144 replies to this topic

[David]

Surprised no one has picked up on this.

The accused - over which I recognise there has always been controversy with the conviction - is supposedly being released on compassionate grounds - at least it's being discussed and wrangled over. 'Compassion', 'Wants to die with his family' etc etc I've just heard on telly.

If we are to assume he is in fact guilty for the crime of bombing PA103 all those years ago, where was his compassion then? I doubt any of them wanted to die at all, yet they had no choice. Do we, as my heart says, say no, stuff it mate? Else, what's the point in jailing? Or do we show compassion for a dying man?

[pmtts]

Surprised no one has picked up on this.

The accused - over which I recognise there has always been controversy with the conviction

And there always will be!

The whole Lockerbie incident stinks to the high hilt.

[Dick Dastardly]

Was he not convicted on the grounds of being complict, rather than the actual placement of the device?

The loss of life from the destruction of the aircraft was primarily from America, however, we seem to be forgetting the loss of life from Scotland is not forefront of the decision to release this individual, jailed in Scotland. It seems that the American nation seem to keep more focussed on the situation, rather than the mixed messages eminating from the UK.

The male concerned will not serve his full sentence due to his medical condition. All things being equal, is a terrible fate to befall any person.

However, the sentence should stand.

[Midsman1]

I find it ludicrous that this is or was even being considered as i now think its not happening but i might be wrong? the Scottish Justice Minster who's name i do not know seemed to imply that he would have been released? when you consider how destructive the act was and the impact that had on many people around the world it seems mad that they would consider him for an early release especially when you compare this mans crime to that of Ronnie Biggs and the hell and high water that was travelled to release him!

I do not know much about the speculation, i understand that he might not have been the bomber but he still had some hand in actually planning the attack so is as guilty as the bomber in my eyes and for that should die in prison!

[Doghandler2009]

Surprised no one has picked up on this.

The accused - over which I recognise there has always been controversy with the conviction - is supposedly being released on compassionate grounds - at least it's being discussed and wrangled over. 'Compassion', 'Wants to die with his family' etc etc I've just heard on telly.

If we are to assume he is in fact guilty for the crime of bombing PA103 all those years ago, where was his compassion then? I doubt any of them wanted to die at all, yet they had no choice. Do we, as my heart says, say no, stuff it mate? Else, what's the point in jailing? Or do we show compassion for a dying man?

[mymumalwayssaidiwasspecial]

Leaving aside the debate over his guilt or innocence.

If he really has only got a few months to live then let him go home and Colonel Gaddaffi can foot the bill for his palliative care rather than Scottish Taxpayers.

However, I would like further clarification as to how 'terminal' his cancer is. People with prostate cancer, even untreatable cases, can often live for several years with little impact on their lifestyles. Before he is released I'd want to be sure that he really was about to shuffle-off within the next few weeks or months and wasn't going to be fit enough to go out drinking and dancing as soon as he gets out.

[Basil the Rat]

Not that this has anything to do with it, but when I was at Farnborough a few years back I saw the reconstructed side of the Pan-Am jumbo where the bomb had gone off. It was a mess; lt was clear that those seated right over the explosion would not have known anything about it.

[mrrandom]

Not that this has anything to do with it, but when I was at Farnborough a few years back I saw the reconstructed side of the Pan-Am jumbo where the bomb had gone off. It was a mess; lt was clear that those seated right over the explosion would not have known anything about it.

thank god for small mercies

[Vampyre]

We were offered a sacrificial lamb, and for various reasons, we have chosen to believe we have the Lockerbie bomber safely incarcerated. Regardless of that, he is now beyond any treatment available, so why not let him go home? Saves us a few quid if nothing else. What possible purpose will keeping him banged up until he dies serve?

I would rather take the opinion of Dr Jim Swire over that of Hillary Clinton.

And if anyone is ever on the M74, I would reccomend a short detour to visit the Garden of Rememberance.

[David]

We were offered a sacrificial lamb, and for various reasons, we have chosen to believe we have the Lockerbie bomber safely incarcerated.

It's this word 'compassion' that's being bandied about. I ask again: assuming that he is guilty as charged, where was his compassion when he slaughtered - slaughtered - 259 innocent people?

What possible purpose will keeping him banged up until he dies serve?

Because that was the sentence handed down. Either way, I find it very hard to square the fact just because he's now ill and about to die he should be repatriated. Let's not the 259 people that never made the flight, the vast majority of which would probably still be alive today. In short, wouldn't it 'serve him right'? Again, think of friends and family denied seeing their loved ones who never saw those 259 innocent people every again, knowing how they died at that. Blown to bits, thousands of feet in the air with no preparation? Settling back for a long flight for a Christmas trip - what choice did they have?

And for what?

[Whopper MacBig]

It's this word 'compassion' that's being bandied about. I ask again: assuming that he is guilty as charged, where was his compassion when he slaughtered - slaughtered - 259 innocent people?

Because that was the sentence handed down. Either way, I find it very hard to square the fact just because he's now ill and about to die he should be repatriated. Let's not the 259 people that never made the flight, the vast majority of which would probably still be alive today. In short, wouldn't it 'serve him right'? Again, think of friends and family denied seeing their loved ones who never saw those 259 innocent people every again, knowing how they died at that. Blown to bits, thousands of feet in the air with no preparation? Settling back for a long flight for a Christmas trip - what choice did they have?

And for what?

The "for what" is likely a revenge attack for the bombing of Libyan targets in 1986 by American planes flying from British bases, operations which were given tacit approval by the British Government of the day. These attacks killed "at least 100 people", including Gadaffi's baby daughter. More innocents blown to bits.

Basically, when it comes to "sorting out the terrorists", we never learn.

[Basil the Rat]

Historical note:

After years of occasional skirmishes with Libya over Libyan territorial claims to the Gulf of Sidra, and years of vulnerability to Libyan-supported terrorism, especially the Abu Nidal group behind the Achille Lauro hijacking December 27 in 1985 in Mediterranean Sea near the Egyptian coast and Rome and Vienna airport attacks of December 27, 1985, the United States contemplated a military attack to send a message about support for international terrorism. In March 1986, the United States, asserting the 12-nautical-mile (22 km; 14 mi) limit to territorial waters recognized by the international community, sent a carrier task force to the region. Libya responded with aggressive counter-maneuvers on March 24 that led to the destruction of Libyan radar systems and missile attack boats. Less than two weeks later on April 5, a bomb exploded in a West Berlin disco, La Belle, killing two American servicemen and a Turkish woman and wounding 200 others. The United States claimed to have obtained cable transcripts from Libyan agents in East Germany involved in the attack.

After several days of diplomatic talks with European and Arab partners, President of the United States Ronald Reagan ordered the strike on Libya on April 14. Eighteen F-111F strike aircraft of the 48th Tactical Fighter Wing, flying from RAF Lakenheath supported by four EF-111A Ravens of the 20th Tactical Fighter Wing, from RAF Upper Heyford in England, in conjunction with fifteen A-6, A-7, F/A-18 attack aircraft and EA-6B Prowler Electronic Warfare Aircraft from the aircraft carriers USS Saratoga, USS America and USS Coral Sea on station in the Gulf of Sidra struck five targets at 02:00 on April 15, in the stated objective that their destruction would send a message and reduce Libya's ability to support and train terrorists. Commander TJ Coughlin and his strike group of A-6 Intruders caused considerable damage to the Libyan Navy by sinking 2 Combattante missile boats. Cdr. Coughlin is credited with the sinking of both of these ships.

The United States was denied overflight rights by France, Spain and Italy as well as the use of European continental bases, forcing the Air Force portion of the operation to be flown around France, Spain and through the Straits of Gibraltar, adding 1,300 miles (2,100 km) each way and requiring multiple aerial refuelings. The attack lasted about ten minutes. Several targets were hit and destroyed, but some civilian and diplomatic sites in Tripoli were struck as well, and the French embassy was reportedly only narrowly missed,^[2] when a number of bombs missed their intended targets.

[TCambs]

Thought I'd weigh in on this.

From those of you who remember posts I've made in the past, I tend to be slighly left of centre and generally liberal minded. However, in this case, I can see NO reason why this person, or anyone convicted of a horrific crime, should be allowed to be released on compassionate grounds.

To those who question the conviction, it's a fair point, but one that should be addressed in court via the appeals process. I don't think it's right to let the court of public opinion determine whether his conviction is safe or not and to say that that doubt is reason he should be released on compastionate is an abuse of process in my mind.

Also, to those who bring up economics, I generally have a pet hate when the media, politicians and the like seem to think the cheapest option is the best option. I think the criminal justice system should transend economics and be about justice, and how much it costs to bring someone to justice should not be a consideration. Afterall, the cheapest option would be not to incarcerate anyone for their crimes.

So my opinion is to keep him in jail and let him go through the appeals process.

[Basil the Rat]

Perhaps they should be lead by the views of the families of the passengers?

[mrrandom]

Perhaps they should be lead by the views of the families of the passengers?

that seems to be a problem as they apper to be split on the matter

[Basil the Rat]

that seems to be a problem as they apper to be split on the matter

That isn't a surprise, I'm sure there are as many sceptics as to the man's guilt. It must be unpleasent havng no faith in the justice you have been given. I don't know what I would think in that position.

[mrrandom]

That isn't a surprise, I'm sure there are as many sceptics as to the man's guilt. It must be unpleasent havng no faith in the justice you have been given. I don't know what I would think in that position.

strangly from what i have seen the US families seem satisfied wereas the UK families are the "non belivers"

[Vampyre]

It's this word 'compassion' that's being bandied about.

I totally agree, I have no compassion whatsoever, I just cannot see what will be gained by not releasing him at this point.

[dredd1981]

Personally I think the yanks, especially Clinton, have a bloody cheek pontificating about justice and the evils of terrorism when it is the yanks who, through NORAID, funded the pira's war against the police, army and innocent civilians. Indeed Senator E Kennedy, one of the persons who signed a letter to the Scottish justice secretary during the week, was known to be a big supporter of NORAID and regularly invited the leaders of sinn fein/ira to functions in Washington. Indeed he and a few of his cohorts have quite a few questions to answer with regard to their links to irish republicanism.
I don't know about the rest of you but in my opinion the U.S is the most morally bankrupt nation on this planet and certainly has no place ranting and raving about justice and terrorism to the very country they were happy to see blown to bits only a decade or two ago!

[LMTS]

Hes been released Speech was decent, Considered all concepts, Wasnt going to decline to keep the Yanks happy was purely down to The personal decision - I think this is a great day For the devolved scottish parlament and powers- and shows what power we actualy do have as a small country.

"he is being freed to his homeland to die, Not to be further punished"

[David]

Hes been released Speech was decent, Considered all concepts, Wasnt going to decline to keep the Yanks happy was purely down to The personal decision - I think this is a great day For the devolved scottish parlament and powers- and shows what power we actualy do have as a small country.

"he is being freed to his homeland to die, Not to be further punished"

Can't agree with any of that at all.

What power are we demonstrating? The fact we/ the Scottish can make decisions all on our own about what we do with our/their prisoners?

Neither do I see it as a 'great day' that a convicted man, albeit allegedly the bomber even after all this time, who slaughtered 270 innocent persons, is released because he himself is dying.

Oddly, at almost the same time, the US is demanding the extradition of a lowly computer geek. The same man who should have been thanked by the US for showing how pathetic their computer security systems were, not dragged from the UK over which the government have rolled over and waved legs in the air instead of saying No.

[Whopper MacBig]

Personally I think the yanks, especially Clinton, have a bloody cheek pontificating about justice and the evils of terrorism when it is the yanks who, through NORAID, funded the pira's war against the police, army and innocent civilians. Indeed Senator E Kennedy, one of the persons who signed a letter to the Scottish justice secretary during the week, was known to be a big supporter of NORAID and regularly invited the leaders of sinn fein/ira to functions in Washington. Indeed he and a few of his cohorts have quite a few questions to answer with regard to their links to irish republicanism.
I don't know about the rest of you but in my opinion the U.S is the most morally bankrupt nation on this planet and certainly has no place ranting and raving about justice and terrorism to the very country they were happy to see blown to bits only a decade or two ago!

Pretty much agree with everything Dredd has posted.

On the release, I probably tend towards keeping him in to be honest. He's going to be dead soon anyway so it hardly makes any difference.

That said, I understand where MacAskill is coming from. His basic argument is that that if we cannot find it within ourselves to show compassion to a dying man then we are no better than those who perpetrate these acts against us. Either we have standards that we want to operate by or we sink to their level. If it's the former, then compassion should be one of them. It doesn't mean we love the bloke, just that we're better than him and his kind.

Many of the comments against release appear to me to be driven by the need for revenge (e.g. the notion that we should let the families decide his fate) which, to me, demonstrates a failure to understand some of the basic tenets of our justice system.

Of course, all of this would be academic if we'd done the sensible thing and hung him in the first place.

[truebluesteve]

This is a really tricky one and I can see both sides of the story. I listened the the Scottish Minister's speech on Radio 4 and it was well balanced apart from the the political point scoring he was trying to achieve by some finger pointing at the UK Government. That said, on balance I think the decision was the right one - the ability to show mercy and compassion in a very difficult situation is the mark of a civilised society.

Its interesting to note that we have only just released Ronnie Biggs who was never convicted of killing anyone. It also shows that we dont have to bow to what the Americans want.

[eyley]

Could have shown him compassion by giving him the chance to see his family and friends by flying them over and letting them visit him. He's served what, 26 years? - that's less than 1/10th of a year per person who died.

This was before my time I know, and I fully understand i don't know many of the facts.

But 5 weeks time served per person who died that day? that's not right.

Somone might have said this before....but he didn't show any compassion to the people on the plane, so how does he deserve it?

[Whopper MacBig]

Could have shown him compassion by giving him the chance to see his family and friends by flying them over and letting them visit him. He's served what, 26 years? - that's less than 1/10th of a year per person who died.

This was before my time I know, and I fully understand i don't know many of the facts.

But 5 weeks time served per person who died that day? that's not right.

Somone might have said this before....but he didn't show any compassion to the people on the plane, so how does he deserve it?

How could he have served 26 years for a crime that occurred in 1988?! He has served 8 years = approx 10 days for each of his victims. And his family had a house in Newton Mearns, just outside Glasgow, from where they regularly visited him.


Anyway ....

Al Megrahi was greeted as his plane landed by cheering crowds waving Libyan and Scottish flags

Well that looks good.