Peter Hitchens writes:
As it happens, I don’t think the Italian state ever came close to proving beyond reasonable doubt that Amanda Knox was guilty of murder. So, in a general way, I am pleased that she has been freed. But compare the frenzy of interest over this rather unimportant case with the strange silence over the equally dubious – but far more important – conviction of the so-called Lockerbie Bomber, the Libyan Abdelbaset Al Megrahi.
One of the key witnesses against him has since admitted to lying in court. Another, described by a senior judge as ‘an apple short of a picnic’, shockingly received a $2 million (£1.28 million) reward after giving evidence that many experts regard as highly dubious. I suspect Megrahi’s release had more to do with the fear of a final, successful appeal revealing inconvenient facts than it did with British oil interests.
If the US had wanted to stop him being freed, they could have. After all, they made us surrender to the IRA.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I thought you disagreed with releasing Al Megrahi?
ReplyDeleteThese decisions are properly judicial, not political. But since several years before his release, I have never made any bones about my view that Al Megrahi was innocent. However, it should have been a court that said so, and it should therefore have been that court's s judge who set him free.
ReplyDelete