Lockerbie bombing suspect's trial expected to begin in 2026
US prosecutors are expected to request a federal court to set an April 2026 trial date for Abu Agila Mohammad Masud, the Libyan man accused of making the bomb that brought down Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988.
According to a joint status report seen by The National, federal prosecutors and court-appointed lawyers for Mr Masud, 73, plan to prepare and submit a pretrial schedule after a June 5 hearing.
'Given the complex, international nature of the evidence in this case, that pretrial schedule will have several atypical features,' the report reads.
At least three depositions of foreign nationals will have to take place outside the US before the trial begins, the report notes.
A court transcript shows that continuing health problems affecting the suspect have been a consistent obstacle in bringing his case to trial.
'I'm sorry to hear about your medical issues,' Judge Dabney Friedrich said to Mr Masud, who was observing the hearing by video conference with the assistance of a translator.
She asked for Mr Masud's lawyers to provide updates about his health condition in the weeks ahead.
'We will certainly endeavour to provide the court whatever updates we can regarding the medical appointments, but it may be helpful to have an update from the marshals as well since they are the direct communicators with the medical providers,' said Whitney Minter, one of the Lockerbie suspect's court-appointed lawyers.
Parts of the transcript are redacted, obscuring possible details about Mr Masud's health, along with other trial planning discussions and concerns.
The unredacted sections show an effort by prosecutors and the federal court to allow victims to listen to the June 5 hearing, along with other court dates in what has become a complex investigation.
'We have the information for the victim group,' said one of the prosecutors, telling the judge that as many of those affected by the tragedy as possible had been notified around the world of the proceedings.
The defendant said little at the recent pretrial conference. 'If my lawyers need me, I am available,' he said.
In 2023, Mr Masud pleaded not guilty in connection to the 1988 attack, one of the deadliest terrorist attacks in UK and US history.
Only one other person, former Libyan intelligence officer Abdelbaset Al Megrahi, has been convicted for the bombing.
After his conviction in 2001, Mr Megrahi spent seven years in a Scottish prison, but he was eventually released on compassionate grounds and died in Libya in 2012.
In 2003, Libya claimed responsibility for the attack that took down the plane.
The US government filed charges against Mr Masud in 2020, but it took more than two years to extradite him from Libya.
All 259 people on board perished in the attack and 11 people were killed by falling debris on December 21, 1988, shortly after the Pan Am flight took off from London bound for New York.
Of the victims, 190 were American citizens, along with others from the UK, Argentina, Belgium, Bolivia, Canada, France, Germany, Hungary, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, the Philippines, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and Trinidad and Tobago.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Khaleej Times
2 hours ago
- Khaleej Times
Trump and Xi speak as trade worries mount, China says
U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping spoke on Thursday in a phone call intended to hash out differences on tariffs that have roiled the global economy, according to China's embassy in Washington. The talks were at Trump's request, China said, without providing further details about the leaders' conversation. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The highly anticipated call comes amid accusations between Washington and Beijing in recent weeks over critical minerals in a dispute that threatens to tear up a fragile truce in the trade war between the two biggest economies. The countries struck a 90-day deal on May 12 to roll back some of the triple-digit, tit-for-tat tariffs they had placed on each other since Trump's January inauguration. Though stocks rallied, the temporary deal did not address broader concerns that strain the bilateral relationship, from the illicit fentanyl trade to the status of democratically governed Taiwan and U.S. complaints about China's state-dominated, export-driven economic model. On Thursday, U.S. stocks ticked higher initially but were little changed after news of the call. Since returning to the White House in January, Trump has repeatedly threatened an array of punitive measures on trading partners, only to revoke some of them at the last minute. The on-again, off-again approach has baffled world leaders and spooked business executives, who say the uncertainty has made it difficult to forecast market conditions. China's decision in April to suspend exports of a wide range of critical minerals and magnets continues to disrupt supplies needed by automakers, computer chip manufacturers and military contractors around the world. Beijing sees mineral exports as a source of leverage - halting those exports could put domestic political pressure on the Republican U.S. president if economic growth sags because companies cannot produce mineral-powered products. The 90-day deal to roll back tariffs and trade restrictions is tenuous. Trump has accused China of violating the agreement and has ordered curbs on chip design software and other shipments to China, while also doubling steel and aluminium tariffs to 50%. Beijing rejected the claim and threatened counter-measures. In recent years, the United States has identified China as its top geopolitical rival and the only country in the world able to challenge the U.S. economically and militarily. Despite this and repeated trade threats and tariff announcements, Trump has spoken admiringly of Xi, including of the Chinese leader's toughness and ability to stay in power without the term limits imposed on U.S. presidents. Trump has long pushed for a call or a meeting with Xi, but China has rejected that as not in keeping with its traditional approach of working out agreement details before the leaders talk. The U.S. president and his aides see leader-to-leader talks as vital to sort through log-jams that have vexed lower-level officials in difficult negotiations. It's not clear when the two men last spoke. Both sides said they spoke on Jan. 17, days before Trump's inauguration and Trump has repeatedly said that he had spoken to Xi since taking office on Jan. 20. He has declined to say when any call took place or to give details of their conversation. China had said that the two leaders had not had any recent phone calls. The talks are being closely watched by investors worried that a chaotic trade war could cut into corporate earnings and disrupt supply chains in the key months before the Christmas holiday shopping season. Trump's tariffs are also the subject of ongoing litigation in U.S. courts. Trump has met Xi on several occasions, including exchange visits in 2017, but they have not met face to face since 2019 talks in Osaka, Japan. Xi last travelled to the U.S. in November 2023, for a summit with then-President Joe Biden, resulting in agreements to resume military-to-military communications and curb fentanyl production.
Khaleej Times
3 hours ago
- Khaleej Times
Travel ban, student visas, Biden inquiry: Trump rolls out 3 big announcements
US President Donald Trump on Thursday announced three big moves, two of which are likely to shift the global power's trajectory with the rest of the world. Trump, who is in his second term, rolled out three policies which could change the landscape not just in the United States but have far-reaching consequences around the world. So, what are these measures? Here is a list of the three big announcements: Travel ban on 12 countries Trump signed a proclamation on Wednesday banning the citizens of 12 countries from entering the United States, saying the move was needed to protect against "foreign terrorists" and other security threats. The directive is part of an immigration crackdown Trump launched this year at the start of his second term, which has also included the deportation to El Salvador of hundreds of Venezuelans suspected of being gang members, as well as efforts to deny enrollments of some foreign students and deport others. The proclamation is effective on June 9, 2025 at 12.01am EDT (0401 GMT). Visas issued before that date will not be revoked, the order said. The countries affected: Afghanistan Myanmar Chad Congo Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Haiti Iran Libya Somalia Sudan Yemen Restricted entry to people from 7 countries: Burundi Cuba Laos Sierra Leone Togo Turkmenistan Venezuela Suspension of foreign students at Harvard Trump also suspended for an initial six months the entry into the United States of foreign nationals seeking to study or participate in exchange programmes at Harvard University, amid an escalating dispute with the Ivy League school. Trump's proclamation cited national security concerns as a justification for barring international students from entering the United States to pursue studies at the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based university. Investigation into Biden's health Trump, who turns 79 on June 14, has also ordered an investigation into what Republicans claim was a cover-up of former President Joe Biden's declining cognitive health during his term in the White House. "This conspiracy marks one of the most dangerous and concerning scandals in American history," a presidential memorandum reads. The Republicans cite Biden's infrequent public appearances while in office, as well as his apparent unwillingness to sit for interviews as evidence of what they say was a man incapable of doing the demanding job of Commander-in-Chief of the United States.
The National
3 hours ago
- The National
Elon Musk's departure proves no one lasts long in the spotlight beside Donald Trump
Last year, the world's richest man, Elon Musk, lavished hundreds of millions of dollars on the presidential campaign of then-candidate Donald Trump, in a transparent effort to translate his vast wealth into personal political power. After Mr Trump returned to the White House, with Mr Musk in tow, it seemed that was indeed happening. Mr Musk was such a regular fixture in the White House that there was even silly talk of a co-presidency. But now the billionaire is gone, unlikely ever to return to the Washington halls of power. In truth, Mr Musk's tenure at the " Department of Government Efficiency" could have been better at its purported tax-cutting mission. Its goal, Mr Musk boasted in the lead-up to the election, was to save the federal government $2 trillion, though he later revised that figure to $1tn. Yet despite pulling out chainsaws on stage and gloating over the mass sackings of eminent, respectable and dedicated public servants, not to mention the gutting of crucial public and human service programmes, he barely made a dent in the federal budget. The most charitable calculation of the actual 'savings' incurred to date is around $175 billion, though Doge has published evidence purported to substantiate less than half of this. Mr Musk seems especially proud of the de facto shuttering of the US Agency for International Development and the elimination of many of its key humanitarian programmes. Although Secretary of State Marco Rubio spent much of last week denying that anyone has died because of the elimination of these crucial programmes, some experts think that the only real question is only whether these deaths, in only a few weeks, must be counted in the thousands, tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands. Journalists and Democratic lawmakers have pointed out specific cases, such as individually named orphaned children in rural Africa who were depending for survival on HIV medicine that was suddenly yanked away by the world's richest man. They're now verifiably and needlessly dead. Despite pulling out chainsaws on stage and gloating over the mass sackings of public servants, Mr Musk barely made a dent in the federal budget There are many other examples. But, as one Republican Senator, Joni Ernst, told constituents worried about their own health care last week: "Well, we are all going to die." That's as true of an impoverished African orphan as anyone else, from the point of view of a millionaire US senator or billionaire venture capitalist. Apart from the decimation of programmes and mass dismissal of public servants, Mr Musk's tenure provided the public with a close look at his lifestyle. It is inspiring to those who think people ought to have more children. He has been energetically promoting large families, in both theory and in practice. He has denied reports from The New York Times that he regularly consumed illegal drugs and amphetamines like Adderall. It might be unfair to speculate that as he was reshaping US government, Mr Musk was frequently in an altered state of consciousness. But we do know that Mr Musk and his crew had, with minimal oversight, access to the most sensitive data on not just public employees and the government, but taxpayers and the general public. The fate of this data is unknown. An even more troubling reality is that his activities were unsupervised, unconfirmed and unvetted. He had no security clearance, or even a security clearance investigation. Mr Musk's Washington adventure illustrates exactly why the founders of the American republic insisted the Senate needed to confirm all senior appointees. This has become an increasingly marginalised procedure, but the wisdom of this check has been amply illustrated by the Musk-Trump transactional relationship. While the two still praise each other, the actual chasm between them grows ever wider. Mr Musk has been increasingly vocal in condemning the " big, beautiful budget bill" that the Republican-dominated Senate is trying to pass at Mr Trump's behest. The billionaire says it is the antithesis of everything he was trying to do, since it may greatly increase the federal budget. He could never say any such thing if he were still connected to the White House. Mr Trump increasingly had little time for his billionaire former buddy. You could see it coming from the very outset. The administration could not contain two alpha males, and Washington was never going to be big enough for both of them. The only surprise is that Mr Musk lasted as long as he did. No one lasts too long in the spotlight next to Mr Trump.
