Arlene Fraser murder trial: Arlene vanished on day of lawyer meeting

THE Arlene Fraser murder trial has heard her marriage had reached the end of the road and she was due to see a lawyer on the day she disappeared.

Mrs Fraser, 33, had complained to her solicitor that her husband, Nat, had been recording her phone calls and she wanted a divorce.

It was not the first time as there had been problems three years into the marriage, but this time she was resolute.

Loanne Lennon, 40, told the High Court in Edinburgh Mrs Fraser had an appointment to see her on the afternoon of 28 April, 1998. She did not turn up.

Fraser, 53, denies that, knowing his estranged wife was seeking a divorce, he acted with others to murder her. He pleads alibi and incrimination, saying that if she was killed, a former friend, Hector Dick, and another or others were responsible.

Mrs Lennon, from Texas, said she had started working as a solicitor with a firm in Elgin, Moray, in late 1997, and took over Mrs Fraser’s case.

She learned from Mrs Fraser’s file she had been seen in May 1997 about a divorce, and that Nat Fraser had offered a £30,000 settlement, but nothing further had been done at that time.

Mrs Lennon met Mrs Fraser in February 1998, and it was obvious that the matrimonial problems had not gone away, because Mrs Fraser had revealed that though the couple shared a home in New Elgin, they had separate bedrooms.

“I recall that she made reference to the fact her telephone calls were being recorded. She told me her husband was recording her calls,” said Mrs Lennon.

She said she was later instructed by Mrs Fraser to put matters on hold. There appeared to have been a change of heart, which was not uncommon, she added.

However, in late March 1998, an unhappy Mrs Fraser was back in touch and, this time, was intent on proceeding.

Advocate-depute Alex Prentice, QC, suggested: “It was obvious by this time that the end of the road had been reached as far as Arlene was concerned.”

Mrs Lennon said: “That’s correct.”

An appointment was made for Mrs Fraser at 2:30pm on 28 April, 1998, but she did not keep it.

Mrs Lennon agreed with Mr Prentice that, sometimes in divorces, one party would try to avoid paying a settlement.

“Did you get anywhere close to knowing the true financial worth of Nat Fraser?” he asked.

“No,” said Mrs Lennon.

She told defence solicitor-advocate, John Scott QC, that Mrs Fraser, who wed in 1987, had considered divorce in 1990 and 1994, and there had been reconciliations. Mr Scott suggested people did not necessarily co-operate in the early stages of divorce.

Mrs Lennon said: “That is a very fair thing to say.”

The trial continues.