• 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!

Is the Lockerbie bomber innocent?

Was the Lockerbie bomber wrongly convicted?

  • Yes

    Votes: 1 20.0%
  • No

    Votes: 2 40.0%
  • maybe/I do not know

    Votes: 2 40.0%

  • Total voters


DP Veteran
Jul 31, 2005
Reaction score
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Poll: Was the Lockerbie bomber wrongly convicted?
Yes, no, maybe? Was he set up as a patsy?

I decided to make a thread on this and put it in the correct forum.Since the poll is in this forum section only members logged in can voted. So the poll can be anonymous without any worries of cheating.
Last edited:
The evidence against him in the public domain is at best highly suspect. The Scottish review system has tagged his trial as suspect of a miscarriage of justice. This means that the appeal system, which was going on before he was released, would very likely have sided in his favour. But due to the delaying tactics of the prosecutors and the governments in question, we will never know since part of his release was dependent on him stopping his appeals against conviction.

Of the things that are suspect, I find it very troubling that the key witness tieing the suspect to the crime, was paid millions by the FBI and relocated to Australia on the US taxpayer's bill. Also he was shown a picture of the suspect days before he officially picked him out as the man he supposedly sold cloths too. Also this witness has changed his story so many times, it makes John Kerry look stable.

Also the prosecutor claims a certain type of timer was used. However the owner of the company who made these trigger circuit board and sold them to Libya has said that the original trigger circuit board he was shown by the prosecutor, were not his, and the trigger circuit board that was presented at the trial were so badly corroded (something the original ones were not), that no positive identification could be made. He basically accused the prosecutor of tampering with evidence.

There are many other issues with the evidence and the conduct of the trial and investigation, that I have very serious doubts that he did it.
The information (and doubts) have always been there.

" ... Malta had become crucial once police found a fragment of the bomb timer wrapped in a piece of clothing in a Dumfriesshire forest.
The clothes had Maltese labels - but question marks remain about how this discovery was made several months after the disaster, and also over how the material was handled.
The original trial heard labels on police evidence bags containing the fragment had been changed: the evidence of the officer who had done this was heavily criticised by the trial judges.

There were question marks too over Tony Gauci, a Maltese shopkeeper who was the only man to identify Megrahi.
His evidence was that the Libyan, whom he picked out at an identity parade, had bought the clothes at his shop.
But his police statements are inconsistent, and prosecutors failed to tell the defence that shortly before he attended an identity parade, Mr Gauci had seen a magazine article showing a picture of Megrahi, and speculating he might have been involved.
Mr Gauci now lives in Australia, and according to defence claims is believed to have been paid several million dollars by the Americans for his evidence. ... "

BBC NEWS | UK | Scotland | Megrahi: 'A convenient scapegoat?'
Top Bottom