I think the most damning indication of the goings-on at the original Zeist trial came from Dr Hans Kochler.
Dr Kochler was an independent observer of the entire farce.
I've come to the view that had Dr Kochler come to the conclusion that Mr Megrahi was 'bang to rights' and the procedings of the court amply showed it, then I'd have run with it.
I only became aware of him a couple of years ago, probs 2009, when I saw a quote attributed to him. The quote ran along the lines of a 9 year old child would have thought you'd just told them the most fantastic fairytale. His report can be found here.
To summarise simply might be to say:
politcal considerations should never have been granted permission to side alongside and interfere with the prosecution or defense teams;
the judgement reached is incomprehensible to any rational observer;
the trial itself was not fair;
many more questions than answers were revealed;
the tactics of the defence were totally incomprehensible and puts into question the credibility of the defense's actions and motives;
that through the conduct of the court a disservice has been done to the cause of international criminal justice.
It was this document, more than anything, that peaked my interest in trying to find out more.
Sporadic internet access over the last couple of years hasn't helped trying to piece it all together.
As some of the better looking sites for documents and opinions are now no longer available I feel it's quite important that I do try and keep contrary opinions to the official line available.
Another thing I've noticed is how badly archived, from a a general seek and find operation, some of Britain's more esteemed media organisations are. This is a shame. However, learning more enables better search requests and little golden nuggets of info are continually popping up.
I'll close this blog with the last paragraph of Dr. Kochler's report:
Truth in a matter of criminal justice has to be found through a transparent inquiry that will only be possible if all considerations of power politics are put aside. The rule of law is not compatible with the rules of power politics; justice cannot be done unless in complete independence, based on reason and the unequivocal commitment to basic human rights.