gauci's contribution to the trial was central to Megrahi's conviction. His co-accused, Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah, walked free while Megrahi was sentenced to life imprisonment, with a minimum recommendation of 20 years.

The key difference was that in Fhimah's case, no credible witness existed to give a firsthand account of incriminating conduct.

The remains of clothes bought from Gauci's shop were found in the suitcase containing the bomb and the shopkeeper is the only person to have positively identified Megrahi, linking him directly to the outrage.