Harleyman Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Susan Atkins who was one of Charles Manson's group has been in prison for several years and is now suffering terminal brain cancer. She recently requested release on compassionate grounds. Request was denied Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 haha, did your ex-wife run off with a Jock? I hope she did and spent the rest of the years paying for everything since he always came up with the same old excuse "Ah seem to be wee bit short o' the poonds. Could ye cover the cost me bonnie lassie?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Harley here is more reported evidence by Time that suggests that the bombed filled suit case had little linkage to al-Megrahi. "TIME has obtained a copy of the five-page FBI message, which states, "This computer entry does not indicate the origin of the bag which was sent for loading on board Pan Am 103. Nor does it indicate that the bag was actually loaded on Pan Am 103. It indicates only that a bag of unknown origin was sent from Coding Station 206 at 1:07 p.m. to a position from which it was supposed to be loaded on Pan Am 103." The FBI agent's report concludes, "There remains the possibility that no luggage was transferred from Air Malta 180 to Pan Am 103." http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,159523,00.html If he was innocent did the Libyans hand over the real culprits? I'm a bit hazy on the details following the bombing. Certainly Khadaffi knew about it and more than likely condoned it. If there was some doubt about this man's guilt then why did he remain in prison so long? Why were no appeals initiated? Why wasn't a full investigation carried out to either conclude guilt or innocence? Did the man while denying his involvement ever reveal any information to M.I. 5 or the police that might have thrown some light as to who was really responsible? If he had then the UK government could have given him immunity and asylum in the UK. I believe this man knew more than he was prepared to admit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Probably didn't do it? Provide conclusive evidence Er what? Since when has the onus been on the defence to provide conclusive evidence that someone is innocent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Probably didn't do it? Provide conclusive evidence It's innocent until prove guilty (which he wasn't), not guilty until proven innocent.. If he had been granted an appeal in a timely fashion, his lawyers would have been merely required to prove there was 'reasonable doubt.' Given that he was convicted entirely on circumstantial evidence and the testimony of a since discredited witness, I don't think that would have been so hard. http://newstrust.net/stories/130340 Luckily for people like the Birmingham Six and Guildford Four, not everyone strikes such a complacent attitude to injustice as you do, or they'd still be rotting in prison today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 It's innocent until prove guilty (which he wasn't), not guilty until proven innocent.. If he had been granted an appeal in a timely fashion, his lawyers would have been merely required to prove there was 'reasonable doubt.' Given that he was convicted entirely on circumstantial evidence and the testimony of a since discredited witness, I don't think that would have been so hard. Luckily for people like the Birmingham Six and Guildford Four, not everyone strikes such a complacent attitude to injustice as you do, or they'd still be rotting in prison today. There certainly was a complacent attitude to justice. Timothy Evans, Edith Thompson and Ruth Ellis could all affirm that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Liberty the law does not state prisoners have to released on compassionate grounds, of the last 30 prisoners in Scottish jails to apply for compassionate release on medical grounds 7 have been refused, God only knows what these guys were in for. Maybe they weren't ill enough? Interested to find out more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hard2miss Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 The fact that he was released and others were not speaks volumes. The fact that as soon as his appeal got dropped he gets the gate key speaks volumes. The war in Iraq has shown the lenths that the western world will goto to secure oil, the fact that libya has plenty of it should not be dismissed. The evidance was weak, everyone with half a brain knew there was more to it than was put in the courts (even the trial judges expressed frustration) and he was yet convicted at the out cry of the American public for justice (who fought tooth and nail for the trial to be held in America) Senior legal and intelligence officials say that the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission will conclude that the conviction of al-Megrahi is unsafe and that he may have been a victim of a miscarriage of justice. so what was options did they have but to release him ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingmaker2 Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 If he was innocent did the Libyans hand over the real culprits? I'm a bit hazy on the details following the bombing. Certainly Khadaffi knew about it and more than likely condoned it. If there was some doubt about this man's guilt then why did he remain in prison so long? Why were no appeals initiated? Why wasn't a full investigation carried out to either conclude guilt or innocence? Did the man while denying his involvement ever reveal any information to M.I. 5 or the police that might have thrown some light as to who was really responsible? If he had then the UK government could have given him immunity and asylum in the UK. I believe this man knew more than he was prepared to admit The crucial piece of evidence that was used to convict Al Megahi was a figernail size fragment of circuitboard wrapped in a tiny scrap of clothing. The fragment of clothing was somehow traced, as part of a shirt that came from a shop in Malta. Al Megrahi worked for Libyan Arab Airlines at Malta airport. The shop owner,Tony Gauci, identified the shirt purchaser to be Al Megrahi. However the clothes shop owner had previously mistaken Al Megrahi for a Palestinian terrorist arrested in Sweden, suggesting that he wasn't the best person to totally rely on when identifing a person or persons. And let's not forget the shop owner had to recall the shirt purchaser from over a decade from the original transaction! When a commission in June 2007 outlined 6 items as grounds for an appeal, 2 of the items relate directly to the purchasing of the shirt and the reliabilty of the clothes shop manager. "The first is a finding by the commission that "there is no reasonable basis" for the trial court's conclusion that al Megrahi purchased the clothes in Malta on the day alleged. It said evidence not heard at trial indicates the clothes were purchased when al Megrahi was not in Malta. Also not heard at trial, the commission said, was evidence that the clothes shop owner had seen al Megrahi's picture in a magazine article about Lockerbie days before he picked the defendant out of a lineup. At trial, clothes shop owner Anthony Gauci said the purchaser of the clothes resembled al Megrahi "a lot." http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/08/14/lockerbie.appeal/index.html?iref=topnews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 The crucial piece of evidence that was used to convict Al Megahi was a figernail size fragment of circuitboard wrapped in a tiny scrap of clothing. The fragment of clothing was somehow traced, as part of a shirt that came from a shop in Malta. Al Megrahi worked for Libyan Arab Airlines at Malta airport. The shop owner,Tony Gauci identified the shirt purchaser to be Al Megrahi. However the clothes shop owner had previously mistaken Al Megrahi for a Palestinian terrorist arrested in Sweden, suggesting that he wasn't the best person to rely when identifing a person or persons. And let's not forget the shop owner had to recall the shirt purchaser from over a decade from the original transaction! When a commission in June 2007 outlined 6 items as grounds for an appeal 2 of the items relate directly to the purchasing of the shirt and the reliabilty of the clothes shop manager. "The first is a finding by the commission that "there is no reasonable basis" for the trial court's conclusion that al Megrahi purchased the clothes in Malta on the day alleged. It said evidence not heard at trial indicates the clothes were purchased when al Megrahi was not in Malta. Also not heard at trial, the commission said, was evidence that the clothes shop owner had seen al Megrahi's picture in a magazine article about Lockerbie days before he picked the defendant out of a lineup. At trial, clothes shop owner Anthony Gauci said the purchaser of the clothes resembled al Megrahi "a lot." http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/08/14/lockerbie.appeal/index.html?iref=topnews Okay, I'll buy some of that but who then were the real culprits? Were they ever ID'd and if they were hiding out in Libya why didn't Khadaffi co-operate and hand them over. I have a problem understanding all this. Khadaffi agree to pay compensation to the families but at the same time denied any Libyan involvement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.