Fraser's fate now in hands of Scots judges

THE fate of Nat Fraser, the man convicted of murdering his estranged wife in 1998, will pass to judges in Edinburgh tomorrow, after the Supreme Court ruled he had been denied a fair trial.

In the latest dramatic twist in a case which has held the fascination of the public since Arlene Fraser disappeared from her home in Moray, the judges in Edinburgh will be asked to allow a retrial of Fraser or set him free.

The Supreme Court in London yesterday upheld Fraser's appeal to have his conviction for the murder of Arlene quashed.

Their decision was made in relation to evidence which had not been disclosed to his lawyers before his trial. The case now has to return to the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh, but yesterday's ruling will have raised Fraser's hopes of clearing his name.

It left Arlene Fraser's family distraught. They said: "Today's decision by the Supreme Court is bitterly disappointing. We accept today's decision. However, we fully support the Crown's intention to seek authority to bring fresh proceedings against Nat Fraser for Arlene's murder."

Lord Hope, the leading judge in the appeal, had gone out of his way to refer to the family and the consequences for them of the ruling. He said: "The decision that we have taken will inevitably result in further delay in the final resolution of this case. We are very conscious of the distress that this will cause to all concerned, especially to the family of the deceased. But fairness lies at the heart of our system of criminal justice, and it is that principle that has made the decision which we have taken today inevitable."

The case goes back to the morning of 28 April, 1998, when Arlene Fraser, 33, waved her two children off to school from the family home in Smith Street, New Elgin, Moray. A few weeks earlier, Mrs Fraser and her husband, a fruit and vegetable wholesaler, had separated. Mrs Fraser disappeared and it was feared she had been killed, but a massive police investigation failed to trace the body.

Some five years after she had vanished, Fraser was put on trial, with two co-accused, Hector Dick and Glenn Lucas. The charge was dropped against the other two and Dick gave evidence for the prosecution.

The Crown's case against Fraser was not that he had committed the murder himself, but that he had arranged for his wife to be killed.

He was convicted by the jury and given a mandatory life sentence. He was told he would serve at least 25 years before he could apply for parole. In 2006, Fraser was freed pending an appeal, after it was discovered that evidence about Mrs Fraser's engagement, wedding and eternity rings had not been disclosed to the defence.At the end of the submissions to the appeal court in Edinburgh, Fraser's bail was withdrawn and he was returned to jail after 19 months of freedom.

Later, the court announced its decision. It held that Fraser had not suffered a miscarriage of justice, even assuming the new evidence about the rings to be correct, given the other evidence against him.

This ruling was overturned yesterday.

"The fact is that the Crown chose to present the case at the trial in a way that it would not have chosen to do if it had been aware at the time of the trial that there was evidence that the rings were in the house within hours of Arlene's disappearance," said Lord Hope.

"It was information that ought to have been given to the defence, and the failure to do this was a breach of the appellant's article 6 right … disclosure of this material before or during the trial would have opened up lines of cross-examination that were never pursued by the defence.

"It would also have materially weakened the Crown's attack on the appellant, that he had no explanation to give for bringing the rings back to the house and the theory that he had retrieved them from Arlene's dead body."