• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US and UK split over prospect of Lockerbie release

Laila

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
10,101
Reaction score
2,990
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
American relatives of victims of the Lockerbie bombing reacted with fury today to reports that the Libyan man convicted of the atrocity may soon be freed on compassionate grounds.

In stark contrast, however, their British counterparts – many of whom have always doubted the guilt of Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi – backed his release.

Pan Am Flight 103 from Heathrow to New York's JFK was brought down over the Scottish village of Lockerbie on December 21, 1988, killing all 259 people aboard and 11 more on the ground below.

It remains the UK's worst terrorist attack but nobody was brought to justice for it until 2000, when al-Megrahi, an intelligence officer and head of security for Libyan Arab Airlines, was found guilty by a Scottish court sitting in the Netherlands. He was sentenced to life with a minimum term of 27 years for the murder of those who died.

Video: US and British relatives split by prospect of Lockerbie bomber release - Times Online

Compassionate release my ass.
Let him die in jail.
 
The fact is Mr. Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi was convicted. If the British authorities believe he was wrongfully convicted, there are legal remedies to address that issue. Barring the introduction of credible and sufficient evidence that he was innocent, I believe he should serve the maximum sentence (life).
 
Typical bleeding heart liberal european assholes. That man killed my friends, and he can't even serve the minimum of 27 years before those despicable european douchebags want to set him free?

The United States should exit NATO immediately and withdraw ALL troops from Europe.
 
The fact is Mr. Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi was convicted. If the British authorities believe he was wrongfully convicted, there are legal remedies to address that issue.

The guy could be dead before his appeal is concluded, some people are putting his life expectancy at weeks, as opposed to months, let alone years.

Barring the introduction of credible and sufficient evidence that he was innocent, I believe he should serve the maximum sentence (life).

:rolleyes:

I am still waiting to see the "credible" and "sufficient" evidence that he is guilty as charged.

Was Megrahi a Libyan spy? Almost certainly.
Was Megrahi responsible for the Lockerbie bombing? Answers on a postcard...
Is there reasonable doubt about his responsibility? "Reasonable" is putting it mildly!
 
The man currently stand guilty of the murder of 270 people acording to the Scottish Justice system.

He must die in prison for his crime or be freed on appeal - tough luck if he dies before his appeal. He has been found guilty - and you can't pick and choose with the law.
 
I am still waiting to see the "credible" and "sufficient" evidence that he is guilty as charged.

His conviction was the proof. The jury heard the evidence, made their decision.

You just want to second guess the jury because you feel sorry for a terrorist? Don't like seeing poor little criminals in jail? Sympathize with the terrorist's cause? What's your problem?
 
There are some people who I have decided are simply not worth responding too. For the sake of clarity however, I feel obliged to point out that Megrahi was tried by three judges in Holland under "Scottish laws"(and I use that term loosely!), he has never been tried by a Jury.
 
Good lord, I cannot believe that they would even consider this. The world's logic truly has turned on its head and we live in an Alice and Wonderland state where right is wrong, wrong is right, up is down, down is up.

:roll:

Yeah, last time I checked "life in prison" meant "yo ass is gonna die in jail".

So the guy's dying, what's the problem?
 
There are some people who I have decided are simply not worth responding too. For the sake of clarity however, I feel obliged to point out that Megrahi was tried by three judges in Holland under "Scottish laws"(and I use that term loosely!), he has never been tried by a Jury.

But....he had a trial.

Sounds fair to me.

How much of a trial did this scum give my friends on that airplane?
 
Good lord, I cannot believe that they would even consider this. The world's logic truly has turned on its head and we live in an Alice and Wonderland state where right is wrong, wrong is right, up is down, down is up.

:roll:

It is disgraceful i agree.

The bastard should rot in jail but VERY rarely do we give people life.
What sort of message are we sending to society? You can kill as many people as you wish, just develop cancer and you can walk free.

First the train robber
Then the women and partner who tortured and beat and raped a child to death
Now this filth.

This law is a joke. This country is beginning to become a joke if we cannot even punish those who break the law :doh
 
It seems you can when you want a politically convenient conviction!

He had a fair trial.
He had the opportunity to speak his case.
He had evidence brought against him.
He was found guilty of a crime which killed over 200 people.

Do we now condone murder in this society?
 
He had a fair trial.
He had the opportunity to speak his case.
He had evidence brought against him.
He was found guilty of a crime which killed over 200 people.

Do we now condone murder in this society?

You do realize that many, many people had their convictions overturned on appeal, right?

The system is not perfect. Far from it.

The case for his innocence is apparently very strong.

The solution here is to expedite the appeal process which has been ongoing, instead of releasing him on compassionate grounds. At this rate, by the time they get around to anything, the man will be dead. And what if it turns out that he actually was innocent?
 
You do realize that many, many people had their convictions overturned on appeal, right?

He had a review did he not? Did it not uphold the original conviction?
Did he not have a chance to present evidence to help his case?

He should stay where he is until he completes his sentence, or dies in prison
 
The guy could be dead before his appeal is concluded, some people are putting his life expectancy at weeks, as opposed to months, let alone years.

While I do not believe the judicial process should be circumvented, though it should be expedited to the maximum extent possible, I do believe that Mr. Megrahi should receive appropriate medical treatment and his family should have full access to visit him.
 
He had a fair trial.

A matter of opinion!

He had evidence brought against him.

Which was mainly circumstantial and rested massively on the testimony of someone the head of the prosecution would later describe as "a few apples short of a picnic"!


Do we now condone murder in this society?

Of course not!
That is why we should find out who is really responsible for this horrific crime and not force some sacrificial lamb to die in a jail cell thousands of miles from his family!
 
Last edited:
A matter of opinion!

Was he coerced? No.
Was he tortured? No.
Did he face a Judge? Yes.
Did he have his case heard? Yes.
Did he have access to a lawyer to defend his case? I believe that is also a yes.

What part of that was 'unfair'?

There is something dangerously wrong with British society and indeed any society when we seem to care for the criminal than the victims. What about those American and British families that lost members? Do their wishes not matter?

I think this entire episode is a disgrace.
 
You do realize that many, many people had their convictions overturned on appeal, right?

The system is not perfect. Far from it.

The case for his innocence is apparently very strong.

The solution here is to expedite the appeal process which has been ongoing, instead of releasing him on compassionate grounds. At this rate, by the time they get around to anything, the man will be dead. And what if it turns out that he actually was innocent?

AND....once his appeal overturns his conviction, he can walk out of jail.

That's fair.
 
Of course not!
That is why we should find out who is really responsible for this horrific crime and not force some sacrificial lamb to die in a jail cell thousands of miles from his family!

The court determined HE was guilty.

That means he's responsible for the murder of more that two hundred people.

Tough **** about his family, he's a mass murderer and if those people were respectable people they'd heave his ass into the gutter if he showed up at their house. If they're not respectable, they don't matter.
 
He had a review did he not? Did it not uphold the original conviction?
Did he not have a chance to present evidence to help his case?

He should stay where he is until he completes his sentence, or dies in prison

Correction. He should stay where he is until the resolution of the ongoing appeal process.

I'm not going to sit here and blindly accept that he's guilty when the evidence used to convict him isn't even enough for many of the victims' family members. I don't have THAT much faith in the criminal justice system.
 
You do realize that many, many people had their convictions overturned on appeal, right?

The system is not perfect. Far from it.

The case for his innocence is apparently very strong.

The solution here is to expedite the appeal process which has been ongoing, instead of releasing him on compassionate grounds. At this rate, by the time they get around to anything, the man will be dead. And what if it turns out that he actually was innocent?
Yes, the system is not perfect.
Yes, innocents go to jail sometimes.
But if we are to assume that every person on earth might be innocent even when convicted, how are we going to define a 'criminal'?
This opinion of yours is dangerous to society no less and perhaps even more than the imperfection of the Justice system.
Both of those problems are bugs in our society's data-bases, and both need to be purged from the system by any means possible.
 
Correction. He should stay where he is until the resolution of the ongoing appeal process.

Fair enough .... until he has proven himself to be innocent in a review then we should release him ofc but not a day before
 
Yes, the system is not perfect.
Yes, innocents go to jail sometimes.
But if we are to assume that every person on earth might be innocent even when convicted, how are we going to define a 'criminal'?
This opinion of yours is dangerous to society no less and perhaps even more than the imperfection of the Justice system.
Both of those problems are bugs in our society's data-bases, and both need to be purged from the system by any means possible.

I never said that we are to assume that every person on earth who was convicted is innocent.

What I said is that the evidence that there was a gross miscarriage of justice is strong in this particular case, as is it has been in many others.
 
I never said that we are to assume that every person on earth who was convicted is innocent.

What I said is that the evidence that there was a gross miscarriage of justice is strong in this particular case, as is it has been in many others.
What evidence?
Did you know? Evidence is a cutting proof.
Do you blame the justice system for ignoring a cutting proof that they're wrong?
 
Back
Top Bottom