- 19 hours ago
Category
📺
TVTranscript
00:11There's no signs of a struggle, the door's unlocked, it's like the Marie Celeste.
00:17To just walk out on our kids, walk out on our family, none of it made sense.
00:30One of our biggest frustrations was the absence of clues.
00:36We've got no direct witnesses, we've got no CCTV, we've got no crime scene or forensics, we've got no body.
00:48Marlene Fraser's disappearance has baffled police and her family.
00:52We can't understand why this has happened. I can't understand.
01:00Today's news conference in Elgin was the first time Nat Fraser had spoken in public about his wife's disappearance.
01:06Arlene, if you're watching this, then please get in touch.
01:09You have an individual who is now appealing for his wife's safe return, and the whole time everybody knows he
01:15tried to murder her.
01:18At the time when Arlene went missing, Nat was on bail for her attempted murder.
01:25But there was one major, major problem for the police at that time. Nat had the perfect alibi.
01:31This was a conspiracy by a number of individuals. Who better to involve than your closest confidants?
01:45Glenn Lucas was a friend of Nat Fraser.
01:48He had been video recorded via CCTV, having a conversation with Nat Fraser.
01:55The CCTV tape was given to a lip reader.
01:59There was distressing detail around the disposal of a body that you would only presume was Arlene.
02:10There has been a major development in the inquiry into the disappearance of the Elgin mother, Arlene Fraser.
02:15Within the past half hour, the Crime Office has announced that three men have been indicted for her murder.
02:21They're Arlene's estranged husband, Nat, his friend, Hector Dick, and English businessman, Glenn Lucas.
02:27Because to learn that three people are involved, it just makes you think, how much planning went into this?
02:36The only way of coping is believing that one day that you will get justice for Arlene.
03:07But in the whole five years, what one thing sticks in your mind that's been the hardest thing for you?
03:14The hardest thing was coming to terms with Arlene being dead.
03:23That's all I can see.
03:30The search for Arlene Fraser was one of the biggest that Scotland had ever seen, yet no trace of her
03:35was ever found.
03:38I'm Sam Poling. I'm an investigative journalist with the BBC.
03:42A few months before the trial was due to start, we received a phone call from Grampian police.
03:47And they said, do you want to make a film about the Arlene Fraser case?
03:53The police had their own theory as to what had happened to Arlene, but little evidence to support it.
03:59Had Nat Fraser committed the perfect crime?
04:05We were given access to the entire case.
04:08I remember looking at the footage that the police had of the house.
04:15And the fact that when you see the way that the house was left, it was left mid-everything.
04:23There's a hoover lying in the hallway.
04:27There was a hairdryer out.
04:29I think there was a hairbrush and some hair products on the bed.
04:35It was like she had vanished into thin air.
04:41And I remember there was some discussion, had Arlene simply just woken up that day and decided to walk out
04:48of her life?
04:49And some people thought that.
04:51And then there was the other half, which was, Arlene would never walk out on her two young children.
05:00Something bad has happened to Arlene Fraser.
05:05The police have got this entire case that they've built up against Nat Fraser, Hector Dick and Glenn Lucas.
05:14The police say they did it, but we've got no body.
05:17We've got no forensics.
05:18We've got no crime scene.
05:19We've got no murder weapon.
05:23It was a circumstantial case.
05:25They are the hardest cases to prosecute.
05:30I just remember as the months were leading up to the trial, making this film and going through the evidence
05:35which the police had given us access to, sit and thinking, oh, is that it?
05:56Nat Fraser arrives at the High Court in Edinburgh for the first day of a trial, which could last at
06:01least six weeks.
06:03Nat Fraser was on bail during the trial, so he was walking into the court and appearing pretty relaxed for
06:11a man who was on trial for the murder of his wife.
06:14Mr Fraser denies, along with Hector Dick of Elgin and Glenn Lucas of Lincolnshire, murdering her and dismembering her body.
06:23The first trial started on my 40th birthday, and my mum was one of the first witnesses.
06:33I just thought how sad it was that it was her eldest daughter's birthday and we should be celebrating it.
06:42But here she is, in court, given evidence for the murder of her youngest daughter.
06:53Isabel Thompson said conditions in the Fraser's marriage had been bad and getting worse in late 1997.
07:01The prosecution was calling witnesses who were talking about a stoner relationship, about a relationship that had problems.
07:08And a solicitor has been giving evidence about how she made an appointment to discuss Mrs Fraser's marital difficulties on
07:16the day Mrs Fraser vanished.
07:17They also talked about the size of any potential financial settlements, and a figure in the region of £250,000
07:23was raised.
07:26The motive was being presented that the relationship was breaking down, Arlene Fraser was going to seek a divorce, and
07:32that that could involve a heavy financial cost for Nat Fraser.
07:38Of course, the elephant in the room was that the jury couldn't be told about Nat Fraser's assault on Arlene
07:45Fraser, that he'd served a prison sentence for her, because that was a previous conviction.
07:50This was the photograph taken a few days later.
07:53The surgeon who examined her said he'd only ever seen injuries as severe as hers on a dead body.
08:02Juries aren't allowed to be told about previous convictions.
08:08So the prosecution had to, through the evidence of witnesses, explain the breakdown of the marriage, explain the fact that
08:14Arlene Fraser went missing.
08:15And the day she was due to meet a lawyer to discuss a divorce, without being able to tell the
08:21jury that one of the men on the dock had attacked her viciously and violently, just weeks before she went
08:27missing.
08:30Nat Fraser and Glenn Lucas have lodged special defences of alibi.
08:34The trial continues tomorrow.
08:37So, obviously, with the attempted murder charge existing against Nat, the finger of suspicion points straight at him.
08:43But there was one major, major problem for the police at that time.
08:47Nat had what seemed to be the perfect alibi.
08:50And in fact, it was almost too perfect.
08:53Nat had made a telephone call from a phone box, which was covered by CCTV.
08:59The phone call that he made was overlaying the period of time where we think Arlene disappeared.
09:08Almost to the minute, he could not have had a more substantial alibi.
09:25Earlier in the day, Arlene Fraser's sister, Carol Gillis, had given evidence.
09:30Mrs Gillis recounted how, when she'd met Nat Fraser, shortly after his wife had disappeared,
09:35she'd felt he was more worried about himself than about her.
09:38He'd also been concerned, he said, about money missing from the house.
09:44He was peddling the story about, you know, she's stolen money from his stash.
09:49That gave her the means to buy tickets to get abroad.
09:55We could absolutely establish that Arlene had not left the country.
09:59She'd not travelled by air, she'd not travelled by train, you know,
10:04because all these areas are covered by CCTV.
10:06There was no sighting of Arlene.
10:11None of it made sense to just walk out on our kids, walk out on our family, our friends,
10:18leave everything, leave the financial gain that she was going to get.
10:34The Arlene Fraser murder trial has heard from her stepmother, Catherine McInnes,
10:39how rings belonging to Mrs Fraser were suddenly discovered in her Elgin home,
10:43a week after it had been thoroughly searched by police and members of her family.
10:48I found them in the bathroom on a wooden dowel and they obviously hadn't been there before
10:54because everybody who was in that house was using the bathroom.
11:00So somebody would have seen three rings hanging on a dowel.
11:07Whoever put the rings there had to be two things.
11:12One, the person who had access to Arlene's body to take the rings from.
11:16Secondly, the person who had access to the house to put the rings back.
11:21Well, who would have had access to the body, the person who killed her?
11:25And who would have had access to the house?
11:27Yes, very few people.
11:32One afternoon, when Nat was in the house, they were suddenly there.
11:38So amazed that they had suddenly appeared from nowhere.
11:46It was almost as if they'd been placed there in order to add weight to this story
11:52that was being peddled, that Arlene had left Elgin to start a new life elsewhere.
12:08In the planning of her disappearance,
12:11I believe that he had to make it look like it wasn't criminal,
12:18that she had simply gone missing.
12:21But on the day she disappeared, Nat was alibied.
12:24And so he wasn't physically the individual
12:27who was responsible for the actual execution of the crime.
12:34So this was a conspiracy by a number of individuals.
12:38Who better to involve than your closest confidants, if you like?
12:43And that looked like it was very much Hector Dick and Glenn Lucas.
12:49Glenn Lucas was from Lincolnshire.
12:52Part of his business would take him up to Elgin,
12:54and he was very close with Nat Fraser.
12:58When Nat was jailed for the attack on Arlene,
13:03then Glenn used to travel up and then go to prison and visit Nat Fraser.
13:08Hector Dick and Nat were good friends.
13:10They were close friends.
13:13Nat Fraser was the best man at Hector Dick's wedding.
13:18And I think there was a bond of trust.
13:29Today, witness Kevin Ritchie, a mechanic,
13:32recalled how Hector Dick asked him the day before Arlene Fraser disappeared
13:35to buy a cheap car.
13:37Mr Dick had stipulated, he said, a car with a boot.
13:41So is there a compelling case against Hector Dick?
13:44I mean, look, he buys a car for £400.
13:47He pays the man he bought the car from £50 to keep quiet.
13:52When was the last time you bought something and said to somebody,
13:54there's 50 quid, keep quiet about it?
13:59The fact that a vehicle had been purchased
14:02in very suspicious circumstances the night before Arlene went missing,
14:07and Nat being present, the knowledge that Arlene's own vehicle
14:11had been set on fire.
14:15Is it the case that Arlene, having no car,
14:19might be susceptible to someone who she knows coming along
14:23and saying, I have a car for you, I've got to run around,
14:26why don't you come in the car, we can go for a spin?
14:30All of this created a very sinister scenario
14:34that clearly we felt was a part of the plan
14:39in Arlene's potential abduction and murder.
14:42And to this day, the whereabouts of that vehicle,
14:46like Arlene, remain unknown.
14:49As the evidence unfolded, you were hearing about Nat Fraser,
14:52you were hearing about Hector Dick.
14:54The picture was building.
14:56I don't remember hearing anything about Glenn Lucas.
15:00The evidence relating to Glenn Lucas
15:03was confined to some circumstantial evidence
15:06and the evidence contained within the lip-reading transcript.
15:10Glenn Lucas had visited Nat Fraser
15:13whilst he was in prison on charges
15:15related to the assault on Arlene.
15:19The CCTV tape of that conversation didn't have audio.
15:23It was given to a lip-reader.
15:25The assessment by the lip-reader,
15:28there was distressing detail
15:31around the disposal of a body
15:35that you could only presume was Arlene.
15:38They were discussing pulling out her teeth,
15:41removing her limbs.
15:43That footage was what changed it for them.
15:45That was the breakthrough.
15:46And I know from having spoken
15:48to a number of lip-reading experts at the time
15:51that that was going to be vulnerable
15:52to challenge from the defence.
16:01Lip-reading is an art.
16:03It's not a science
16:04because it is open to interpretation.
16:07So my name is Tina Lannan
16:09and I'm a forensic lip-reader.
16:14Lip-reading isn't just about reading lips.
16:17You're looking at the jaw,
16:18the eyes,
16:21the neck,
16:23even the shoulders.
16:24So you are checking in all of what you can see
16:27and the lips are really only part of it.
16:32I'm watching CCTV footage
16:35of Glenn Lucas and Nat Fraser
16:38having a shot in prison.
16:41Really difficult to work out
16:43what is being said
16:44because of the quality of the footage.
16:47Very, very difficult to live through it.
16:51I think in the case of Glenn Lucas
16:53being charged with murder
16:55and the bearded job this evidence,
16:58it's very disconcerting.
17:00There's no clarity.
17:02It's very, very,
17:03in my professional opinion.
17:05This evidence is not good enough
17:07to be used in court.
17:12I was never convinced
17:13that there was a sufficiency of evidence
17:15to convict Glenn Lucas.
17:18We were confident
17:19that we had strong circumstantial cases
17:22against Hector, Dick
17:24and Nat Fraser.
17:26We probably had a stronger
17:28circumstantial case
17:29against Hector, Dick.
17:38When I speak to our court reporters,
17:40they often say that
17:41the one predictable thing
17:44about covering court
17:45is the unpredictability of it.
17:48We all turn up in court
17:50as usual.
17:53But this day,
17:55there were some whisperings
17:56and mutterings.
17:58Court was a little bit
17:59later in starting.
18:01We were asked
18:03to all kind of gather
18:04in a room.
18:06Alan Turnbull
18:06came in.
18:07He announced
18:08that the charges
18:10against Hector, Dick
18:11and Glenn Lucas
18:12had been dropped
18:13and that Hector, Dick
18:16was now going to be a witness.
18:19The first thing I said
18:21was,
18:21does he know
18:22where Arlene is?
18:24The Arlene Fraser murder trial
18:26has taken a sensational turn.
18:28Two men
18:28charged with the murder
18:29of the Elgin woman
18:30who disappeared
18:30without trace
18:31five years ago
18:32have walked free
18:33from court.
18:34We're all sitting there
18:35going,
18:35what?
18:37Three accused
18:38and suddenly there's
18:38just Nat Fraser
18:39left in the dock.
18:40Glenn Lucas
18:41walks from the court
18:42after today's
18:42dramatic developments.
18:50So six days
18:51into a murder charge
18:52in the high court
18:53from Hector, Dick
18:54decides that
18:55he will cooperate.
18:56At no point
18:57in the previous
18:58three years
18:58did he think
18:59it was the right thing
19:00to do
19:01to help
19:01the investigation.
19:03When Hector, Dick
19:05turned Queen's evidence
19:06his status legally changed.
19:07He was no longer
19:08an accused person
19:09he was a witness.
19:11People don't generally
19:12just do this
19:12for the good
19:13of their consciences.
19:14They cut a deal
19:15with the authorities
19:16to avoid
19:16a more serious
19:17prosecution and conviction
19:19and to escape
19:20some of those consequences.
19:23Would he finally reveal
19:24what happened
19:25to Arlene Fraser?
19:26Would he tell everybody
19:28what Nat Fraser's role
19:29was in all of this?
19:30Would he explain
19:31his own role
19:32in all of this?
19:45I got overexcited
19:46and thought
19:46here we go
19:47we're going to find out
19:48what happened here.
19:51There was a wait
19:51of quite a few days
19:52I think
19:53four or five days
19:54before he actually
19:54got in
19:55the box
19:57and that
19:58took forever.
19:59I think that was
20:00the longest
20:01week
20:01of my life
20:05waiting
20:05to hear
20:06if we were
20:07actually going
20:07to get the truth.
20:17So in the duration
20:18of that inquiry
20:20Hector said nothing.
20:22He stonewalled
20:23the police
20:23so for the very
20:25very first time
20:26the public
20:27get an opportunity
20:27to hear
20:28what might have
20:29happened
20:29and that moment
20:30happens
20:31when Hector
20:31walks along
20:33the courtroom floor
20:33and gets into
20:35the witness box
20:35and stares right
20:37across at his
20:37former best mate
20:38Nat.
20:44Hector Dick
20:45began by saying
20:45he was concerned
20:46by Nat Fraser's
20:47conversations
20:48in the days
20:49leading up
20:50to Arlene's
20:50disappearance.
20:52Hector Dick
20:53told the court
20:53that two days
20:54before Arlene
20:55Fraser disappeared
20:56Nat Fraser
20:57was at his
20:57farm
20:58he was
20:59agitated
21:00he was very
21:01annoyed
21:01he believed
21:03Arlene was
21:03having an affair.
21:05Hector said
21:06Nat told him
21:08about discussing
21:10nobody murders
21:11and how many
21:12people go missing
21:13every year
21:13and their bodies
21:14are never found.
21:15So this is
21:16quite a moment
21:17in that court
21:17case
21:18and the case
21:19in its entirety
21:19because nobody
21:20has heard
21:21Hector come
21:22forward with
21:22this type
21:23of information.
21:24The farmer
21:25went on to admit
21:26he'd lied to police
21:27about the fate
21:28of a Ford Fiesta
21:29regarded as central
21:30to the disappearance.
21:31He confessed
21:32to buying it
21:33for Nat Fraser
21:34then after Arlene
21:35had disappeared
21:36he burnt it
21:37crushed it
21:38and dumped it
21:39at a local
21:39scrapyard.
21:42And he started
21:43to tell this story
21:44story of
21:46Nat Fraser
21:47wanting
21:49to get rid
21:50of Arlene.
21:51Nat Fraser
21:51wanted Hector
21:53Dick to purchase
21:54a car.
21:55He claimed
21:56the vehicle
21:57had been taken
21:57by somebody
21:58returned to his
21:59farm
21:59in a damaged
22:00state
22:01and he'd
22:01later
22:02set fire
22:03to the vehicle
22:04and then took
22:04what remained
22:05of that vehicle
22:06to the scrapyard.
22:08Hector's panicking
22:09he doesn't know
22:10forensically
22:10what's in this car
22:12he knows
22:13Arlene's missing
22:14he panics
22:15he gets rid
22:16of the car
22:17he then says
22:18that a couple
22:18of weeks later
22:19Nat says to him
22:19don't worry
22:20Hector
22:21don't worry
22:21they'll never
22:21find her.
22:25Hector Dick
22:26then delivered
22:27the most crucial
22:28piece of evidence
22:28to date.
22:30Weeks after
22:31she went missing
22:32he asked Nat
22:33what had happened
22:33to Arlene.
22:34His friend said
22:35he'd paid a killer
22:36to murder her
22:37then ground up
22:38her body
22:39so she couldn't
22:39be identified
22:40by dental records
22:41burnt the remains
22:43and scattered
22:44the ashes.
22:48When Hector Dick
22:49was explaining
22:50what had happened
22:51to Arlene
22:52what Nat
22:53had told him
22:54you were able
22:55to stay in court
22:56and you could
22:58listen to that.
22:59Yes
22:59I wanted to hear
23:00the words
23:00I wanted to hear
23:02the truth
23:02and I wanted
23:03to hear Hector
23:04Dick say it
23:06and I'm satisfied
23:07that
23:08what he's saying
23:09is true
23:11but
23:12I think
23:13he's only
23:14given us
23:14about
23:15less than
23:1650%
23:16of the truth.
23:18There's some
23:19way still
23:19to go
23:20in this trial
23:20and the key
23:22point is
23:22whether the jury
23:23of seven men
23:24and seven women
23:25will at the end
23:26of the day
23:26accept that
23:27Hector Dick's
23:28evidence
23:28has been
23:29the truth
23:30the whole truth
23:31and nothing
23:32but the truth.
23:46calling Hector
23:47Dick
23:47to give evidence
23:48is clearly
23:48a risk.
23:49He was a man
23:50who's changed
23:51his story
23:51umpteen times
23:52but that was
23:53the Crown's
23:54calculation
23:54that the power
23:55of his evidence
23:56as Nat's friend
23:57given the damaging
23:58nature of what
23:59you could testify
24:00to was worth
24:01putting him
24:02in front of the jury
24:03well knowing
24:04that the defence
24:05would have a field day
24:06with his credibility.
24:08Hector Dick
24:09has been trying
24:10to defend
24:10his position
24:11and his evidence
24:12today
24:12in the face
24:13of an onslaught
24:14from Nat Fraser's
24:15defence QC
24:16Paul McBride.
24:19Today
24:20Paul McBride
24:21consistently put it
24:23to Mr Dick
24:24that he in fact
24:24was lying
24:25that he'd lied
24:26to police
24:27all along.
24:27The problem
24:28with Hector Dick
24:29was he was
24:29a convicted liar
24:30at this point
24:30right?
24:31So you have
24:32a convicted liar
24:33who has lied
24:33all the way up
24:34until you're
24:35in the middle
24:35of a murder trial
24:36and then suddenly
24:37decides he's going
24:38to tell the truth
24:39and then takes
24:40a stand
24:40where expected
24:41to believe him.
24:43Today he was
24:43pointedly asked
24:44repeatedly
24:45did you kill
24:46Arlene Fraser?
24:48I did not
24:48he replied.
24:50Were you at all
24:51involved in luring
24:52Mrs Fraser from the house?
24:54Of course I was not
24:55he said
24:55but he did admit
24:56he was silly
24:57and gullible.
25:00So in terms of
25:01Hector Dick's decision
25:02to change his story
25:04and to incriminate
25:05Nat effectively
25:06another line
25:07that the jury
25:08might ask themselves
25:08is can we really
25:10believe this?
25:10Is he just doing
25:11this to save
25:12his own skin?
25:15Nat Fraser's
25:16defence QC
25:16Paul McBride
25:17rubbished this
25:18evidence branding
25:19Dick a practiced
25:20consummate
25:21and habitual liar.
25:22He said putting
25:23words into
25:23Nat Fraser's
25:24mouth was
25:25Dick's way
25:25of slithering
25:26out of a murder
25:27charge.
25:42Nat Fraser was
25:42asked some
25:43very straight
25:44questions and
25:44gave some
25:45very straight
25:46answers.
25:47Paul McBride
25:47said did you
25:48kill your wife
25:48and Nat Fraser
25:49said no.
25:51Mr McBride
25:52asked Nat Fraser
25:53if he knew
25:53any hitmen
25:54or thugs
25:55who would
25:55kill somebody
25:56for money.
25:57Nat Fraser
25:57said he did
25:58not and he
25:59had never
25:59had any
25:59reason to
26:00hire one.
26:02On the
26:03cross-examination
26:04Nat Fraser
26:05denied knowing
26:06that Arlene
26:07was going
26:07through with
26:08the divorce.
26:09He admitted
26:09being jealous.
26:10He agreed
26:11she had no
26:12enemies and
26:13the only person
26:14she had any
26:14trouble with
26:15was him.
26:19when did
26:19you give
26:20up hope
26:20that your
26:21wife would
26:21be coming
26:22back
26:22he was
26:22asked.
26:23On Monday
26:24he said
26:24after Mr
26:25Dick's
26:26evidence.
26:27He's telling
26:27one big
26:28story
26:28said Nat
26:29Fraser
26:29I think
26:30it's plain
26:30to see
26:31and at
26:31one point
26:32he appeared
26:32to be
26:32almost
26:33fighting
26:33back
26:33tears.
26:35There were
26:36some
26:36crocodile
26:37tears
26:37and I think
26:38that was
26:39all part
26:39of the
26:40fact that
26:41he thought
26:42that he
26:42could fool
26:43everyone
26:44in his
26:45way
26:45could fool
26:46the jury
26:46I wouldn't
26:48allow myself
26:49to get
26:50caught up
26:51in the lies
26:52that he
26:53was saying.
27:02Today the
27:03prosecution's
27:03been summing
27:04up its
27:05case to
27:05the jury
27:06and the
27:07advocate
27:07deputy
27:08Alan
27:08Turnbull
27:09QC
27:09said that
27:10individually
27:11each
27:11piece
27:12of
27:12evidence
27:12might
27:13be
27:13meaningless
27:13but
27:14it
27:14was
27:14a
27:14relentless
27:14combination
27:15of
27:15circumstances
27:16which
27:17all
27:17pointed
27:17to
27:18Nat
27:18Fraser
27:18as
27:19the
27:19murderer.
27:22The
27:23wedding,
27:23engagement
27:24and
27:24eternity
27:25rings
27:25were
27:25a
27:26cornerstone
27:26of the
27:26case
27:27against
27:27him
27:27he
27:27said.
27:29And
27:30he
27:30said
27:31how ironic
27:32is it
27:32that
27:32these
27:32tokens
27:33of
27:33permanence
27:34love
27:34and
27:34fidelity
27:35should
27:35end
27:36up
27:36being
27:36his
27:36undoing
27:37they
27:37are
27:38the
27:38undoing
27:38of
27:38a
27:38husband
27:39consumed
27:39by
27:40jealousy
27:40and
27:41greed.
27:42I was
27:43so tired
27:45and so
27:46stressed.
27:47He spent
27:48the whole
27:48time saying
27:49don't worry
27:49about it,
27:50don't worry
27:50about it,
27:51it's beyond
27:51your control.
27:52Always at the
27:53back of my
27:53mind was
27:55he could walk
27:56out,
27:56he could just
27:57walk out of
27:57here.
27:58the
27:59defence
27:59the
28:00defence QC,
28:00Paul McBride
28:01has said
28:01that this
28:02is not
28:02a guessing
28:03game,
28:03it's not
28:03a game
28:03of theory.
28:04He told
28:04the jury
28:06it's not
28:06a mystery
28:07for them
28:07to solve
28:08and he
28:09said
28:09there may
28:09be smoke
28:10but it
28:11doesn't
28:11mean
28:11there's
28:11any
28:11fire.
28:13My
28:13memory
28:13of it
28:14when the
28:14jury
28:15was sent
28:15out
28:15is that
28:15we
28:16didn't
28:16know
28:16which
28:16way
28:16it
28:16was
28:16going
28:16to
28:17go
28:17because
28:17it
28:17was
28:17a
28:17circumstantial
28:18case,
28:19it
28:19was
28:19a
28:19complicated
28:20case.
28:22There
28:22had been
28:23so
28:23many
28:24things
28:24that
28:24happened
28:24during
28:25that
28:25trial.
28:25I
28:26couldn't
28:26call
28:26it.
28:27I
28:28couldn't
28:28call
28:28it.
28:49When
28:50the
28:50jury
28:50came
28:50back
28:51with
28:51a
28:51verdict
28:51it
28:52was
28:52unbearable.
28:52unbearable.
28:57I've
28:58never
28:58seen
28:58tension
28:59like
28:59that
28:59in
29:00a
29:00courtroom.
29:00Never.
29:06So
29:07when
29:07the
29:08foreman
29:08of
29:08the
29:08jury
29:09said
29:10the
29:10words
29:12guilty
29:14there
29:15was
29:15a
29:15release
29:16of
29:16emotion.
29:21I
29:21felt
29:21absolute
29:22relief.
29:25When he was
29:26found guilty
29:26his legs
29:27went
29:28and
29:28the judge
29:30said to him
29:30stand up.
29:34Nat Fraser
29:35collapsed in the dock
29:36and had to be
29:36supported by two police officers
29:38as the judge Lord Mackay
29:40described him
29:41as evil.
29:41said to him.
29:43It was a
29:45and he was
29:45a striking moment
29:45to see Nat Fraser
29:46appear to lose his composure
29:50at the very end of the case.
29:53Arlene's family left the court for a hotel nearby where they expressed their mixed emotions at today's verdict.
30:00Because we've sat in court and we've heard some terrible things and the judge has sentenced him for 25 years
30:10and at the moment although I'm thrilled that justice has been achieved for Arlene, I do feel overwhelmed with sadness.
30:24Fraser's legal team say they're considering an appeal against his conviction which will mean he'll be 69 before he can
30:30apply for parole.
30:39A service in remembrance of Arlene Fraser will take place in Elgin this afternoon, almost five years after the mother
30:46of two was last seen alive.
30:48We had to mark the fact that she had nothing. We hadn't marked anything. I think maybe part of us
30:55was thinking, you know, we'll find her and we'll be able to give her, you know, a burial ourselves and
31:01everything, but it was becoming obvious, you know, we're five years down the line, it's not going to happen.
31:09We just wanted to acknowledge Arlene's life.
31:15You know, Arlene was a person. She's not just remains. She is a person. She had a life and that
31:26should be marked.
31:29Her family say they want today's service to celebrate the happy times of her life.
31:36But I wasn't willing to accept that, right, okay, you've marked her life, you've had the memorial. I wanted a
31:48real funeral.
31:53It was a pretend goodbye.
32:20Matt Fraser, who's serving a life sentence for the murder of his wife Arlene in 1998, has been freed pending
32:27an appeal.
32:27Three judges at the appeal court in Edinburgh released him after hearing there were compelling grounds of appeal in his
32:34case.
32:40Fraser left for Elgin without comment.
32:43I vividly remember the images of him being released. It was absolutely torturous.
32:49How can this happen? How, how, how, how's this allowed?
32:54We suddenly found ourselves in a situation where all the apparent hard work and effort was overnight destroyed and he
33:01was a free man again.
33:10A key piece of evidence in the case was the mystery reappearance of Mrs. Fraser's rings.
33:15It was argued at the original trial that only Nat Fraser could have returned the rings, taken from her dead
33:21body.
33:23But statements from serving police officers at the time suggest that the rings may never have left the house.
33:30The problem with the integrity of the rings came from the testimony of two officers who maintained they had seen
33:40rings in the house on the night that Arlene had gone missing.
33:47That made no sense for those who were closely involved in the investigation.
33:53I did not see the rings there that night.
33:55I was certainly in the bathroom.
33:57So I was all through the house on that night, trying to ascertain where Arlene was.
34:02So we have these two statements that the rings were in the house when she went missing.
34:06And yet, in the prosecution case at trial, the cornerstone of the case was they were not there.
34:13So if you have a piece of evidence, which is wildly inconsistent with the cornerstone of the Crown case, and
34:21nobody knows about it, then that can give serious rise to miscarriages of justice.
34:28That single issue was sufficient to jeopardise the conviction.
34:35I had no idea where we were going to go from here.
34:40We've gone through all this, and we're back to square one.
34:55The appeal court asked themselves, taking all of the evidence into account, the rings, yes, but also Hector Dick, also
35:02all the circumstantial evidence.
35:03They asked themselves, has there been a miscarriage of justice here?
35:14The question is whether, in the light of the proposed new evidence, the verdict was a miscarriage of justice.
35:23In my view, it was not.
35:25There was evidence that he had motives for the crime.
35:29There was evidence of his previous malice and ill will towards the deceased.
35:33There was evidence of preparatory acts by him in setting up an alibi, and in his involvement with Hector Dick
35:42on the previous night, in the urgent purchase of a car with a boot.
35:47I propose to your Lordships that we should refuse the appeal against conviction.
35:54The appeal court basically rejected it on a fairly summary basis.
35:58Sure, there'd been a lack of disclosure.
36:00Sure, they hadn't shared this information, but reached the conclusion that there hadn't.
36:03There hadn't been the miscarriage of justice.
36:11But Arlene's family are convinced justice has now definitely been done.
36:16He's given us a life sentence, and it's only proper that he should have a life sentence.
36:22What are your feelings, Colonel, towards tonight?
36:26Strangely enough, I don't feel anything.
36:29I just see him as a source of information.
36:32The information goes as weird as hell.
36:35Mm-hmm.
36:36Do you live out of time, did he?
36:39I have to accept, probably, no.
36:43If there's only way you can survive is it will be a bonus, but they have to try and get
36:51our lives back on track after 10 years, so I would say.
36:56I do remember that press conference just being a very emotional occasion.
37:04There was a combination of great relief that the appeal had been rejected, but also just this huge aura of
37:09sadness about the whole thing,
37:10because they had no idea where Arlene was, and no great optimism that they would ever find out where she
37:17was.
37:18If he tells us where Arlene is, then we'll accept a lesser sentence.
37:25You would accept that?
37:26If he tells us where Arlene is.
37:32When Nat Fraser was being taken back to jail, having lost his appeal, he was determined to keep fighting and
37:40to keep trying to clear his name,
37:42and to keep claiming that he was an innocent man.
37:44The fight will go on, as will the...
37:47Hold on a second.
37:50As will the fight to get to the truth.
37:52OK.
37:58Nat Fraser, the man found guilty of murdering his wife in Elgin 12 years ago, is to challenge his conviction
38:04at the Supreme Court in London.
38:06Now, having exhausted all means of challenging the verdict in the Scottish courts,
38:10Fraser has approached the UK Supreme Court in London, and has been granted special leave to appeal.
38:16Though the Court of Criminal Appeal is the final court for criminal law matters,
38:21sitting above it is the UK Supreme Court.
38:25The only thing they can look at are fundamental right challenges, and one of those rights is the right to
38:31a fair trial.
38:31The question was, has Nat Fraser got a fair trial or not?
38:37This relatively new court in England was making a landmark decision on a serious Scots criminal case.
38:43The Supreme Court unanimously allows the appeal.
38:49According to the UK Supreme Court, it was a failure to disclose the evidence about the rings.
38:55So they didn't say there's no evidence here.
38:57They didn't say this is a flimsy case.
38:59They said there's been a procedural failure.
39:02They say, send the case back to the appeal court in Edinburgh.
39:09Nat Fraser is at the appeal court in Edinburgh today.
39:12Judges there will decide whether his conviction should be quashed, and whether he should face a retrial.
39:19The Supreme Court's decision was another incredible moment in the history of the case.
39:23And we didn't know what was going to happen.
39:25That would be the end of it, and that phrase it would walk free, that the case would be over.
39:28Or would there be a retrial, which is an extremely unusual thing to happen.
39:34This case is now entering a period of torturous limbo.
39:37No one can say with any certainty what's going to happen next.
39:41The prosecutor, Alec Prentiss QC, said the Crown would not challenge the overturning of the conviction of Nat Fraser.
39:49But he asked the court to grant a retrial, and the three judges have been hearing legal arguments on that
39:55all day.
39:55Outside court, Arlene's family told of the pressures of the last few days.
40:00We've had 13 years of this.
40:02I'm shaking like I leave.
40:05It's exhausting. It's really, really exhausting.
40:08You do have the fear that he would be freed, but you have to stay positive.
40:14You have to have belief in the system.
40:28The idea that a man could be put on trial twice for the same crime can seem quite confusing.
40:36But actually, it's not uncommon, where we have a miscarriage of justice identified on appeal, like the Nat Fraser case,
40:43to say, no, no, the interests of justice mean a second chance should be pursued to prosecute this case.
40:50What we did was not fair, and we have to do it again.
41:04It was a case of, here we go again.
41:08I was really, really worried that he could walk out that front door, and then that would be it.
41:15This is our last chance.
41:18A man accused of murdering his wife in Murray 14 years ago has gone on trial at the High Court
41:25in Edinburgh.
41:26Nat Fraser denies killing Arlene Fraser, who disappeared in 1998.
41:32So in this case, Nat Fraser's lawyers argued that he was simply not capable of getting a fair trial because
41:38there's no one in the country who hasn't heard of Nat Fraser that he was accused and convicted of killing
41:44his wife.
41:46The court's argument against that is that juries are given very clear instructions to ignore anything they've read in the
41:54media, anything they've watched on the television or heard on the radio.
41:56Concentrate on the evidence that's presented to them in the court.
42:01Two special defences have been lodged on Nat Fraser's behalf.
42:04The first gives details of an alibi.
42:07The second says that if Arlene Fraser was murdered, the crime was committed by the crown witness number one, Hector
42:13Dick.
42:15In 2012, the defence came out all guns blazing, right?
42:20Nat Fraser launches a special defence of incrimination.
42:22Basically what he's saying is, it wasn't me, it was you, the finger being pointed at Hector Dick.
42:32So the prosecution have the burden of proving not only that Nat Fraser murdered his wife, but that Hector Dick
42:39didn't.
42:40So what you now have effectively is a trial of two men, Nat Fraser and Hector Dick.
42:55When we were first told that it was going to be filmed, we weren't overly happy about that because it's
43:06hard enough being a witness.
43:08But actually when, when we went in and we were witnesses, we completely forgot the cameras were there.
43:18I understand that they actually use this as teaching.
43:24I always ask my students to look at the Nat Fraser trial because it gives you the opportunity to understand
43:30the reality of what goes on inside a courtroom in Scotland.
43:36So we're going to be watching the murder trial of Nat Fraser.
43:41Many murder cases are easily proven.
43:44You have a body, you have a murder weapon, you have a murder scene.
43:47None of that is available here.
43:50Given the state of evidence in this case, the only witness we've got who says that Arlene was murdered is
43:56Hector Dick.
43:57As you can see here, he's the only witness the Crown can produce who points the finger directly to Nat
44:04Fraser and says that's the man that coordinated, organised and orchestrated this homicide.
44:11And Nat came to the farm, is that correct?
44:13Yeah.
44:15Did you ask about Arlene?
44:16Yeah, he said she was dead.
44:18He said she was dead?
44:19Yeah, his favourite topic was that she'd never be found.
44:24And his initial comment to me was that he'd gotten help from someone down south.
44:30What sort of help?
44:32To murder Mrs Fraser.
44:34To murder Mrs Fraser.
44:36That's powerful evidence.
44:38The important thing in a legal sense is that he can say Nat Fraser told me he had his wife
44:44killed.
44:44But as we can see, almost as soon as Hector Dick begins being questioned, he looks like a man tired.
44:51And he's a man who knows what is coming.
44:54He knows that Nat Fraser's defence is one of incrimination.
44:57He knows that his lawyers are going to ask him questions which will cast doubt on his credibility.
45:03Can you think back with me over the past 14 years?
45:08Are you able to tell us today how many times you have lied about your involvement in the disappearance of
45:20Arlene Fraser?
45:21No, I can't put a figure on it.
45:23It's too many times to put a figure on, isn't it?
45:26I don't know.
45:28The defence strategy here is to use all that prior inconsistency to establish that Hector Dick is a liar.
45:35If the jury can be convinced that Hector Dick is not a man to be trusted, then they'll discard all
45:41of the evidence.
45:42All of the detail about Arlene Fraser's disappearance and her death, it all comes from you and what you say
45:48Nat Fraser's told you.
45:51Most of it, yeah, I think so.
45:53The car and disposal of the car.
45:56And the reason you tried to put the police off the scent is because you didn't want the car found.
46:01In the initial stage, yeah.
46:03Because it may be that you were more involved than you've ever been prepared to say.
46:07That's the truth, isn't it?
46:08No, I'm no more involved than I've said.
46:11And so you can see through the way that Nat Fraser's lawyer questions Hector Dick, what he's trying to do
46:17is generate reasonable doubt by saying, it could be this guy.
46:21This guy has admitted engaging in criminal behaviour, which might be consistent with him having murdered Arlene Fraser.
46:29Nat Fraser did not kill Arlene Fraser, nor did he tell you that he did?
46:33He surely did.
46:36And the obvious conclusion, Mr. Dick, from all of this, and especially your persistent lies, is that you killed Arlene
46:44Fraser.
46:45Not correct.
46:47So the goal of that is not to prove that that is the case.
46:50Hector Dick is not on trial here.
46:52But by throwing in the idea that he might be responsible for this woman's death, we're establishing reasonable doubt.
47:00You're going to be asking yourself, is Nat Fraser guilty?
47:04But we have to remember, you are not seeing all of the evidence.
47:08Hector Dick is just one small part of what's primarily a circumstantial case against Nat Fraser.
47:14And even if you disbelieved Hector Dick, you arguably could still convict Nat Fraser of the murder of his wife.
47:25Well, there are a number of weaknesses in the case.
47:27No body, no forensics, no crime scene.
47:31So what do they have?
47:32They've got Hector Dick to lean on.
47:34Hector Dick, the convicted liar, the man whose testimony could be torn apart with everything that comes out of his
47:40mouth.
47:41He bought the car that was supposedly used to abduct Arlene Fraser, have her murdered, and he's disposed of the
47:50evidence.
47:53He's the only one.
47:54He's the only one to this day that's ever admitted involvement in the disappearance of Arlene Fraser.
48:00People often assume that the trial would be the smoking gun which suddenly reveals that the accused person is guilty.
48:05This is a circumstantial case, which means there's no direct evidence of this crime being committed.
48:11This afternoon forensic scientist Neville Trowell said his examination of Arlene's home had provided no forensic clues at all as
48:18to what might have happened to her.
48:20So we have to rely on what prosecutors often refer to as effectively the strands of evidence being woven together
48:26into a rope of evidence.
48:29A jury at the High Court in Edinburgh has been hearing how Elgin woman Arlene Fraser had been planning to
48:34see a solicitor to discuss a divorce on the day she went missing.
48:37Ms Scott also remembered Arlene as a good mum who would never leave her children unattended.
48:43Each bit might not strike you as even necessarily obviously incriminating.
48:49Mrs Thompson was also asked how Nat Fraser seemed, given his wife and the mother of his children was missing.
48:56She said he didn't seem all that bothered one way or the other.
48:59But woven together, they create a picture of events which allows the jury to conclude all the other explanations for
49:08what might have happened.
49:09Arlene Fraser left, Arlene Fraser was kidnapped by someone else that wasn't her husband.
49:14If we can exclude all of those things, then we're left with a single remaining logical basis for what happened.
49:22And I have got no doubt whatsoever that Nat had planned the murder of Arlene.
49:29He wanted her out of his life altogether for so many reasons.
49:34I think when you look at the case as a whole in its entirety and you look at the circumstances
49:38involved,
49:40again that question being who has got the most to gain from Arlene disappearing.
49:45There's only one man in this case who beat her, bullied her and tried to kill her.
49:51And that was Nat Fraser.
49:53If you're not going to live with me, you'll not be living with anyone.
49:57It was put to a jury today that she was murdered because she tried to leave a possessive, controlling husband.
50:10We were getting very, very stressed towards the end.
50:15We were very tired because we were all at the stage where we couldn't go through
50:20another trial.
50:22Nat Fraser denies organising her murder because she was going to divorce him.
50:27He says if she was murdered, it was the responsibility of another man called Hector Dick.
50:32The jury will return tomorrow to carry on their deliberations.
50:46There's a little room where the family are kept.
50:50I remember the wait.
50:52I came across the tannoyed.
50:54Jury, verdict, court three.
50:56Jury, verdict, court three.
50:58Court number C.
51:00Jury, verdict.
51:01Court number C.
51:04I remember how my stomach went.
51:06Just the whole fear around it.
51:10Once we were actually back in court, everybody's there.
51:13You can feel the atmosphere.
51:16Members of the jury, will your spokesperson please rise?
51:20What is your verdict in respect of the charge on the indictment?
51:25Guilty.
51:29When it came through, you know, we had to be very careful not to jump up and, you know, high
51:37five on another sort of thing, you know, to try and stay as kind of calm as we could.
51:45All the tension, the worries and everything that you carry about with you for weeks on end.
51:52And I think I, part of me said, right, that's it, that's it, that's it, I can't do any more.
52:01Nat Fraser showed very little emotion.
52:04For a second time, he was found guilty of murdering his wife Arlene.
52:11Thankfully, justice was seen to be done eventually when he was convicted at the High Court for the second time
52:18for the same crime.
52:20Arlene Fraser's family have, in 14 long years, seen justice delivered, snatched away, then delivered again.
52:27A short time after the verdict, there was no display of triumph, no talk of hatred towards Fraser, just complete
52:34and utter resignation that he'll never tell him where Arlene is or give up his fight against his conviction.
52:42Hopefully, we won't have to go through that again.
52:46Living through it again is just too much.
52:48And I think it's just time, you know, that, you know, that we move on and get a bit of
52:55joy in our lives rather than all this, you know, dark stuff that we have to deal with.
53:02I felt exhausted.
53:04You go home, you get a rest, and then it's like, wait a minute, we still don't have Arlene.
53:12The judge said Fraser had instigated a cold-blooded, premeditated murder.
53:17He'll serve at least 17 years before being considered for parole.
53:42The Arlene Fraser investigation, it will remain with me.
53:52The mystery of what happened to the victim, and that remains to this day.
54:02So here we are, St. Columbus Church in Elgin.
54:08And the memorial bench that the family have for Arlene.
54:14I think it brings home just exactly what it is that we're dealing with here, the needless loss of a
54:23mother, sister, daughter.
54:25Of course, of course, the agony here is that they don't have a headstone, they don't have a grave that
54:31they can visit.
54:33And that, that for me is an extension of the torture that Nat Fraser has exerted in this family.
54:46You know, I often hear the expression, you know, the recovery of her body would be closure for the family.
54:53I don't see it as closure, I see it as justice.
55:10You spend the whole time just trying to think of a way to, to get Arlene back.
55:23And that's the only one that knows.
55:27The families of two murder victims have spoken of the mental torture of not knowing where their bodies are
55:33as they campaign for a change in the law surrounding parole.
55:37Arlene Fraser and Suzanne Pilly disappeared 12 years apart at opposite ends of the country.
55:43Suzanne Pilly was a young woman from Edinburgh, a bootkeeper, who disappeared.
55:47Her former boyfriend, a work colleague, David Gilroy, was convicted of a murder.
55:53And just like the Arlene Fraser case, Suzanne's body was never found.
55:57The men convicted of killing them have refused to say what happened to the two women.
56:02With both nearing the end of their life sentences, Arlene and Suzanne's families want that to be taken into account
56:08when they're considered for parole.
56:10So Suzanne's law basically is a change in the legislation, basically changes one word from me to must.
56:24The parole board must take into account, they believe that the perpetrator has more information and knows where the body
56:35is.
56:37His crime is still continuing.
56:39He's perpetrating a crime against us.
56:42We're still dealing with this every day.
56:47The clock is ticking with us because of Nat Fraser's parole date.
56:52That really is putting us under pressure.
56:58I feel that he controlled Arlene when she was alive and he's controlling her when she's dead.
57:07It's a form of mental torture.
57:11It gives Nat Fraser a choice.
57:14Tell us where our remains are or go back to your cell.
57:20It's the final chance of getting to the truth because if the parole board can't do anything to help us,
57:28then he'll get out and the truth will be gone forever.
57:40The result of the vote is yes 71, no 46.
57:44The motion is therefore agreed and the Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reforms Scotland bill is passed.
58:00You need to forget about the one person that has done this and about everyone that is on our side
58:10and how lucky we are and believe that one day we won't necessarily bring Arlene home
58:20but one day we might actually get somewhere near the truth
58:25and that's what I'm holding on to at the moment.
58:28As she walks in the room
58:33Scented and tall
58:36Hesitating once more
58:41And as I take on myself
58:45And the bitterness I've felt
58:49Realize that love
58:52Flows
58:54Wild white horses
58:57Wild horses
Comments