Month: September 2021

Nat Fraser – Wife killer 1998 – YouTube

Refuge – 24-hour National Domestic Abuse Helpline 0808 2000 247 (UK) or nationaldahelpline.org.uk

 

worldpopulationreview.com-Elgin Population

Wikipedia- Elgin Cathedral

Death in a cold town: The Arlene Fraser case (Murder World: Scotland): Amazon.co.uk: MacGregor, Steve: 9781973540212: Books

Elgin Visitor Guide – Accommodation, Things To Do & More | VisitScotland

Dad of murdered Arlene Fraser would accept killer hubby being freed from jail if he reveals where he left wife’s body

Nat Fraser’s former pal speaks out after 20 years and urges killer to reveal where he dumped wife’s body – Daily Record

Arlene Fraser case: A wave – then a 14-year mystery – BBC News

Dawn:

A violent husband, a hitman or a pig farmer, who kidnapped and murdered Arlene Fraser?

Dawn and Cole:

Hi wee ones, I’m Dawn and I’m Cole, and this is Scottish Murders.

[THEME TUNE]

WINE, DINE AND STORYTIME PODCAST PROMO

Dawn:

33 year old Arlene Fraser was living at number two Smith Street in Elgin with her two children, Jamie ten and Natalie five, at the time of her disappearance. Her husband Nat had a restraining order as he had attempted to murder Arlene previously, however, this hadn’t kept him away. The 28th of April 1998 was just like any other weekday for Arlene Fraser, she got her kids ready for school and waved them off, but that wave goodbye to our children would be the last time she was ever seen again. Elgin is a town in Moray, now with a population of over 24,000, and is situated in the northeast of Scotland, lying on the south coast of the Moray Firth, approximately halfway between Inverness and Aberdeen. Elgin once had been a city in the 13th century when an imposing Cathedral had been built, but the cathedral was later abandoned making Elgin a town. The ruins of the cathedral remain to this day. For today’s story I gained most of the information from a book called Death in a Cold Town by Steve McGregor, where you can find even more in-depth information about Arlene and Nat Fraser than I’ve been able to include in this story. Arlene was a popular and outwardly confident person, but internally she lacked confidence and didn’t believe people when they told her she was pretty. This lack of confidence could have stemmed from always being compared to her elder sister Carol, who could apparently do no wrong. However, by 1985 Arlene’s sister had married and had moved to Erskine, just outside of Glasgow, and her parents had split up, with Arlene opting to stay with her father Hector in Elgin, where she worked in a clothes shop. At Hogmanay in 1985, when Arlene was 21 years old, she attended a party where she and Nat Fraser, who was 26 years old, finally got together. Nat appeared to be quite the catch as he was a friendly, confident, popular man, and he was a partner in a successful fruit and veg business in Elgin. Nat also played the guitar in a local band as well as being a rugby player. However, there was another side to Nat, he had a habit of fighting with others, both verbally and physically, after a few drinks, but due to his friendly nature this was shrugged off as just being Nat’s way. Nat was also very popular with the females and he would regularly have new girlfriends, sometimes even having a couple on the go at the same time. However, when Arlene and Nat finally got together at the Hogmanay party, he seemed to, at least initially, change his ways and to have really taken to her and she him. However, not everyone was quite as taken with Nat and Arlene’s relationship. Apparently Arlene’s sister, Carol, advised her to be careful and that Nat wasn’t the best match for her. However, Arlene ignored this advice and forged ahead with her relationship with Nat, actually moving into his bungalow at number two Smith Street only four months after meeting. The couple lived together quite peacefully and happily it would appear, both carrying on with the normal duties, Nat carrying out fruit and vegetable deliveries in the Elgin area and Arlene working in the clothes shop. It was in September 1986 that the couple announced they were engaged and had set a date for their wedding of the 9th of May 1987. However before the big day arrived, in late 1986, Arlene found out that she was pregnant. The couple were delighted with the news and were so looking forward to their wedding and their child’s arrival shortly afterwards. Arlene’s wedding day finally arrived and she looked beautiful in her white wedding dress with her father Hector walking her down the aisle to the waiting Nat, who wore a kilt and sported two black eyes. Apparently the stag do had turned a bit violent, but well that was apparently to be expected from Nat and it was just brushed off, and the couple went on to have a great evening reception. In August 1987, three months after the wedding, Arlene and Nat welcomed baby Jamie into the world. Nat and Arlene apparently were thrilled with the new arrival and they seemed to settle down into newly married, new parents bliss. Nat did want to continue to play with his band every weekend, and with him working Monday to Saturday delivering his fruit and veg, Arlene was finding it difficult to bring up Jaime without Nat’s support. Arlene asked Nat if he would give up playing in the band but he refused saying that he needed to let off steam after a full week of work, and he said that they needed the money. It also appeared that Nat had returned to his old ways from before he met Arlene. Arlene had heard that Nat had been seeing other women, but when confronted of course he denied this vehemently. The problem was Arlene was feeling more and more isolated, she had given up her job at the clothes shop to take care of Jamie and she also was finding it increasingly difficult to see her friends. Nat liked this though as he became extremely jealous if she went out without him, criticising what she was wearing for starters. He was very controlling and she was completely dependent on Nat, not only for support but financially as well, as her only source of money was her weekly allowance that Nat gave to her. Arlene was lonely and stuck at home more and more by herself, until she met 17 year old Dougie Green, a delivery driver who worked for Nat, less than a year into their marriage. Dougie ended up visiting Arlene when Nat was out at weekends and one night the pair ended up sleeping together. Nat found out about this and was furious with Arlene. As Nat’s jealousy and suspicions towards Arlene escalated, he became more and more angry and eventually his anger turned physical and he started to push her around. Arlene had apparently confided in her family that she was afraid of him sometimes when he got like this. One night in 1990, when Arlene came home from a Saturday night out with her friends, she was met by an angry Nat who accused her of being with another man. He ripped at

her clothes, slapped and punched her until she fell to the floor, where he then proceeded to kick her in the stomach. At this point Arlene had had enough and she was terrified of Nat, so she took Jamie and went to stay at a woman’s refuge for ten

days. During this time she also saw a solicitor in regards to divorce proceedings. However, as always, Nat was very sorry, he hadn’t meant to hurt her and that he got angry because he loved her so much and the thoughts of her being with another man had just taken over. He sent her gifts while she was at the refuge, until finally she agreed to move back home. Everything seemed to settle down again for a while, and in 1992 Arlene and Nat welcomed baby Natalie into their family. However, Nat’s jealousy festered continually in the background, and every time Arlene went out with her friends an argument between the two ensued when she returned. Apparently from the time Natalie was born and Arlene’s disappearance she had visited her solicitor a further three times regarding a divorce, but each time Nat would apologise and give her a lovely gift and convince her to give it another go. She actually had an appointment with her solicitor on the afternoon she went missing to discuss the divorce and finalise the paperwork, an appointment that she unfortunately wouldn’t be able to keep. In 1997, with Natalie now being five and Jamie being ten, Arlene decided that it was time to get some of her independence back, financially at least, and so she enrolled in a two-year business studies course at the local college to learn new skills she could use to make her own money. It appeared though that the allowance Nat gave Arlene was very generous as she had somehow manage to save up £3,000 or about $4,000, and in 1997 she had decided that she wanted to spend this money on a breast enhancement. She went ahead with this procedure without telling Nat who, because he hadn’t been in control of Arlene, was pretty angry about this.

 

He took his bad temper out on her in various ways for the rest of 1997, such as hiding her glasses or contact lenses and ripping her clothes, all to try to prevent her from going out with her friends. However, in February 1998 his temper erupted again and he attacked Arlene, beating her so badly in the jaw that she was unable to eat. Following this attack she lost weight and became depressed. She apparently told her friend, Michelle Scott, that she didn’t love Nat anymore and was terrified of him. After this vicious attack Nat agreed to leave the home for a month and to go and live with his friend Hector Dick, who lived in a farm just outside Elgin. However, after less than a week Nat was seen by neighbours back at the home, and soon after he had worn Arlene down and had moved back into the home. Only a month later on the 22nd of March 1998, which was Mother’s Day, Nat beat Arlene and strangled her to the point that she passed out. She had been on a night out with her female friends at a bar and after closing time the group decided to go back to Arlene’s friend Michelle’s house to continue the party. What had set Nat of this time, although it didn’t take much, was that Arlene hadn’t got home until 5:30am. I think maybe he could have been worried about her, but it does sound more like he was angry that he wasn’t in control of her. Yeah, I agree. However, when Arlene came around

she hadn’t remembered the attack.  Nat had told her that she’d had some kind of fit and had collapsed.  So, she didn’t remember being strangled? Yeah. Maybe she had passed out and blocked out what had happened. Maybe she was just in shock. However, later that morning Arlene noticed some worrying red dots on her eyelids and eyes, so she took herself to the doctor. Terrifyingly, the doctor told her that the red dots were caused by strangulation and that he had only heard of this being seen normally on the dead bodies of strangulation victims.

Cole:

Wow! I’m not surprised she didn’t remember after that then.

Dawn:

After some persuasion, Arlene went to the police and told them about the attack and what the doctor had said. This was confirmed by the police’s own specialist. Subsequently, Nat was arrested and charged with attempted murder. Nat was bailed and had an injunction against him not allowing him to go near the house on Smith Street or Arlene. Arlene visited her solicitor again after this and this time decided to start the ball rolling with a divorce and settlement. The settlement figure that her solicitor came up with was £250,000, which is about £460,000 and $577,000 in today’s money. Arlene was a bit reluctant to ask for this amount of money as she knew Nat would be angry, but her solicitor reminded her that Nat had a very successful business and that this was just a starting figure and that it was best to start high and come down, so Arlene agreed and a letter was sent to Nat’s solicitor. When Matt found out that Arlene was going ahead with a divorce and that the settlement figure she was asking for was in the region of £250,000 he was furious. Apparently he had said to Arlene that if she wasn’t going to be living with him then she wouldn’t be living with anyone. Nat was clearly thinking of himself as the victim in the situation he found himself in. To further anger Nat, part of the injunction was that he wasn’t allowed access to his precious car, a Ford Granada, as it was parked at the house in Smith Street. Arlene had apparently started using this car. That is until the 5th of April, two weeks after the horrific attack on Arlene, when this car that was parked on Arlene’s drive went up in flames, destroying the car. This fire was apparently deliberately started.

Cole:

Wow, that’s a coincidence, isn’t it?

Dawn:

Yeah. I wonder who could have done that? Then just over three weeks later on Tuesday the 28th of April 1998 Arlene disappeared. Arlene was seen hanging out washing at around 8:15am by a neighbour, and then seen by another neighbour at around 8:50am when she was waving Jamie, ten, and Natalie, five, off as they walked to their school not far away. Jamie was apparently going on a group event to Inverness with his school that day so Arlene called the school at about 9:41am to find out what time he was returning. The receptionist didn’t know the time so she said she would check and call Arlene back. However, when she called Arlene back approximately ten minutes later, there was no answer. The receptionist had been the last person to ever speak to Arlene Fraser. So, what had happened to Arlene between 9:41 and 9:51am? As Arlene had Tuesdays off from college, she liked to use this day to catch up with her friends whenever possible, and on Tuesday the 28th of April she had arranged for her friend, Michelle Scott, to come and have lunch with her at the bungalow. When Michelle arrived at about 11am for this lunch date, she knocked but there was no answer. The door however was unlocked so she went inside. She did find the fact that the door was unlocked very strange as Arlene was very security conscious.

Cole:

Yeah, I think that would have been a red flag for me too after what she’d been through.

Dawn:

Yeah, me too. Definitely. So, Michelle called out but there was no answer. When Michelle had a quick look around she didn’t find Arlene, but she did find a vacuum cleaner standing in the middle of Natalie’s room plugged in as if ready to be used but not switched on. She also found the washing machine on, which she also found strange as Arlene was terrified of the washing machine going on fire so she never put it on if she wasn’t going to be in the house. She also found Arlene’s contact lenses, glasses and Crohn’s medication lying on her bedside cabinet. Arlene had been diagnosed with Crohn’s disease a few years previous and had had bad flare-ups, she never would have left indefinitely without her glasses, contacts or Crohn’s medication. Michelle did notice that Arlene’s favourite brown coat was missing, so she assumed that Arlene hadn’t gone far and maybe she had just got delayed. Unfortunately, Michelle had to leave as this had just been a quick lunch visit, however, she did ring Arlene a couple of more times, but each time there was no reply. This was just so unlike Arlene, she was a creature of habit and didn’t just go missing for hours on end. Michelle went back to the bungalow again about 1pm, but there was still no sign of Arlene and everything was still the same way it had been when she was last there. This time Michelle left Arlene a note asking her to call when she got back. By 3pm Natalie had returned home from school and was spotted outside her house crying by neighbours, Irene and Graham Higgins, as her mum wasn’t home. They knew Arlene and Natalie so took Natalie into their home until Arlene arrived home. However, at 8pm there was still no sign of Arlene, but Michelle had arrived back and this time was beginning to think something was seriously wrong. Irene and Michelle went back to Arlene’s home again and found everything exactly the same as before, except there was now a note from Jamiee saying he had been home and had gone to a friend’s house as Arlene wasn’t there. Nobody had seen Jamie arrive or leave the home. When they returned to Irene’s home, following a debate with her husband, they decided to call the police. Two police officers, PC Neil Lynch and PC Julie Clark, arrived that evening and they looked around Arlene’s home, spoke with Graham and Irene Higgins and Michelle Scott. However, at this point, as it was very late in the evening and there was no body or crime scene, all they could do was put out a description of Arlene to see if she was spotted around the area. It wasn’t until the following day, the 29th of April, the detectives arrived on the scene and a detailed examination of the house was carried out and video recordings of the whole property were taken. While it clearly didn’t look like anything untoward had occurred in the property, the fact that Arlene’s glasses, contact lenses, medication, passport, driving licence and keys were all in the property, and after taking into consideration that her husband had been charged with strangling her until she passed out just over a month ago, the police decided to treat Arlene’s disappearance as something much more sinister than a missing person case. However, as there was no body or crime scene they knew it was going to be an uphill struggle to prove this. It wasn’t until the 3rd of May, five days after Arlene was last seen, that a massive search took place of all open spaces around Elgin. This was carried out by police and volunteers, including Arlene’s father and stepfather, however Nat did not attend.

Cole:

Okay, so why did it take so long to arrange a search?

Dawn:

I think it was because there was no body or crime scene, and that they were just busy searching the house and doing interviews. I think they also held out a bit of hope that Arlene would probably just come back.

Cole:

And do we know why Nat didn’t attend?

Dawn:

No.

Cole:

Well that’s suspicious.

Dwan:

Isn’t it. Interviews were carried out with any potential witnesses or locals that could give a better picture of Arlene and her life. A lot of people were of the impression that Arlene had just gone on holiday without telling anyone, and had just left her children to come home from school with no one to look after them.

Cole:

People actually thought that that’s what she would have done?

Dawn:

Yeah, I can’t believe it either. She was supposed to be a caring and compassionate person and doted on her kids, there was no way she was just going to have left and gone on holiday.

Cole:

No, that would be classed as neglect and she doesn’t sound like that type of person at all.

Dawn:

No, I don’t know what these people were thinking. There were also other rumours going around which also got into the newspapers, that Arlene was into drugs, drink and sleeping around. Well she had had that one affair and she did enjoy a night out with her female friends now and again, but did this really make her a bad person or parent or mean that she would just have left her children suddenly? Not only did her friends and sister Carol both confirmed that these stories were nonsense, but the police actually carried out tests using hairs from Arlene’s hairbrush post her disappearance, and this proved conclusively that she had not been taking drugs. It turned out that these rumours had actually come from Nat himself trying to paint a bad picture of Arlene and draw attention away from himself. Nat appeared to have a lot of supporters in and around Elgin and they were happy to repeat these untruths about Arlene. When detectives went to interview Nat, he was ready with a cast iron alibi. He stated that he started work at around 7:30am that morning, and that he had also taken a van boy with him on this occasion to help him with the deliveries. This was a very unusual thing for Nat to do, he always preferred to do the deliveries alone. He stated that about 9am he had made a phone call from a phone box in Elgin, leaving the van boy in the van. He had called a Hazel Walker, who he had previously been in a relationship with but hadn’t spoken to her in quite a while and he didn’t call again afterwards either. He said that the call had lasted about 40 minutes and then he continued with his deliveries. And wait for it, it just so happened that of all the phone boxes in Elgin this phone box was one of the few that had a CCTV camera pointing right at it, further providing and backing up Nat’s alibi.

Cole:

Very smart if you’re looking for an alibi.

Dawn:

Yeah, that was clever. And he just so happened to have made this phone call at the approximate time that Arlene is thought to have gone missing as well.

Cole:

That’s also suspicious.

Dawn:

Detectives were also immediately suspicious of Nat as this was a pretty cast iron alibi, backed up by witnesses and a camera. Who normally has such a cast iron alibi when carrying out the day-to-day duties?

Cole:

Having such a solid alibi such as his is almost as incriminating as not having one at all I think, sometimes.

Dawn:

In this case certainly. So, the police at this point have no body, no crime scene, no forensic, no witnesses, and Nat has a solid alibi. So, what had happened to Arlene Fraser? Now, the police did continue to have their suspicions about Nat Fraser having something to do with Arlene’s disappearance, even though he had a cast iron alibi, but all they could do was keep an eye on him. For the first few days after Arlene went missing, Nat came across as being very upset and concerned about Arlene, he checked the hospitals in the area and would constantly get in touch with the police to find out if they had any developments. However, after a couple of weeks his attitude completely changed, he stopped contacting the police for updates, they had to contact him to tell him what was going on. He was apparently joking to his friends that the kids would get used to Arlene being away. So, he’d gone from this really caring, worried estranged husband, who behind closed doors was controlling and beating Arlene, to showing his true colours and really not caring about where Arlene was or what had happened to her. Also, a few months after Arlene’s disappearance, Nat started to tell anyone that would listen the story that Arlene had simply ran away and had betrayed and abandoned her family, she had left her children, Nat, her sister, her mom and dad behind to start a new life. Now it all made sense why he had been spreading untruths about Arlene’s character, so he could set the scene for his next plan of telling everyone that she’d just ran away, all to take the limelight off him as a suspect. He was no fool, he knew that he would be suspected by the police of being involved in Arlene’s disappearance, which the police did suspect practically from the start of the investigation, but they just had no proof. Now, something else strange happened. On or around the 7th of May 1998, after the police had finished with the bungalow forensically and they had taken video recordings of all the rooms, they had allowed the family back in to use it. It was a few days after that a member of the family found Arlene’s engagement ring, wedding ring and eternity ring in the bathroom on a special hook. The family member was sure they had not been there before and so let the police know. The police immediately checked the video recording and discovered that these rings had indeed not been there at the time of Arlene’s disappearance. So, where had they come from? Nat had access to the house after the police had finished with it, so had he removed the rings from Arlene’s dead body and placed them back in the house? But why? Was this perhaps to back up his story that Arlene had simply ran off and left them? But wouldn’t she have taken her rings with her so she could maybe sell them for money?

Cole:

Yeah, that doesn’t make any sense if he was trying to portray that she ran away, she would have had her rings on her, she wouldn’t have stopped to take them off. And I can’t imagine why putting those rings back there would work out for him. It just doesn’t make any sense.

Dawn:

Then in October 1998, six months after Arlene’s disappearance, the police issued a further appeal asking for information on Arlene’s disappearance, but this time stating that they believed she had been murdered. Following this appeal, a mechanic who worked in Elgin was identified, who stated that he had sold a beige Ford Fiesta to a very good friend of Nat’s, Hector Dick, on the day before Arlene’s disappearance, that he had delivered it himself to Hector’s farm, and he said that Nat had also been present at the farm for the delivery of the car.

Cole:

What’s strange about that?

Dawn:

Well, nothing, if it hadn’t been a cash in hand job, with extra cash given to the mechanic if he said nothing about the deal, and the fact that three men proceeded to take the same Ford Fiesta, having been partially crushed and burnt, to a scrapyard at the beginning of May 1998 to be crushed and recycled. Although Hector Dick was questioned repeatedly about this, he denied ever having seen this car. At the beginning of 1999, with no word or sightings from Arlene, the police felt sure that she had been murdered, but without any evidence or a body they had to set about trying to prove for sure that she was indeed dead. They needed to prove this in order to charge anyone with her murder. They did this by checking Arlene’s bank accounts to see if there had been any withdrawal since her disappearance, which there hadn’t been. They had to establish that she had not been in contact with any friends or family since her disappearance, which she hadn’t. They checked that she had not been in contact with any GPS or Opticians in the UK to get vital medication or glasses or contact lenses, but she hadn’t. All the while Nat continued his daily routine of fruit and veg deliveries and maintained that Arlene had just gone on holiday, nearly a year since her disappearance. But fewer and fewer people were buying that story anymore. Plus, Nat had the most motivation for killing Arlene, he was waiting a criminal trial for her attempted murder five weeks before her disappearance. He possibly thought he wouldn’t go to prison if she wasn’t around to give evidence. She was also asking for a divorce and a huge settlement which would damage him financially, and he had an injunction against him after he had attempted to murder her so he wasn’t allowed in or near his home. If Arlene wasn’t around he would get back into his home again and see his kids. But he had a cast iron alibi, so even though the police felt he was involved somehow, obviously he couldn’t have kidnapped Arlene that morning, so the case went cold. Until October 1999, a year and a half later, when Hector Dick and Nat Fraser were charged with perverting the course of justice in connection with the Ford Fiesta. However, due to the lack of evidence, the charge against Nat was dropped and Hector’s trial was deferred. Then on the 1st of March 2000, nearly two years after Arlene went missing, Nat had his day in court in Inverness for the charge of attempted murder of Arlene just over a month before she went missing. This charge was reduced to assault and he was sentenced to 18 months in prison. Unbelievably he was released from prison in December 2000 after serving only half of his sentence. While Nat was in prison for the assault of Arlene, the police investigation continued and they were monitoring who had visited Nat in prison. He had frequent visits from another of his good friends, a Glen Lucas, so the police started looking at this man in connection with Arlene’s disappearance too. The meetings between Glen and Nat were recorded but there was no audio, so the police got in touch with a deaf lip-reading expert to help them determine what had been said between the two. Her findings were very damning. Basically she said that Nat was describing to Glen how he had cut Arlene’s bones into very small pieces so that no DNA could be found.

Cole:

Oh wow.

Dawn:

He made the motion of sawing his wrist as he spoke about how he had cut her up, with Lucas supposedly agreeing that this had been a good idea and that he was sure Nat would get away with it. They also mentioned a third man involved, Hector Dick, and how he had been instrumental in Arlene’s disappearance. Unfortunately the lip-reading expert’s findings were not able to be used in court, but had given the police what they had needed, they now knew that Nat had definitely been involved with Arlene’s disappearance.

Cole:

So, why would it not be usable in in court?

Dawn:

I think it was because things of this sort were relatively new and hadn’t undergone rigorous testing to ensure this was a valid practice to be used.

Cole:

How could he have been so stupid to say these things while he was in prison.

Dawn:

Oh don’t worry, we’ll get into that later.

Cole:

Oh interesting.

Dawn:

February 2001 was when Hector Dick’s trial for perverting the course of justice in relation to his involvement with the Ford Fiesta finally went ahead, with him pleading not guilty. However, on the fourth day Hector changed his plea to guilty. He now was stating that he had indeed purchased the beige Ford Fiesta but that it had been to use for a drink smuggling scam he and Nat were involved in. Due to his change of plea he was sentenced to one year in prison, and during his time in prison he attempted to hang himself. Now, in April 2001, Nat also found himself back in prison after being found guilty for lying about his finances in order to receive £18,000 or about $25,000 of legal aid funding. This was four months after being released from prison for assaulting Arlene. He was sent back to prison this time for 12 months, although he was out again in October 2001 after serving half of his sentence.

Cole:

There seems to be a pattern going on here.

Dawn:

Yes, half seems to be enough. After being released again in October 2001, Nat tried to get on with his life again, still doing his fruit and veg deliveries, but by this time there were less people who actually believed that Arlene had simply gone on holiday and left her children, people were starting to look at Nat a bit differently.

Cole:

It’s about time.

Dawn:

Plus the police were constantly questioning him about Arlene’s disappearance. Things were not going too well for Nat. Then on the 26th of April 2002, about six months after Nat was released from prison for fraud, Nat, Hector Dick and Glen Lucas were indicted for the murder of Arlene Fraser, each being charged with conspiracy to murder Arlene, murdering her and attempting to defeat the ends of justice.

Cole:

So, did they find her body or have any other evidence?

Dawn:

Nope, nothing had changed, but things were about to get interesting. The trial of the three men began on Tuesday the 1st of January 2003 at Edinburgh’s High Court. The prosecution laid out their case, and on the Friday the jury were shown the video recordings of the bathroom, showing how there were no rings present at the time of Arlene’s disappearance, but that they had appeared in the bathroom on or around the 7th of May 1998. Everything seemed to be going well for the prosecution, until Tuesday the 14th of January when it was announced that the charges had been dropped against Hector Dick and Glen Lucas, and they were immediately released.

Cole:

What? Why?

Dawn:

Well, over the weekend Hector Dick had decided to turn on his long-term friend Nat to save himself, and he had told the police an amazing story of what had happened to Arlene. He said that Nat had hired a hitman to kidnap and kill Arlene, but her body had then been burnt and dismembered in a machine on Hector’s farm that was designed for cow disposal, and then her ashes were scattered. Now you might think okay, great, now we know what happened, good for Hector, however, it just so happens that Hector had been caught by the government and had a humongous tax bill to pay due to him smuggling booze, and this bill would have ruined him. Hector didn’t agree to testify against Nat until he had it in writing that the tax bill would be wiped out, which he received.

Cole:

Wow, you’re kidding, right?

Dawn:

No. So, now Nat would be standing alone with a new charge of arranging Arlene’s abduction and murder. So, the trial reconvened on Monday the 20th of January 2003 and Hector Dick was questioned for a prolonged period of time, and of course the question of the purchase of the beige Ford Fiesta was brought up again. Bearing in mind that at Hector’s trial in 2001, he said that he had bought the car for drink smuggling that he was involved in with Nat, however, now at Nat’s trial he said, under oath, that he had bought the car on behalf of Nat. So Hector had lied about ever buying the beige car initially and now he was saying under oath that he had been lying about what it was used for. What was to say that he was now telling the truth? Were the police and the prosecutors just grasping at anything they could to convict Nat as they knew they didn’t have enough evidence, regardless if it was lies or not?

Cole:

Yeah, I’m beginning to wonder that myself.

Dawn:

Over the course of the trial, Hector continued to say very derogatory things about Nat, blatantly pointing the finger at him for Arlene’s kidnapping and arranged murder any way he could. Nat also gave evidence at this trial in his defence where he denied vehemently murdering his wife or being involved in any way. Nobody knew what the outcome of the trial was going to be, it was very superficial, and the case rested on whether the jury categorically believed that Nat had returned Arlene’s rings to the house after she had been murdered. Carol, Arlene’s sister, and Hector, Arlene’s dad, were extremely nervous about attending for the verdict on the 29th of January 2009, almost five years since Arlene’s disappearance. But they needn’t have worried, Nat Fraser was found guilty with a majority verdict. He was sentenced to life imprisonment, to serve a minimum of 25 years. So, finally the family had some closure and peace to grieve for Arlene, even if they didn’t have her body they could try to get on with their lives as best they could.  Right? Wrong. The story doesn’t end there. Following the trial Hector Dick appeared to have negotiated various deals with newspapers and he continued to give new statements about what had happened to Arlene, saying things like Nat had hired a hitman who had strangled Arlene at home and then Nat had gone and cleaned up, amongst other things. Bearing in mind this man had already lied repeatedly. This was extremely difficult for the family to hear, especially when they had their suspicions that Hector was more involved in Arlene’s disappearance than he had been letting on. Now, Glen Lucas didn’t just fade into the background either, he was apparently sick of having the finger pointed at him by everyone and so persuaded a newspaper to pay for him to have a lie detector test to prove once and for all that he wasn’t involved. He passed. In April 2005 a book was published called Murdered or Missing? The Arlene Fraser Case, which was co-written by Glen Lucas himself.  This book basically suggested that Arlene was still alive and had walked out on her children. He alleged that she had been into drinking and drugs and having affairs. The book also ridiculed Hector Dick’s testimony. Glen Lucas was still a good friend of Nat’s and had stood by him protesting his innocence for years, he wasn’t going to stop now. That was until he died in September 2006 from a heart attack. Now, following Nat being convicted and sent to prison, revelations about the prosecution’s leading evidence for charging Nat started to come into question. There were now questions being raised about the three rings that were found in the bathroom.  PC Neil Lynch and PC Julie Clark, who were first inside Arlene’s home on the night her disappearance was reported, came forward to say that they had actually seen these rings in the bathroom when they had first checked Arlene’s home that evening. They had apparently informed their supervisors about this but for some reason this information never reached the relevant people and Nat was charged, with the three ring saga being a large part of the prosecution’s case.

Cole:

So, who removed them then?

Dawn:

Well, it was claimed by a PC David Alexander, who had been part of the investigation, that these rings had been seen in a desk drawer of a Detective Sergeant. However, PC Alexander had his own problems and was in court for a breach of the peace charge in 2004 and was subsequently suspended from the police, however, he widely made it clear that he felt there was a cover-up going on in this case. He went on to give Nat’s solicitors a statement where he admitted that it was a Detective Sergeant David Slessor who had told him about seeing the rings. David was also involved in Arlene’s investigation. However, this fact couldn’t be corroborated by Slessor as he had apparently killed himself in July 1998.

Cole:

This just keeps getting more and more confusing.

Dawn:

So, was it true that there was a cover-up going on with this case, or was this just a scorned police officer wanting to have revenge?

Cole:

Why would it be a cover-up?

Dawn:

Yeah, exactly, I don’t know why. It doesn’t make sense. After this came out, an announcement stated that an investigation would be carried out into what had happened in the Arlene Fraser case to see if there was any merit behind the former PC’s statements. So, obviously this was great news for Nat, and so his solicitors immediately appealed against his conviction, and on the 12th of May 2006 Nat Fraser was released from prison on bail while he waited to hear about his appeal against his murder conviction.

Cole:

Okay, so he’s out of prison again?

Dawn:

Yep.

Cole:

So, is that him out of prison for good?

Dawn:

Well Nat might have thought so.  Nat’s appeal hearing started on Tuesday the 13th of November 2007 in Edinburgh, this lasted for two weeks where all the evidence was presented and gone over. It can often take months for a verdict to be decided after all the evidence is presented, so Lord Johnston, the judge overseeing the appeal, instructed that Nat go back to prison to await the result. Everyone was shocked by this. In actual fact the verdict of the appeal wasn’t announced until the 8th of May 2008, so Nat had been in prison for six months waiting for the verdict. His verdict was upheld, his appeal was refused, and he was to serve the remainder of his sentence.

Cole:

It’s like being on a roller coaster now.

Dawn:

I can’t keep up. So, following this, Nat’s legal team continued to ask for appeals, which were all refused. That was until May 2011 when Nat finally had an appeal granted. He won this appeal and his conviction for the murder of Arlene was quashed and he was free to live his life again.

Cole:

Are you kidding?! What is going on here?

Dawn:

(laughs) At this point I just feel really sorry for what Arlene’s family must be going through. They just weren’t allowed any peace. It’s bad enough that they still didn’t know what happened to Arlene or have her body, now the only person who has the strongest motive for wanting Arlene dead and who had been making her life a living hell while she was alive, was now a free man, free to carry on with his life. This verdict must have crushed them. They thought that finally at least the ordeal of going through a trial was over, but it had all been for nothing and they were back where they started, no Arlene, no evidence, no witnesses, and Nat free to live his life. It was however announced straight away that the Crown office would be building a case in order to bring a future charge against Nat for the murder of Arlene Fraser. Upon Nat’s release, the police decided that it would be a good time to release extracts of the lip reading report which was pretty damning for Nat. There may have been a few stragglers in Elgin who still believed that Nat was innocent, but after these extracts were released, their minds finally changed. Nat was on his own. Even his fruit and veg business partner turned against him saying he wanted nothing further to do with him, going as far as suing him for an unpaid tax bill. So life for Nat probably wasn’t as great as he would have expected back home, but at least he was still alive. However, things were about to take a positive turn for Nat. Reports had started to surface questioning the lip reader’s expertise who had been used to determine what Nat and Glen had spoken about during the prison visits. Her credentials turned out not to be true, and when police gave the recordings and the original transcript of Nat and Glen talking in prison to experienced forensic lip readers to see how it compared, the results were alarming. The original lip reader produced a transcript which consisted of 2,100 words, and the new experts agreed with only 234 words of this.

Cole:

Oh no.

Dawn:

Not only that, but other lip-reading recordings the lip-reader had produced detailed transcripts for were reviewed, and many were deemed to be such poor quality that they weren’t able to confirm any words, even though the original lip-reader had produced a detailed and long transcript of what was being said.

Cole:

Oh my God.

Dawn:

So not only had the three rings appearance in the bungalow come into question, but now also the only other evidence that the police had had now been proven unusable. How could they now possibly bring a murder case against Nat? But they did, as on the 23rd of April 2012 the second murder trial of Nat began in Edinburgh, this time with the addition of cameras being allowed to record the trial as a documentary, which was later shown on TV, and called The Murder Trial. Nat’s defence team started the proceedings by saying that Nat had a solid alibi and he could not possibly have kidnapped or murdered Arlene, and Hector Dick was named as the actual murderer. In this trial, the questions about the ring placement validity and the lip-reading expert’s report was brought up by the defence. Also, Hector Dick appeared again as a witness for the prosecution.

Cole:

Really?! I mean it’s been proven that he lies and lies again under oath, why bring this man to be a witness again? Plus, he was happily selling stories to any paper that would pay him. It’s just annoying.

Dawn:

Yeah. It annoyed others too, and the defence spent four days ripping his stories apart, basically making him out to be a liar, although he did a good job of this by himself with his ever-changing answers. Other witnesses that were called included Hector’s brother James, Nat’s previous business partner Ian Taylor, police officer Neil Lynch, who had been first on the scene, the manager and employees of the scrapyard, and a taxi driver from Elgin, amongst others. None of these witness statements were as damning as Hector’s.  Nat did not take the stand at this trial. Arlene’s sister, Carol, and her father, Hector, went through the ordeal again of not knowing what the verdict would be and were terrified this monster would walk free again. Thankfully they wouldn’t have long to wait, the jurors took only one day to deliberate. On the 30th of May 2012, 14 years after Arlene’s disappearance, the verdict by majority was guilty. Nat was sentenced to serve 17 years in prison without the possibility of parole. It was finally over for the family, they again had the verdict they deserved. They must have been overwhelmed with emotion this time, that finally they could concentrate on their grief of losing Arlene and not have the continual threat of her killer, her husband, being a free man. And that was the case until September 2013.

Cole:

Oh no, not again. 

Dawn:

When Nat tried to appeal the verdict of the second trial. However, this appeal was refused. 

Cole:

Thank God.

Dawn:

To this day Nat continues to plead his innocence, and has tried to appeal the verdict on numerous occasions. He will be 69 when he is eligible for parole. After the second trial, Hector continued to give exclusive interviews, for money obviously. Even as recently as the 28th of April 2018 he’s been making statements to the newspapers, this time he was urging Nat to finally reveal where he had buried Arlene’s body. Arlene’s family continue to believe that Nat arranged for Arlene to be killed, but many of them believe they know who the actual murderer is and that he should be behind bars too. Now, Nat’s daughter Natalie, who in 2020 was 27 years old, went on to have her own children. She has always maintained that her father is innocent of killing or being involved in her mother’s murder. She insists that the actual killer was her dad’s then friend Hector Dick. Jamie apparently lived in the bungalow in Smith Street for many years, with Natalie living there when she briefly split up with her partner. Arlene’s dad, Hector, who at the time of recording was 79, has only one wish, for Nat Fraser to finally reveal what he has done with Arlene’s remains. And finally, Hector Dick. He is still living in Elgin. Is it fair that this man told so many lies that he didn’t know himself what was true anymore, and that he had his tax bill written off? This man turned on his friend, told more and more outrageous lies, and yet he has lived a long and free life. Has there been justice for Arlene Fraser? Now, obviously there is a lot of information about this case and there’s only so much I can say in this episode, but like I said I did get a lot of information for this episode from a book called Death in a Cold Town The Arlene Fraser Case by Steve McGregor. I really enjoyed reading this book, as strange as that sounds, there was so much information there that I just couldn’t find anywhere else. If you have time and want to know even more about this case have a read, I’d highly recommend it. And that’s the end. If you’ve enjoyed this episode and know just the person who’d also like it, please share it with them, don’t keep it to yourself.

Cole:

Please also get in touch on social media if you have any questions, comments or suggestions, and we’ll get back to you as soon as we can. All social media and contact details are on our website scottishmurders.com, as well as all the source material and photos related to this episode.

Dawn:

So that’s it for this week, come back next time for another episode of Scottish Murders.

Dawn and Cole:

Join us there. Bye.

Granny Robertson:

Scottish Murders is a production of Cluarantonn.

Scottish Murders is a production of Cluarantonn

Hosted by Dawn and Cole

Researched and Written by Dawn Young

Produced and Edited by Dawn Young and Peter Bull

Production Company Name by Granny Robertson

Music:

Dawn of the Fairies by Derek & Brandon Fiechter

Gothic Wedding by Derek & Brandon Fiechter

Meehan v. Beltrami in case of Deadly Innocence | HeraldScotland

Survivor relives day 50 years ago when gunman ran amok in Glasgow and shot him playing on swings – Daily Record

James Griffiths | Glesga Keelies Message Board

1960s Nutters in Glasgow – James Griffiths – General West End Chat – Pat’s Guide to Glasgow West End

The Round Toll Bar Possil

Patrick Meehan – Peterman.org.uk

A madman on the rampage – Daily Record

WolfieWiseGuy: James Griffiths – Demented Gunman

Wikipedia – Glasgow

Wikipedia – special_defence

The Griffiths Incident – 15 July 1969 – Glasgow Police Museum

Famed defence lawyer Joe Beltrami dies at 83 – Law Society of Scotland

The Ferris Conspiracy: Amazon.co.uk: Ferris, Paul, McKay, Reg: 9781840183887: Books

A Presumption of Innocence: The Amazing Case of Patrick Meehan: Amazon.co.uk: Kennedy, Ludovic: 9780575020726: Books

Deadly Innocence: Amazon.co.uk: Beltrami, Joseph: 9781851582976: Books

Scottish Murders is a production of Cluarantonn

Hosted by Dawn and Cole

Researched and Written by Dawn Young

Produced and Edited by Dawn Young and Peter Bull

Production Company Name by Granny Robertson

Music:

Dawn of the Fairies by Derek & Brandon Fiechter

Gothic Wedding by Derek & Brandon Fiechter

Cole:

Warning Wee Ones, this episode contains some strong language.

Murder, a shooting spree and a royal pardon. Nobody could have predicted the shocking events that took place in Glasgow, that all started with a murder in a town 40 miles away.

Dawn and Cole:

Hi wee ones, I’m Cole and I’m Dawn, and this is Scottish Murders.

[THEME TUNE]

CRIME DIVERS PODCAST PROMOTION

Cole:

On Tuesday the 15th of July 1969, James Griffiths went on a shooting spree lasting about two hours, which started in the west of Glasgow and ended up in an area in the northeast of the city. What started as a misunderstanding created a domino effect, that might otherwise not have been if it were not for a cruel and heinous robbery and a murder that had happened on the 6th of July 1969. This case is still being talked about on the streets of Glasgow today by those that remember the terror of the day or through stories passed down by family members. Today, Glasgow has a diverse architectural scene and is the fifth most visited city in the UK. Glasgow is situated on the River Clyde which is host to an abundance of futuristic looking buildings, including the SEC Armadillo. The population is estimated at over 611,000. In 1969 however, the Glasgow streets were known for their bloodshed due to gangs such as the Cumbie and the Tongs, but nobody was prepared for what happened on an otherwise quiet Tuesday morning. James Griffiths was brought up in Rochdale, Greater Manchester in England, and from an early age he was involved in crime, later turning to armed robbery and safe blowing by the age of 13. James was in and out of young offenders centres as a child, and as an adult he frequented prison. However, even though James was a time-served criminal, he was not respected by his fellow cons, mainly because he would spend his time in prison boasting about his crimes and saying things like one day he’d use a gun on the police and that he would never be taken alive. He wasn’t taken seriously and just thought to be all talk. After being caught and arrested for yet another crime, James was sent to HMP Parkhurst prison, which is a high security prison on the Isle of Wight off the south coast of England. Here he shared a cell with two Scots; Archibald Hall, who went on to become a serial killer known as the killer butler, and Paddy Meehan. Meehan was a top safe cracker and friend to Arthur Thompson, who the media dubbed The Godfather. Neither could be bothered with James and his usual boasting ways, until that is James managed to escape from HMP Parkhurst and get off the island, spending the ferry crossing chatting to a prison warden and his wife.

Dawn:

Did the prison guard not recognise him? Was he still in his prison clothes?

Cole:

It’s presumed that James had somehow changed from his prison clothes into civilian clothes, or at least had a coat on to cover his prison gear.

Dawn:

Okay.

Cole:

James was, however, captured again a few hours later on the mainland and brought back to Parkhurst, where he suddenly had a friend in Meehan, who invited him to Glasgow when he was released in early 1969, presumably for criminal activity as they were both safe crackers. Whatever the reason, this would prove to be a massive mistake by Meehan, one he would pay for dearly. James took Meehan up on the offer to come to Glasgow once he was released. On Sunday the 6th of July 1969, the two set out for a town called Stranraer, which is about 88 miles or 141 kilometres Southwest of Glasgow, to scope out a post office there that they had wanted to rob. On the way to Stranraer, Meehan and James would have passed through a town called Ayr, which is just under halfway between Glasgow and Stranraer, and it just so happened that the same night two men were breaking into the Ayr home of a wealthy elderly couple, Abraham Ross and his 72 year old wife Rachel, to steal their valuables. These two men tied up the couple before disgustingly assaulting and torturing them until they revealed where their valuables were. Mrs Ross had been bludgeoned so badly that she had sustained horrific head injuries from which she died. Abraham Ross was tied up and he had to lie beside his wife for a further 24 hours before being found.

Dawn:

Oh no, that’s horrible.

Cole:

It really is. And this murder shocked and scandalised Scotland.

Dawn:

I can understand why.

Cole:

Now, as Meehan was very well known to the police they frequently kept an eye on him, and they knew that Meehan was in the vicinity of Ayr that night, so he was arrested and taken in for questioning. On Monday the 14th of July 1969, eight days after the horrific murder, an identity parade was set up and a very frail and grief-stricken Abraham Ross identified Meehan as being the man that had broken into his house that night.

Dawn:

What?!

Cole:

There’s more. Abraham had also reported to the police that the robbers had addressed each other as Pat and Jim. Both the identity parade and the evidence was later stated by Meehan and others to have been set up by the police.

Dawn:

Oh okay.

Cole:

So, Meehan was in a bit of trouble. He knew he didn’t do what he was being accused of, but he’d been up to no good with James that night. Meehan didn’t want to point the finger at James and use him as an alibi, something to do with the criminal code, and James wasn’t coming forward by himself. When it became clear that Meehan was facing a murder charge he eventually gave the police James’ name as an alibi, and said that he was staying at 29 Holyrood Crescent in Glasgow’s West End under the name of Mr Douglas. Meehan was released from custody while the police spoke to James about providing him an alibi. The police knew that James, now 34, had a criminal record for armed robbery and safe cracking, so they sent five plain clothes detectives to question James about providing Meehan an alibi, at his flat in Holyrood Crescent on the morning of Tuesday the 15th of July 1969. They could not have imagined in their wildest dreams exactly what was about to unfold in front of them. Now, from his flat, James saw the detectives arriving. He heard them climbing the stairs of the block of flats and knock repeatedly at his door. They received no answer. The detectives knew that James was home and upon getting no answer they broke the door down, coming face to face with James screaming, swearing and firing a sawn off shotgun at them.

Dawn:

Shit!

Cole:

The detectives ran for the stairs but a shot caught one detective, DC William Walker who was 28, square in the back, sending him tumbling down the stairs. James barricaded himself in the flat, and going from window to window took shots at anyone that had the misfortune of being near his flat at the time, including Samuel Collins who was 65, Mary McKinnon who was 46 and Jack Kerr who was 22. All had been short but thankfully survived their injuries. Now, apparently a lady who lived just along from where the shooting was taking place was up a ladder decorating her front door. At first she didn’t pay any attention to the gunfire, maybe just a normal Tuesday for her. It wasn’t until a bullet embedded itself right next to her in the wall that she decided that maybe she had better get inside out the way. James would have known that if he was to continue to keep the police at bay, then he would need more ammunition, so he made his way down to his car, undetected, and from the boot of his car he retrieved a sniper’s hunting rifle and bullets, before heading back to his flat and continuing to shoot at anything or anyone in the vicinity, including the ever-increasing police presence with their bulletproof shields and police marksmen. There’s actually a picture of James at the window of his flat in Holyrood with his rifle in his hand taking shots at everyone below, which I’ll put on our website. It’s really eerie to see it now. The street would have been in complete panic with gunfire raining down onto the street, and people below screaming and running to escape. The police were just about ready to move in with tear gas when suddenly there was silence. The police below looked at each other perplexed. Had James given up?

Dawn:

Well had he?

Cole:

No. James had escaped his flat through an attic window and made his way down into an alley behind the flat. The next sighting of James was on Henderson Street, about a six minute leisurely stroll from his flat, although I doubt he would have been strolling, I think he would have been running.

Dawn:

I think he might have been.

Cole:

Here he came across a 57 year old salesman, James Kerr, in his car, who probably just stopped to find out the details of the next client he was going to visit. He hadn’t seen James approach, so he was a bit taken aback when a dark-haired frenzied man with a bandolier of bullets across his chest loomed over him, with a rifle in one hand and a shotgun in the other. His surprise rapidly turned to fear as James raised his gun and fired a shot through the car window, deafening Kerr, before pulling him out of his car and speeding off in it.

Dawn:

Was Kerr shot as well?

Cole:

Yeah, James Kerr had been shot on his left shoulder, but thankfully he survived the shooting.

Dawn:

Oh good.

Cole:

As James drove manically about the nearby streets, he continued to shoot at passers by, and unfortunately shot at and grazed 24 year old John Curry’s ear in Napier’s Hall Street. He also shot Ian Watson who was 23 in Great Western Road, and shot at Robert McAdam, who was 57, in Barrington Drive. Again, thankfully, although they would have been in an absolute shock and disbelief, these men survived their injuries. Obviously, James found it quite difficult to drive while firing shorts at pedestrians as he passed them, as after only driving the stolen car for about three miles or just under five kilometres he crashed it. Unfortunately he was unhurt and he ran to the nearest pub, which was The Round Toll on Possil Road. Now, pubs in the area were used to a bit of trouble, but I think this was even a step up for this pub. Once in the pub James waved his rifle around, firing two shots into the ceiling and yelling “Don’t Mess! I’ve got a gun, I’m gonna stick you up!” Bang, bang, bang, bang. bang!

Dawn:

(laughs) You fuc*ing idiot. What did he really say, Cole?

Cole:

“Don’t mess! I’ve shot two coppers already.” He then helped himself to a bottle of brandy and proceeded to gulp it down, while the punters looked on terrified. A 65 year old man called William Hughes happened to move slightly, causing James to turn around and shoot him twice. William died a few days later from his wounds.

Dawn:

No!

Cole:

Yeah. It was really unfortunate.

Dawn:

Oh poor man.

Cole:

The bar manager, James Connolly, was having no more of this. He had tolerated James helping himself to a drink, but when he picked on his customers he stepped over the line for the bar manager. The bar manager shouted at James “You dirty bastard! What did you do that for?! He was just an old man.”

Dawn:

Oh I love this man.

Cole:

He then grabbed James by the scruff of his neck and forcibly threw him out of the pub, dumping him on the pavement, before turning on his heels and walking back into the pub.

Dawn:

Yay!

Cole:

Usually in Scotland you get oxtered out of the club.

Dawn:

Is that true?

Cole:

Yeah.

Dawn:

I’ve never heard of that.

Cole:

Yeah. They put their hands under your armpits and oxter you out of the club.

Dawn:

Oh. No, I did not know that.

Cole:

I saw Billy Connolly talking about it once. Do you want to explain what an oxter is?

Dawn:

Oh, it’s your armpit.

Cole:

It’s the Scottish word for your armpit. James Connolly, the bar manager, was recognized for his bravery and received the Glasgow Corporation Medal for Bravery for his heroism. So well deserved. What an amazing guy for protecting his punters.

Dawn:

I’m so glad that he was recognised for doing that. That was pretty amazing.

Cole:

Yeah. Really brave. No doubt James wasn’t too happy about being dumped outside on the pavement, and probably fully intended to march back into the pub and finish the job he started. However, another brave passer-by had seen James wielding a gun and a rifle and decided to tackle him outside the pub. Unfortunately, the man was unsuccessful and was left wounded in struggle. By this time the police had heard the shots being fired and were in pursuit. James would have heard the sirens getting closer, so now he was looking for his next mode of transport to escape. It just so happened that a lorry driven by John Craig had pulled up nearby the pub when he heard what he thought was an explosion. He certainly didn’t expect to see a man wielding a rifle and a shotgun, firing shots at him, while running in his direction on a Tuesday morning. John, thankfully, had quick reactions and was out of his cab sprinting away to take shelter behind a lamppost as fast as he could, with James taking a final shot at him and thankfully missing, before he jumped in his lorry and sped away.

Dawn:

I’m sorry, he hid behind a lamppost?

Cole:
Yes, he hid behind a lamppost, he must have been a very skinny gentleman. So, James, in his newly acquired lorry, continued to shoot at unsuspecting pedestrians as he flew down street after street, this time hitting Peter Patterson who was 39 in Possil Road. James wasn’t that familiar with the city but he probably would have thought that as long as he could hear the sirens of the police then he could avoid them, changing his direction and just keeping one step ahead of them. This might have been a good strategy if he’d known the area, however, he ended up in the Springburn area of Glasgow, about a 1.5 mile or 2.4 kilometre drive from The Round Toll Pub. He hurled the lorry into Kay Street and slammed on the brakes, he had reached a dead end. He then jumped down from the lorry cab, with his shotgun and rifle in hand, and made his way to 26 Kay Street, where he broke into the top floor flat. There have been two different reports about what he found when he broke into this flat; one version is that the tenants, Valerie Boyd who was 21 and her young daughter, were inside the flat.  It was reported that Valerie had been shot but not fatally, before they managed to escape the flat. The second version is the flat was in fact empty when James broke.  I’m not sure which version is true,  either way nobody was killed. James then went from window to window in the flat in Kay Street, from the back to the front of the flat, again firing at anyone that happened to be in the vicinity. Unfortunately, situated at the back of the flat and within shooting distance was a children’s playground where many children were enjoying being out and about in the sunshine, as it was the school holidays. James’ shots managed to hit an eight-year-old boy, called Peter Traynor, in the stomach, but thankfully it was only superficial, still traumatic though. And also a mother called Mrs Irene Reid, who was shot in the leg. The police eventually did manage to get all of the terrified and crying children and their mothers out of harms way. The police had by this time surrounded the whole flat, back and front, so there was at least no chance of James slipping out through a back alley this time. The police also by this time realised just what they were dealing with and a phone call was made to the Army asking for help. In the confusion a baby in a pram had been left on Kay Street and bullets were fired around the pram. I really can’t imagine why the pram with a baby in it had been left in the streets, in the line of fire, when a gunman was firing shots, but thankfully the baby was not hit and a brave policeman crawled out from safety, grabbed the baby and it was passed safely into a ground floor flat. Hopefully, afterwards, Child Services were also called.

Dawn:

(laughs) Can you imagine though. You’re just walked along the street, and you’re like, gunfire, I know what  I’ll do. (laughs) I’m just leaving this thing here, fu*k it. It’ll be fine.

Cole:

Fu*k this baby.

Dawn:
Didn’t like it anyway.

Cole:

Also walking down Kay Street, unaware of what was about to happen, was a man who had just come out of hospital where he’d been recovering from a knife attack. James shot this poor man in the neck. Someone else who had been in the wrong place at the wrong time was a couple who had only just got married, Irene Reed, who was an 18 year old, was hit, and her new husband was so angry that the police had to jump on him and hold him back as he ran towards James and his shotgun.

Dawn:

Oh don’t mess with his woman eh?

Cole:

Exactly. So, with the shooting spree now having been going on for almost two hours, and shots still being fired from every room of the flat above, endangering everyone below, and with no end in sight, the daunting task of stopping James was given to two brave police officers, Chief Superintendent Malcolm Finlayson and Detective Sergeant Ian Smith. They both armed themselves with revolvers and made their way undetected to the flat, slowly and quietly going up the stairs. When they got to the front door of the flat Finlayson opened the letterbox so that you could see inside. However, the metal squeaked on being opened and gave them away to James inside.

Dawn:

Oh no.

Cole:

On finding out that the police were at the door of the flat he raised his rifle and came running towards the door. Knowing James would be more than likely to shoot them if they didn’t do something, Finlayson placed the barrel of his gun through the letterbox and fired once, hitting James in the shoulder. James fell to the floor and the two men instantly came through the door and surrounded him. They kicked his guns away and carried him downstairs to their waiting colleagues. However, on reaching the street, James had died from his wounds. Apparently, the bullet had gone into James’s shoulder, ricocheting off a bone and sliced through his aorta artery, the main artery of the heart. Later, a pathologist said the path the bullet had taken was a chance in a thousand. The frenzied shooting spree was finally over, but not before James had shot a hundred bullets, injured 12 people and killed one, William Hughes. James was the first wanted man on record to be shot dead by Scottish police. James was given a paupers funeral and lies in Linn Cemetery in Glasgow. Chief Superintendent Malcolm Finlayson and Detective Sergeant Ian Smith both received the Glasgow Corporation Medal for Bravery, and were given the British Empire Medal by the Queen at Buckingham Palace. Finlayson apparently got to keep the actual gun that he shot James with when he retired in 1971, and he kept it in a box at his home on the Isle of Skye until he died in 1994 at the age of 83.

Dawn:

Good for them, I’m glad they both got recognised for what they did.

Cole:

Yeah, me too. So the story doesn’t actually end there, because we still haven’t had justice for Rachel Ross.

Dawn:

Oh my God, yes! I’d totally forgotten about why this had all started.

Cole:

Yeah, well, a lot has happened since then.

Dawn:

Yeah, it has.

Cole:

So, after James’s shooting spree, the police took this as an act of guilt, and in their minds that meant Meehan was guilty of the murder of Rachel Ross too. So, Meehan was immediately arrested and charged.

Dawn:

I don’t quite follow their thinking there, but, okay.

Cole:

I guess they couldn’t really know because James had died and hadn’t got a chance to say why he did what he did.

Dawn:

Yeah. So, they’ve just made an assumption.

Cole:

Yes. Meehan went to trial on the 24th of October 1969, where he submitted a defence of incrimination, claiming that the murder had actually been committed by another man named Ian Waddell.

Dawn:

What does defence of incrimination mean?

Cole:

So, it just means that he was alleging someone else had committed the crime, Ian Waddle.

Dawn:

Ah, I see, okay.

Cole:

Meehan knew of Waddell due to their crime world connections, so I’m assuming he was given Waddell’s name by one of his associates. However, despite this, Meehan was found guilty by a majority verdict of the murder of Rachel Ross and received a life sentence.

Dawn:

Okay, but I thought that he was somewhere else that night?

Cole:

Well, that is what he maintained, but obviously because Abraham Ross identified him they thought that it was an open and shut case, but not everybody agreed.

Dawn:

Hmm I can see why.

Cole:

Meehan spent his time in prison in solitary confinement and continued to proclaim his innocence from prison. He continued to appeal and assert that he was the victim of police framing, specifically stating that the identity parade had been rigged and the evidence had been suppressed that pointed to others haven’t actually committed the murder. This was backed up by journalist and broadcaster Ludovic Kennedy, Meehan’s advocate at the trial Nicholas Fairbairn, and others, who all suspected that there had indeed been a miscarriage of justice.  Also, in Kennedy’s book in 1975, he puts forward two names that were likely to be the killers; Ian Waddell and William Tank McGuinness.

Dawn:

Okay, he’s new.

Cole:

He is new. With the support of Kennedy, Fairbairn and Joe Beltrami, Meehan solicitor at the time of the trial, a campaign was set up, which eventually secured Meehan a Royal Pardon in May 1976, as well as receiving compensation of £50,000 in 1984, which is around £170,000 and about $213,000 in today’s money. On receiving his Royal Pardon and being released, Meehan had spent seven years in prison.

Dawn:

How were they able to secure the Royal Pardon? Was there new evidence presented? 

Cole:

Okay, so this is quite a story, with a couple of different versions being told. So, you remember I mentioned that Ludovic Kennedy had put forward in his book that a likely killer of Rachel Ross could have been William Tank McGuiness?

Dawn:

Yes.

Cole:

Well, it turns out that William Tank McGuiness was also a client of Joel Beltrami, Meehan solicitor at the time of the trial and before.

Dawn:

Oh really. Wouldn’t that have been a conflict of interest?

Cole:

It would, and this is why Joe Beltrami was unable to reveal the fact that he actually knew of Tank McGuiness’s involvement in Rachel Ross’s murder, that was until Tank McGuiness’s death in 1976.

Dawn:

So, he knew that someone else was actually responsible for Rachel’s murder, but he kept quiet, even though he was representing Meehan and he was actually going to go to prison for it?

Cole:

Yes. Although Joe Beltrami believed that due to a client confidentiality he was unable to reveal this fact until after Tank McGuiness’s death, and this may have been the reason why he fought so hard to secure a Royal Pardon for Meehan.

Dawn:

That’s quite shocking that Beltrami only came forward with this information after Tank McGuiness’s death.

Cole:

I know. Meehan’s Royal pardon followed shortly after.

Dawn:

Poor Meehan. I mean he really got the raw end of the stick here didn’t he?

Cole:

Yeah, he did. And in an inquiry report by Lord Hunter, he too did not agree with Beltrami’s claim that there was a solicitor client relationship between him and Tank McGuinness at the time in question, going as far as suggesting that perhaps the best thing that Beltrami could have done back in 1969 when he was representing Meehan was to have stepped down and let another solicitor represent Meehan.

Dawn:

Well, yeah, that was the least he should have done. So, anyway, what happened to Tank McGuiness? How did he actually die?

Cole:
Well, there’s a couple of different stories. One is he was killed in a drunken street brawl. However, I found another story that was very interesting. In the book The Ferris Conspiracy by Reg McKay and Paul Ferris, it is stated that an arrest warrant was out for Tank McGuiness when he was picked up by two police officers. One of these police officers later stated that instead of taking him to the police station, they were ordered to drop him in a specific street in Glasgow, where he was subsequently beaten to death.

Dawn:
Oh, so, who was behind that?

Cole:

Well according to The Ferris Conspiracy book it was Arthur Thompson, who was a Scottish gangster known as The Godfather, who had ordered Tank McGuiness to be killed.

Dawn:

Why would he do that?

Cole:

Well, the book goes on to say that both Meehan and Tank McGuinness were long-term friends and asssociates of Arthur Thompson. However, more importantly, Joe Beltrami was Arthur’s solicitor, who had frequently got him out of tight scrapes, and he knew that Beltrami was struggling to get Meehan a Royal Pardon and was unable to break his client confidentiality restrictions with Tank McGuiness, so Arthur stepped in.

Dawn:

Alright, that’s quite interesting.

Cole:

And there’s even more. Following the information about Tank McGuiness’s involvement in the Rachel Ross murders coming out, it was then reported that apparently McGuiness had been stopped near Rachel and Abraham Ross’s house on the night of the murder by the police.

Dawn:

What?!

Cole:

But he supposedly pretended he was just drunk and had just missed the last bus home to Glasgow. He wasn’t arrested but sent on his way.

Dawn:

I’m shocked. I don’t know what to say.

Cole:

Well, I guess the police didn’t know about the break-in and the murder of Rachel at that point, it would have been 24 hours later before they were found tied up, but when they did know you’d think they might have followed up that line of inquiry.

Dawn:

Yeah, they should definitely have followed up that line of inquiry. I can now understand why Meehan was so suspicious of a police cover up.

Cole:

Yeah, it really makes no sense. A further interesting development that didn’t happen until after McGuiness’s murder is that apparently there were two witnesses, a Mr and Mrs Marshall who had seen two men acting suspiciously near Rachel and Abraham’s house shortly before the murderer. Upon Mrs Marshall finally being shown the correct photograph seven years later, she positively identified that it was William McGuiness that she had seen near Rachel and Abraham’s home that day.

Dawn:

Wait, you said they were shown the correct photograph seven years later, what did you mean?

Cole:

Well, according to Meehan in an article in The Herald newspaper on the 22nd of November 1989, Beltrami had told the police to show the witnesses a picture of a Michael McGuiness instead of a William McGuiness.

Dawn:

What?

Cole:

Yeah. Even though Beltrami knew William McGinnis and presumably what he looked like as he was one of his clients. And even more incredulously, William McGuiness actually had a record of tying people up.

Dawn:

That’s quite incredible really, and I could totally see why Meehan felt overwhelmingly that he was being framed.

Cole:

So can I.  In Beltrami’s book A Deadly Innocence, he did concede that with hindsight there could have been MI5 involvement.

Dawn:

What now?

Cole:

He went on to state that he knew nothing of William McGuiness’s involvement until much later. And, according to the Law Society of Scotland, he had only been able to disclose this information following McGuiness’s death, due to their client solicitor relationship, but that he had campaigned for seven years to secure Meehan a Royal Pardon.

Dawn:

Alright, that was really big of him.

Cole:

I know. Joe Beltrami died in 2015 at the age of 83. Following Meehan’s Royal pardon in 1976, journalist and broadcaster Ludovic Kennedy continued a prolonged campaign and eventually an inquiry was ordered into the miscarriage of justice, which was chaired by Lord Hunter, who was a Scottish judge at the time. However, having received and processed all of the information that was available to him about this case, it would take a further five years before Lord Hunter eventually concluded in a report in July 1982 that Meehan could not have committed the murder, but that he may actually have been involved in the background. So, he believed that Meehan may have been aware of the robbery, but maybe not what would be done to Rachel and Abraham. The report also added that there was insufficient evidence to support the claim that Meehan had been a victim of police conspiracy. Ludovic Kennedy, who has written many many books, also wrote a book about Meehan’s  case called A Presumption of Innocence, just if you want to delve further into this particular case. I could literally do a whole episode about Meehan alone. If you are interested there is a whole host of information on the internet about Meehan and his fight for justice. Meehan died from throat cancer on the 14th of August 1994 at the age of 67.

Dawn:

So, after all that, we still haven’t had justice for Rachel Ross’s murder, with Meehan now being pardoned and Tank McGuiness now being dead. So, what about the guy mentioned at Meehan’s trial? Was it Ian Waddell?

Cole:

Yes. He was the man named at Meehan’s trial, and by Ludovic Kennedy in his 1975 book as a potential suspect in the killing. Not long after the trial, Ian Waddell actually confessed to journalists that he had indeed committed the murder of Rachel Ross.

Dawn:

What?!

Cole:

Yeah. However, it wasn’t until 1976, after Meehan’s pardon, that Waddell was finally charged and tried for the murder of Rachel Ross, where he too submitted a defence of incrimination and claimed that the murder was actually committed by Meehan.

Dawn:

Oh okay. What is wrong with this guy?! He speaks to journalists and says yeah, I did this, and then when he’s charged and on trial he changes his story and says no, it wasn’t me, it was actually Meehan.

Cole:

Yeah, I know. He seems to be a bit all over the place. I don’t really know what he was thinking there.

Dawn:

Yeah, he’s just messing about.

Cole:

Anyway, even more incredulous the judge presiding over Waddell’s trial, Lord Robertson, in his closing statement managed to sway the jury into acquitting Waddell, simply because he was still not convinced of Meehan’s innocence or happy about Meehan receiving a free pardon. So, Waddell was acquitted.

Dawn:

I’m beginning to feel that everybody just has it in for Meehan. I’m not saying that he’s a saint, but he was pardoned!

Cole:

Yeah. He wasn’t actually there that night. Waddell was actually murdered in 1982 by Andrew Gentle, an associate of his, after they carried out a robbery together where they had murdered a woman called Josephine Chipperfield. Unfortunately, Waddell was dead so he couldn’t be charged and tried for this murder, but Gentle was convicted of both the murder of Waddell and Josephine. Gentle later committed suicide in prison, but that’s a whole other episode right there. So, what started that day in 1969 as just a few detectives wanting to speak to James about providing an alibi for Meehan the night of Rachel Ross’s murder, had turned into a shooting spree from Glasgow’s West End to the north of Glasgow, and continued to have ramifications over many years to come. What I did find seriously lacking though was information about Rachel and Abraham Ross and their story. I would have loved to have said more about them both, the victims. I would like to know what happened to Abraham. I know this was back in 1969, but if anyone can remember anything or if any details have been passed down by families, please send us a message to let us know, cause we’d love to do a mini episode about Rachel and Abraham Ross and their lives.

Dawn:

And that’s the end. If you’ve enjoyed this episode and know just the person who’d also like it, please share it with them, don’t keep it to yourself.

Cole:

Please also get in touch on social media if you have any questions, comments or suggestions and we’ll get back to you as soon as we can. All social media and contact details are on our website scottishmurders.com, as well as all the source material and photos related to this episode.

Dawn:

So that’s it for this week, come back next time for another episode of Scottish Murders.

Dawn and Cole:

Join us there! Bye! 

Granny Robertson: Scottish Murders is a production of Cluarantonn.