UK UK - Alistair Wilson, 30, murdered at home, Nairn, Scotland, 28 Nov 2004

We know that the murder weapon, an HS pocket pistol, was manufactured in Germany 1922-30, and that the ammunition was manufactured by Czech Republic-based Sellier and Bellot, who still manufacture ammunition. Do we know if the bullets were modern, post-WW2, or were contemporary with the manufacture and general circulation of the pistol? Is the killer someone who had access to a gun with old rounds and just had to load, point and fire, or was he someone who had an old gun and had to source bullets of the same caliber recommended for, say, a modern Browning? The former requires no expertise but the latter requires knowledge of firearms and how to procure the correct ammunition.
If the gun and ammo were purchased together then it seems an odd choice of weapon, unless that was the only one available or affordable to the killer. Whilst any gun can be a lethal weapon, these pocket guns have a history of non-lethal outcomes. In my view, this points to an amateur with bottle, i.e. inexperienced but willing to point and shoot. That the gun, a size easily disposed of, was dropped into a drain streets away, suggests an attempt to put as much distance between the crime and the perpetrator as possible in the shortest time. With less haste, a gun of that size could be made to disappear permanently relatively easily. My current thinking is that the killer was from out of town, possibly never having been to Nairn before, and got out of there as quickly as possible in a car driven by an accomplice. AW was entirely innocent. The wrong man in the wrong house.
 
Sounds plausible and matches my thinking, just need to find motive.
 
Generally I've not thought this was a premeditated killing. More that this person was carrying a gun "just in case". Pure guesswork though like most things in this case.
 
One thing I've always been curious about is the lack of information that Veronica was able to give the police about her conversation with Alastair. Given he spoke to the guy for some time. You would have thought he would have told Veronica as much as he knew. All we seem to know is that AW was confused and asked Veronica if she was sure the guy had asked for him. It does sound like AW didn't know what was going on but the police have always said they don't believe it was a case of mistaken identity. Veronica was bound to have asked him who it was and what they wanted, yet it's all a complete blank.
I thought that it was more the police didn't release the full conversation AW had with Veronica - rather than that there wasnt much information. Almost as if the conversation was something they wanted to keep underwraps until the right time - just the same with the envelope.
 
I thought that it was more the police didn't release the full conversation AW had with Veronica - rather than that there wasn't much information. Almost as if the conversation was something they wanted to keep under wraps until the right time - just the same with the envelope.
Well yes and no. You're quite right they have never released the details of the conversation but they have also said there's nothing in it of significance to the investigation. Which is all rather odd.
 
Well yes and no. You're quite right they have never released the details of the conversation but they have also said there's nothing in it of significance to the investigation. Which is all rather odd.
When did they say that?
 
A few thoughts FWIW:

The planning row seems a plausible motive - AW wouldn’t be the first person killed in the UK in such a dispute (the most famous being Harry Collinson in 1991) and this could have been building up over the course of several months through the construction, initial complaint and subsequent council planning processes - plenty of time for tempers to boil over. That said, this was known from the start, so why it wasn’t considered seriously until a new witness apparently pointed police back in this direction in 2022 isn’t clear. Also, hard to see why the gunman wouldn’t have come straight to the point - I can’t imagine AW was keeping a planning objection secret from VW, so (barring some additional unknown element) why the initial confusion?

Another obvious possibility might be someone who had nursed a grievance related to AW’s work over a long period before acting on it - long enough for AW to have completely forgotten about, but for the grudge to still be consuming the aggrieved party - eg a loan refused leads to financial ruin, marriage breakup etc. I’ve seen mention that AW was upset previously over the head office refusal of a loan he had approved to a business in Orkney, which brings MR to mind. He would be a good fit in terms of VW’s description, but as best I can tell he would still have been in Iraq at the time - the first of the Black Watch troops returning from there in December 2004.

Lastly - did the gunman believe that the envelope would have some significance to VW and wanted her to see it in her husband’s hand - eg “Take this; show it to your wife; come back and tell me what she says. I’ll wait.”
 
Wondering if it was necessary to shoot 3 times in order to kill AW?
The sight of blood from a close up shot would sicken (hopefully) a person unaccustomed to killing, but the perp shot two more times, was that out of panic in case AW did not die right away, or did the perp enjoy the act of slaying a man with a wife standing by?
speculation, imo.
Ido you imagine him stood at the doorway - gunman shoots twice in the head and 1 in the chest ? The reality is it doesn’t happen like that - if he was shot in the head first he would instantly fall to the ground, the second and third shot were probably fired with the victim on the ground. It would be interesting to know entry points for the rounds (head shots were they front side or back?) taking a gun from a pocket it would be natural to hit him in the chest first - firing second and third to the head whilst on the ground. Another point is disposal of the firearm - pros do not dispose. Whilst I’m here - no one has considered Blackmail?
 
Ido you imagine him stood at the doorway - gunman shoots twice in the head and 1 in the chest ? The reality is it doesn’t happen like that - if he was shot in the head first he would instantly fall to the ground, the second and third shot were probably fired with the victim on the ground. It would be interesting to know entry points for the rounds (head shots were they front side or back?) taking a gun from a pocket it would be natural to hit him in the chest first - firing second and third to the head whilst on the ground. Another point is disposal of the firearm - pros do not dispose. Whilst I’m here - no one has considered Blackmail?
Hi, who would be blackmailing who? If the person at the door is the blackmailer it seems unlikely they would kill the person they are blackmailing. More likely they would reveal whatever information they had on AW if he refused to pay up. If AW was being blackmailed he would be the one with the motive to shoot. Can't see AW as a blackmailer. Slightly off centre thought, do we definitely know the person at the door brought the gun with them?
Another scenario if AW was being blackmailed or threatened is that he had the gun as protection but the caller grabbed it off him and shot him. Seems far fetched but sometimes these intractable killings are strange and unexpected scenarios.
 
Funny how this case and the Claudia Lawrence case revolve around pubs. Are they really such hotbeds of intrigue and criminality? I'm not so sure in either case, the Police could be clutching at straws.
 
Hi, who would be blackmailing who? If the person at the door is the blackmailer it seems unlikely they would kill the person they are blackmailing. More likely they would reveal whatever information they had on AW if he refused to pay up. If AW was being blackmailed he would be the one with the motive to shoot. Can't see AW as a blackmailer. Slightly off centre thought, do we definitely know the person at the door brought the gun with them?
Another scenario if AW was being blackmailed or threatened is that he had the gun as protection but the caller grabbed it off him and shot him. Seems far fetched but sometimes these intractable killings are strange and unexpected scenarios.

IIRC one of the women who went over from the pub described AW’s cheek being very swollen where one of the shots had gone in.
 
Peter Bleksley’s piece in the Scottish Mail 22/11/22

IT was only two months ago that I spotted the headline which screamed, ‘Police have new man in sights over banker shooting’. This wasn’t news to me because months earlier, in the summer, a number of trusted sources had passed this man’s name to me, explaining how they’d been asked by detectives what they knew about him.

His identity was becoming the worst kept secret in Nairn
.


NB: if the article text doesn’t come up complete, try ‘select all’ then copy and paste into a text document.
 
Peter Bleksley’s piece in the Scottish Mail 22/11/22

IT was only two months ago that I spotted the headline which screamed, ‘Police have new man in sights over banker shooting’. This wasn’t news to me because months earlier, in the summer, a number of trusted sources had passed this man’s name to me, explaining how they’d been asked by detectives what they knew about him.

His identity was becoming the worst kept secret in Nairn
.


NB: if the article text doesn’t come up complete, try ‘select all’ then copy and paste into a text document.
I doubt that Bleksley has actually added anything to this story. That police would ask around before going public is what you would expect. Wasn't he pushing another book at the time.

That the police, after such a long passage of time, came up with the planning issue as a line of inquiry just seems to me like they have run out of ideas. I now agree with AW's wife that a mistaken identity is why this is so difficult to solve. The wrong man in the wrong house was shot, possibly over a drug-related debt, by someone unfamiliar with the town, who was then driven away by an accomplice. I hadn't associated Nairn with drug dealing before but the town looks like it has its fair share of issues. Doorstep shootings over drug debts are not uncommon in the UK.
 
I doubt that Bleksley has actually added anything to this story. That police would ask around before going public is what you would expect. Wasn't he pushing another book at the time.

That the police, after such a long passage of time, came up with the planning issue as a line of inquiry just seems to me like they have run out of ideas. I now agree with AW's wife that a mistaken identity is why this is so difficult to solve. The wrong man in the wrong house was shot, possibly over a drug-related debt, by someone unfamiliar with the town, who was then driven away by an accomplice. I hadn't associated Nairn with drug dealing before but the town looks like it has its fair share of issues. Doorstep shootings over drug debts are not uncommon in the UK.
I'm with you on the mistaken identity but not sure about the drugs connection - it is possible, still lean towards a nutter with a grudge.
 
One theory I have been looking at, if AW was the target, is Bank of Scotland connection to the new town Tornagrain on the Moray Estate and the A96 Corridor. I know BoS funded some of the original Tornagrain development and the timing is about right as well, in 2004. Don't know if AW was personally involved but could be, or just targeted as a figurehead by a displaced tenant or landowner subject to compulsory purchase. Not found anything really compelling yet but I would be surprised if feelings didn't run high in some people opposed to the development. Plans also include a big expansion of Nairn which might not find favour in some quarters. Worth looking into more. Would also like to see death records in Nairn and Inverness in 2003/4, especially any suicides.
 
One theory I have been looking at, if AW was the target, is Bank of Scotland connection to the new town Tornagrain on the Moray Estate and the A96 Corridor. I know BoS funded some of the original Tornagrain development and the timing is about right as well, in 2004. Don't know if AW was personally involved but could be, or just targeted as a figurehead by a displaced tenant or landowner subject to compulsory purchase. Not found anything really compelling yet but I would be surprised if feelings didn't run high in some people opposed to the development. Plans also include a big expansion of Nairn which might not find favour in some quarters. Worth looking into more. Would also like to see death records in Nairn and Inverness in 2003/4, especially any suicides.
Further thought, going back to one of my theories that this was mistaken identity and Paul was a biblical reference to Paul the Apostle. Did AW have a "road to damascus" conversion and that's what Paul referred to? Thinking of his change of job from Banker to Environmental consultant, quite a big change of direction. Could someone have been upset or felt threatened by this? Was it seen as hypocrisy? Was someone worried about secrets or AW's potential to oppose some of the development using his inside knowledge from BoS role?
 
A few thoughts FWIW:

The planning row seems a plausible motive - AW wouldn’t be the first person killed in the UK in such a dispute (the most famous being Harry Collinson in 1991) and this could have been building up over the course of several months through the construction, initial complaint and subsequent council planning processes - plenty of time for tempers to boil over. That said, this was known from the start, so why it wasn’t considered seriously until a new witness apparently pointed police back in this direction in 2022 isn’t clear. Also, hard to see why the gunman wouldn’t have come straight to the point - I can’t imagine AW was keeping a planning objection secret from VW, so (barring some additional unknown element) why the initial confusion?

Another obvious possibility might be someone who had nursed a grievance related to AW’s work over a long period before acting on it - long enough for AW to have completely forgotten about, but for the grudge to still be consuming the aggrieved party - eg a loan refused leads to financial ruin, marriage breakup etc. I’ve seen mention that AW was upset previously over the head office refusal of a loan he had approved to a business in Orkney, which brings MR to mind. He would be a good fit in terms of VW’s description, but as best I can tell he would still have been in Iraq at the time - the first of the Black Watch troops returning from there in December 2004.

Lastly - did the gunman believe that the envelope would have some significance to VW and wanted her to see it in her husband’s hand - eg “Take this; show it to your wife; come back and tell me what she says. I’ll wait.”

Source re the alleged Orkney loan:

In his final year with what had become Halifax Bank of Scotland, Alistair's colleagues recalled that he had taken it hard when a multi-million-pound loan he believed he had secured for a business in Orkney was rejected by head office.


Disillusioned with banking? Or did he leave ‘under a cloud?’
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
117
Guests online
3,495
Total visitors
3,612

Forum statistics

Threads
595,619
Messages
18,028,212
Members
229,704
Latest member
MarthaPrirl
Back
Top