Fraser v HM Advocate

Last updated

Fraser v Her Majesty's Advocate
Court Supreme Court
Decided25 May 2011
Citation(s)2011 SLT 515, 2011 SCL 582, [2011] UKSC 24
Case history
Prior action(s)Fraser v. Her Majesty's Advocate [2009] ScotHC HCJAC 27 (Lord Gill JC, Lord Osborne and Lord Wheatley)
Subsequent action(s)Re-trial of the appellant Fraser
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting Lord Hope of Craighead (Deputy President), Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore and Lord Dyson
Case opinions
Lord Hope of Craighead (Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore and Lord Dyson concurring) and Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood
Keywords
Fairness, Disclosure Article 6 of ECHR, devolution issues

Fraser v Her Majesty's Advocate (2011) UKSC 24 is a decision of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom relating to the effect of non-disclosure of evidence to the defence at trial and the role of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in Scots criminal law.

Contents

Background and trial

On 29 January 2003, Nat Fraser was convicted by a majority verdict at the High Court at Edinburgh, before Lord Mackay of Drumadoon and a jury, of the murder of his wife Arlene. He was duly sentenced to life imprisonment with a punishment part of 25 years. His wife had disappeared in 1998 and he insisted that he was innocent of any involvement in her disappearance and presumed death. [1] The cornerstone of the Crown's case against Fraser was that on 7 May he had returned certain rings from the dead body of his wife, 9 days after she vanished, in order to foster the appearance that she had decided to leave of her own volition. The trial judge directed the jury that they were obliged to acquit Fraser if they were unsure that he had returned the rings to the house. [2]

Initial appellate proceedings

Fraser lodged a note of appeal against conviction and sentence to the Court of Criminal Appeal. The appeal was heard by the Lord Justice Clerk (Lord Gill), Lord Osborne and Lord Johnston. It emerged that two police constables had given witness statements to the Crown before the trial to the effect that they had seen jewellery, including the rings, in the Fraser's house on 28 and 29 April. Fraser's two grounds of appeal were that the new evidence had a vital bearing on the jury's verdict, and that its non-disclosure to the defence had caused a miscarriage of justice. However, the court unanimously refused Fraser's appeal on the grounds, that notwithstanding the fresh evidence and the non-disclosure, the strength of the circumstantial evidence against Fraser was so strong that no miscarriage of justice had occurred. [3]

Appeal to the Supreme Court

Fraser applied to the High Court for leave to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on the grounds that his case involved a devolution issue, namely that his prosecution and conviction had infringed his rights under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. His application was refused as incompetent by the Appeal Court on 24 March 2009, on the grounds that the issues had already been determined in the earlier appeal proceedings and that Parliament had not intended, in the Scotland Act 1998, to allow the Privy Council to review the merits of decisions of the Appeal Court. [4]

The Middlesex Guildhall, seat of the Supreme Court UK Supreme Court.jpg
The Middlesex Guildhall, seat of the Supreme Court

Fraser then applied for special leave to appeal to the Privy Council directly. However, the determination of his application was delayed pending the resolution of two other Scottish cases, by which point the jurisdiction of the Privy Council to determine devolution issues under the Scotland Act 1998 had been transferred to the Supreme Court. On 20 May 2011, the Supreme Court granted his application for special leave to appeal. [5]

Lord Hope of Craighead delivered the majority judgment. Reaffirming that the High Court remained the final court of appeal in criminal matters in Scotland and that the Supreme Court had no jurisdiction to review the merits of its decisions made in exercise of that function, [6] he ruled that the Appeal Court had applied the wrong test in law in relation to article 6(1), namely, whether they believed that there had been a miscarriage of justice rather than whether there was 'a real possibility that the jury at this trial would have arrived at a different verdict' which created a miscarriage of justice, based on the precedent of McInnes v Her Majesty's Advocate. [7] He concluded that a real possibility existed, and accordingly allowed the appeal, and remitted the matter to the Appeal Court with a direction to quash Fraser's conviction, once it had decided whether he should be re-tried, in exercise of the court's powers under paragraph 13 of Schedule 6 to the Scotland Act 1998. [8]

Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood agreed that the Appeal Court had applied the wrong test in law and would have allowed the appeal but was inclined to have remitted the whole case to the Appeal Court, absent a direction to quash. He did not, however, carry this view to dissent. [9]

Aftermath

On 17 June 2011, in accordance with the order of the Supreme Court, the Appeal Court quashed Fraser's conviction and granted authority to bring a new prosecution. [10] On 23 April 2012, Fraser's retrial began at the High Court at Edinburgh before Lord Bracadale and a jury. [11] [12] On 30 May 2012, Fraser was convicted of the murder of his wife, and was sentenced to life imprisonment with a punishment part of seventeen years. [13]

Political consequences

Alex Salmond was accused of "unbelievable ignorance" AlexSalmond 2007-Cr.jpg
Alex Salmond was accused of "unbelievable ignorance"

The Supreme Court ruling was controversially attacked by Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill MSP who threatened to withhold funding for the court on the grounds that it was undermining Scottish judicial independence. [14] In addition, Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond MSP convened an expert group to limit the referral of Scottish cases to the court on human rights grounds.

Both men were accused of "unbelievable ignorance" by former Principal Advocate Depute at the Crown Office, Brian McConnachie [15] and for "interfering in the independence of the judiciary and for making "highly personal" attacks on senior legal figures" by Richard Keen, dean of the Faculty of Advocates, and Cameron Ritchie, president of the Law Society of Scotland. [16] Legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg claimed that Salmond had made an "extraordinary personal attack" against Deputy President Lord Hope of Craighead, as part of a Scottish nationalist agenda. [17]

The Scotland Bill 2011 was amended, partially as a result of the decision in Fraser, to insert new section 98A into the Scotland Act 1998 which would create a statutory right of appeal to the Supreme Court from the Appeal Court in the case of an issue of compatibility with the Convention only. [18]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judicial functions of the House of Lords</span> Historical role of the UK House of Lords

Whilst the House of Lords of the United Kingdom is the upper chamber of Parliament and has government ministers, for many centuries it had a judicial function. It functioned as a court of first instance for the trials of peers and for impeachments, and as a court of last resort in the United Kingdom and prior, the Kingdom of Great Britain and the Kingdom of England.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kenny MacAskill</span> Alba Party politician

Kenneth Wright MacAskill is a Scottish politician who has been Member of Parliament (MP) for East Lothian since 2019. He previously served as Cabinet Secretary for Justice from 2007 to 2014 and was a Member of the Scottish Parliament (MSP) from 1999 to 2016. A former member of the Scottish National Party (SNP), he defected to the Alba Party in 2021 and currently serves as the party's depute leader.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">High Court of Justiciary</span> Supreme criminal court in Scotland

The High Court of Justiciary is the supreme criminal court in Scotland. The High Court is both a trial court and a court of appeal. As a trial court, the High Court sits on circuit at Parliament House or in the adjacent former Sheriff Court building in the Old Town in Edinburgh, or in dedicated buildings in Glasgow and Aberdeen. The High Court sometimes sits in various smaller towns in Scotland, where it uses the local sheriff court building. As an appeal court, the High Court sits only in Edinburgh. On one occasion the High Court of Justiciary sat outside Scotland, at Zeist in the Netherlands during the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial, as the Scottish Court in the Netherlands. At Zeist the High Court sat both as a trial court, and an appeal court for the initial appeal by Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Courts of Scotland</span> Administration of justice in Scotland

The courts of Scotland are responsible for administration of justice in Scotland, under statutory, common law and equitable provisions within Scots law. The courts are presided over by the judiciary of Scotland, who are the various judicial office holders responsible for issuing judgments, ensuring fair trials, and deciding on sentencing. The Court of Session is the supreme civil court of Scotland, subject to appeals to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, and the High Court of Justiciary is the supreme criminal court, which is only subject to the authority of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom on devolution issues and human rights compatibility issues.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of the United Kingdom</span> Final court of appeal in the United Kingdom

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom is the final court of appeal in the United Kingdom for all civil cases, and for criminal cases originating in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. As the United Kingdom’s highest appellate court for these matters, it hears cases of the greatest public or constitutional importance affecting the whole population.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Alan Rodger, Baron Rodger of Earlsferry</span> Scottish judge (1944-2011)

Alan Ferguson Rodger, Baron Rodger of Earlsferry was a Scottish academic, lawyer, and Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Abdelbaset al-Megrahi</span> Libyan convicted of the Lockerbie bombing (1952–2012)

Abdelbaset Ali Mohamed al-Megrahi was a Libyan who was head of security for Libyan Arab Airlines, director of the Centre for Strategic Studies in Tripoli, Libya, and an alleged Libyan intelligence officer. On 31 January 2001, Megrahi was convicted, by a panel of three Scottish judges sitting in a special court at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands, of 270 counts of murder for the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, on 21 December 1988 and was sentenced to life imprisonment. His co-accused, Lamin Khalifah Fhimah, was found not guilty and was acquitted.

The Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial began on 3 May 2000, more than 11 years after the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 on 21 December 1988. The 36-week bench trial took place at a specially convened Scottish Court in the Netherlands set up under Scots law and held at a disused United States Air Force base called Camp Zeist near Utrecht.

Justice is a human rights and law reform organisation based in the United Kingdom. It is the British section of the International Commission of Jurists, the international human rights organisation of lawyers devoted to the legal protection of human rights worldwide. Members of Justice are predominantly barristers and solicitors, judges, legal academics, and law students.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Robert Black (advocate)</span>

Robert Black is Professor Emeritus of Scots Law at the University of Edinburgh. He has been an Advocate in Scotland since 1972, was in practice at the Bar and became a QC in 1987.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Alan Turnbull, Lord Turnbull</span>

Alan Turnbull, Lord Turnbull is a Scottish lawyer, and a Senator of the College of Justice, a judge of the country's Supreme Courts. He was one of the lead prosecutors in the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial.

Alastair Peter Campbell, Lord Bracadale is a retired senior Scottish judge.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Frank Mulholland, Lord Mulholland</span> Scottish lawyer, Lord Advocate

Francis Mulholland, Lord Mulholland, is a Scottish judge who has been a Senator of the College of Justice since 2016. He previously served from 2011 to 2016 as Lord Advocate, one of the Great Officers of State of Scotland and the country's chief Law Officer, and as Solicitor General, the junior Law Officer.

Arlene Fraser was a 33-year-old woman from Elgin in Moray, Scotland, who vanished from her home on 28 April 1998 after her two children went to school. No trace of her was ever found, but her husband was convicted of her murder, upheld on appeal.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Brian Kerr, Baron Kerr of Tonaghmore</span> Northern Irish senior judge (1948–2020)

Brian Francis Kerr, Baron Kerr of Tonaghmore,, was a Northern Irish barrister and a senior judge. He held office as Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland and then as a justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. In 2009, he was the last person to receive a law life peerage under the Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876. At the time of his retirement on 30 September 2020, he was the longest-serving justice of the Supreme Court, and the court's last original member.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">World's End Murders</span> Crime in Edinburgh, Scotland, in 1977

The World's End Murders is the colloquial name given to the murder of two girls, Christine Eadie, 17, and Helen Scott, 17, in Edinburgh, in October 1977. The case is so named because both victims were last seen alive leaving The World's End pub in Edinburgh's Old Town. The only person to stand trial accused of the murders, Angus Robertson Sinclair, was acquitted in 2007 in controversial circumstances. Following the amendment of the law of double jeopardy, which would have prevented his retrial, Sinclair was retried in October 2014 and convicted of both murders on 14 November 2014. He was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 37 years, the longest sentence by a Scottish court, meaning he would have been 106 years old when he was eligible for a potential release on parole. He died at HM Prison Glenochil aged 73 on 11 March 2019. Coincidentally, he died on the same day the BBC's Crimewatch Roadshow programme profiled the murders.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Colin Sutherland, Lord Carloway</span> Scottish advocate and judge

Colin John MacLean Sutherland, Lord Carloway, is a Scottish advocate and judge who has served as the Lord President of the Court of Session and Lord Justice General since 2015. He was previously Lord Justice Clerk from 2012 to 2015 and has been a Senator of the College of Justice since 2000.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John McCluskey, Baron McCluskey</span> Scottish lawyer, judge and politician

John Herbert McCluskey, Baron McCluskey was a Scottish lawyer, judge and politician, who served as Solicitor General for Scotland, the country's junior Law Officer from 1974 to 1979, and as a Senator of the College of Justice, a judge of Scotland's Supreme Courts, from 1984 to 2004. He was also member of the House of Lords from 1976 until his retirement in 2017.

Alex Prentice KC is a leading Scottish lawyer.

<i>R v Gnango</i> British legal case

Regina v Armel Gnango[2011] UKSC 59 is the leading English criminal law case on the interaction of joint enterprise, transferred malice, and exemption from criminal liability where a party to what would normally be a crime is the victim of it. The Supreme Court held, restoring Gnango's conviction for the murder of Magda Pniewska, that he was guilty of murder notwithstanding the fact that he had not fired the shot which killed Pniewska during the shoot out which led to her death, and that the fatal shot had been fired by his opponent in an attempt to kill him. The judgment of the Supreme Court has been criticised over the alleged extent to which it was designed to mollify public opinion, and in the context of debates over the nature of the doctrine of joint enterprise.

References

  1. A. Cramb, "Nat Fraser sentenced to life for wife's murder", The Daily Telegraph, (London, 30 January 2003)
  2. Supreme Court Judgment at [2]
  3. Fraser v. Her Majesty's Advocate [2008] ScotHC HCJAC_26 (6 May 2008)
  4. Fraser v. Her Majesty's Advocate [2009] ScotHC HCJAC 27 (24 March 2009)
  5. Supreme Court Judgment at [10]
  6. Supreme Court Judgment at [11]
  7. Supreme Court Judgment at [38]
  8. Supreme Court Judgment at [42]-[43]
  9. Supreme Court Judgment at [51]-[52]
  10. BBC News Online, "Nat Fraser faces Arlene murder case retrial", BBC News (17 June 2011)
  11. BBC News Scotland:NE, Orkney & Shetland, "Nat Fraser faces trial in April over murder of wife Arlene", BBC News Online, (17 February 2012)
  12. BBC News, "Nat Fraser goes on trial accused of murdering wife Arlene", BBC News Online, (23 April 2012)
  13. BBC News, "Nat Fraser found guilty for second time of murdering wife Arlene in 1998", BBC News Online, (30 May 2012)
  14. D. Leask, "MacAskill threat to end Supreme Court funding", The Herald (1 June 2011)
  15. S. Johnson, "Alex Salmond and Kenny MacAskill accused of 'unbelievable ignorance' over UK Supreme Court", The Daily Telegraph (London, 1 June 2011)
  16. S. Carrell, "Scotland's top lawyers accuse Alex Salmond of 'highly personal' attacks", The Guardian (16 June 2011)
  17. J. Rozenberg, "Alex Salmond is gunning for the Supreme Court" Archived 11 June 2011 at the Wayback Machine , Law Society Gazette (London, 9 June 2011)
  18. P. Nicholson, "Power struggle", The Journal Online (20 June 2011)

Further reading