Bomber rejects Maltese witness
The Libyan man convicted of the 1988 Lockerbie bombing yesterday rejected the testimony of Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci in an appeal dossier he believes would have proven his innocence.
In the 300-page dossier released yesterday, the first such disclosure since he was controversially released on compassionate grounds by the Scottish government last month, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmet al-Megrahi attacks key planks of the prosecution case against him, especially Mr Gauci's evidence.
The shopkeeper had identified Mr al-Megrahi - who at the time worked for the Libyan Airlines in Malta - as the man who had bought clothes from his shop, Mary's House, in Sliema, and which were later found wrapped around the bomb.
According to the version of events accepted by the judges who had sentenced Mr al-Megrahi to life in prison in 2001, the bomb left Malta in a suitcase, which was transferred onto the ill-fated Jumbo Jet, operating Pan Am flight 103, in Frankfurt.
The explosion over the Scottish town of Lockerbie had killed 270 people.
This version of events hinges on the testimony of Mr Gauci whose credibility has been questioned time and again even by Scottish relatives of victims of the tragedy.
In his dossier yesterday, Mr al-Megrahi, who is terminally ill with prostate cancer, said: "I have returned to Tripoli with my unjust conviction still in place. As a result of the abandonment of my appeal, I have been deprived of the opportunity to clear my name through the formal appeal process. I have vowed to continue my attempts to clear my name".
He said that Mr Gauci had originally rejected his photograph in a spread of 12 images shown to him on February 15, 1991 because they showed men who were younger than the purchaser. He was then asked to discount age and to look again and it was then that he picked Mr al-Megrahi, saying he looked "similar" but "younger".
Later, during an identification parade on April 13, 1999 at Kamp Zeist in the Netherlands, Mr Gauci pointed at Mr al-Megrahi, saying: "Not exactly the man I saw in the shop..."
Mr al-Megrahi also berated the fact that Mr Gauci had been shown a photo of his in the press identifying him as the bomber before he was asked to make a formal identification in court.
Mr al-Megrahi raises further concerns about the amount of time that had lapsed between the purchase from the shop and the identification process: 27 months before the first identification took place and 12 years before the trial was held.
The dossier also challenges the trial's conclusion that the purchase of the clothes took place on December 7, 1988, describing the evidence as "hopelessly confused".
It also says there were "significant problems" with the inference that the suitcase containing the bomb was loaded at Luqa airport, pointing out there were opportunities to do so at Frankfurt and Heathrow and that documents and witnesses contradicted computer records suggesting that an unaccompanied bag was on the flight from Luqa to Frankfurt.
Most of this and other new evidence had surfaced in recent years, in fact, after Mr al-Megrahi had won the right to a second appeal after he convinced a Scottish legal review board that he might have suffered a miscarriage of justice.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Petrol price up 6c
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
9 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
John Mizzi
Sep 19th 2009, 22:30
He is right the bomb originated from Frankfurt and not from Malta. The Unaccompanied luggage from Malta would have been stopped at Frankfurt.
philip pace
Sep 19th 2009, 17:42
I dare say that Mr.Portelli got his argument a bit mixed up!!!!!!!
The rest who believed that Megrahi was the terrorist, well you better think twice and in a serious way!
Jesmond Micallef
Sep 19th 2009, 17:34
Saddam Hussein, the executed ex President of the Iraq, built a huge super cannon in Iraq. Who was behind it's technology and contractual work....?, British companies. Mr. Jaques Chirac, the ex president of France, sold Mirage fighters to Iraq in the eighties, the chief scientist who developed chemical weapons delivered by such aircraft on Iraqi Kurds and Iranian soliders was educated in a British university !!! What does one call this CAPITALISTIC SPONSORSHIP of terrorism ??
Furthermore, Mr. Augustus Pinochet, ex President of Chile, was freely let off when he was in the UK for medical treatment. Mr Pinochet died in peace but left thousands of unresolved disappearnces of political opponents in his Chile of the 1970's !!! Questions to the readers Did Chile support the UK during the Falklands conflict, was Mr. Pinochet let off the hook just for this same reason ??
Mr. Idi Amin, formed and educated by elitist British Army units during the British colonial times in Africa died peacefully in Saudi Arabia, was he not the man responsible for that very bloody dictatorship in Uganda, How ??? Was he not EDUCATED by the British Colonialists !!!!!
British colonialism outside British homeland speaks fot itself !!!
joe portelli
Sep 19th 2009, 16:16
Lower than the lowest. A bad day for the civilised world when you free a convicted terrorist and allow him to start terrorising others.
What's happened to British Justice? they hung a maltese artist Carmelo Pisani because he dared question involving his homeland into a vicious war - now the Scottish have let a terrorist go Scot Free. are they all drunk?
Denis Catania
Sep 19th 2009, 15:49
@Chris Finch: Well said and thank you.
Charles Muscat
Sep 19th 2009, 14:09
What a cheap way for Malta to become popular among the evil.
steve elliott
Sep 19th 2009, 13:31
There is only one way to prove your innocence and that is in a court of law not online. This terrorist chose not to stand for an appeal but to withdraw his appeal knowing it would lead to his release. He shall die as a terrorist and hopefully not to soon as he has terminal ill with prostrate cancer. Suffer then go to HELL Mr al-Megrahi
Emile Cassar
Sep 19th 2009, 13:05
@ chris finch... it's not just 'some commentators', but also family members of the victims who believe in megrahi's innocence.
The world will never know since court proceedings were not able to go their full course due to the man's illness... therefore even by deciding that he is undeniably guilty you are 'knowing the law' better than the justice system.
But let's put the argument of 'knowing the law' aside... we all know that miscarriage of justice with one, five or a hundred judges is something that happens. So even if a person is convicted, if new evidence surfaces that contradicts the conviction it makes sense to start questioning his guilt.
Chris Finch
Sep 19th 2009, 12:27
Of course a CONVICTED terrorist who has KILLED HUNDREDS of people will continue to protest his innocence. What does he have to lose?
The fact is that he remains CONVICTED by at least 5 senior judges of the worst terrorist atrocity to occur in the UK. But I suppose some commentators will know the law better than these 5 judges and protest this convicted terrorist's innocence.