Arlene Fraser: revisiting the hunt for arlene fraser’s killer
The new documentary series reopens the case of arlene fraser, who vanished from her home in Elgin, Moray, in April 1998, and retraces the searches, the odd clues left in her house and the trials that followed. The programme brings fresh archive footage and interviews to a story that has left her family in agonising limbo and produced conflicting verdicts.
Arlene Fraser’s disappearance: Elgin house, April 1998 and the morning timeline
Police went to Arlene Fraser’s house in Elgin, Moray, in April 1998 and found a home where ordinary signs of daily life sat untouched: a bicycle on its side in the yard, a vacuum cleaner still plugged into a socket in the hall and washing on the line. Witnesses recall that she had stood in her dressing gown to wave her two children off to school that Tuesday morning before she vanished. The documentary details the clocked exchanges that morning: Arlene phoned her son’s school at 9. 41am to check when she needed to pick him up; when the school rang back 10 minutes later they got no answer. She also failed to turn up for a planned 11am meeting with a friend and had been scheduled to see a divorce lawyer that day.
Rings on a peg and the empty searches across the Highlands
Nine days after her disappearance, Arlene’s gold wedding, engagement and eternity rings — which she was known to wear constantly — were found suddenly placed on a peg in her bathroom. Investigators treated the discovery as a sign that someone with access to her body had moved them. Despite massive searches across the Scottish Highlands and a reward of £20, 000, her body has never been recovered. During legal proceedings a former friend of Nat Fraser gave testimony that Nat had told him the body had been burned and the ashes scattered.
Nat Fraser’s alibi, arrest in 2001 and the prosecution theory
Suspicion quickly fell on Arlene’s husband, Nat Fraser, but he had what was described as a cast-iron alibi for the morning he disappeared. On that morning he was out on his rounds as a fruit and veg wholesaler and deliberately made himself visible to customers. He was not arrested and charged until 2001, three years after Arlene vanished, following a painstaking investigation by Grampian Police. Prosecutors advanced a theory that Nat had not killed her with his own hands but had "instructed, or moved others" to kill her so he could avoid a costly divorce settlement.
Trials, convictions and the long appeals run
Nat Fraser was first convicted of Arlene’s murder in 2003. That conviction was quashed in 2011 after a Supreme Court ruling. The Crown pushed for a retrial in 2012, and a second jury found him guilty. The judge at the retrial, Lord Bracadale, described the murder as "calculated" and imposed a life sentence with a minimum term of 17 years. As of 2026 Nat Fraser remains incarcerated at HM Prison Addiewell in West Lothian; now in his 70s, he has spent more than a decade behind bars for the second time. He has lost several appeals, taken his case to the European Court of Human Rights and continues to maintain his innocence from his cell.
Domestic violence history, refuge stays and warnings from campaigners
The programme traces Arlene’s backstory and the pattern of abuse. Before she married Nat she was described as a friendly and popular young woman; Nat attended their wedding with a black eye, an image then taken as an amusing misfortune. Arlene had stayed at Moray Women’s Refuge in 1990 and again in 1992, each time returning to Nat. Five weeks before she went missing, Nat placed his hands around her neck until she lost consciousness and faced an attempted murder charge. A later judge would be sympathetic to the assertion of Nat’s defence lawyer that that attack was out of character, but Dr Emma Plant of the Moray Violence Against Women and Girls Partnership observes: "There is no such thing as an isolated incident of violence against women. " Lorna Creswell, co-founder of the Moray Women’s Refuge, is quoted saying: "They don’t see themselves with an alternative or the confidence to move on, " describing why many women return to abusers. The documentary also notes that Arlene had recently been hospitalised following an assault and was in the process of seeking a divorce when she disappeared.
The documentary’s scope, family campaigning and the enduring limbo
The two-episode series mixes a sober reflection on violence against women with a gripping whodunnit that replays the twists and surprises of the trials, including moments when concrete details refused to emerge. It uses never-before-seen archive footage and interviews to shine a light on the investigation. Arlene’s sister, Carol Gillies, has campaigned for decades and told the press: "We just want to find her. We want to be able to put her to rest. " The programme highlights eerie public moments such as Nat’s dispassionate reading of a prepared statement at a press conference — "Arlene, if you’re watching this, then please get in touch" — and shows how Arlene’s family stayed in an agonising limbo; the timing of later developments is unclear in the provided context.
