Difference between revisions of "Richard Marquise"

From Wikispooks
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Wikifying and adding links)
m (test)
Line 32: Line 32:
 
"Those of us who have never taken money from anyone doing business in Libya are comfortable with that we did. Can you say the same? In the book, 'The Price of Terror', you are quoted as saying that you tried to resolve the (Lockerbie) deadlock at the behest of 'a group of British businessmen whose desire to participate in major engineering works in Libya were being impeded by the UN sanctions'. Perhaps YOU were misquoted. Would you also like to get some law students on that as well?"<ref>[http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.co.uk/2009/10/al-megrahi-defence-knew-bomb-fragment.html "Al-Megrahi defence knew bomb fragment was sent to US"]</ref>
 
"Those of us who have never taken money from anyone doing business in Libya are comfortable with that we did. Can you say the same? In the book, 'The Price of Terror', you are quoted as saying that you tried to resolve the (Lockerbie) deadlock at the behest of 'a group of British businessmen whose desire to participate in major engineering works in Libya were being impeded by the UN sanctions'. Perhaps YOU were misquoted. Would you also like to get some law students on that as well?"<ref>[http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.co.uk/2009/10/al-megrahi-defence-knew-bomb-fragment.html "Al-Megrahi defence knew bomb fragment was sent to US"]</ref>
  
Professor Black responded to this 'snide remark' by Richard Marquise [[Robert Black#Double dealing|here]].
+
Professor Black responded to this 'snide remark' by Richard Marquise [[Robert Black#Double dealing|here]]...
  
 
==References==
 
==References==

Revision as of 07:21, 18 June 2013

Special Agent Richard A. Marquise became the FBI's chief investigator of the Pan Am Flight 103 case when the Lockerbie bombing investigation began to focus on Libya. He is the author of the 2006 book Scotbom: Evidence and the Lockerbie Investigation.[1]

Lockerbie Revisited

Richard Marquise was interviewed extensively in the 2009 documentary film Lockerbie Revisited and admitted that the case against Libya hinged on the tiny piece of printed circuit board from the Swiss Mebo MST-13 electronic timer that was alleged to have triggered the Lockerbie bomb and to have been discovered in the debris from the aircrash. He agreed that "without the timer fragment we would have been unable to develop additional evidence against Libya." Marquise said that of all the evidence retrieved from the crash scene, only that one piece of timer fragment (labelled PT-35) was brought over to America from Britain. However, in another interview towards the end of the film, Marquise changed his mind and was prompted by his British opposite number, Detective Chief Superintendent Stuart Henderson to say that the "fragment never came to the US." Marquise then volunteered that he actually saw the timer fragment (PT-35) in London, but Henderson corrected him saying Marquise had seen it where all the other evidence was kept in the UK.

In the film, Richard Marquise stated categorically that no money was paid to any of the witnesses before the Lockerbie bombing trial. In relation to witness Tony Gauci, who was alleged to have been rewarded with $2 million for testifying against Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, Marquise refused to say whether any money was paid out after the trial.

Marquise clarification

On Professor Black's blog, Richard Marquise sought to clarify what he had said in the film Lockerbie Revisited:[2]

"I would like to clarify one point which so many people seem to have made important. A photograph of PT-35 was identified by Tom Thurman as similar to a photograph of a timer circuit board which had been located in Senegal in 1988 in the possession of two Libyan intelligence officers. He also compared that photograph with the circuit board of a similar MEBO timer found in Togo in 1986 and in the possession of the US in 1990. He believed them to be identical. The FBI asked the Scottish police to bring the fragment (PT-35) to the US in about June 1990 to be compared with the photograph of the Senegal timer and the circuit board of the Togo timer. Feraday did in fact bring the fragment to the US--it was never out of his possession and was brought back to the UK at the conclusion of his analysis with Tom Thurman in the FBI lab. This is what I said on my initial interview and later clarified my remarks made at Arlington National Cemetery in December by email to Mr Levy in December 2008 stating I believed that Feraday did in fact bring the fragment to the US but it was never out of his possession. I did not see the fragment on that trip. I later saw the fragment (PT-35) in person at RARDE when I traveled there with Mr Henderson in the winter of 1991. I have many more things I would like to say but do not want to use this site to post my 'rants' each time I disagree with what someone posts."

Email to Professor Black

In October 2009, Richard Marquise emailed Professor Black a further clarification:

"I will try and make it simple for you---

"Marquise: told Gideon Levy (producer of Lockerbie Revisited) in 2008 that the fragment came to US in custody and control of Scottish police/British forensic officials. Never out of their custody or control. When Levy 'cornered' me at Arlington, he said the Lord Advocate told him it never came to US. I told him there what I told him earlier in 2008 was what I thought the truth to be but perhaps I was mistaken. (I did not see the fragment when it came to US in June 1990.) I later clarified in an email that my first statement was correct.

"Henderson: as far as I know, the microphone in his face at Arlington in December 2008 was the first time Mr Henderson ever said anything in public about Lockerbie. What he said was it was never in 'US control'.

"In his official statement to prosecutors before trial, he acknowledged that it had traveled to the US for examination.

"Unfortunately, some things which happened over 20 years ago needed to be reflected upon. We are all aging and our recollections may not be perfect. However, I know one thing—none of us ever 'fiddled with', 'tampered', 'changed', 'altered' or 'manufactured' any evidence in this case to include PT-35.

"My brother once owned a football. He was so afraid it would get ruined, he kept it in the closet and never used it. It suffered 'dry rot' and was eventually never useable. The same could be said about PT-35. Should police officials never shared its existence with anyone else, it might never have been identified. Try as they might, 6 months, 17 countries and 55 separate company visits failed to determine what it was. It was the sharing of the photograph and eventually the lab comparison which identified it.

"To listen to some in Scotland, this case should have been conducted ONLY by Scots without outside interference. It was only through the sharing of information that strides were able to be made to identify who was responsible for Lockerbie—despite what so many people do not want to believe. The sharing of information was vital to the Lockerbie case and is vital today as we try and prevent horrible acts of terrorism and other crimes.

"Those of us who have never taken money from anyone doing business in Libya are comfortable with that we did. Can you say the same? In the book, 'The Price of Terror', you are quoted as saying that you tried to resolve the (Lockerbie) deadlock at the behest of 'a group of British businessmen whose desire to participate in major engineering works in Libya were being impeded by the UN sanctions'. Perhaps YOU were misquoted. Would you also like to get some law students on that as well?"[3]

Professor Black responded to this 'snide remark' by Richard Marquise here...

References

External links