Forum Index
To allow readers to post comments on current issues related to the Shirley McKie case
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Join! (free) Join! (free)
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

More Lockerbie Oppression
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 54, 55, 56  Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic Forum Index -> Test Forum 1
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Please Register and Login to this forum to stop seeing this advertising.

Posted:     Post subject:

Back to top
Big Wullie

Joined: 25 Apr 2007
Posts: 5125

Location: Glasgow

PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:18 am    Post subject:  Reply with quote

Extracted from this article is the following:

Identification of the buyer and the date of sale were immediately unsatisfactory.
Gauchi, the shopkeeper was on record as saying that pictures of Megrahi shown to him by the police were like the buyer, but he would have to have been taller and older.
Meanwhile his brother had shown him a picture of a man called Talb on the front page of the Sunday Times, which he had immediately recognized as the buyer. He had also been aware that up to $4,000,000 reward was on offer for a conviction.

I thought Gauchi did his best, under pressure, but reasonable doubt about the buyer’s identity was certainly left. Ex Lord Advocate, Lord Fraser was more critical later, calling Gauchi ‘One apple short of a picnic’.

Who did buy the clothes from Gauchi then? Remember the name

Talb, whose picture was shown to Gauchi in the Sunday Times? He was later arrested in Sweden for causing an explosion in a terrorist attack unrelated to Lockerbie. In his flat in Sweden, the police found some more of the clothing from Gauchi’s shop, and a calendar on which the 21st December 1988 was ringed.

Again, an amazing coincidence?

Did the SCCRC really need three years to decide this verdict might be unsafe?

Aside from questioning the length of time taken by SCCRC to decide on their referral have SCCRC referred this case on the evidence of an expert when all the time no expert opinion was needed.

To clarify this point above:  Gauchi really did not Identify Megrahi he has always said it was Talb, yet SCCRC refer his case on Gauchi being shown a photograph 4 days prior to an ID Parade taking place.

See SCCRC referral here:

Page 9

Additional evidence, not made available to the defence, which indicates
that four days prior to the identification parade at which Mr Gauci
picked out the applicant, he saw a photograph of the applicant in a
magazine article linking him to the bombing. In the Commission’s view
evidence of Mr Gauci’s exposure to this photograph in such close
proximity to the parade undermines the reliability of his identification of
the applicant at that time and at the trial itself.

Very very strange that three of our High Court Judges accepted this partial Identification as evidence to base their decision to convict on, given all the issues regarding Identification evidence over the years like the "Devlin" report allong with the many others that followed.

It certainly shows how incompetent the SCCRC are at investigating these cases.

They have wasted public funds asking ---  --------- for his expert opinion on non existent Identification evidence, surely this must call into question their competence in spending public funds
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Big Wullie

Joined: 25 Apr 2007
Posts: 5125

Location: Glasgow

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Crown Office still keeping secrets from Megrahi's defence team.

Like my article above Gauci has never positively identified Megrahi so our courts should never be reliant upon his evidence for conviction.

The same expert now backs me Pro-Bono and has said photos should never have been shown at my ID Parade yet SCCRC refuse to refer my case on the same issue.

he also say's the arresting officers should never have participated in the Parade, Both did in my case.

SCCRC should be closed until they can find someone Impartial from the Judiciary to run it.

Gerard Sinclair is a part time Judge along with Gerald Gordon QC.

How can they sit on trials and appeals and claim independence from Juddiciary and sit on the board of SCCRC

Gerard Sinclair should be sacked for gross incompetence
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Big Wullie

Joined: 25 Apr 2007
Posts: 5125

Location: Glasgow

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 1:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This article proves Crowns reluctance to reveal material evidence despite current legislation to the contrary

The most worrying part of this statement is the following:

Ronnie Clancy QC, advocate-depute acting for the Crown, raised legal argument that the disclosures sought should only come after grounds of appeal were established as supporting documents and not to help form the basis of grounds for appeal.

Surely the documents should be released after SCCRC referred this case to allow proper preparation of grounds.

They are clearly afraid of fresh grounds being found.

SCCRC have referred this case on evidence that should never have been allowed in the first place.

How can they reward Gauci when all the time he Identified Abu Talb and his identification of Megrahi was Only if he was ten years older and taller he would fit the bill ?

Partial Identification is not reliable in the first instance to base any conviction upon and his case should fall to be set aside through lack of evidence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Big Wullie

Joined: 25 Apr 2007
Posts: 5125

Location: Glasgow

PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 4:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Firm

Lockerbie a done deal

Here the issue of non disclosure is broached again:

Last edited by Big Wullie on Tue Mar 17, 2009 3:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Big Wullie

Joined: 25 Apr 2007
Posts: 5125

Location: Glasgow

PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 3:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Firm Magazine

Complaints of the defence team of Megrahi

It will come as no surprise for anyone who has followed my own case that Mr Megrahi's defence QC Bill Taylor is being heavily criticised over his handling of the Trial & Appeal.

Mr Taylor Sat on the board of SCCRC while they listened to my appeal and complaints against Mr Taylor in his defective presentation of my case in 1982 so it comes as no surprise that they (SCCRC) want to hide his inadequacies.

This I have continually complained was their reasons for not fully investigating my grounds.

My Original complaint before defective representation was accepted as a competent ground of appeal can be seen here:

So I am not in the least surprised that he did the same with the Lockerbie trial.

I have complained he stood up unexpectedly and closed my defence case without consultation first and I am backed in this by my Solicitor saying it was taylor who decided which witness's to call, He had nothing to do with it he claims here:

impartiality in the operation of Scotland’s supreme judicial review body. The SCCRC’s “Press Release” of 28 June 2007, announcing the decision about the referral of Mr. Al-Megrahi’s case back to the High Court of Justiciary, does not simply give
the reasons for such referral, but also contains a strange kind of “preventive exoneration” of Mr. Al-Megrahi’s original defence team (who represented him during the Trial and first Appeal in the Netherlands and in a manner that was less than adequate) and of Scottish investigators (in connection, inter alia, with accusations of manipulation of key forensic evidence in the period preceding the trial).

In spite of Mr. Al-Megrahi’s repeated complaints about inadequate representation by his own Defence team, the Commission bluntly stated that it “did not consider the allegations to be well-founded.” The SCCRC apparently wanted to have these questions as to the fairness and impartiality of Mr. Al-Megrahi’s trial and (first) appeal excluded from a new appeal. Another remarkable feature of the SCCRC’s News Release was that it kept one of the six grounds for the referral secret.

The above quote was taken from here:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Big Wullie

Joined: 25 Apr 2007
Posts: 5125

Location: Glasgow

PostPosted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 10:49 pm    Post subject: SNP Plan To Send Megrahi Home Reply with quote

Found this interesting article on Professor Robert Black's blog:

Seems any application for transfer will not be refused but he would have to drop his appeal, How convenient eh ?

30 March 2009
SNP in secret bid to send bomber home

[I am grateful to a kind reader for the information that the Scottish edition of yesterday's Mail on Sunday did in fact contain a story about Lockerbie and for sending me the text of the article, which appears below. Notwithstanding an assiduous search of the newspaper's website, I am still unable to find the article online (but it has been picked up in today's editions of both The Times and The Scotsman). Apart from the information that US senators' representatives have been involved in the prisoner transfer discussions, the article does not seem to add much to what was published by The Herald on 15 January 2009.]

The SNP has been engaged in secret talks that would allow the Lockerbie bomber to be freed and sent home to Libya.

A series of high-level meetings has taken place between senior SNP advisers and Libya as the Scottish Executive prepares to sign a crucial international pact on prison transfers this week.

The flurry of diplomatic activity, including at least one meeting this month, also comes as the medical condition of the man serving life for the Lockerbie bombing continues to deteriorate.

The cancer that has struck down Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi has spread to his spine and pelvis.

Officially, the meetings are taking place between the UK Foreign Office and Libyan officials, as Scotland is not a sovereign state.

But The Scottish Mail on Sunday can reveal that Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has instructed his top official, Robert Gordon, director general of the Executive's justice department, to play a key role in the negotiations. Meetings between Mr Gordon and a Libyan delegation began last October and continued in November, January and earlier this month. The talks, in London and Edinburgh, have included dialogue with US senators.

Mr MacAskill and British officials are keen to ease US fears that Megrahi could be released to spend his last few months as a free man. Instead, the Libyan's legal team are being encouraged to apply for a Prisoner Transfer Agreement (PTA) that would see him serve the remainder of his 27-year sentence in Libya. The talks have accelerated in advance of a second appeal by Megrahi against his conviction for the murder of 270 people in 1988, due to start at the end of next month.

The complex appeal is expected to take up to a year but Megrahi's health has deteriorated so much there is speculation he may be forced to abandon the fight to clear his name. Megrahi is keen to do so in court, but as his condition worsens he is facing a dilemma over whether to continue with his appeal and face dying in prison in Scotland or abandoning the case and applying for the transfer likely to represent his only chance to spend time with his family.

Last night, officials confirmed the PTA signed between the UK and Libya in November is expected to be ratified 'in early April' and responsibility for Megrahi, should he seek a transfer, will pass to Mr MacAskill.

A spokesman for the Justice Secretary confirmed the dialogue with the Libyans and Americans. She said: 'At the request of the Libyan government, there have been meetings between Executive officials and officials of the Libyan government. 'These have been concerned with factual matters of the Scottish judicial system and how these relate to prisoner transfer agreements and other matters.

'A meeting has also taken place with US senators' representatives. This was also concerning factual matters related to the Scottish judicial system. We understand there have been similar meetings with UK Government officials.'

Mr Gordon has played a vital role in the talks, attended by top Libyan officials and Foreign Office personnel. Sources close to the Libyan delegation, which included deputy foreign minister Abdul Ati al-Obeidi, said Mr Gordon had given them every encouragement to push for a transfer. One said: 'He told them in fairly plain language that if an application came in it would be granted.'

The ratification of the PTA involves the document being laid before Parliament for 21 days to give MPs the chance to raise any issues.

The UK Ministry of Justice said it expected the UK and Libya to complete the 'relevant constitutional arrangements' by the start of April. A spokesman confirmed that any bid to transfer a prisoner would be for Scottish ministers to decide.

Professor Robert Black, QC, the architect of the trial under Scots Law in a neutral country, said: 'It has been my view for some months that every effort was being made to push Megrahi down the prisoner transfer route to avoid the embarrassment that would follow for our justice system and our governments if the appeal went ahead.'

Megrahi's legal team sought bail pending his appeal in the wake of the cancer revelation, but this was refused by the Court of Appeal. Now the Scottish authorities are expected to jump at the chance to return Megrahi to Libya, as a condition of the deal is that the prisoner must drop any legal proceedings.

The planned appeal has the potential to humiliate the Crown Office and to expose conspiracy and dirty tricks involving UK and US intelligence agents and the Scottish police. Dr Jim Swire has campaigned for 20 years for the truth since the murder of his daughter Flora. He said: 'If Megrahi agrees to seek a transfer and drop the appeal, his family will be labelled for life as the family of the Lockerbie bomber.

'I have been certain for some time the authorities were intent on pushing him down that road. The timing of the ratification of the agreement, a few weeks before the appeal, doesn't feel like a coincidence.'

The Times:

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

Joined: 28 Aug 2008
Posts: 601

PostPosted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 11:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How very convenient for the Crown and the authorities if this man just signs their deal or dies first.

Do they really think that we the public are so stupid as not to know what kind of cover up this is?

What about the many families who want a full investigation into this?  270 people died at Lockerbie. That is 270 families who deserve to know the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

To deny Mr Megrahi and these families the truth is wrong.
It is also an insult to every victim and every victims family if they are allowed to cover this up and put an end to this case.

What a massive shame to the judicial system this case is.

Imagine saying to a man choose between your family or die alone in prison.

This truly is Scotlands shame.
Great Spirit, grant that I may not criticize my neighbor until I have walked a mile in his moccasins." - Old Native American Indian Prayer that my dad taught me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Big Wullie

Joined: 25 Apr 2007
Posts: 5125

Location: Glasgow

PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2009 1:59 pm    Post subject: More Lockerbie Oppression Reply with quote

I have said for ages that our courts cannot rely on a partial Identification for a basis for a conviction in this case.
(See Lord Gills comments regarding this matter in the case of William Mills)

Gauci it would appear was coached by DCI Harry Bell who I think was also involved in Shirley McKie's case, Perhaps Iain can confirm exactly what role he played in Shirley's case.

He initially identified someone a lot older and taller but this did not matter to those wanting to set up Megrahi and Libya but was forced by our Scottish police to change his mind after being shown Photos of Megrahi.

Surely if there is no proof he bought the clothes from Gauci then the case must collapse, End Of.

The following can be read here in more detail:

The defense has identified a person, not heard at the trial, who witnessed the purchase of the clothing items. Although he has not been named by the defense, I understand that the witness is David Wright, a longtime friend of the Gauci family
Wright told the police in September and December 1989 that the purchase occurred Nov. 23 and that the buyer was not Megrahi. His interview was not passed to the defense team at the time of the trial.

Missing Statements

According to a well informed source, the defense will establish that contradictory statements made by Gauci were not passed to the defense team at the Zeist trial

The Lumpert Affidavit

"I confirm today on July 18, 2007, that I stole the third hand-manufactured MST-13 timer PC-board consisting of eight layers of fiber-glass from MEBO Ltd. and gave it without permission on June 22, 1989, to a person officially investigating in the Lockerbie case," Lumpert wrote.

"It did not escape me that the MST-13 fragment shown [at the Lockerbie trial] on the police photograph No. PT/35(b) came from the nonoperational MST-13 prototype PC-board that I had stolen," Lumpert added.

Following the initial visit of DCI Harry Bell to Malta in September 1989, RARDE scientists looked for a black umbrella that would show traces of explosive residue. On Oct. 3, 1989, RARDE "scientist" Allen Feraday identified part of a black umbrella (evidence number PK/206) that had been in direct contact with the explosion. EUREKA! But again, there is a small problem. The log book indicates that PK/206 was at RARDE Laboratory only from Jan. 16 to Feb. 8, 1989. How did Allen Feraday conduct on Oct. 3, 1989, an experiment on an item which was not in his possession?

Dum spiro spero.
Militamus sub spe.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Big Wullie

Joined: 25 Apr 2007
Posts: 5125

Location: Glasgow

PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2009 12:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The latest news from the Megrahi appeal could really turn the heat up in his appeal.

Would they not gain immense credibility if they decided the first half of his appeal and the evidence they have heard is enough to raise concerns over his conviction and free him:

Dum spiro spero.
Militamus sub spe.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Iain McKie

Joined: 08 May 2007
Posts: 939

Location: Ayr, Scotland.

PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2009 9:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Wullie,

Harry Bell is the shadowy fixer figure central to the Megrahi conviction and the SCRO shambles.

His place in the Lockerbie investigation has been carefully analysed and the allegations that he set Megrahi up as the crucial witness appear to have considerable credibility.

As Director of SCRO after Shirley’s 1999 trial it can be clearly seen how he acted as their chief apologist and artfully orchestrated the Crown Office, SCRO Executive Committee, ACPOS and police response to the emerging scandal

What is less clear is the link between the two cases. My theory is that Lockerbie was a fit-up in the best traditions of ‘Ashes to Ashes’ and that when the world spotlight turned on Scotland, as they trial approached,  the Crown Office and individuals like Bell closed ranks to show the world how pure and efficient the Scottish justice system was.

The only problem was Shirley and her suggestions that perhaps things weren't whiter than white after all.

If you had been analysing the evidence as I have you would see that while heaven and earth was moved to convict Shirley by any means – fair or foul – there was a marked reluctance to pursue the experts with such vigour. Just to seal their lips forever they were granted immunity.

Perhaps the Inquiry will probe some of these dark, dirty and disgraceful depths.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Forum Index -> Test Forum 1 All times are GMT
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 54, 55, 56  Next
Page 4 of 56

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum
Sincere thanks to all those who have supported Shirley and challenged miscarriages of justice on this forum.