megrahimystory.net - Lockerbie Bomber launches website claiming innocence!

You know, those Scots really did drop the ball. I don't know if the guy was guilty or not, but surely some provision stopping him from doing this should have been part of the deal!

Lockerbie bomber launches website claiming innocence

EDINBURGH (Reuters) - Lockerbie bomber Abdel Basset al-Megrahi launched a website on Friday with the aim of proving his innocence in the 1988 bombing of a U.S. airliner over Scotland in which 270 people died.

The former Libyan agent released information "which he hopes will establish his innocence" on the website, megrahimystory.net, his Scottish lawyer Tony Kelly said.

Scotland's top public prosecutor said she deplored the move. "Mr Megrahi remains convicted of the worst terrorist atrocity in UK history," Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini said.

Here's a link to the website:


Abdelbaset Ali Al-Megrahi
My Story

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi was convicted before the High Court of Justiciary sitting in the Netherlands of the murder of 270 people.

Mr Megrahi contends that he has been the victim of a miscarriage of justice.

His case was referred back to the Court of Criminal Appeal by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission on 27th June 2007.

He abandoned his appeal against conviction and sentence, with leave of the Court, on 18 August 2009.

The purpose of this website is to explain the basis of his challenge to that conviction.

Initially, he intends to publish those parts of his Grounds of Appeal which were argued before the Court between 28 April and 19 May 2009.

Thereafter, he will publish the Grounds of Appeal which were due to be the subject of argument before the Court, commencing on 2nd November 2009.

It gives you the chance to view the PDFs involving his appeals and the grounds for those appeals.

I mean this guy got released early on compassionate grounds, SURELY he should just keep his mouth shut. Unless he's specificall been released to stir things up?

The more I read about this story, the more I really do think that is the case!

reply to post by kiwifoot


Ya... or maybe he was actually innocent??

Originally posted by kiwifoot
You know, those Scots really did drop the ball. I don't know if the guy was guilty or not...

Are you serious?!? You admit you don't know the facts, yet attack the Scottish government for not censoring those very facts!!! This is a dangerous and stupid attitude. As a Scot, I'm not even going to get into the debate about what happened here - but I think your attitude is horrendous. Shame on you, Kiwifoot.

Originally posted by king9072
reply to post by kiwifoot

 

Ya... or maybe he was actually innocent??

And if he was (highly likely scenario), there are ways of releasing someone, the Scots would not have done it on compassionate grounds. There are plenty of ways to manoeuvre a release for this guy, but to do so on compassionate grounds implies they think he is still guilty, and if that was the case, the release should have contained some kind of restrictions on his talking about the case and his trial/appeal. Unless they really intended on making this as uncomfortable as possible for the UK and giving the US some ammo against Libya.

Originally posted by Millions

Originally posted by kiwifoot
You know, those Scots really did drop the ball. I don't know if the guy was guilty or not...

Are you serious?!? You admit you don't know the facts, yet attack the Scottish government for not censoring those very facts!!! This is a dangerous and stupid attitude. As a Scot, I'm not even going to get into the debate about what happened here - but I think your attitude is horrendous. Shame on you, Kiwifoot.

Ahh, let me explain, I don't know if this guy was TRULY guilty or not, BUT I KNOW for sure he was found guilty in a court of law in Scotland.

That being the case, if they decided on reviewing the evidence that he wasn't guilty, then they could have let his appeal go ahead or release him due to misgivings about the original trial, BUT to release him on compassionate grounds, and not to put a gagging order on him , sorry, doesn't matter if it's Scot, NZ, Indian or from the Vatican City, that my friend is dropping the ball, IMO!

I should also add that what I meant to say was the lawyers that negotiated his release dropped the ball, apologies to the Scottish Nation and People in general!



[edit on 18-9-2009 by kiwifoot]

I think he was framed, probably yet another covert ops false flag operation. I saw a documentary on the case, and it did not seem like everything was as crystal clear as such a case should be.

Al Megrahi has always maintained his innocence and was appealing the verdict again when it was decided he would receive a compassionate release. I don't know why it would be shocking that still maintains his innocence. Would you prefer his site proclaimed his guilt and he was released anyway? From the interviews I watched with people in Lockerbie and law enforcement in the area, they didn't believe he is guilty either, or at the very least not the sole responsible party.

I don't know whether he did it or not, but I do know if I was falsely accused of a horrible crime/act of terrorism and I was innocent I would also put up a website proclaiming my innocence. For my 1 little site, there would be thousands, including encyclopedia's that proclaimed my guilt as fact.

[edit on 18-9-2009 by searching4truth]

reply to post by searching4truth


You know, I really didn't word this one right!

I too believe he was innocent, well maybe involved but just in a minor role.

The thread was supposed to highlight (without offending Scottish people, failed miserably!) that the release of this guy was nothing to do with compassionate ground, because the guy has been allowed to protest his innocence.

I think it was about making as much trouble as possible between the US and Libya. He's got a few months to live, so lets use him as a destabilising factor in the middle east,.

They know he's innocent, but they are using him to the last.

Something alng those lines is how I should have put it.

Listen, none of us are perfect are we??

Well, for what its worth, a lot of the folk here in Scotland believe that he is either innocent, or is only a small part of a much larger plot.

By releasing him on so-called compassionate grounds now, the government has avoided the need for the appeal process which was about to start. It seems they may have wanted to avoid re-opening that whole big can of worms for the fear of what new facts would emerge.

So, Kiwifoot - now that I see where you are coming from, I think I agree with you. I don't know what actually happened with Lockerbie, but I do know that I do not believe the official story. And many people in Scotland share that view. Thanks for raising an important topic, Kiwifoot.

reply to post by kiwifoot


Jails are full of people who claim wholeheartly to be innocent. Like that line from Shawshank Redemption:

Red: Why'd you do it?
Andy: I didn't, since you ask.
Red: [chuckling] You're gonna fit right in. Everybody in (here) is innocent. Didn't you know that? [to Heywood] Hey Heywood, what you in for?
Heywood: Didn't do it. Lawyer #ed me.
Red: Rumor has it you're a real cold fish. You think your # smells sweeter than most. Is that right?
Andy: What do you think?
Red: I'll tell ya the truth. I haven't made up my mind.

reply to post by Millions


No my friend, I'm sorry for going about it all pig eared!

And believe me, I sincerely meant no offence!

I had to come out with that on Skeptic's Racism thread day lol!

When will I ever learn!??

But I think you have a good point in that they released him to avoid the whole appeal process, they must have known he had a good case. It wouldn't surprise me if they had the OK from the US who also didn't want it to come out he was a patsy, plus they could get some ammo to stoke up the Mid-East.

I guess we'll never know the whole story.

Sorry again mate for being a tool!

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by kiwifoot

 

Jails are full of people who claim wholeheartly to be innocent. Like that line from Shawshank Redemption:

Red: Why'd you do it?
Andy: I didn't, since you ask.
Red: [chuckling] You're gonna fit right in. Everybody in (here) is innocent. Didn't you know that? [to Heywood] Hey Heywood, what you in for?
Heywood: Didn't do it. Lawyer #ed me.
Red: Rumor has it you're a real cold fish. You think your # smells sweeter than most. Is that right?
Andy: What do you think?
Red: I'll tell ya the truth. I haven't made up my mind.

I'm actually proud to say I was one of the 10 people worldwide who actually saw that at the movies, my favourite movies of all time, in fact, am going to watch it now.

Just like in the film I guess, this guy got out in the end, and in the film, he WAS innocent too!

reply to post by kiwifoot


Clearly I'm not perfect, I'm sure everyone saw all my typos (I think I've cleared those up, it's just my mind moves faster than my fingers and I miss words ) I hope you didn't see it as an attack. Like you said, if he were involved at all, it was probably something trivial.

Originally posted by searching4truth
reply to post by kiwifoot

 

Clearly I'm not perfect, I'm sure everyone saw all my typos

(I think I've cleared those up, it's just my mind moves faster than my fingers and I miss words

) I hope you didn't see it as an attack. Like you said, if he were involved at all, it was probably something trivial.

ARRGGHH what is my problem tonight!

No I didn't take it as an attack at all my friend, there should have been a smiley face or something on the end of that.

You know, sometimes I should just give up lol!

I agree with you completely, but unfortunately I've tried to have a debate with you good people on a day when my IQ has shrunk to a number no greater than my shoe size!

forgive me friend, I think we are on the same page, I'm just reading upside down that's all!

Wow, I've already had to apologise to Millions for being a tool, now you too, what a night!

All the best kiwifoot!

"Dropping the ball" implies that this occurred by accident. This was no accident. It was a considered and deliberate act. I have never voted SNP in my life and never will, however I have never been more proud of my government than in this case. The guy is going to die! He is not going to do it again. Releasing him will not encourage anyone else. What is to be achieved by keeping him in jail.
To those in the British Govt and their opposition who oppose his release - what about the terrorists that were released with their support under the Good Friday Agreement.

reply to post by kiwifoot


I am not convinced he is not guilty.