I don't think it's Scotland per se, but I think the doubt stemmed from US officials at the time were pushing to get a conviction, make an example that should someone commit a crime as heinous as this, the full weight of the US's judicial might would be thrown at them (It wasn't just US political interference, Whitehall has been accused of that too but seems to be the US who's getting it the most.)
I can understand their motivations for wanting to bring him to justice and so quickly, but there are UN observers who say that political influence affected almost every aspect of the trial and prosecution and in some cases took precedence over the rule of law. That a key witness(s?) was unreliable at least. I mean, if he is a responsible party, hang him high, if he's not, then "Brotherly Leader" would have ensured we'll never find who is.
There is one little thing that I can't seem to shake. K, say I commit a particularly nasty crime, I go to trial, I get sentenced for life, how is it there can be talk of me getting paroled in 20 years?? I thought life was exactly that -- Life. I don't understand this bit of the guy's sentence. How can he have been expected to serve at least 20 years of his sentence before being paroled? I though once you got life, that's it, you aren't coming out unless it's in a body bag in a coroner's wagon.