shirleymckie.myfastforum.org

Big Wullie · Joined: 25 Apr 2007 Posts: 1149 Location: Glasgow

In my view it would have been all too easy for the police to pass the rings to one of the other people occupying the murder scene (which wasn't secured as pointed out above) to set Fraser up.

Would the family not have been all too willing to do this having been told by the police Fraser was guilty and for revenge for the assault Fraser was jailed for on Arlene.

How could Fraser get the rings back from the Police to plant them ?

Can anyone correct me here but did one of the more senior policemen involved in this case not commit Suicide ? Because of his involvement.

It would seem the judiciary are very keen to just sweep these matters under their carpets.

I cannot get out of my head the judges saying:
The evidence of the rings in any case would have enhanced the Crown's Case against Fraser.

scotkaz · Joined: 28 Aug 2008 Posts: 526

Big Wullie · Joined: 25 Apr 2007 Posts: 1149 Location: Glasgow

Hi Scotkaz

From the evidence I have heard recently the Officer alleged to have taken the rings turned into the Family Liasion Officer and he was allegedly in the house three times on the day the rings re-surfaced.

The house was never secured as a scene of crime allowing all sorts of family and friends to come and go.

What I really cannot understand is If the police had the rings how can they claim Fraser planted them later in the house.

How have the police explained the evidence of the rings.

How can any of our Judges say this evidence would have enhanced the crowns case.

Big Wullie · Joined: 25 Apr 2007 Posts: 1149 Location: Glasgow

This Magistrate saw nothing wrong with posting peopels cases on Twitter.

He said he had done nothing wrong because the cases had been discussed in open court.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/8018471.stm

Why then are people still being denied access to witness statements when the witness's have already given evidence in OPEN COURTS in Scotland ?

Wonder if our Mr Sinclair of SCCRC would have concerns about this conduct ?
_________________
http://justiceforwulliebeck.webs.com/index.htm

http://williambeck.blogspot.com/

http://williambeck.wordpress.com/about/

scotkaz · Joined: 28 Aug 2008 Posts: 526

scotkaz · Joined: 28 Aug 2008 Posts: 526

Interesting article on the Fraser case which raises even more questions than ever.

I know its an old article but I just found it.

Arlene Fraser Police 'Lied About Evidence'

Nov 16 2007 By Gordon Mcilwraith

POLICE investigating Arlene Fraser's murder lied about vital evidence before her husband's trial, it was claimed in court.

Defence lawyer Peter Gray said "staggering incompetence" meant Nat Fraser's trial had been a farce.

Mr Gray also claimed that two constables were now being "hung out to dry" by their senior colleagues in a desperate bid to protect the conviction against Fraser.

He said: "One is fighting a smog and there is a reek about the police conduct."

Fraser is appealing against his 2003 conviction for murdering his estranged wife Arlene.

The 33-year-old mum-of-two vanished from her home in New Elgin, Moray, on April 28, 1998. Her body has never been found.

A cornerstone of the case against Fraser was that Arlene's engagement, wedding and eternity rings had suddenly appeared in her house 10 days after she vanished.

It was claimed Fraser had planted them there in the hope of making people believe she was alive and that she had left him for good.

If that was the case, it suggested he had access to Arlene's body.

But it has now emerged that Constable Neil Lynch saw the rings in Arlene's home on the evening of her disappearance.

However, his statement was never passed to the defence or the prosecution at the trial.

It only came to light a year after Fraser, 48, was found guilty and jailed for 25 years.

Another officer, Constable Julie Clark, has since come forward and said that she, too, saw the rings in Arlene's bathroom on the same day.

Mr Gray said there was now considerable concern as to whether the trial advocate depute, Alan Turnbull, now Lord Turnbull, had been misled, either by the police or the then Elgin fiscal David Dickson.

Mr Gray told the Appeal Court in Edinburgh that PC Lynch recalled speaking to a police officer about the rings prior to the trial.

When he said he had seen them on the day Arlene vanished, PC Lynch was told he was mistaken.

The constable believed the officer he spoke to was Detective Sergeant William Robertson.

The revelations by constables Lynch and Clark sparked a Crown Office investigation.

Referring to that probe, Mr Gray said: "No police officer who was interviewed at the inquiry accepted that they were ever aware of Constable Lynch's position that he had seen the rings in the bathroom.

"And no officer accepted that they had spoken to Lynch or Clark about this matter prior to trial."

Mr Gray then turned to Lord Turnbull's statement to the inquiry.

The judge stated: "Someone said to me there was a police officer who thought he had seen the rings.

"I think this might have been Detective Chief Superintendent Keith Wilkins. I have a clear recollection of being firmly assured that the police officer concerned had made a mistake.

"The impression I was left with was that he himself acknowledged this."

Mr Gray said: "If this information was given to Lord Turnbull by a police officer, then, one way or another, lies were being told.

"The Crown were labouring under a misrepresentation because of staggering incompetence.

"The trial was a farce because the jury were presented and asked to consider a case on a basis which the trial depute accepts was wrong.

"Somebody lied and they lied to the inquiry and they lied to the advocate depute.

"The two constables are being hung out to dry to protect a conviction and they are being hung out to dry by the police."

PC Lynch gave his pre-trial statement to court official Douglas Burns. He said he left a note about it with fiscal David Dickson. Mr Dickson, who now works at the Crown Office, told the inquiry he couldn't recall seeing the statement.

But when his successor took over, she found it in the Fraser file.

Mr Gray said: "If the information was not given to Lord Turnbull by a police officer, it must have been given to him by a member of the procurator fiscal service.

"If that information was provided by Mr Dickson, then he has lied to the inquiry."

Lord Turnbull has said that if he had learned about the missing evidence during the trial, he would have stopped it immediately.

The appeal hearing continues.

'Two constables have been hung out to dry to protect a conviction'

Big Wullie · Joined: 25 Apr 2007 Posts: 1149 Location: Glasgow

Hi Scotkaz

Been doing some recent Investigations into Nat Frasers case myself and what I have found is startling.

Besides the two officers who now claim the rings were planted back into the house there was another two Officers who claimed the rings were there from the start.

Det Sgt Willie Robertson has never denied taking the rings to his office which would mean that even if Turnbull could claim not to have seen the statements from the other two.

There was also an officer who committed suicide "David Slessor" who had seen the rings in Robertson's desk.

This totally destroys the evidence from Turnbull that he did not know about the rings.

According to Nat's Solicitor, Robertson has never denied the evidence of the rings.

This case should have collapsed at trial never mind the appeal if the evidence about Nat Fraser placing the rings back into the house was the most cruacial evidence against him.

How can the appeal court conclude Fraser still had room to put the rings back after a week when clearly they were in Robertson's desk.

The only conclusion anyone else can come to would be Robertson must have placed the rings in the Bathroom a week later if he had them in his desk.

From what I have been told Robertson was in the House two or three times the day the rings re-appeared.

_________________
http://justiceforwulliebeck.webs.com/index.htm

http://williambeck.blogspot.com/

http://williambeck.wordpress.com/about/