Jump to content

Talk:Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Inaugurating

[edit]

SlimVirgin and OscarD, I have just started this article. All three of us will work together on this article and move some of the information about the trial from Pan Am Flight 103 article to here. -- SNIyer12

I've been checking the article periodically and have found out from the article's history that anonymous users have been adding information without checking Pan Am Flight 103. SlimVirgin, I left a message on your talk page about this situation. -- SNIyer12 1 August 2005, 18:34 (UTC)

Citation

[edit]

The website of UN observer Dr Hans Köchler cites this article as an information source for documentation on international law issues.[1]Phase4 17:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Link to main article

[edit]

Following discussion and agreement here, I have inserted into the text of this sub-article a link to the main Pan Am Flight 103 article.---PJHaseldine (talk) 12:44, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Second appeal

[edit]

Less than a week before the start of Megrahi's second appeal against conviction on 28 April 2009, a question mark has been raised over the reliability of the timer fragment evidence at his trial nine years ago (see 3news video clip).---PJHaseldine (talk) 09:26, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The full 52-minute video entitled "Lockerbie revisited" can now be viewed here,courtesy of Dutch public broadcaster VPRO. The film's director and narrator, Gideon Levy, interviews retired FBI officer Richard Marquise, Detective Chief Superintendent Stuart Henderson of the Scottish police, ex-FBI laboratory official Thomas Thurman, UN Observer at the Lockerbie trial Hans Köchler, author and journalist Ian Ferguson, former CIA agent Robert Baer, ex-FBI laboratory scientist Fred Whitehurst and former Lord Advocate Lord Fraser of Carmyllie.
Robert Baer says that geopolitics and inter-agency rivalry prevented the CIA passing intelligence-derived evidence to the FBI. Richard Marquise states categorically that no money was paid to any of the witnesses before the trial. In relation to witness Tony Gauci, Marquise refuses to say whether any money was paid out after the trial. Lord Fraser says he gave strict instructions that no payment should be made to witnesses. Dr Whitehurst describes the FBI laboratory as a "crime scene", where his unqualified colleague Tom Thurman would routinely alter Whitehurst's scientific reports over a five-year period. Ian Ferguson reports that the timer fragment - allegedly found in the PA103 debris and which allegedly was part of the Mebo timer that triggered the bomb - had not been tested for explosives residue because of 'budgetary reasons'. Whitehurst does not accept that cost could be the reason since it would have taken him just a morning's work to have tested the timer fragment. Thurman confirms that the fragment - the only real piece of evidence against Libya - had been brought over from the UK to the FBI lab, where he had personally identified it as coming from the circuit board of a Mebo MST-13 timer, only 20 of which had been made and all were supplied to Libya. Marquise agrees that "without the timer fragment we would have been unable to develop additional evidence against Libya." He says that of all the evidence retrieved from the crash scene, only one piece - the timer fragment - was brought to America. Lord Fraser disagrees saying he would have had to authorise the handing over to the FBI of this crucial piece of evidence, and he had not done so.
In another interview towards the end of the film, Marquise changes his mind and is prompted by DCS Henderson to say that the "fragment never came to the US." Marquise volunteers that he actually saw the timer fragment (PT-35) in London, but Henderson corrects him saying Marquise had seen it where all the other evidence was kept in the UK. Before taking his leave, Henderson emphasises to the camera that there are "no hidden holes to find because the culprit is in custody - take my word for it!"
Ian Ferguson is given the last word. He is heard to say: "This could bring an end to the appeal. If the Crown knew that this was all going to be heard in public, they may well drop their opposition to the appeal and Megrahi goes free. That's how f*****g important it is. This could bring the Scottish judicial system and the FBI into f*****g complete disrepute, and frankly they would not want this linen to be washed in public!"---PJHaseldine (talk) 15:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The FBI's Richard Marquise responded to this summary of the film 'Lockerbie revisited' on Professor Black's blog,as follows:
"I would like to clarify one point which so many people seem to have made important. A photograph of PT-35 was identified by Tom Thurman as similar to a photograph of a timer circuit board which had been located in Senegal in 1988 in the possession of two Libyan intelligence officers. He also compared that photograph with the circuit board of a similar MEBO timer found in Togo in 1986 and in the possession of the US in 1990. He believed them to be identical. The FBI asked the Scottish police to bring the fragment (PT-35) to the US in about June 1990 to be compared with the photograph of the Senegal timer and the circuit board of the Togo timer. Feraday did in fact bring the fragment to the US--it was never out of his possession and was brought back to the UK at the conclusion of his analysis with Tom Thurman in the FBI lab. This is what I said on my initial interview and later clarified my remarks made at Arlington in December by email to Mr Levy in December 2008 stating I believed that Feraday did in fact bring the fragment to the US but it was never out of his possession. I did not see the fragment on that trip.
I later saw the fragment (PT-35) in person at RARDE when I traveled there with Mr. Henderson in the winter of 1991.
I have many more things I would like to say but do not want to use this site to post my "rants" each time I disagree with what someone posts."---PJHaseldine (talk) 22:36, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First stage concluded

[edit]

The first stage of Megrahi's appeal was concluded in May 2009 and the appeal court reconvenes week commencing 6 July 2009. I have proposed and self-reverted this edit to update the article. On account of my edit ban, I'd be grateful if another editor could undo my self-reversion. Many thanks.---PJHaseldine (talk) 17:07, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion proposal

[edit]

Please note proposal to delete the separate Tony Gauci article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Gauci. Your comments welcome. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 14:23, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would concur with this as his only claim to fame is his association with the Megrahi trial.--Cyber Fox (talk) 00:24, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Megrahi’s case was ‘wrongful conviction’"

[edit]

I have added a ref to the Gareth Peirce article, but we probably need to update 2 or 3 other articles, eg. Jim Swire. --Mais oui! (talk) 09:59, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'Flaws' in key Lockerbie evidence

[edit]

--Mais oui! (talk) 13:53, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Second trial on the cards?

[edit]

Lorraine Davidson, The Times, 26 Sept 2011: "Scotland’s Lord Advocate has opened a dramatic new chapter in the Lockerbie saga by formally seeking evidence from the new Libyan authorities which could lead to a second trial for the atrocity, The Times has learnt. Frank Mulholland, QC, has made the move in the growing belief that the Libyan National Transitional Council (NTC) in Tripoli will release key evidence and testimony relating to the blowing up of Pan Am Flight 103. Scottish prosecutors believe that the co-operation of the NTC will provide them with the vital evidence they need to convict those who acted along with Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi in committing the terrorist act. In particular, the Crown Office is keen to obtain further evidence against Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah, the man who originally stood trial for the terrorist atrocity alongside al-Megrahi, but was acquitted of any involvement." --Mais oui! (talk) 08:51, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Pan Am Flight 103 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 22:31, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i were in nelson drama in a small roll tell about him some impotens — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.193.105.105 (talk) 11:57, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:12, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:19, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:08, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:09, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pan_Am_Flight_103_bombing_trial&oldid=1245041853"