Last week I wrote on the nakedly biased identification procedure that helped to convict Megrahi. Buncrana, a poster at the JREF forum, had the bright idea to contrast it with the U.S. Department of Justice’s guidelines for dealing with eyewitness evidence. Here(pdf), from page 29, is the guide to photo lineups, where the ever inconsistent Tony Gauci first claimed Megrahi looked “similar” to the man in his shop. (He’d also said this of Abu Talb and Mohamed Salam, neither of whom bear a close resemblance to the Libyan. He’d also helped to create an artist’s sketch, which, yes, looked nothing like Megrahi.)
3. If multiple photos of the suspect are reasonably available to the investigator, select a photo that resembles the suspect description or appearance at the time of the incident.
The photo used (marked as 1) isn’t too alike a picture from near the incident (marked, for reasons of inconsequent variety, 3). The former looks like AJ Soprano wearing a comedy wig while the latter’s more like Homer Simpson modelling a beefeater’s hat their dog has mauled.
Moving on…
10. View the spread, once completed, to ensure that the suspect does not unduly stand out.
Professor Tim Valentine writes(pdf) that the foils used “d[id] not match the grainy quality of Mr al Megrahi’s picture”. Thus, “Mr al Megrahi’s picture d[id] stand out”. I can imagine. It looks like a mug shot from Asbury’s Gangs of New York. What should raise the hackles of any self-respecting sceptic is that even though the lineup stood in naked contradiction with the most basic of guidelines; even when they had a much better photo from much closer to the incident, the investigators were “reluctant to show any more photos” for fear of “tainting what [Gauci] had already provided”. It’s like refusing to approach a distant oasis for fear of discovering that it’s a mirage.
The Scottish government still claims they “do not doubt” the conviction.
January 16, 2011 at 1:58 am
[...] as Jim Swire and Robert Forrester note in their reply, not only was the verdict based on meager and largely discredited evidence, it was disputed by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission. And if the [...]
April 7, 2011 at 2:58 am
[...] indeed, that Megrahi was implicated. Presently, however, these assumptions rest on little more than guesses, contradictions and innuendo. LikeBe the first to like this [...]
May 26, 2011 at 2:32 am
[...] for Robertson: he’s remarkably efficient. What’s the point of explaining the biased procedure, dodgy witnesses and meager evidence of the prosecution when you can dismiss all scepticism as the [...]
May 26, 2011 at 4:55 pm
More detail with more pics.
http://www.vetpath.co.uk/lockerbie/photoid.pdf
February 28, 2012 at 12:08 am
[...] linked to Gaddafi. This, if true, would be extremely significant as the fragments, along with the unreliable testimony of a Maltese shopkeeper, is all the solid evidence the prosecution boasted. When and if [...]