Megrahi petition returns to Scottish Parliament Justice Committee

[Justice for Megrahi’s petition features on the agenda for the meeting of the Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee to be held on Tuesday 5 September 2017 starting at 10.00 in Holyrood Committee Room 2. The following are (a) the committee clerk’s note on this agenda item and (b) Justice for Megrahi’s submission to the committee:]

PE1370: Independent inquiry into the Megrahi conviction

Terms of the petition

PE1370 (lodged 1 November 2010): The petition on behalf of Justice for Megrahi (JFM), calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to open an independent inquiry into the 2001 Kamp van Zeist conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi for the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in December 1988.

Current consideration

7. At its meeting on 2 May 2017 the Committee agreed, as it had at its meeting on 24 January 2017, to keep the petition open pending completion of Operation Sandwood. This is the operational name for Police Scotland’s investigation into the nine allegations of criminality levelled by Justice for Megrahi at the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, the police, and forensic officials involved in the investigation and legal processes relating to Megrahi’s conviction. The allegations range from perverting the course of justice to perjury.

8. The clerks understand from Police Scotland that the operation is ongoing and, although in its final stages, there are certain aspects that are not fully concluded. Once Police Scotland’s report is completed, it will be submitted for consideration by an independently appointed Queen’s Counsel appointed by Police Scotland, before going to the Crown Office. Clerks continue to seek updates from Police Scotland as to a likely publication date but Police Scotland is as yet not in a position to suggest when the report will be made public. (The JfM submission indicates that it believes the report will be available to the Crown Office at some stage this year).

9. The petitioners have provided a written submission (Annexe A) requesting the Committee to confirm that the petition will remain open until Crown Office consideration of the police report is complete and any related decisions are made. The submission also states, along similar lines to previous submissions, that the Petitioners continue to have regular meetings with the Operation Sandwood police team and that they have faith in the integrity and completeness of the police inquiry.

10. On 4 July 2017, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) confirmed it had received an application to review the conviction*. The SCCRC may refer a case to the High Court if it believes that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred and that it is in the interests of justice that a reference should be made. The SCCRC stated that it will give careful consideration to this new application, but that it will not make any further comment at this time.

11. The Committee is asked to consider and agree what action it wishes to take in relation to the petition (...), having regard to its decisions in January and in May to keep the petition open pending the completion of Operation Sandwood.

*Mr Megrahi previously applied to the SCCRC in 2003, who referred his case to the High Court for appeal in 2007; however, this appeal was abandoned in 2009. After Mr Megrahi’s death in 2012, a new application was made to the SCCRC on his behalf in 2014, which was rejected in 2015 as the SCCRC had not had access to appeal materials from 2007-09

oooOooo

Annexe A

Letter from Justice for Megrahi

25 August 2017

Justice for Megrahi submission to the Justice Committee of the Scottish

Parliament’s consideration of PE 1370 on 5th September 2017

The position of Justice for Megrahi (JfM) remains largely as was following our last communication with your good selves on the Justice Committee of the ScottishParliament (JC).

We reiterate the value we place on the continued JC scrutiny until Crown Office has considered the Operation Sandwood report and has reported on its findings. JfM's sole interest remains acquiring justice for the victims of Pan Am 103, their families and friends, and those whom we regard as having been wrongly accused and convicted.

As your committee members will understand this report is central to any further

Analysis of the Lockerbie tragedy, is of direct significance to the ongoing SCCRC consideration of the Megrahi family's submission for another appeal and is vital if the massive stain on the Scottish Justice System is ever to be removed.

Moreover, it should be added that JfM and Police Scotland continue to maintain a highly valued and constructive rapport.

In short, JfM has complete confidence in the work of Police Scotland on its behalf regarding JfM's various allegations of criminality associated with the conviction of Mr al Megrahi.

Our present understanding is that the Police Scotland Operation Sandwood Report is in its final stages and will be available to the Lord Advocate at some stage this year.

JfM wishes all members of the Justice Committee of the Scottish Parliament our very best and looks forward to being represented at your meeting on 5th September, 2017.

Megrahi petition on Justice Committee agenda for 23 February meeting

[The Justice Committee of the Scottish Parliament will be resuming consideration of Justice for Megrahi’s petition (PE1370) at its meeting on 23 February 2016 commencing at 10.00 in Holyrood Committee Room 2. The relevant note by the committee’s clerk reads as follows:]

PE1370: Independent inquiry into the Megrahi conviction

Terms of petition

PE1370 (lodged 1 November 2010): The petition on behalf of Justice for Megrahi (JFM), calls for the opening of an inquiry into the 2001 Kamp van Zeist conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi for the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in December 1988.

Background

Operation Sandwood

17. “Operation Sandwood‟ is the operational name for Police Scotland‟s investigation into JFM‟s nine allegations of criminality levelled at the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, police and forensic officials involved in the investigation and legal processes relating to Megrahi‟s conviction. The allegations range from perverting of the course of justice to perjury. Police Scotland‟s report of this operation is expected to be completed before the end of the year. The Committee has received a number of updates from JFM asking that an “independent prosecutor‟ be appointed to assess the findings of Operation Sandwood.

18. The Committee previously wrote to the Lord Advocate seeking his views on the appointment of an „independent prosecutor‟ as proposed by JFM. His response outlined arrangements made by COPFS to employ independent Crown Counsel not involved in the Lockerbie case to deal with the matter. JFM have rejected the involvement of independent Crown Counsel as they consider it does not represent an “independent, unbiased and constitutionally sound approach”. The Committee sought further information regarding the appointment of an independent prosecutor in September 2015 to which the Lord Advocate reiterated his earlier response.

Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission

19. On 5 November 2015, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) announced that: “it is not in the interests of justice” to continue with a review of the conviction of the late Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi. Consequently, the application has been refused.” In a news release published that day the Commission‟s Chairman, Jean Couper said:

“A great deal of public money and time was expended on the Commission‟s original review of Mr Megrahi‟s case which resulted, in 2007, in him being given the opportunity to challenge his conviction before the High Court by way of a second appeal. In 2009, along with his legal team, Mr Megrahi decided to abandon that appeal. Before agreeing to spend further public money on a fresh review the Commission required to consider the reasons why he chose to do so. It is extremely frustrating that the relevant papers, which the Commission believes are currently with the late Mr Megrahi‟s solicitors, Messrs Taylor and Kelly, and with the Megrahi family, have not been forthcoming despite repeated requests from the Commission. Therefore, and with some regret, we have decided to end the current review. It remains open in the future for the matter to be considered again by the Commission, but it is unlikely that any future application will be accepted for review unless it is accompanied with the appropriate defence papers. This will require the cooperation of the late Mr Megrahi‟s solicitors and his family.”

Latest developments

20. On 5 January 2016, the Committee agreed to write again to the Lord Advocate, asking him to respond to JFM‟s most recent submission to the Committee which questions the Lord Advocate‟s intention to appoint Catherine Dyer, the Crown Agent, as the Crown Office official responsible for co-ordinating matters with the “independent counsel‟. The Committee requested the Lord Advocate‟s response by 5 February. At the time of writing this response has not been received. It will be circulated to members and published on the Committee‟s website as soon as it is received.

21. In the interim, JFM has provided a submission to the Committee outlining their disappointment that a response from the Lord Advocate has not yet been received (Annexe D).

Options for action on petition PE1370

22. The Committee may wish to agree to:

• keep the petition open and recommend that a future justice committee continues to monitor these issues and, in particular, progress with Operation Sandwood, or

• take any other action in relation to the petition that the Committee considers appropriate (including closing the petition).

ANNEXE D

Justice for Megrahi submission for the consideration of PE1370 by the Justice Committee on 23 February 2016

Since the last consideration of PE 1370, on 5 January 2016, nothing of import has emerged from either the Lord Advocate or the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) that clarifies their position re JfM‟s request that a prosecutor entirely independent of COPFS, and who had been appointed independently of said body, receive and consider the final Police Scotland Operation Sandwood report.

On 12th January 2016, the Deputy Convenor of the Justice Committee wrote to the Lord Advocate asking that he address JFM‟s concerns over the manner in which he was dealing with our request for total independence from the Crown Office in the consideration of the Operation Sandwood report.

When this letter was posted on the Parliament website JfM expressed some concern that the terms of the agreement reached at the Justice Committee on 5th January to write to the Lord Advocate appeared not to have been fully met in that the 8 questions we asked the committee to put to the Lord Advocate had not been referred to. We are unaware if this issue had been resolved.

The Deputy Convenor afforded the Lord Advocate a full month in which to respond. At the time of writing, we believe that he is in default as no reply has yet been received by the Justice Committee.

Given that the submission of Police Scotland‟s Operation Sandwood report to the Crown Office is imminent this is a most unsatisfactory position.

It is clearly against the public and a constitutional interest that the Lord Advocate has so far failed to confirm that the police report will be considered by an authority entirely separate from the Crown Office and totally free from its influence or to lay out clearly what his intentions are.

Thus, JFM appeals to the Justice Committee of the Scottish Parliament to exercise whatever means it has at its disposal to ensure that before the Operation Sandwood Report is submitted that your committee and JfM are fully briefed on how this report will be considered and who will consider it.

Today's Justice Committee consideration of Megrahi petition

[What follows is from a message sent this afternoon by Justice for Megrahi’s secretary, Robert Forrester, to JfM supporters:]

Following a splendidly diplomatic contribution from John Finnie MSP, supported by Alison McInnes MSP, the Justice Committee of the Scottish Parliament today resolved to maintain 1370's status as open before them, and, even more importantly, in the final words of the Deputy Convener, the JC is going to write to the Lord Advocate asking him what his response is to JFM's eight specific questions surrounding the appointment of an independent prosecutor who will consider Police Scotland's final report on Operation Sandwood. These questions have remained unanswered by the Crown Office since the beginning of November 2015. The response from Chambers Street is now eagerly awaited.

Today's proceedings may be viewed by clicking on the link below.

Click on the link and go two hours and 30 minutes into the broadcast.

http://www.scottishparliament.tv/Archive/Index/19a16110-bf48-4b3d-b417-a373a49c7691?categoryId=02b0ce45-3c90-4738-9580-25467469c73b&parentCategoryClicked=False&pageNumber=1&orderByField=ScheduledStart&queryOrder=DESC

[RB: A message sent to supporters yesterday by Mr Forrester, which contains a link to the relevant committee papers, can be found here.]

Megrahi petition at Justice Committee on 5 January 2016

[What follows is from a message sent today by Justice for Megrahi’s secretary, Robert Forrester, to JfM supporters:]

Tomorrow, 5th January 2016, the Justice Committee of the Scottish Parliament will convene to consider, amongst other matters, PE 1370. This meeting will commence at 10 AM, however, given that the Justice Committee will be conducting evidence sessions with two government ministers prior to hearing public petitions, it is unlikely that the committee will consider 1370 before 11 AM. The meeting may be watched live via the parliament's TV broadcasting system by connecting to the following link and clicking on links which will take you to the meeting of the Justice Committee in committee room 4:

http://www.scottishparliament.tv/

Background information on 1370 may be found here:

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/44107.aspx#PE1370

You will note that JFM sent a letter to the Lord Advocate on 5th November 2015. With respect to this letter, he defaulted on his ministerial responsibility to reply to queries from the general public within a maximum of twenty working days. This limit was overshot by a total of fourteen working days, thus, JFM was not in receipt of his response until 31st December 2015. We have, therefore, submitted an emergency supplement to the Justice Committee outlining our considerable displeasure at both the conduct of Chambers Street in the above regard and at the content of his letter. Indeed, we have lodged official complaints with COPFS and the Jusice Committee.

Since Police Scotland's Operation Sandwood final report on our nine allegations of criminality against Crown, police and forensic officials is likely to be forthcoming in the near future, we sincerely hope that the committee will be able to accommodate this supplement in its busy schedule tomorrow.

Justice for Megrahi secretary's report on Justice Committee meeting

[What follows is a message sent out today by Justice for Megrahi’s secretary, Robert Forrester, to JFM members and supporters:]

Some may well feel frustrated by what might seem to be a lack of progress regarding PE1370, however, bear in mind that it remains open with unanimous cross-party support. It took a matter of seconds, with no discussion or questioning from members of the Justice Committee to deal with our submission and supplement.

JFM has only been in existence for some six years, Others have been slogging away at this for twenty-five years.

I cannot stress strongly enough how important it is to keep 1370 on the table before Holyrood's Justice Committee. It is a device which produces results. I may have differences of opinion with some; nevertheless, a man whom I regarded as a foe, David McLetchie MSP, came up trumps in the end and made a difference. That, I respect, as I do other brave supporters of the redemption of the Scottish criminal justice system on the JC.

I must formally say that I apologise for any embarrassment caused by my  spontaneous 'clapping' at the end of the brief hearing. The convener, quite rightfully, reprimanded me. Having said that though, I, in my defence, would like to say that I was applauding all members of the JC, not clapping.

This is going to take time. It's politics. But we are moving in the right direction.

[Robert clearly allowed his well-known enthusiasm to get the better of parliamentary decorum. However, he copied the above message to the Justice Committee clerk and received a response which included this:]

I was about to email you with formal notification that the Committee agreed to monitor the progress being made between JFM and Police Scotland and to consider the petition again at a future meeting.

Apologies that we didn’t have time to chat yesterday. As you saw, the Convener was keen to get through business as timeously as possible.

Regarding your very kind message, I shall show it to the Convener tomorrow and we shall endeavour to convey it to members as well. I can assure you that no embarrassment was caused!

We will be in touch, and every good wish.

Justice for Megrahi submission to Scottish Parliament Justice Committee

[What follows is the text of Justice for Megrahi’s submission to the Scottish Parliament Justice Committee in connection with its consideration of JFM’s petition at tomorrow’s meeting (which begins at 10.00 in Holyrood Committee Room 6 -- the relevant agenda item is expected to be reached at around 11.00.]

Since the Justice Committee’s last consideration of PE 1370 on 18 February 2014 and the resultant correspondence between the Justice Committee and Police Scotland, JFM is pleased to inform the Committee that constructive progress is now being made regarding the investigation into all nine allegations of criminality against Crown, police and forensic officials.

Justice for Megrahi (JFM) is grateful to the Justice Committee for its intervention with Police Scotland subsequent to the stalling of the investigation into JFM’s allegations of criminality against aforementioned officials.

On 21 February 2014 JFM received a letter of reassurance from Chief Constable Sir Stephen House that action would be taken to re-establish JFM’s confidence in the investigation. Through his good offices, a meeting between DCC Livingston (responsible for oversight), Detective Superintendent Johnstone (responsible for running the investigation) and representatives of JFM took place at the Police Scotland College, Tulliallan, on 2 April 2014.

Following a full and frank discussion, a major crime investigation team has been set up under Detective Superintendent Johnstone. In addition, the issue of ‘conflict’ between the JFM allegations and the COPFS investigation appears to have been overcome and interviews with JFM representatives speaking to the allegations in question have now taken place and further interviews may result. Clear lines of communication have been established and regular updates are in progress.

While there has been a positive sea-change in the police approach to the criminal allegations, ultimately, the report of their investigation will be handed over to the Crown Office for any action it might deem necessary. Given that institution’s public and highly prejudicial pronouncements, in 2013, before any investigation was even launched (see: Scotsman article of 24 September 2012 - http://www.scotsman.com/the-scotsman/scotland/lockerbie-cover-up-like-hillsborough-claim-campaigners-1-2543953

and Times Scotland Edition article of 21 December 2012 - http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/pro-megrahi-backers-flayed-by-new-lord.html), JFM continues to have little faith in any decision the Crown Office might make in respect of its allegations.

Currently there are three separate initiatives being pursued in relation to the Lockerbie atrocity. The JFM call for an independent public inquiry (PE 1370), the JFM criminal allegations and the Lockerbie relatives anticipated submission to the SCCRC re a third appeal against Mr al-Megrahi’s conviction. All three pillars are integrally linked, although JFM, while totally supportive, has no direct role in the SCCRC submission.

There is no question that the Justice Committee, in its role as political overseer, has been hugely influential in progressing all three initiatives. For this reason, JFM considers it of major importance that the Justice Committee maintains PE 1370 open on the parliamentary books and continues to maintain a watching brief on behalf of the people of Scotland.

Should a decision to close be taken and it later transpires that criminal wrongdoing was committed during the Lockerbie investigation and Zeist trial, and/or should Mr Megrahi’s conviction be quashed upon appeal, the call for an inquiry would be irresistible. Closing the petition at this stage therefore makes little sense.

It is JFM’s position that the Justice Committee still has a massively important role to play in maintaining political oversight over these ongoing initiatives aimed at casting light on the most appalling atrocity ever committed on Scottish soil in recent history. We believe their continuing involvement is essential if wounds are ever to be healed and faith restored in the Scottish criminal justice system. It is sincerely hoped that the Justice Committee will identify with this view.

Finally, JFM regrets the delayed lodging of this submission but we were only informed of the 3 June consideration of PE 1370 after the deadline had lapsed.

Police still to probe Lockerbie criminality claims

[This is the headline over a report published this afternoon on the website of The Scotsman.  It reads as follows:]

Scotland’s most senior policeman has admitted the force has yet to look into allegations of criminality in the original Lockerbie investigation.

Chief Constable Sir Stephen House was responding to fierce criticism from MSPs on the Scottish Parliament’s justice committee.

They had accused Police Scotland of kicking Justice For Megrahi’s claims “into the long grass” through “procrastinating and obfuscation”.

In particular, they said they would write to Sir Stephen asking how many officers were working on the investigation, and what stage it is currently at.

The campaign group Justice For Megrahi (JFM) made the allegations to then Deputy Chief Constable Patrick Shearer in April, last year.

The Crown Office is currently leading fresh inquiries into the atrocity, having recently signed information sharing agreements with Libyan prosecutors, and police insist that must take precedence.

Sir Stephen wrote to the Scottish Parliament’s justice committee: “In relation to your specific question about how many officers have been working on the allegations since Mr Shearer retired, the reality is that no further investigation could take place because of the conflict with the live investigation.”

However, Sir Stephen’s letter has failed to convince MSPs.

Christine Grahame MSP, justice committee convener, said: “It’s very disappointing and a bit annoying. We feel it’s being kicked into the long grass.

“I don’t see why it’s being held up just because there’s a live inquiry.”

On whether the two inquiries could run simultaneously, she added: “I don’t see why that’s not possible.”

John Finnie MSP, a former police officer and justice committee member, added: “The response from the chief constable does nothing to reassure me that there is a will to address the serious accusations of criminality which have been reported to the police.

“Indeed the letter prompts more enquiries than it answers. For instance given that Mr Shearer, who was initially appointed ‘senior investigating officer (SIO)’, retired last October why did it take to the day before last week’s justice committee for his replacement, Detective Superintendent Johnstone to be appointed ‘in a full-time capacity’ and what, if anything, should we read into the fact that the new SIO is three ranks lower than the original appointee.

“Mr House’s letter states that Mr Johnstone’s ‘appointment will now provide for a full examination of further allegations that Police Scotland have determined to be investigated’. The point is that Police Scotland should investigate all allegations they receive, albeit some may not be progressed beyond initial investigation.”

JFM insists the late Abdelbaset al Megrahi, the only person ever convicted of the bombing of Pan Am 103, in December 1988, killing 270 people, was innocent.

It says the prosecution relied on evidence known to be false during the Camp Zeist trial.

In his letter, Sir Stephen said his force was determined to investigate these claims and estimated the “conflict” with the live inquiry would be over by the end of March.

“I can assure you that the allegations made by the Justice for Megrahi group are being investigated thoroughly and as expeditiously as possible,” he wrote.

“Detective Superintendent Johnstone’s appointment (in place of Mr Shearer) is in a full time capacity such is the commitment of Police Scotland to progress the allegations in this regard.

“As and when he identifies the need for additional support to help him I can assure you that will be provided.

“I will, of course, ensure the justice committee is provided with updates as appropriate.”

[Detective Superintendent Johnstone’s letter of 17 February (the day before the Justice Committee’s meeting) to Justice for Megrahi’s Robert Forrester can be read here.  Mr Forrester has just sent the following message to JFM members and supporters:]

Please find here a link to the letter from Sir Stephen House in response to the query from the Justice Committee concerning what is happening regarding our allegations against Crown, forensic and police officials, which I received from the clerks of the JC yesterday evening.

Here, in black and white, is the proof, if such were ever needed in this sorry tale, that the Crown Office and the police have been laughing up their sleeves at us from the moment we lodged our allegations with them in accordance with Mr MacAskill's suggestion. The degree of arrogance and disdain is quite spectacular!

It is worth reminding ourselves that what we are dealing with here is a case involving the mass murder of 270 people and allegations of attempts to pervert the course of justice by the aforementioned institutions. Little in this whole Lockerbie saga can be said to be normal, however, this letter reveals quite plainly what serving the interests of justice now means in Scotland today. Whereas one would have expected a full time team of officers in double figures to have been working on this since the allegations were lodged in October 2012, it is now clear that from the start no more than two officers at best were devoted to the investigation, and at worst none at all. Furthermore, the officer leading the initial stage was due too retire within the year, and his main contribution was, in consultation with the Crown Office, to freeze three of the allegations which posed the greatest threat to the authorities. Now we learn that all the allegations have effectively been frozen as a consequence of an unspecified 'conflict' with the Crown's own cynical charade. First we have the Crown Office accusing us of being conspiracy theorists and making unfounded accusations before they have even been investigated, now we learn that the allegations have not been the subject of any serious investigation from the word go.

In circumstances where not only are the complainants being treated with such flagrant disregard but a parliamentary committee too is being regarded with quite stupefying contempt by the very bodies we task with serving the interests of justice, surely we have entered resignation territory.

It is also worth pointing out that we have yet to receive a response beyond an acknowledgement form Sir Stephen House to our own letter of 31st January (see attachments). Hopefully this letter to the Justice Committee will prove once and for all to those keen to close down our petition the value of the Justice Committee's oversight in conjunction with 1370.

Watch this space.

Conservative Party contortions over Megrahi petition

[What follows is the text of an article by Justice for Megrahi's secretary, Robert Forrester, that was due to appear in the the Scottish edition of today's Sunday Express. I cannot find it on the newspaper's website (which is pretty selective in its coverage) but it probably does appear in the print edition:]

The Justice Committee's consideration of the Justice for Megrahi (JFM) petition, calling for an independent inquiry into the Lockerbie/Zeist affair, held on Tuesday 18th February, was by far the most animated session yet on the subject. Reaching almost operatic proportions, it generated valiant, bravura performances from both Christine Grahame MSP (SNP Convener of the Justice Committee of the Scottish Parliament) and John Finnie MSP (Independent) in the teeth of determined pressure to close the petition: this opposition emanated largely from Margaret Mitchell MSP (Conservative).

The principal argument used against maintaining the JFM petition, PE 1370, open was the feeling that the Justice Committee was wandering away from its strict remit with regard to the petition proper by conflating it with JFM's allegations of criminality against police officers, forensic investigators and legal officials.

Margaret Mitchell's position is an interesting development in that the principal Conservative Party member on the Justice Committee when JFM received its first unanimous vote by the committee to keep 1370 open (11th December 2012) was the late David McLetchie MSP. JFM had, up until that moment, rather regarded Mr McLetchie an arch foe. However, he was most vocal in his support of the petition: backing up earlier statements made by John Finnie. The catalyst behind his change of heart was in fact that he had been attracted by the new dynamic brought to the petition not only by the lodging with the then Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary of the JFM allegations themselves but also by the manner in which the JFM allegations were being treated by the authorities. This referred to the Justice Directorate's release of our private and confidential letter to Cabinet Secretary for Justice MacAskill to the Crown Office and the ensuing media attacks on JFM launched by Chambers Street, culminating in Lord Advocate Mulholland's outbursts to Magnus Linklater on the anniversary of the 103 tragedy in 2012.

It is now, therefore, most curious that the Conservative Party appears to doing a complete volte-face on essentially the same principle that encouraged Mr McLetchie to support 1370. In the current situation, both JFM and the Justice Committee are being confronted by an outrageously dismissive attitude by Police Scotland and the Crown Office with respect to the JFM allegations. As Mr Mcletchie recognised at the time, the petition and the allegations had become inextricably entwined as a result of the attitudes of the authorities to the allegations.

This situation has not altered one jot. In fact, the attitude of Police Scotland and the Crown Office towards JFM is now even more parlous than it ever has been following the freezing of the investigation into three highly contentious allegations, so why has the position of the Conservative Party changed? Something of a mystery. Or, perhaps Margaret Mitchell’s viewpoint is simply her own and not necessarily her party’s. Perhaps she sees herself as a champion of the Crown Office and Police Scotland where Mr Mcletchie wisely spied a political opportunity in supporting the JFM’s mutually complementary petition and allegations. Perhaps he saw JFM as an irritant to First Minister Salmond and his longstanding Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Mr MacAskill. They can hardly be overjoyed today by the fact that Petition PE 1370 has now entered it’s fourth year on the parliamentary books on top of the results of a public opinion poll in the Scottish Sunday Express of 4th September 2011 (Sample: 500. 52% expressed the view that there ought to be an independent inquiry into the Lockerbie bombing, 34% disagreed and 14% were unsure).

Ultimately though, the strength of Christine Grahame's anger at the behaviour of Police Scotland, and John Finnie's reasoned presentation of the current, developing environment vis-à-vis JFM’s petition and the now 9 JFM allegations won the day: with the Justice Committee decision that letters would be sent to the Chief Constable of Police Scotland Sir Stephen House and Detective Superintendent Johnstone asking them, amongst other things, to account for the seemingly blasé and dismissive conduct of Police Scotland.

It now remains to be seen whether or not Margaret Mitchell will, before her next consideration of this petition, experience the same political epiphany that David McLetchie did.