dressed as male on doorstep ?
UK UK - Alistair Wilson, 30, murdered at home, Nairn, Scotland, 28 Nov 2004
- Thread starter shadowdancer
- Start date
Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
A female who first came to door with envelope
Must admit I struggle with the envelope bit of the story. If AW had gone to the door and the caller had simply handed him the envelope and run off it might make sense. However it’s said they had a conversation for a few minutes before AW came back in with the envelope. He then expresses bewilderment about it to his wife before going back to see if the caller is still there. None of that makes any sense to me. Assuming the envelope ever existed AW surely knew what he was supposed to do with it. That the caller was still waiting around outside surely means AW was supposed to come back out again and that AW did not on the off chance go back to see if he was still there. Why did the killer hand the envelope over if he wasn’t confident he was going to get it back again? What other reason was there for the caller to hang around?
To me the only way I can understand why AW wasn’t shot the first time he answered the door would be because the killer needed something from AW first. Something put in that envelope. I doubt it was money (how can you ever know anyone has ready cash available?) but more likely a document or small item. Something he needed or was incriminating. So AW puts something in that envelope, hands it back and is then shot. All this of course assumes there ever was an envelope.
To me the only way I can understand why AW wasn’t shot the first time he answered the door would be because the killer needed something from AW first. Something put in that envelope. I doubt it was money (how can you ever know anyone has ready cash available?) but more likely a document or small item. Something he needed or was incriminating. So AW puts something in that envelope, hands it back and is then shot. All this of course assumes there ever was an envelope.
Littlegreenlady
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2014
- Messages
- 350
- Reaction score
- 699
The police seem to be placing a lot of their hopes on the envelope though, so it makes me think that it's a much bigger clue than we've been led to believe. Wasn't there something about they only recently released the information about what was on the envelope and what it looked like?
Envelope for 'Paul' key to solving Alistair Wilson murder | Press and Journal
"There has been continuous calls for more information about the contents of the turquoise envelope to be made public.
Detectives who have led the murder hunt over the last 13 years have refused to offer any details about the envelope and what it contained."
Envelope for 'Paul' key to solving Alistair Wilson murder | Press and Journal
"There has been continuous calls for more information about the contents of the turquoise envelope to be made public.
Detectives who have led the murder hunt over the last 13 years have refused to offer any details about the envelope and what it contained."
rbbm.
Almost wondering if it held a photo of someone?
Did anything happen at AW's high school or university to cause long-simmering anger?
Funny, the whole scene seems like a very old-fashioned murder plot, ie, the knocking at the door, the presentation of a blue envelope and the ladies old small handgun with which AW was shot, imo, speculation.
We can only surmise, looking at the map, how the killer got to the location where the gun was found; what we do know is they passed dozens of other drains on the way, but certainly if in a vehicle at this point, it points to an accomplice unless the killer stopped and leaned across to the passenger side or got out the car and walked around.
This is the key : there is no plausible way AW could not have known "What" the killer said to him and whether this related to the envelope (even if, for instance he genuinely did not understand the details (for instance if any names were mentioned and so on).
It's mentioned in the Evidence locker podcast (and elsewhere) that The Police told AWs wife not to disclose what they talked about when Alistair came upstairs. (As an aside, if the killer wanted anything incriminating, they did not get it (apparently) and the Police did not seem to think that it was unsafe to allow the family to remain where there was potentially pertinent material someone was prepared to kill for?
Meanwhile Alistair asked his wife if she knew what it was 'all about' (when he came upstairs) but was confused and bewildered - however AWs Wife 'rest of family' decided after bedding the kids down they would help Alistair "Work out what was going on"
Alistair then decided to go and see if the person was still at the door......
Clearly then the Police know more than they have ever told the public (And of course so did Alistair and his wife) - (Why not, after this time, disclose what was said?); it is interesting that the family seemed intent on attempting to work out what was 'going on' (A Natural response?)
Why would Alistair ask his wife if she knew anything about the bewildering visitor?
See my previous post: altogether, thinking about it one has to ask the following:
1) Was the killer a hired person? Let's assume they were. They had a job to do - and the big question is this: if the job was to get something, was the best way to do so by going to Alistairs door? They did not (at least initially) threaten him - but did kill him. Thereby eliminating any chance to get what they came for.
2) If you 'want' something badly enough to kill for it (whether you get it or not) would it not be more effective to use threat? Could this have been accomplished in some other way or other place? (That is, "If you do not....." - by letter, phone call or whatever?)
3) Was this result of someone wanting something? If so, what? For Alistair to surrender something or do something? Do the Police know what this might be?
4) Why shoot Alistair if the 'mission' is incomplete? What purpose does this serve?
We don't know that they didn't get what they came for.
-Somebody came to the door and handed him an empty envelope.
-He went upstairs with the envelope then returned to the door.
-Presumably handed the envelope back to the person at the door (based on the fact that it hasn't been seen since)
There is plenty of opportunity there for him to put something in the envelope before returning it.
If the item that the person wanted was upstairs and Alistair didn't want his wife to know what was going on, he would need to make an excuse to go back up and get it. Going up to speak to his wife would be a perfect excuse. Maybe he knew exactly what was going on and went upstairs, distracted his wife and put what they wanted in the envelope.
The theory doesn't really fit well though. His wife is likely to ask a lot more questions about it this way than a lot of other excuses he could have given. Maybe he was panicked.
Either way, I don't think the fact that they killed him rules out that they also got what they wanted from him.
Ruthbullock
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2016
- Messages
- 1,846
- Reaction score
- 9,285
That makes perfect sense, I’d never considered that he was bluffing his wife and did indeed place something in the envelope.
An intriguing theory!
No matter how much I think about it, I cannot think of a reason why Alistair took the envelope - and empty one - upstairs. I mean if a random stranger was at the door and attempted to foist an envelope on you would it not be more natural to tell them where to go?
Does the (never revealed) discussion upstairs hint at the Police knowing more about the purpose of the envelope?
(It is still perplexing why they still have not revealed more)
As for killing Alistair after (possibly) getting what you have called for - while possible - I think an interesting topic for 'why'? - if the killer had what they wanted, committing murder immediately raised the stakes (in being caught for a start) - surely in getting what was required, vanishing into the night without firing the gun would have sufficed?
An intriguing theory!
No matter how much I think about it, I cannot think of a reason why Alistair took the envelope - and empty one - upstairs. I mean if a random stranger was at the door and attempted to foist an envelope on you would it not be more natural to tell them where to go?
Does the (never revealed) discussion upstairs hint at the Police knowing more about the purpose of the envelope?
(It is still perplexing why they still have not revealed more)
As for killing Alistair after (possibly) getting what you have called for - while possible - I think an interesting topic for 'why'? - if the killer had what they wanted, committing murder immediately raised the stakes (in being caught for a start) - surely in getting what was required, vanishing into the night without firing the gun would have sufficed?
That theory would hinge on it not being a random stranger at the door. Alistair would need to know what the person was asking and what he was to put in the envelope.
It doesn't seem like a logical thing for him to do. If he needs a reason to go upstairs and get the item to put in the envelope without arousing suspicion in his wife then showing her the envelope and pretending he doesn't know anything about it doesn't seem like the best method to me. But, if the contents of the envelope were worth killing him over then it was obviously something significantly important so maybe Alistair panicked a bit and that was the best he could come at with on the spot (However, his wife did say he seemed calm and not panicked during their conversation).
Although, if that's true then his plan did work - as far as we know, his wife didn't suspect that he had put anything in the envelope.
I think it's an unlikely scenario but it does show that there's a possibility that the killer did get what he wanted beforehand.
One of the most baffling aspects of the case is Alistair returning the the door. On the one hand Alistair might have wanted to satisfy himself some random person had actually left, on the other hand (based on what was said at the door) Alistair might have had reason to believe the person might still be at the door for the same reason (what was said).
Questions:
1) Although Alistair did not know (or perhaps didn't) know the killer, perhaps he did immediately know who the killer was working for / what they wanted?
2) The above raises another question however: if - if Alistair knew he had 'something' of great value to someone (enough that he would understand some danger - enough to hand it to the killer) - would he have this item at home? Would there not be better places to keep such things?
3) If Alistair was totally unaware of something he'd stumbled onto (hence his bewilderment) what could he have at home that would be related to this that only he would have or would not be in his office (if work related)?
Let's say the envelope was in fact empty, but AW recognized that particular method of communication and knew just what to do with it.
What if that message was written in invisible ink? speculation, imo.
Were the Russian spies using the same invisible ink you can buy at toy stores?
2010
''Eleven Russians were arrested this week and accused of spying in the United States. The group is said to have employed seemingly outdated instruments for their espionage. According to the Justice Department’s criminal complaint, one suspect told another that he would transmit a message to her “in invisible.” Do spies use the same invisible ink you can get at toy stores?
Pretty much. There are three main techniques for making invisible ink, all of which have been used by toy manufacturers and spies alike.''
''The CIA has acknowledged in court papers that American spies do use invisible ink, but the agency won’t disclose which types are in play. Unless the government has made some secret breakthroughs in invisible-ink technology, however, the kind used in spycraft won’t be too far off from what you’d find at a novelty store.''
''During WWII, the American singer and actress Josephine Baker carried invisible messages for the French resistance written on her sheet music.''
Science News for Students
What if that message was written in invisible ink? speculation, imo.
Were the Russian spies using the same invisible ink you can buy at toy stores?
2010
''Eleven Russians were arrested this week and accused of spying in the United States. The group is said to have employed seemingly outdated instruments for their espionage. According to the Justice Department’s criminal complaint, one suspect told another that he would transmit a message to her “in invisible.” Do spies use the same invisible ink you can get at toy stores?
Pretty much. There are three main techniques for making invisible ink, all of which have been used by toy manufacturers and spies alike.''
''The CIA has acknowledged in court papers that American spies do use invisible ink, but the agency won’t disclose which types are in play. Unless the government has made some secret breakthroughs in invisible-ink technology, however, the kind used in spycraft won’t be too far off from what you’d find at a novelty store.''
''During WWII, the American singer and actress Josephine Baker carried invisible messages for the French resistance written on her sheet music.''
Science News for Students
One theory that might have happened is what if AW did know what the envelope was for but just refused to handover whatever was requested from him. Perhaps instead he threatened to go to the police or something and which stage he had to be silenced?
The more I think about it the less inclined I am to think it was a planned hit. There's too much other stuff around it for my liking. We have a killer who went to AWs house presumably not knowing who was at home, not bothered about who answered the door and might be able to identify him. He allows AW back in to his house showing huge confidence AW will reappear rather than call the police or flee out the back door or something. However he did carry a gun which shows be was prepared for trouble. Even the method of disposing the gun seems random for a planned hit. I tend to think the killing took place because of what happened on the doorstep that night.
Also on the envelope. I've said the chances of anything coming to light about it after so many years must be nearly zero. The chances of anyone knowing about it are tiny unless there is other significance to it. I wonder if this is a bluff and just a method used by the police to make it known they know about its existence? Perhaps they are hoping to spook someone?
Is there any verifiable evidence that AW actually did return inside the house? I think everything is based on one piece of testimony isn't it?
The more I think about it the less inclined I am to think it was a planned hit. There's too much other stuff around it for my liking. We have a killer who went to AWs house presumably not knowing who was at home, not bothered about who answered the door and might be able to identify him. He allows AW back in to his house showing huge confidence AW will reappear rather than call the police or flee out the back door or something. However he did carry a gun which shows be was prepared for trouble. Even the method of disposing the gun seems random for a planned hit. I tend to think the killing took place because of what happened on the doorstep that night.
Also on the envelope. I've said the chances of anything coming to light about it after so many years must be nearly zero. The chances of anyone knowing about it are tiny unless there is other significance to it. I wonder if this is a bluff and just a method used by the police to make it known they know about its existence? Perhaps they are hoping to spook someone?
Is there any verifiable evidence that AW actually did return inside the house? I think everything is based on one piece of testimony isn't it?
In terms of what the killer actually wanted. It wouldn't necessarily have to be something tangible. Perhaps it was information the killer wanted written down? An address or some bank details or something to do with "Paul"?
Let's say the envelope was in fact empty, but AW recognized that particular method of communication and knew just what to do with it.
What if that message was written in invisible ink? speculation, imo.
Were the Russian spies using the same invisible ink you can buy at toy stores?
2010
''Eleven Russians were arrested this week and accused of spying in the United States. The group is said to have employed seemingly outdated instruments for their espionage. According to the Justice Department’s criminal complaint, one suspect told another that he would transmit a message to her “in invisible.” Do spies use the same invisible ink you can get at toy stores?
Pretty much. There are three main techniques for making invisible ink, all of which have been used by toy manufacturers and spies alike.''
''The CIA has acknowledged in court papers that American spies do use invisible ink, but the agency won’t disclose which types are in play. Unless the government has made some secret breakthroughs in invisible-ink technology, however, the kind used in spycraft won’t be too far off from what you’d find at a novelty store.''
''During WWII, the American singer and actress Josephine Baker carried invisible messages for the French resistance written on her sheet music.''
Science News for Students
Interesting thought. IMO, someone would only use this if they were 100% sure they could retrieve the envelope (it would be relatively simple for the Police, for instance, to analyse for invisible ink?
Well....
A) Killer calls at AW's house on a Sunday evening (High chance AW would be at home) - (I will touch on 'what was requested' of AW Shortly) - but, (especially having gone back inside**) there was a high chance AW would potentially call the Police (if threatened enough) - evidence from his wife is that he did go back inside, and was not back at the door very long before being shot (What changed - AW was going to check to see if the person was still there - did he at that point say "go away"?)
B) What did AW say to the person before going in the first time? (Enough to indicate 'go away I do not know what you are on about?)
I don't think the gun was disposed of randonly. Unless it was placed there at a later date the location proves the killer (or someone associated with them) was at the location within minutes of the shooting. They then had immediate access to the main road into and out of Nairn (whichever way they went). The time to reach this point would be before the emergency services were around en masse. They had to pass literally dozens of other drains to reach this point and could have deposited the gun earlier. Once on the main road no one would find a gun if they were stopped.
In regards to the envelope, the Police have never disclosed what the substance of the chat between AW and is wife was.
Clearly they don't believe she is in any danger at the house yet clearly the 'evidence' from the conversation is sensitive enough they will not release it.