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

[SteveH]

I have just watched the Channel 5 doc Murder On The Doorstep. Absolutely essential viewing for those intrigued by this case. Why are C5 docs so much better than C4 ones? This one is David Wilson free (no Bleksley either) but it does briefly feature Mohammed Rahman. His ideas are thoroughly debunked by the end of the programme. Could have done without the intrusive music though.

Apparently Alistair's objection to the decking was the subject of "heated debate" and threats in the Havelock in the couple of days before the murder. Also it is stated that several regulars of the pub had banded together and built the decking, Was Paul one of them? Was it him and his nephew who were seen on the beach a month before the killing? The two men were described as being a) in his 20s and b) 40-60 and were aiming a handgun at the sea There is no mention of the emergency worker - I think the doc was made before the announcement by the police about him being a suspect.

No access outside UK

www.channel5.com

Also see Police Scotland records concerning the murder

From April 2022:

"Detective Superintendent Graeme Mackie said: “Shortly before his murder, Alistair had objected to the building of a large decking area within the car park of the Havelock Hotel, directly opposite the family home which he said was responsible for increased noise and litter in the area.

“The decking was built in the summer of 2004 and subject to a retrospective planning application at the time of the murder.

“While we cannot rule out any scenario, we believe this could be significant to our enquiries and I am asking anyone with information about this issue to please come forward and speak with officers.

“Alistair did not disclose his disapproval regarding the decking to many people, however we understand that his formal objection was sent by the Local Authority to the Havelock Hotel on the Thursday before his murder and knowledge of his objections became public before his murder on the Sunday, which may be significant.

“I would also appeal to anyone who was involved in the building of the decking area at the Havelock Hotel in 2004 to come forward.

“Through significant enquiries being carried out we believe the answer to Alistair’s murder lies within his personal life and not in his role with the bank.

“Someone locally will have that piece of information that could be crucial to catching his killer and providing answers for his family.”"

from May 2022:

"Detective Superintendent Graeme Mackie, of Police Scotland’s Major Investigation Team, said: “We understand through our enquiries that Alistair’s objection was openly talked about in the Havelock Hotel bar from Friday, 26 November up until his murder on Sunday, 28 November, and would urge anyone who was present over this period, or knows who was there, to please come forward and speak to us.

“This would have been the first time Alistair’s objection to a retrospective planning application for the decking would have become public knowledge.

“We want to know what was being said about it and who else was there as this may be significant to our investigation. I would ask anyone with information, no matter how insignificant they think it might be, to please come forward.”

Mr Wilson had objected to the building of a large decking area within the hotel car park in the summer of 2004 which he said was responsible for increased noise and litter in the area.

The decking subject to a retrospective planning application at the time of the murder and Mr Wilson had lodged his objection with the local authority on Thursday, 25 November, 2004."

Police Scotland Search

Police Scotland Search

www.scotland.police.uk

Anyone who thinks that the decking was too trivial a motive for murder should think again.

<modsnip: Off topic>

 

[rvlvr]

Yes the timeline is certainly questionable. It's not as though anyone was timing it after all. I wonder how long Veronica and Alastair spent discussing things. Whatever was said obviously did not include anything giving a specific motive. If the caller had turned up and started ranting about the decking or a banking transaction etc. Alastair would surely have relayed that information. Either Alastair was totally confused and had no idea at all what was going on or he was holding back from Veronica.

Anything specific would would have immediately provided the motive but as we know it didn't. It's an unusual case in that it's not often a victim has the opportunity to tell someone exactly what's going on before they are killed. Yet Alastair didn't do that. The police have spent years trying to find a motive. We don't know what tone the original conversation took but it certainly doesn't look like it was anything that scared Alastair as he wasn't bothered about going outside again. It's a case full of puzzles and contradictions.

The envelope plays in to this as it could be vitally important or could be completely irrelevant.

And then there’s the theory that two people were involved - after all, we can’t be sure that the man Veronica saw was even the man who pulled the trigger. I think this theory has been discussed on here before, and I think it’s plausible. The killer, man A, may have had a certain familiarity with the Wilsons, and couldn’t risk being identified if Veronica answered the door (as happened). So a less familiar face - man B - calls instead. He demands something from Alistair, which would necessitate Alistair going back in to the house, at which point man A steps forward with the gun to await his return. This could tie in with what @SteveH mentioned regarding two men apparently being seen on the beach messing around with a gun.

As you say, Alistair had a wonderful opportunity to provide Veronica with useful information, or to call the police if he felt threatened. Perhaps he was bluffing Veronica in an attempt to downplay a situation that had unsettled him, but would he have then abandoned the safety of the upstairs of his house to return to the front door?

For me the weapon is the key. I don’t think police have ever linked it to other shootings? In fact I don’t think there can be many murders in Scotland that were committed with this type of gun. It strikes me as the sort of weapon that might typically be gathering dust in your grandad’s attic rather than being handled by organised criminals. These guys aren’t generally in the business of doing odd stunts with blue envelopes either. Someone in Nairn surely knows where the gun came from and who pulled the trigger, but persuading people to talk is always difficult, and especially so when a conviction will likely hinge on it.

 

[Professor Moriarty]

I haven't seen the ch5 documentary yet, as I am waiting for my password problem to be resolved.

I wonder why it took police so long to decide that it was the decking "wot done it" or to announce that, if they knew a lot earlier.

If, as seems likely, it is to do with the decking, then a number of people probably know who is likely to have done the murder. Possibly, some decking-builders could be eliminated on the basis of their age or Veronica could eliminate them.

In fact, the police probably have a good idea who built the decking and which one did the murder.

 

[alb1on]

For me the weapon is the key. I don’t think police have ever linked it to other shootings? In fact I don’t think there can be many murders in Scotland that were committed with this type of gun. It strikes me as the sort of weapon that might typically be gathering dust in your grandad’s attic rather than being handled by organised criminals. These guys aren’t generally in the business of doing odd stunts with blue envelopes either. Someone in Nairn surely knows where the gun came from and who pulled the trigger, but persuading people to talk is always difficult, and especially so when a conviction will likely hinge on it.

I would agree about the gun but for the fact that I posted at #1053 a link to a report of a kidnap and torture for extortion case clearly committed by professional criminals that used precisely this gun model. I do not know how common this model is but there are obviously some in criminal circulation. It does not mean that it was a professional hit but it does mean it cannot be ruled out by the gun used.

 

[Warwick1991]

I am pretty sure that .25 rifle ammunition cannot be used in a pistol.

Agree. The .25 ACP caliber ammunition used in pocket pistols was designed for very small pistols; there's a case, a primer, gunpowder and a lead projectile. It is a center fire cartridge. It's still sold today in the US, although not too common.

 

[Warwick1991]

And then there’s the theory that two people were involved - after all, we can’t be sure that the man Veronica saw was even the man who pulled the trigger. I think this theory has been discussed on here before, and I think it’s plausible. The killer, man A, may have had a certain familiarity with the Wilsons, and couldn’t risk being identified if Veronica answered the door (as happened). So a less familiar face - man B - calls instead. He demands something from Alistair, which would necessitate Alistair going back in to the house, at which point man A steps forward with the gun to await his return. This could tie in with what @SteveH mentioned regarding two men apparently being seen on the beach messing around with a gun.

As you say, Alistair had a wonderful opportunity to provide Veronica with useful information, or to call the police if he felt threatened. Perhaps he was bluffing Veronica in an attempt to downplay a situation that had unsettled him, but would he have then abandoned the safety of the upstairs of his house to return to the front door?

For me the weapon is the key. I don’t think police have ever linked it to other shootings? In fact I don’t think there can be many murders in Scotland that were committed with this type of gun. It strikes me as the sort of weapon that might typically be gathering dust in your grandad’s attic rather than being handled by organised criminals. These guys aren’t generally in the business of doing odd stunts with blue envelopes either. Someone in Nairn surely knows where the gun came from and who pulled the trigger, but persuading people to talk is always difficult, and especially so when a conviction will likely hinge on it.

The gun is a relatively unusual pocket pistol. The Haenel Schmeisser .25 ACP pistol was sold in the 1920s, and was not a WWII military weapon, although some might have been taken back to the UK as souvenirs by soldiers returning home. The cartridge is considered very underpowered for self defense, and would be an odd choice for organized crime operations. The pistol was one of a number of its type designed for concealability.

 

[CSIAngus]

Couldn’t edit my post in time to correct this, it was actually found about half a mile from the murder scene, on Seabank Road:

New image of gun used to kill Nairn banker Alistair Wilson

Police release a new image of the gun used in the nine-year-old unsolved murder of Nairn banker Alistair Wilson.

www.bbc.com

It’s difficult to imagine anyone linked to gangs in Glasgow for instance coming to Nairn to shoot Alistair with a ‘pocket pistol’ then dropping it in a drain just down the road from his house, I think this almost certainly means the killer was not particularly smart (inebriated?) and local.

Well they got rid of it in a drain and have never been caught. That's very lucky if they were inebriated, and why drop it there if they were local? There must be lots of places to better dispose of a weapon with local knowledge. If anything, it points to a perpetrator without local knowledge who got rid of it as soon as possible. As was discussed earlier on this thread, the drain deposition would suit a drop from the passenger side of a getaway vehicle suggesting perhaps two perpetrators, and a conspiracy.

 

[CSIAngus]

I have just watched the Channel 5 doc Murder On The Doorstep. Absolutely essential viewing for those intrigued by this case. Why are C5 docs so much better than C4 ones? This one is David Wilson free (no Bleksley either) but it does briefly feature Mohammed Rahman. His ideas are thoroughly debunked by the end of the programme. Could have done without the intrusive music though.

Apparently Alistair's objection to the decking was the subject of "heated debate" and threats in the Havelock in the couple of days before the murder. Also it is stated that several regulars of the pub had banded together and built the decking, Was Paul one of them? Was it him and his nephew who were seen on the beach a month before the killing? The two men were described as being a) in his 20s and b) 40-60 and were aiming a handgun at the sea There is no mention of the emergency worker - I think the doc was made before the announcement by the police about him being a suspect.

No access outside UK

www.channel5.com

Also see Police Scotland records concerning the murder

From April 2022:

"Detective Superintendent Graeme Mackie said: “Shortly before his murder, Alistair had objected to the building of a large decking area within the car park of the Havelock Hotel, directly opposite the family home which he said was responsible for increased noise and litter in the area.

“The decking was built in the summer of 2004 and subject to a retrospective planning application at the time of the murder.

“While we cannot rule out any scenario, we believe this could be significant to our enquiries and I am asking anyone with information about this issue to please come forward and speak with officers.

“Alistair did not disclose his disapproval regarding the decking to many people, however we understand that his formal objection was sent by the Local Authority to the Havelock Hotel on the Thursday before his murder and knowledge of his objections became public before his murder on the Sunday, which may be significant.

“I would also appeal to anyone who was involved in the building of the decking area at the Havelock Hotel in 2004 to come forward.

“Through significant enquiries being carried out we believe the answer to Alistair’s murder lies within his personal life and not in his role with the bank.

“Someone locally will have that piece of information that could be crucial to catching his killer and providing answers for his family.”"

from May 2022:

"Detective Superintendent Graeme Mackie, of Police Scotland’s Major Investigation Team, said: “We understand through our enquiries that Alistair’s objection was openly talked about in the Havelock Hotel bar from Friday, 26 November up until his murder on Sunday, 28 November, and would urge anyone who was present over this period, or knows who was there, to please come forward and speak to us.

“This would have been the first time Alistair’s objection to a retrospective planning application for the decking would have become public knowledge.

“We want to know what was being said about it and who else was there as this may be significant to our investigation. I would ask anyone with information, no matter how insignificant they think it might be, to please come forward.”

Mr Wilson had objected to the building of a large decking area within the hotel car park in the summer of 2004 which he said was responsible for increased noise and litter in the area.

The decking subject to a retrospective planning application at the time of the murder and Mr Wilson had lodged his objection with the local authority on Thursday, 25 November, 2004."

Police Scotland Search

Police Scotland Search

www.scotland.police.uk

Anyone who thinks that the decking was too trivial a motive for murder should think again.

<modsnip: Off topic>

No need to think again. People don't get murdered for letters of objection to retrospective planning applications. The synchronicity of those two things is entirely coincidental, IMO. And there is no suggestion I've read that the granting of retro planning permission was in doubt. Nothing else in this case points to the pub opposite being a factor. The Police took nearly two decades to publicly suggest planning as a possible motive, and I think that is more about desperation than anything else.

 

[davidt]

And then there’s the theory that two people were involved - after all, we can’t be sure that the man Veronica saw was even the man who pulled the trigger. I think this theory has been discussed on here before, and I think it’s plausible. The killer, man A, may have had a certain familiarity with the Wilsons, and couldn’t risk being identified if Veronica answered the door (as happened). So a less familiar face - man B - calls instead. He demands something from Alistair, which would necessitate Alistair going back in to the house, at which point man A steps forward with the gun to await his return. This could tie in with what @SteveH mentioned regarding two men apparently being seen on the beach messing around with a gun.

As you say, Alistair had a wonderful opportunity to provide Veronica with useful information, or to call the police if he felt threatened. Perhaps he was bluffing Veronica in an attempt to downplay a situation that had unsettled him, but would he have then abandoned the safety of the upstairs of his house to return to the front door?

For me the weapon is the key. I don’t think police have ever linked it to other shootings? In fact I don’t think there can be many murders in Scotland that were committed with this type of gun. It strikes me as the sort of weapon that might typically be gathering dust in your grandad’s attic rather than being handled by organised criminals. These guys aren’t generally in the business of doing odd stunts with blue envelopes either. Someone in Nairn surely knows where the gun came from and who pulled the trigger, but persuading people to talk is always difficult, and especially so when a conviction will likely hinge on it.

One thing I'd like to know more about is how long AW and VW spent discussing things. I get the impression it was maybe 2-4 minutes but not sure. Also I'd particularly like to know exactly why AW went back outside. Early reports said AW had already concluded his business, whatever it was, at the end of the first conversation. Other reports suggest going back outside was just something AW decided to do on the spot. If that's correct then presumably for the time being at least he was supposed to keep the envelope. But then it makes no sense that the caller was still hanging around. If however, as seems possible, it was always his intention to go back outside and the caller expected him, how could the caller be confident he would do so? Unless it was someone AW knew well for example but that doesn't tie in with AW being bewildered.The more you think about it, the more it makes your head hurt.

Whatever AW and VW did discuss it obviously wasn't anything that provided any specific information or motive.

I'd agree that there being more than one person being involved can't be entirely ruled out.

 

[davidt]

I haven't seen the ch5 documentary yet, as I am waiting for my password problem to be resolved.

I wonder why it took police so long to decide that it was the decking "wot done it" or to announce that, if they knew a lot earlier.

If, as seems likely, it is to do with the decking, then a number of people probably know who is likely to have done the murder. Possibly, some decking-builders could be eliminated on the basis of their age or Veronica could eliminate them.

In fact, the police probably have a good idea who built the decking and which one did the murder.

I'm not sure they have really decided its the decking. They clearly didn't know what the motive was at the time. They spent an enormous amount of time combing through every aspect of AW and his family lives and came up with nothing. It feels a bit like the decking was all they had left. That's not to say that rules the decking out either.

 

[Professor Moriarty]

Two people were seen possibly firing a gun on the beach some time before the murder. Why were they doing that? The .25 calibre gunn wouldn't make a loud noise, although it would make a noise. But why were they doing that? Had they recently acquired the gun, or the ammunition? Were those people already plannng to shoot AW?

 

[rvlvr]

I would agree about the gun but for the fact that I posted at #1053 a link to a report of a kidnap and torture for extortion case clearly committed by professional criminals that used precisely this gun model. I do not know how common this model is but there are obviously some in criminal circulation. It does not mean that it was a professional hit but it does mean it cannot be ruled out by the gun used.

Thanks, I’ve just read your post, that’s interesting, sadly the link wasn’t working for me, do you have one that might be?

 

[SteveH]

No need to think again. People don't get murdered for letters of objection to retrospective planning applications. The synchronicity of those two things is entirely coincidental, IMO. And there is no suggestion I've read that the granting of retro planning permission was in doubt. Nothing else in this case points to the pub opposite being a factor. The Police took nearly two decades to publicly suggest planning as a possible motive, and I think that is more about desperation than anything else.

You will see at the end of my comment that there was a modsnip. Quite right too. I have been very badly behaved and deserve chastisement. But the point of that last sentence was completely lost. People get murdered for a lot less than the decking dispute. They might get murdered over an argument about whose turn it is to do the washing up. I linked some articles about another doorstep murder in Scotland which seemed to be because somebody threw a brick through someone else's window. Type Greenock doorstep murder into a search engine. As for why the police changed their approach in 2022 you might be right that it was desperate move - which is David Wilson's theory - or they might have had new evidence or witnesses. Only time will tell - or maybe not!

 

[SteveH]

And then there’s the theory that two people were involved - after all, we can’t be sure that the man Veronica saw was even the man who pulled the trigger. I think this theory has been discussed on here before, and I think it’s plausible. The killer, man A, may have had a certain familiarity with the Wilsons, and couldn’t risk being identified if Veronica answered the door (as happened). So a less familiar face - man B - calls instead. He demands something from Alistair, which would necessitate Alistair going back in to the house, at which point man A steps forward with the gun to await his return. This could tie in with what @SteveH mentioned regarding two men apparently being seen on the beach messing around with a gun.

As you say, Alistair had a wonderful opportunity to provide Veronica with useful information, or to call the police if he felt threatened. Perhaps he was bluffing Veronica in an attempt to downplay a situation that had unsettled him, but would he have then abandoned the safety of the upstairs of his house to return to the front door?

For me the weapon is the key. I don’t think police have ever linked it to other shootings? In fact I don’t think there can be many murders in Scotland that were committed with this type of gun. It strikes me as the sort of weapon that might typically be gathering dust in your grandad’s attic rather than being handled by organised criminals. These guys aren’t generally in the business of doing odd stunts with blue envelopes either. Someone in Nairn surely knows where the gun came from and who pulled the trigger, but persuading people to talk is always difficult, and especially so when a conviction will likely hinge on it.

Back on August 24 I wrote: "Pure speculation here. Maybe Paul (and his emergency worker relative?) were involved in the construction of the decking. They would stand to lose money if they had to take it down. They found out about AW's letter of objection which had been passed on to the pub. They decided that one of them should go round and demand compensation from AW at his home. With menace - therefore the gun in case AW got lairy."

I have now come round to thinking that if it was Paul and his nephew CH who carried out the crime - and who knows if that is the case? - then it must have been Paul who went to the doorstep and killed Alistair as Veronica described the man as stocky and 30-40 years old. Against this whole idea is that if the pair were Havelock regulars then it's a bit surprising that Paul wasn't identified at the time. as a person of interest - or maybe he was. Also maybe he would have been known to Alistair and Veronica. For some reason an e-fit made up from Veronica's description has never been issued. Peter Bleksley has confronted this Paul.

As for the gun, it was suggested in the Channel 5 doc that the person who dumped it may have assumed it would wash away into the Moray Firth. That's what they speculated happened to the envelope. The drain was blocked though.

David Wilson interviewed a hitman in My Life With Murderers. He asked him "Why do some gunmen leave their gun at the site of the hit?"

This anonymous bloke said: "Because then they are untraceable. If you get caught with that gun you're tied to a hit...The gun is always a throwaway or it might have been something that has been used over the border - so you just leave it - it's not worth the money taking it with you because you're looking at a life sentence as opposed to £500 for the gun - so you just drop it and leave it! If you get caught with it, that's it."

I don't agree with Wilson that this is likely to have been a "professional hit" but if it was Paul/CH together they might have been paid a few quid to do it by someone else. My "source" said that CH had lots of illegal weapons in his house.

 

[Eastend Eagle]

One thing I'd like to know more about is how long AW and VW spent discussing things. I get the impression it was maybe 2-4 minutes but not sure. Also I'd particularly like to know exactly why AW went back outside. Early reports said AW had already concluded his business, whatever it was, at the end of the first conversation. Other reports suggest going back outside was just something AW decided to do on the spot. If that's correct then presumably for the time being at least he was supposed to keep the envelope. But then it makes no sense that the caller was still hanging around. If however, as seems possible, it was always his intention to go back outside and the caller expected him, how could the caller be confident he would do so? Unless it was someone AW knew well for example but that doesn't tie in with AW being bewildered.The more you think about it, the more it makes your head hurt.

Whatever AW and VW did discuss it obviously wasn't anything that provided any specific information or motive.

I'd agree that there being more than one person being involved can't be entirely ruled out.

Maybe the caller alleged to AW that his wife was having an affair with someone called Paul then told him to ask her about this, AW then instead of asking her directly just showed her the envelope with the name on it to see how she reacts. Maybe the caller's plan was to try to create false narrative around the case to throw a future police investigation off course. AIUI, VW has since had to put up with rumours in the local community that she may have been involved in the murder.
When AW returned to the doorstep, the envelope was then effectively returned to Paul.
MOO/JMO

 

[Professor Moriarty]

Although there seem to be strong grounds for blaming the decking people, the person who knocked on the door was seen by both VW and AW. They could also, possibly, be seen by people in the Havelock Arms, just across the road. Wouldn't that risk the killer(s) being identified? Presumably, decking people could not rely on everyone in the hotel that evening being happy to keep quiet about what happened.

 

[Eastend Eagle]

Although there seem to be strong grounds for blaming the decking people, the person who knocked on the door was seen by both VW and AW. They could also, possibly, be seen by people in the Havelock Arms, just across the road. Wouldn't that risk the killer(s) being identified? Presumably, decking people could not rely on everyone in the hotel that evening being happy to keep quiet about what happened.

VW saw the person who rang the door and apparently did not recognise them, AW saw the person who rang the door and seemingly did not recognise them so we must surely presume that this person was not known to either of them.
What seems remarkable to me is that this person was apparently neither spotted nor recognised by anyone in the vicinity. Surely it couldn't be that everyone there was acting in cahoots with the gunman or astonishingly could this have been the case? Could there really have been so many people care that much about the fate of the decking?

 

[rvlvr]

I'm not sure they have really decided its the decking. They clearly didn't know what the motive was at the time. They spent an enormous amount of time combing through every aspect of AW and his family lives and came up with nothing. It feels a bit like the decking was all they had left. That's not to say that rules the decking out either.

Yeah, I think it’s highly unlikely anyone ordered a hit based on a grudge over the decking. I think anyone officially connected to the pub played no part in this. But I don’t think it rules out a pub regular with access to a gun, high on having read one too many Glasgow gangster stories, fuelled by youthful exuberance and a few beers, deciding to confront the posh banker who always has his curtains drawn, who couldn’t make a go of the hotel but seems to be doing just fine financially, and who now wants to pick a fight with his local?

It’s a stretch but it’s far less fanciful imo than any theories relating to gangs and paramilitaries. A convoluted killing with a pocket pistol just isn’t their style. In any case murders involving firearms happen incredibly rarely in Scotland, especially outside of the central belt. It’s very possible this was personal in some way but it’s surprising imo that nothing has apparently come out regarding the Wilsons’ relationship, their finances, etc, during the two decades since the murder that would point to that.

 

[davidt]

Yeah, I think it’s highly unlikely anyone ordered a hit based on a grudge over the decking. I think anyone officially connected to the pub played no part in this. But I don’t think it rules out a pub regular with access to a gun, high on having read one too many Glasgow gangster stories, fuelled by youthful exuberance and a few beers, deciding to confront the posh banker who always has his curtains drawn, who couldn’t make a go of the hotel but seems to be doing just fine financially, and who now wants to pick a fight with his local?

It’s a stretch but it’s far less fanciful imo than any theories relating to gangs and paramilitaries. A convoluted killing with a pocket pistol just isn’t their style. In any case murders involving firearms happen incredibly rarely in Scotland, especially outside of the central belt. It’s very possible this was personal in some way but it’s surprising imo that nothing has apparently come out regarding the Wilsons’ relationship, their finances, etc, during the two decades since the murder that would point to that.

From my point of view I can't get past the difficulty matching this theory and others to the sequence of events said to have happened that night. If this case is ever solved it will be very interesting to see how that narrative stands up. If it was the decking AW didn't tell Veronica as she was unable to give the police anything in the way of a clear motive. It seems strange AW did not tell her clearly what was going on, unless he was deliberately hiding it or he had no idea himself. But if it was the decking he would surely know what it was about.

An awful lot depends on tbe accuracy and completeness of Veronica's account together with the details of AW and VWs conversation that the police have withheld to date.

 

[Cedars]

"Dr Mohammed Rahman, lecturer in criminology at Birmingham City University, who has analysed the case, said he believes the gunman was a professional....

"Dr Rahman said he believes the envelope given to Mr Wilson was symbolic, and the name Paul was intended to be circulated in the media to send a message to others.

He said: “Whoever commissioned the hit would know that the envelope would be mentioned in the media and therefore it could have been used to send out a subliminal message to any wider connections to Alistair’s case.""

This sounds like second rate cultural studies/semiotics/psychology to me.

I disagree. I expect Dr. Rahman is very familiar with the actions of organized crime and other criminals.

It's a variant on the long tradition of symbolic asassinations. Consider the man who recently shot a CEO of a US health insurance company, on the street in NY. He wrote a message on the bullets. He didn't care about the man, he just did it because he wanted to bring attention, through the news media coverage of the murder, to the issue of the health care system. It was entirely symbolic, has nothing to do with the actual man.

Charles Manson had his followers select a random house and murder all the occupants, writing something in blood on the walls, believing that it would ignite a race war. ie the murders had nothing to do with the individuals but were entirely symbolic and so that the message would be delivered through the news media coverage. Interestingly, it didn't work - no one understood the message until Manson explained it.

Organized crime do this as well, since they can't call police/government to intervene in their disputes, or use ordinary advertising channels. The mafia has always governed by violence. But, traditionally, they would just break someone's legs or set fire to their home, and rely on word of mouth about the open secret. IMO, with the advent of mass communication, and competition in the drug trade, the violence has escalated...

The epitome of this is the wars of the Mexican drug cartels, when they are in intense competition with each other, as well as authorities. Around 2010 the brutality escalated to the level where a new gang would advertise that they'd moved into an area by killing a dozen innocent people and leaving all their bodies in an abandoned vehicle, or tossing their heads in a busy venue.

People often believe these crimes have something to do with anger or revenge or sociopathy, but not at all: they're simply warnings "don't mess with us because we'll stop at nothing". They are completely symbolic, and they target innocent people because they're just easier to kill, unlike other gang members who are on guard.

The crimes are completely outrageous precisely so that the message isn't confused with other theories about them being personal.

JMO

ETA In this and potentially other unsolved cases, the message might have been directed to only a few people, rather than the general public. The name of the victim, the blue envelope and the name Paul could add up to a highly direct message to some people in the criminal underworld.