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

[Kiri]

She then discusses how she gets her dad to look after boys upstairs, she rings 999, but can't bare to do CPR and runs to pub twice, to get help, which she only manages on 2nd look in at pub.
There is a female witness in pub (name of Ross - coincidence I'm sure!!). Who helps, and Burnett. (Think that's discussed in another clip.). I've had to administer 1st aid for chocking on 2 of my family members, not in the same league obviously as this, but I would have thought VW could have tried. But she couldn't - I will give benefit of doubt here, as we do not know where/how bad the wounds were, and VW could well have been in shock.

 

[Kiri]

Correction - Michael Stuart, chef is 1st on scene b4 Burnett, Rachel Ross (witness) commented (it is in the same clip actually) on how VW came back in 'again' to get help, which she thought odd (maybe she just meant odd as in 'hasn't this woman sorted her problem yet!'), I.e not in retrospect, why did she not secure help in the 1st attempt? Anyhow, they all realise it's a very bad situation and worry about a shooter at large, within 7 minutes police/ambulance then arrive. How did VW/witnesses know AW had been shot??? (up until she sees A on floor, VW still thought pallet noises may have been fight). I know she heard what she described as pallets dropping, and thinks maybe a fight, but she then is sure AW shot? would she have seen a bullet hole? How would she know he wasn't stabbed and bleeding from that? Maybe she is discussing it with hindsight.

 

[cortina]

so much of it is odd...as David t. has. said, we dont know if. we can believe if the envelope existed.

if we. are looking at. possible business connections, or help with. personal finances I hope the police have looked at the people aw played golf with-...the golf. course is a favoured place for. this...I know Burnett was a former golf partner, but there were probably others

 

[Taskforce88]

Where was the envelope found? Was it on AW when he was shot? Was it in the house?

 

[Taskforce88]

She then discusses how she gets her dad to look after boys upstairs, she rings 999, but can't bare to do CPR and runs to pub twice, to get help, which she only manages on 2nd look in at pub.
There is a female witness in pub (name of Ross - coincidence I'm sure!!). Who helps, and Burnett. (Think that's discussed in another clip.). I've had to administer 1st aid for chocking on 2 of my family members, not in the same league obviously as this, but I would have thought VW could have tried. But she couldn't - I will give benefit of doubt here, as we do not know where/how bad the wounds were, and VW could well have been in shock.

Are you not buying VW's version?

 

[cortina]

FWIW I don't buy it either. What really puzzles me is that the official line is so blindingly obviously odd that they must know anyone spending more than a couple of minutes on it is going see it doesn't make sense. I don't for a second believe the police are unaware how it looks. For whatever reason they must be happy with this.

It makes much more sense if AW was always going to come back out. But if that if is the case then a huge chunk of the official line is wrong and if that is wrong what else in the official version is wrong as well. It's very hard to believe the gunman hung around on the off chance. If the intention was always to kill AW I don't see a professional hitman allowing his intended victim to return back in to his property unless he's very confident AW is going come back out. If that's the case he must have very good reason for thinking that. That doesn't tally with the official version though.

Perhaps there never was an envelope, perhaps there was only one conversation on the doorstep and AW didn't go back in at all. If we can't trust one bit why should we trust any of it?

I can't reconcile the original statement that the envelope was unopened because AW was already aware of its contents with the current version that it was unopened and empty. Which is it?

Police refuse to divulge the contents of the conversation between AW and VW but say it throws no light on the murder itself. Given that presumably the whole conversation was about the envelope and the stranger at the doorstep how is it possible the conversation throws no light on the murder?

[/QUOTE]
what exactly does the official line. say about aw. going out a second time...maybe he just. never mentioned to v that he said he'd go out again, so when he said. he would she thought he'd just made the decision...playing devils advocate here.

 

[cortina]

Are you not buying VW's version?

I think she has been briefed what to. say by the police...aw may have told. her more than she, or the official version says, but something...or several things...dont make sense here..the police have arranged the story for. some reason..maybe because they are. hoping to catch someone out who knows what really happened

 

[davidt]

Where was the envelope found? Was it on AW when he was shot? Was it in the house?

It was never recovered. Its assumed the killer retrieved it.

 

[davidt]

what exactly does the official line. say about aw. going out a second time...maybe he just. never mentioned to v that he said he'd go out again, so when he said. he would she thought he'd just made the decision...playing devils advocate here.
[/QUOTE]

Basically AW returned inside. He asked VW if she was sure the caller had asked for him. They then had a discussion. We don't know the details of the rest of the conversation. AW was reportedly still bewildered or confused about what was going on. At that stage AW decided he would go back out to see if the caller may still be there. That's about it. And that's really why it's so hard to come up with a logical explanation of what happened.

 

[Kiri]

Where was the envelope found? Was it on AW when he was shot? Was it in the house?

The shooter took it. Hence no DNA, prints etc. DCI McPhee felt the shooter returned to get it (discussed in Bleksley book). As aparently VW saw the shooter quite close to the scene. So his theory was that the shooter stopped/delayed/returned to get the envelope. Again, is that a professional move?!?

 

[Kiri]

I think she has been briefed what to. say by the police...aw may have told. her more than she, or the official version says, but something...or several things...dont make sense here..the police have arranged the story for. some reason..maybe because they are. hoping to catch someone out who knows what really happened

Something like this, yes, I actually agree with you on this! But I cant quite figure what in detail is going on! AW has never been anything other than a witness/victim of crime, so I'm (within the rules here too!) Honouring her status as a victim of crime BUT she was the only/first witness, so she is integral!!!

 

[Kiri]

so much of it is odd...as David t. has. said, we dont know if. we can believe if the envelope existed.

if we. are looking at. possible business connections, or help with. personal finances I hope the police have looked at the people aw played golf with-...the golf. course is a favoured place for. this...I know Burnett was a former golf partner, but there were probably others

AW was in the Mason's also?

 

[davidt]

The shooter took it. Hence no DNA, prints etc. DCI McPhee felt the shooter returned to get it (discussed in Bleksley book). As aparently VW saw the shooter quite close to the scene. So his theory was that the shooter stopped/delayed/returned to get the envelope. Again, is that a professional move?!?

Again this is why it's so complicated. If he did return because he wanted the envelope back, why? How was he intending to get it back? Struck lucky because AW just happened to pop out at the same time with the envelope? Find it a bit hard to think why the caller changed his mind about leaving it unless handing it over in the first place wasn't planned.

Of course if this is correct there can't have been an original intention to kill AW. Originally he was happy to leave the envelope. If he changed his mind and came back for it something must have happened to cause the shooting. Perhaps AW refused to give it back? Also if the intention was to leave the envelope surely he would have made sure AW knew what he was supposed to do with it, yet supposedly AW didn't have a clue. All of it makes your head spin.

 

[davidt]

Something like this, yes, I actually agree with you on this! But I cant quite figure what in detail is going on! AW has never been anything other than a witness/victim of crime, so I'm (within the rules here too!) Honouring her status as a victim of crime BUT she was the only/first witness, so she is integral!!!

Think this is spot on. There's only one witness and no corroborative evidence. So it's VWs account plus or minus whatever the police may have done to it.

 

[cortina]

do you think the police are bluffing when they maintain its all about the decking....to give someone a false sense of security

 

[Mickymack10]

do you think the police are bluffing when they maintain its all about the decking....to give someone a false sense of security

O I think there clutching at straws now in my opinion, I don't think there trying to give a false sense of security.

 

[Kiri]

Again this is why it's so complicated. If he did return because he wanted the envelope back, why? How was he intending to get it back? Struck lucky because AW just happened to pop out at the same time with the envelope? Find it a bit hard to think why the caller changed his mind about leaving it unless handing it over in the first place wasn't planned.

Of course if this is correct there can't have been an original intention to kill AW. Originally he was happy to leave the envelope. If he changed his mind and came back for it something must have happened to cause the shooting. Perhaps AW refused to give it back? Also if the intention was to leave the envelope surely he would have made sure AW knew what he was supposed to do with it, yet supposedly AW didn't have a clue. All of it makes your head spin.

It's very very odd.

 

[Taskforce88]

do you think the police are bluffing when they maintain its all about the decking....to give someone a false sense of security

After all this time what would be the point of that unless they were going down the last line of enquiry. But why not do this 10 years ago?

I think the answer is much closer to home.

 

[Taskforce88]

She then discusses how she gets her dad to look after boys upstairs, she rings 999, but can't bare to do CPR and runs to pub twice, to get help, which she only manages on 2nd look in at pub.
There is a female witness in pub (name of Ross - coincidence I'm sure!!). Who helps, and Burnett. (Think that's discussed in another clip.). I've had to administer 1st aid for chocking on 2 of my family members, not in the same league obviously as this, but I would have thought VW could have tried. But she couldn't - I will give benefit of doubt here, as we do not know where/how bad the wounds were, and VW could well have been in shock.

I wonder why VW didn't shout to her dad to phone 999 or get him to do first aid. And running to the pub twice is interesting. Why not go to a neighbour if the pub was empty the first time? People act differently in difficult circumstances though.

 

[Kiri]

I wonder why VW didn't shout to her dad to phone 999 or get him to do first aid. And running to the pub twice is interesting. Why not go to a neighbour if the pub was empty the first time? People act differently in difficult circumstances though.

I wondered this too, but she definitely wanted her boys out the way, as the 4 yr old (AW) had already seen his dad on the floor, she needed the younger one and her friend's little one looked after (they were babysitting a friend's 18 mnth old too). She had thought the caller was her friends coming to pick their little one up originally and wondered why they didn't use side door, like usual. They didn't use front door day to day. She wanted someone she knew to help her from pub, is what she says. Didn't see anyone on 1st attempt, got more panicky and went in again aparently.