• #21
Thanks for that. I think this might be an important quote from the police, which I've not seen reported elsewhere yet:
"They also confirmed they did not believe it could have been an accident"

Likely either because of the gun/bullet used, or because the trajectory/distance of the shot wouldn't allow for an accident. Burn marks, for example, would mean the gun was pressed against the skin. Which doesn't generally happen by accident.
 
  • #22
  • #23
You have to wonder how much evidence was lost in the time between the body being found and them calling it a murder. The scene wouldn't have been secured until it was and that means walkers will have trampled all over anything that might have been found.
 
  • #24
You have to wonder how much evidence was lost in the time between the body being found and them calling it a murder. The scene wouldn't have been secured until it was and that means walkers will have trampled all over anything that might have been found.
I was thinking the same thing.

Sad that a man was just walking his dog, probably what he does most days and now he is dead :(
 
  • #25
Just watched a short report on the BBC and apparently he died of a shotgun wound to the chest and neck! How did Police miss that? It must surely have been fairly obvious. Also, now looks like he was killed by someone at fairly close range.

There must surely be a name floating about in such a small community? Perhaps a lack of evidence is the problem given it took a number of days to actually identify that a crime had been committed.

All very strange.
 
  • #26
So they found a grey-haired dead man, assumed heart attack (or similar) due to age and let him lay in a fridge for a week without once checking his body?
??

"Police Scotland initially classed Brian Low's death as a "medical event" before launching a murder hunt a week later when they found gunshot wounds on his body."
...
"Former superintendent Martin Gallagher, who retired from the force in 2022, says there are concerns over the officers who discovered Mr Low's body and wrote the case off as non-suspicious."

 
  • #27
  • #28
  • #29
  • #30
  • #31
  • #32
Former gamekeeper, who had previously been charged with damaging the property after he lost his job, has now been charged with murdering the former groundsman.

I'd guess this was either a personal issue between the two, or that Mr. Low caught Mr. Campbell attempting to cause more mischief and tried to stop him.
 
  • #33
‘David (Campbell), bless his cotton socks, does not like criticism’

 
  • #34
Last edited:
  • #35
  • #36
For people who have not read this link, take the time to do so. Wow, there have been a lot of weird things happen at that estate. And yet nobody has ever been in trouble.
Definitely. Good read...as I quoted another article posted below
This will be -an almost humorous -- BBC special down the road.
 
  • #37

Suspect has appeared in court.

As for the injuries - shotgun to the chest and neck! I’m no expert in firearms injuries but I reckon I could identify that sort of injury pretty quickly.

Would appear that an e-bike was used to make good his escape.

Will be interesting to find out the reasoning behind the alleged murder.
 
  • #38
  • #39
Fascinating case. If this was a novel, the same person who “framed” Campbell for the bird poisoning is now framing him for murder, but that stuff only happens in detective stories not real life.

Campbell seems like the most likely culprit, but the police clearly made an absolute mess of this and I don’t know how watertight their case is.

BBC News report that when the body was found he was cold and stiff to the touch (i.e obviously long dead) and covered in blood from 30 shotgun wounds to the face, amongst others, yet the police believed he’d had a medical incident and injured himself falling. When they realised their mistake they publicly stated he’d died about 8:30am and appealed for witnesses from that time despite rigor mortis having already set in and phone data indicating he’d died the night before. With mistakes like that, it’s hard to put much faith a police investigation, especially when they didn’t treat the (I assume) public footpath as a crime scene for 6 days.

From what I can tell so far the case against Campbell seems largely circumstantial. The pair clearly hated each other, Campbell has a habit of threatening to shoot people he doesn’t like (of which there are many) and there are potential questions over Campbell’s whereabouts on the day. But reading between the lines, it doesn’t sound as if they have found the murder weapon or have any evidence Campbell actually had or disposed of a shotgun. It’s also not clear yet how they can prove he fled the scene on an ebike. The most suggestive evidence is disabling his CCTV, but he discussed it with his daughter so he may have had a good reason and really bad timing. He clearly has motive, opportunity and possibility means, but he’d also be a convenient scapegoat for an embarrassed and potentially incompetent police force. IMHO.
 

Guardians Monthly Goal

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
178
Guests online
1,744
Total visitors
1,922

Forum statistics

Threads
642,866
Messages
18,791,038
Members
245,023
Latest member
Leo_
Back
Top