Letters | Sunday, 24 May 2009

PRINT THIS ARTICLE

Lockerbie and Malta

I refer to the two opinion pieces of the 10 May – “The FBI detective – Tony Gauci’s evidence was credible” by Richard Marquise and “Lockerbie victim’s dad speaks out: bomb did not leave from Malta” by Jim Swire. I also refer to Ian Ferguson’s article for the Sunday Times of the 10 May “The Judges got it wrong”.
Mr Marquise criticises the SCCRC for failing to interview him or Superintendent Stuart Henderson, stating that “as an investigator with 31 years experience I could not have got away with such an incomplete investigation.” If Mr Marquise was as he claims the head of the investigation then he did get away with such an incomplete investigation.
I became involved in Lockerbie in early 1993 through researching the career of the “intelligence fraudster” Ian Spiro who had supposedly murdered his wife and children in November 1992, an incident I suspect may be related to Lockerbie.
In 1996 I wrote to the Chief Constable of the Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary bringing his attention to certain matters concerning Spiro. The response by return of post from an unnamed Chief Superintendent was “this was out with the scope of my investigation.”
I wrote to the US Ambassador pointing out that the Police had made a colossal blunder in “eliminating” Heathrow and pointed out who built the bomb and how, where and by whom it had been introduced. I also claimed the advertised reward.
I received a reply dated the 7 June 1996 from an assistant legal attaché stating “your letter has been forwarded to the FBI Washington for their consideration. They will respond to you directly concerning the information you provide.” Naturally I heard nothing further.
In response to the PM’s claim in the 1996 adjournment debate that the investigation was “open” and inviting those with information to “come forward” I wrote to the PM pointing out again that the Police had made a colossal blunder in “eliminating” Heathrow.
The response was a letter from an official drawing my attention to the conclusion of the 1990 Fatal Accident Inquiry that the “bomb suitcase” arrived unaccompanied from Frankfurt. As I explain in part 1 of “The Masonic Verses”, “Lockerbie – The Heathrow Evidence” at http://e-zeecon.blogspot.com, if the bomb was contained within a bronze Samsonite tourister then it is irrefutable that it didn’t.
Sir Teddy Taylor MP wrote to the Metropolitan Commissioner of Police raising the key points I made to him. The response was a claim it was “beyond doubt” the bomb arrived from Frankfurt.
I find it particularly disturbing that this conclusion was based on the “evidence” of the Lord Advocate’s deputy and successor Andrew Hardie QC, now a Judge, who had no personal knowledge of what transpired. Indeed the “logic” of this conclusion was demolished by the Trial Judges at Camp Zeist. In my view the “elimination” of Heathrow marked the end of an objective investigation. The central point is this – as no bronze Samsonite hard-sided “tourister” suitcase was recovered (other than the suitcase containing the bomb) then the suitcase that mysteriously appeared in luggage container AVE4041 prior to the arrival of PA103A must have contained the bomb. If it didn’t what became of the suitcase? If Marquise’s investigation was so thorough, why cannot he address this simple point?
Jim Swire now grasps this point. However in 1996 he was collaborating with Alan Francovich, writer/director of The Maltese Double Cross, which with Francovich’s “consultant” conman Oswald LeWinter produced a version of events, where it could be pinned down, even more preposterous than the official “Libyan solution”. This claimed that a suitcase of drugs had been smuggled on board at Frankfurt and actually recovered at Tundergarth. The “terrorists” had smuggled aboard another suitcase containing the bomb. How this bomb was detonated or why anybody would smuggle drugs on board a plane they knew was going to explode was not explained. This however purported to be the “alternative” version of events.
I mentioned Ferguson’s article because with John Ashton he was co-author of “Cover-up of Convenience” essentially a rehash of The Maltese Double Cross which claimed the bomb was introduced at Frankfurt! It wasn’t the Judges but Ian Ferguson who got it wrong!
If Megrahi is innocent then it follows, from the “Malta” evidence, that the plan to frame him predated the bombing and therefore that the authorities colluded in the bombing. It is also my view that that the object of the indictment was not a trial but sanctions against Libya. The theatre of Malta was chosen because of the close relationship with Libya. It may also have a great deal to do with it having been the starting point for several shipments of arms to the Provisional IRA.

Barry Walker
Berkshire, UK

Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below.
Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.

All the interviews from Reporter on MaltaToday's YouTube channel.

EDITORIAL


What governance?

INTERVIEW