A federal judge on Monday postponed the first United States trial related to the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103. U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich cited the discovery of new evidence as the reason for delaying the proceedings against Abu Agila Mohammad Mas'ud Kheir Al-Marimi, a former Libyan intelligence official accused of making the bomb used in the attack. Jury selection had been scheduled to begin Wednesday in Washington, D.C.
The trial concerns the December 21, 1988, explosion of a Boeing 747 over Lockerbie, Scotland, which killed 270 people. While two other Libyan intelligence agents were tried by a Scottish tribunal in the Netherlands in 2000—resulting in one conviction and one acquittal—Al-Marimi is the first person to face trial in a U.S. court for the incident. Prosecutors allege Al-Marimi acted under the direction of former Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi, who was killed in 2011.
Defense attorneys, including assistant federal public defender Laura Koenig, stated that prosecutors disclosed the new evidence on Saturday. The defense argued that their constitutional and ethical obligations require an investigation into the new development before the trial can proceed. Judge Friedrich's order did not describe the content of the evidence but noted the complexity of the case and the defense's need to determine how to proceed.
The scale of the case is reflected in the decades-long investigation and the maximum penalty of life in prison faced by Al-Marimi on two counts of destruction of an aircraft resulting in death. The proceedings represent a significant intersection of international law and U.S. federal prosecution, as Al-Marimi was only transferred to U.S. custody in late 2022 after being indicted that December. The case involves evidence spanning nearly 40 years and multiple countries, including Malta, Germany, and the United Kingdom.
The delay sets a precedent for how newly discovered evidence is handled in high-profile, decades-old terrorism cases where the defendant's right to a fair trial must be balanced against the age of the allegations. A person following this case would notice that the expected start of jury selection this week has been replaced by a status hearing. What happens next is a scheduled hearing on Sept. 1 in Washington, D.C., where the judge and attorneys will discuss the current status and future schedule of the case.