In 2001, a Libyan intelligence officer, Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, was convicted of the bombing and 270 counts of murder, following a trial in front of three Scottish judges sitting in a special court at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands.
After detailing a brief period of separation between the couple when their first child was an infant, Erin Patterson told the court that she and Simon Patterson struggled to work out their disagreements."If we had any problems at all it was… we couldn't communicate well when we disagreed about something," she said.
"We would just feel hurt and not know how to resolve it."She also told the court about the traumatic birth of her first child in 2009, less than a year before the couple's first break."He started to go into distress and they lost his heartbeat," she said.
Her voice choking up, she explained doctors performed an emergency caesarean to get her son out quickly.When he was ready to go home, Ms Patterson said she discharged herself from hospital against medical advice as she didn't want to remain there alone.
The jury has heard that Ms Patterson discharged herself from hospital against medical advice in the days after the fatal lunch, which prosecutors earlier pointed to as evidence that she was not unwell.
However her barrister Colin Mandy in his opening address said she had done so at several occasions over her life.Jim Monaghan was involved with the Equality for Veterans Association (EfVA) which also campaigned against pension decisions in the 1970s.
Military rules before April 1975 meant that in most circumstances, servicemen had to serve 22 years to be eligible for an armed forces pension in addition to the state pension.Mr Monaghan left the RAF at the end of 1974, having accrued 14 years' service, including in Singapore and the middle east.
Had he left a few months later, he would have received a military pension. The rule change in 1975, like rules on pensions generally, were not retrospective.The issue was debated in parliament in 2015, with then-Defence Minister Anna Soubry saying making changes to pension policy retrospective would break an "essential principle" and "would lead to widespread, long-term and unmanageable consequences for both this government and future governments".