US paid reward to Lockerbie witness, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi papers claim

Scottish detectives discussed secret payments of up to $3m made to witness  and his brother, documents claim

Severin Carrell, Scotland correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Friday 2 October 2009 17.00 BST

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/02/lockerbie-documents-witness-megrahi

Two key figures in the conviction of the Lockerbie bomber were secretly given rewards of up to $3m (£1.9m) in a deal discussed by Scottish detectives and the US government, according to legal papers released today.

The claims about the payments were revealed in a dossier of evidence that  was intended to be used in an appeal by Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the Libyan  convicted of murdering 270 people in the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in1988.

Megrahi abandoned his appeal last month after the Libyan and Scottish  governments struck a deal to free him on compassionate grounds because he  is terminally ill with prostate cancer. Now in hospital in Tripoli,  Megrahi said he wanted the public to see the evidence which he claims  would have cleared him.

"I continue to protest my innocence – how could I fail to do so?," he  said. "I have no desire to add to the upset of many people I know are  profoundly affected by what happened in Lockerbie. My intention is only for the truth to be made known."

The documents published online by Megrahi's lawyers today show that the US  Department of Justice (DoJ) was asked to pay $2m to Tony Gauci, the  Maltese shopkeeper who gave crucial evidence at the trial suggesting that  Megrahi had bought clothes later used in the suitcase that allegedly held  the Lockerbie bomb.

The DoJ was also asked to pay a further $1m to his brother, Paul Gauci, who did not give evidence but played a major role in identifying the  clothing and in "maintaining the resolve of his brother". The DoJ said  their rewards could be increased and that the brothers were also eligible  for the US witness protection programme, according to the documents.

The previously secret payments were uncovered by the Scottish Criminal  Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), which returned Megrahi's conviction to the court of appeal in 2007 as a suspected miscarriage of justice. Many references were in private diaries kept by the detectives involved,  Megrahi's lawyers said, but not their official notebooks.

The SCCRC was unable to establish exactly how much the brothers receivedunder the DoJ's "reward-for-justice" programme but found it was after  Megrahi's trial and his first appeal in 1992 was thrown out.

A memo written by "DI Dalgleish" to "ACC Graham" in 2007 confirms the men  received "substantial payments from the American authorities".

The inspector claims the rewards were "engineered" after Megrahi's trialand appeal were over, but said there was "a real danger that if [the]  SCCRC's statement of reasons is leaked to the media, Anthony Gauci couldbe portrayed as having given flawed evidence for financial reward."  Instead, he claimed, the reward was intended to ensure the Gaucis could afford to leave Malta and start new lives "to avoid media and other  unwanted attention".

However, the documents disclose that in 1989 the FBI told Dumfries and  Galloway police that they wanted to offer Gauci "unlimited money" and  $10,000 immediately. Gauci began talking of a possible reward in meetings  with Dumfries and Galloway detectives in 1991, when a reward applicationwas first made to the DoJ.

The evidence, which was due to be heard by the appeal court next month, also discloses that Gauci was visited 50 times by Scottish detectives  before the trial and new testimony contradicting the prosecution's claims  that Megrahi bought the clothes on 7 December 1988 – the only day he was  in Malta during the critical period.

In 23 police interviews, Gauci gave contradictory evidence about who he believed bought the clothes, the person's age, appearance and the date of  purchase. Two identification experts hired by Megrahi's appeal team saidthe police and prosecution breached the rules on witness interviews, using  "suggestive" lines of questioning and allowing "irregular" identification  line-ups.

Two new witnesses also disproved the prosecution claim that Megrahi was in  Gauci's shop on 7 December, his lawyers said. Gauci said the area's  Christmas lights were not on when the clothes were bought. The current  Maltese high commissioner to the UK, Michael Rufalo, then the local MP, told the SCCRC the lights were switched on on 6 December, raising further  inconsistencies in the prosecution case.

It has also emerged that Scottish police did not tell Megrahi's lawyers that another witness, David Wright, had seen two different Libyan men  buying very similar clothes on a different day; evidence that  psychologists believe may have confused Gauci and again clouded the  prosecution case.

Dumfries and Galloway police said only a court could properly consider  this material, and supported previous criticism of Megrahi's decision torelease his appeal papers by Elish Angiolini, the lord advocate. "We will  not be taking part in any discussion or debate concerning the selective publications made by Mr Megrahi," a statement said.

"We have nothing more to add other than to echo the lord advocate's recent  comments pointing out that Mr Megrahi was convicted unanimously by threesenior judges and his conviction was upheld unanimously by five judges, in  an appeal court presided over by the lord justice general, Scotland's most  senior judge. Mr Megrahi remains convicted of the worst terrorist atrocity  in UK history."

A spokesman for the US Department of Justice also refused to comment,  since Megrahi had voluntarily withdrawn his appeal. He said: "None of the  allegations in the SCCRC referral, or the grounds of appeal filed by  Megrahi, were finally adjudicated by the Scottish High Court of Justiary(the appropriate judicial forum) because Megrahi withdrew his appeal  before the court could rule. Consequently, the U.S. Department of Justice  will not comment further on his aborted appeal."


-- Facts are sacred ... but comment is free.