This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/int/news/-/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-13534802

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Wife killer Nat Fraser to learn appeal outcome Nat Fraser wins appeal to quash murder conviction
(about 9 hours later)
Judges at the Supreme Court will deliver their verdict on a bid by wife killer Nat Fraser to clear his name. By Reevel Alderson Home affairs correspondent, BBC Scotland
The Elgin businessman was convicted in 2003 of the murder of Arlene Fraser who disappeared in 1998, but her body has never been found. A man jailed for life for murdering his wife in Elgin in 1998 has won his appeal to have his conviction quashed.
When Fraser exhausted the appeal process in Scotland he turned to Supreme Court judges in London to overturn his conviction. Nat Fraser, 52, was ordered to spend at least 25 years in jail after the High Court in Edinburgh heard he ordered a hitman to kill his wife, Arlene.
He will find out on Wednesday morning if he has been successful. Arlene Fraser was last seen on 28 April, 1998, waving her children off to school.
Fraser, who was jailed for a minimum of 25 years, claims he was denied a fair trial because the Crown failed to disclose a vital piece of evidence about 33-year-old Mrs Fraser's rings. Despite an intensive search, her body has never been found. Mr Fraser was convicted in January 2003.
Judges heard the appeal over two days in March. When he exhausted the appeal process in Scotland, Mr Fraser turned to Supreme Court judges in London to overturn his conviction.
Their verdict will be announced at 0950 BST. Five judges at the Supreme Court have now remitted the case to the Scottish Court of Criminal Appeal.
If he is successful and if the Crown decides not to remand him pending a new trial, Fraser could be released within hours. Granting the appeal, href="http://www.supremecourt.gov.uk/docs/UKSC_2009_0192_ps.pdf" >the Supreme Court judges said in their deliberations: "The Supreme Court unanimously allows the appeal. It remits the case to a differently constituted Appeal Court to consider whether to grant authority for a new prosecution and then, having considered that point, to quash the conviction."
If not, he could consider a further legal challenge in the European Court of Human Rights. The Crown Office said it would now seek to bring fresh proceedings against Nat Fraser.
Mr Fraser's legal team argued there had been a miscarriage of justice, centring on claims that evidence was tampered with and prosecutors had not been given all of the facts.
At the Supreme Court hearing his QC, Maggie Scott, said: "The essential question is whether or not the appellant received a fair trial."
It was the second appeal for Nat Fraser, who ran a fruit and vegetable business in Elgin, Moray.
Relatives of Mrs Fraser, who was 33 when she disappeared, travelled to London for the two-day hearing.
The cornerstone of the case against Mr Fraser was his wife's rings, which she always kept on a small wooden rail in her bathroom.
When police originally searched the family home they were missing - their subsequent re-appearance later in the police investigation led to Nat Fraser being charged.
But in 2007 the appeal court in Edinburgh, where Mr Fraser was challenging his conviction, heard police and the local procurator fiscal may have known more about them than they told prosecutors.
At the hearing Nat Fraser's QC, Gordon Jackson, said this amounted to as good a ground of appeal as he had lodged.
The court was also told two significant investigations were launched into the way the original criminal investigation was carried out.
That appeal was rejected, and Mr Fraser turned to the UK Supreme Court, having exhausted all legal avenues in Scotland.
Delivering the opinion of the Supreme Court, Lord Hope said: "Consideration will now have to be given to the question whether authority should be given for a new trial. This matter is best dealt with by the High Court of Justiciary.
"So the case will be remitted to that court for this question to be dealt with, and it will be for that court to quash the conviction."