NAT Fraser today abandoned his bid to have his jail sentence cut for killing his estranged wife more than 10 years ago.
Nat Fraser was jailed for life with a minimum of 25 years behind bars in 2003 after a jury found him guilty of killing his wife Arlene, despite her body never being found.
The 49-year-old Elgin businessman lost his long-running appeal against conv
iction in May this year and was expected to appeal against his sentence on Friday.
But today, a spokeswoman at the Court of Appeal in Edinburgh confirmed Fraser has dropped the attempt to cut the amount of time he must spend in custody.
Mrs Fraser was 33 when she disappeared from her home in New Elgin, Moray, on April 28, 1998. Her family were convinced she had been murdered.
The disappearance led to one of the largest and most complex investigations mounted by Grampian Police, and resulted in a high-profile trial.
In early 2003, Fraser was found guilty of murder and ordered to serve a minimum of 25 years in prison for what the trial judge called an "evil, cold-blooded killing".
During his appeal against conviction at the end of last year, his lawyers claimed he was the victim of a miscarriage of justice and argued that vital evidence casting doubt on his guilt was withheld from the defence team.
But three senior judges recently ruled that the appeal should be refused, saying the original evidence against Fraser was "overwhelming".
"The circumstantial evidence alone constituted a compelling case against the appellant," said the Lord Justice Clerk Lord Gill.
"There was evidence that he had motives for the crime.
"There was evidence of his previous malice and ill-will towards the deceased."
He continued: "In my opinion, the circumstantial evidence alone was not only sufficient in law to entitle the jury to convict, but was powerful in its effect."
At the time, the victim's family spoke of their "sheer relief" and said there was "no doubt" that the right man was behind bars.
Fraser, who spent more than 18 months on bail while his appeal was being dealt with, protested that the "fight to get to the truth" would go on, as he was led away to continue his sentence.
His lawyer, John Macaulay, would not shed light on the reasons behind the decision to drop the sentence appeal.
"All I can say is he's abandoned his appeal against sentence," he said today.
The full article contains 418 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
