Lockerbie bomber released

Posted by: Bruce Woodhouse on 21 August 2009

Something tells me I know how the forum will split on this issue but I have been kicking it around for some time.

Ultimately I feel that by releasing Megrahi (sp?) for the last months of his life the authorities have shown compassion and humanity. This is in dramatic counterpoint to that shown by him and his consorts and as such has even greater power. The message is simple, we are not mean and bitter, we still abhorr the crime, we mourn the victims but we have retained the ability to show compassion to even a mass-murderer. I think that is a noble message.

No custodial sentence can ever be 'proportionate' to such a crime, attempting to measure wether he has been punished 'enough' is facile.

His release is not a pardon, just a gesture that might resonate with those who would commit acts of violence against us (accepting the US was the real target of the act). In the USA he would probably have been given the death penalty, if not his early release now would clearly not have been contemplated.

I think the Scottish decision is the braver, and perhaps one that makes further terrorist attacks a fraction less likely rather than more. That has to be good.

A good friend of mine died at Lockerbie.

Bruce
Posted on: 27 August 2009 by Tarquin Maynard - Portly
Drek

That would include the recently-deceased Senator Kennedyl in all of the eulogising I've seen over the last few days, zero mention of his support for the Provisional IRA.

M
Posted on: 27 August 2009 by Derek Wright
Indeed - I have seen hints of his links with the IRA mentioned on the box. Sadly it took 9-11 to remind some people of the other side of supporting terrorist groups.
Posted on: 29 August 2009 by mbenus
This article from the FT has been on my fridge for a few years. It got absolutely no coverage here in the US.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mbenus/3868047934/
Posted on: 29 August 2009 by Roy T
quote:
Originally posted by Mike Lacey:
Drek

That would include the recently-deceased Senator Kennedyl in all of the eulogising I've seen over the last few days, zero mention of his support for the Provisional IRA.

M

That was the price he paid so that he could continue to be elected and continue his works in the USA. It is also the price the UK paid so that he could continue works in the USA.
Posted on: 29 August 2009 by NaimDropper
quote:
It got absolutely no coverage here in the US.

quote:
This article from the FT has been on my fridge for a few years. It got absolutely no coverage here in the US.

I remember media coverage on this. It was one of many "strange bedfellows" moves the USA and other Western countries made post 911.
David
Posted on: 29 August 2009 by Voltaire
I humbly consider myself quite intelligent but, can someone please explain to me the concept of compassion in a judical context because it leaves me cold?
Posted on: 29 August 2009 by Voltaire
quote:
The balance of probability is that he is not guilty.


Confused
Posted on: 30 August 2009 by Howlinhounddog
"Mr Straw's change of stance over Megrahi's inclusion the transfer agreement came at a crucial time in negotiations over an oil exploration contract for BP worth billions of pounds."

Voltaire, you may not agree with compassion within the justice system. Does it sit better with you than the above?
Full story hereStraw 'backed down' over Megrahi
Posted on: 30 August 2009 by Chris Dolan
quote:
Originally posted by Steve O:
I just cannot see why the guy deserves our compassion.
For arguments sake let's say the guy spent eight years in jail for the murder of 270 innocent passengers on that Pan-Am flight.
8 yrs = 2920 days.
2920 days divided by 270 passengers = 10.814 recurring.
So the guy has served around 11 days for each of the lives he ended, without compassion, not to mention the devastation heaped on the bereaved families.
Still feel compassionate?
Regards,
Steve.


From the evidence that was presented at the trial I was completely astounded that he was convicted in the first place and I had fully expected that his appeal would have been successful if it had proceeded.
Posted on: 31 August 2009 by Busta
hmmm... mixed feelings on this one.
If? he was the sole bomber in this attrocity then he shouldn't have been released.
But I doubt he was acting alone if he played any part in it at all, and the real masterminds/ bombers have never been brought to account.
Our goverment leaders have and are probably shaking hands with the real mastermind/s of the attack cough! cough! (no names) since.

Mad World!
Posted on: 02 September 2009 by Steve O
Chris,
I wasn't aware we were debating his guilt.
The argument is whether a convicted terrorist should be released on compassionate grounds.
If he were innocent I would agree to his release, but for different reasons obviously.
Should a convicted terrorist be released on compassionate grounds? Never IMHO.
Regards,
Steve.