William Gordon Grant came forward as a witness in the case for the first time on Saturday 2 September 2006 when he handed an anonymous letter, in person, to Kirkwall Police Station. This was 12 years after the murder of Shamsuddin Mahmood. The letter was taken by the civilian administration assistant and handed to DC Robert Petrie who was on duty that day. The administration assistant knew William Grant, therefore was able to identify him to DC Petrie. He then went out to interview William Grant, accompanied by DC Thomas, and he noted the first of four police statements. DC Petrie was the only senior officer that had been involved in the investigation from the beginning and he was the Productions Officer in the case, which meant he was responsible for cataloguing and storing all evidence.
Right after the murder of Shamsuddin Mahmood in 1994, police made huge efforts to trace everyone that had been in or around Kirkwall town centre and in the harbour area, on foot and in vehicles, on the evening of 2 June. They noted dozens of statements from people that had been identified to them or who had voluntarily come forward. When William Grant was interviewed in 2006, he claimed that he had been staying at his mother’s address in Kirkwall on the night of 2 June. It is known that her home was visited by the police in their door-to-door enquiries and statements were taken from customers in all of the pubs that William Grant claimed to have visited that evening; however, his name does not appear anywhere in the police files until he came forward in 2006.
On examination of the disclosed case files, it is apparent that William Grant was able to provide information in his letter that appeared to tie-up loose ends in the police investigation:
- William Grant could place a male in the public toilets at Kiln Corner at the relevant time wearing a balaclava and holding a weapon.
- A statement taken in June 1994 referred to a man in a shop wearing similar clothing to a man seen leaving Kiln Corner toilets after the murder. The witness referred to this man in the shop possibly wearing a “rolled up balaclava” on his head like a hat.
- William Grant was able to identify a Beretta handgun in his letter that links with an alleged missing Beretta handgun from a statement taken in 1996.
William Grant later named the youth he alleged that he had witnessed in Kiln Corner toilets; however, he had not named him in the letter. In Grant’s first police interview he said that the youth had been 15-year-old Michael Ross, son of local police officer Eddy Ross.
The first statement was taken from William Grant on 2 September 2006. On examination of the disclosed case files, it is apparent that there were incidents reported at the time of the murder in 1994 that were similar to the accounts he gave in that interview :-
A man gave a police statement on 3 June 1994. He had heard rustling noises in the cubicle next to him in Kiln Corner toilets at around 7:20pm on the evening of the murder. He waited when he left the toilet to see who came out, and watched a man walk away from the toilets, giving him a back view of the man. He described the man as early 20’s, 5″8 tall and stocky build.
The witness from 1994 said:
“I heard someone in one of the cubicles. There was a lot of rustling of paper coming from the cubicle. It sounded like if something was being wrapped. There was no one else in the toilets.
William Grant said:
“During the early evening between the hours of 7.30pm and 9.00pm I had gone into the toilets at the Kiln Corner. I was on my own and the toilets appeared empty. I then heard some scuffling within one of the toilet cubicles (which I could now assume may have been the person getting ready or whatever he had to do) I was standing at the top end of the urinal about finished what I was doing and heard the cubicle door open.”
The witness from 1994 said:
“When I finished I came out and waited to see who was in the cubicle. I guess it was just my inquisitiveness.”
” A short time later, I saw a male early 20s 5’8, chunky build, with short fair hair come out of the toilets. He then walked off towards the Post Office.”
William Grant said:
“I immediately left the toilet without washing my hands. I went further along the road towards Peace’s Garage and stood and looked back towards the toilet out of curiosity to see what was going on.”…….“I was back off the road and he wouldn’t have seen me. I saw the same person come out of the toilet and run across the road towards the car park.”
William Grant later changed his account of the time of visiting Kiln Corner toilets to be just after 7pm.
He went on to say that he was confronted with a youth with a gun in his hand who he recognised to be Michael Ross.
On the late evening of 31 May 1994 just before the restaurant closed and 43 hours before Mr Mahmood was shot and killed, two men were witnessed by several people in an aggressive altercation with the murder victim at around midnight. According to a witness, one of the men allegedly said “I’ll shoot you” to Mr Mahmood several times. DI Chisholm was quoted in the press on 16 July 1994 stating that this incident had been “cleared up” and the individuals involved had been “mainland Scots”. The post-conviction review completed by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission from 2014 – 2017 found that the altercation had not been ‘cleared up’ and the suspects were never identified or questioned by police. Therefore, contrary to the claim made by DI Chisholm, the incident was in fact unsolved.
William Grant said:
“I had also recognised Michael Ross as being with a group of three boys who had been at the Mumutaz Restaurant about two or three weeks earlier. It was Michael and two other boys one may have been slightly older. I would have said they were all possibly army boys as they all had similar short hair cuts. It would have been about the middle of the week and about closing time. I had just come out of the Torvaugh and was heading to the Georgian. The group of boys were at the front door of the restaurant and shouting threatening violence. It was Michael who was doing most of the shouting and seemed quite wound up. One of the other boys may have also shouted something but it was mostly Michael. It was one of the workers inside that they were shouting at.”
William Grant’s account is similar to the unsolved account of the aggressive men threatening the victim at midnight on 31 May, although the descriptions given in 1994 suggested that these individuals were men, not youths and there were key differences in the descriptions of the incident. It is apparent from William Grant’s account that his alleged sighting could provide a possible explanation for the altercation. It was not public knowledge that the altercation was actually unsolved until this information was released by the J4MR campaign group in recent years. Only senior police officers involved in the investigation knew that the incident had not been ‘cleared up’.
William Grant refers to seeing a “big Beretta” held by Michael Ross in his anonymous letter; however, in his first police statement said :
“I think it was a gun with a magazine. I am not sure names of guns but if shown a picture would be able to identify it.”
On 29 May 1996, Police Officer ‘A’ noted a statement from a man who spoke of his deceased brother having a Beretta handgun that was never located after his death.
Kiln Corner Toilets
William Grant was questioned for his first two statements by officers Petrie and Thomas and his second two statements were taken in Inverness by senior officers in the murder inquiry. On 14 September 2006 in his third police statement Grant gave a description of the Kiln Corner toilets as follows:
“There is only one door to the toilets from Junction Road. As you enter you turn left and then right. On the right hand side there is a small stainless steel sink as you enter. Just the one sink. In fact there is approx 5 urinals, with 4 cubical doors, toilet doors to the left. There is also a door on the far wall – cleaning cupboard. The floor of the toilet is stone / concrete. The toilet doors have a wire mesh to the top with a small gap to the bottom. All the toilet doors were closed over and the toilets appeared empty. The toilets smelt of urine. There is a stone floor to the toilets. I went to go to do a pee. I used the urinal directly in front of the door / entrance. I heard rustling of a carrier bag / plastic bag from one of the cubicles.”
As can be observed, the statement is written in a mix of present and past tense. The parts describing the toilets are all present tense. Kiln Corner toilets had been demolished and new buildings were erected some years before William Grant came forward in the police enquiry and he said that he’d only ever used the toilets a couple of times.
In this statement was the following drawing:
Police Photograph:
The Anonymous Letter
We submitted an analysis of William Grant’s letter to Police Scotland. The rationale for this was that the wording in the anonymous letter used ‘police-speak’ terms like ‘firearm’ and ‘handgun’ and the phraseology appeared to resemble a police statement. We examined the 2,728 police statements that were disclosed in the police inquiry.
Point 1
In our analysis, it was apparent that the terms ‘handgun’ and and ‘firearm’ were the most common words used to describe a weapon in police statements noted where weapons were discussed. The terms ‘gun’ and ‘pistol’ were used less.
We looked at the use of ‘firearm(s)’ and ‘handgun(s)’ together in the same statement as this was a feature of the anonymous letter with ‘handgun’ being used three times and ‘firearm’ once. There was a total of seven officers that used those words together in the same statement.
Three officers used both words together in one of the statements they had noted.
One officer used both words together in two of the statements they noted.
One officer used both words together in four of the statements they noted.
One officer, Police Officer ‘A’, used both words together in eleven of the statements they noted. From all statements containing both words, 52% were taken by this officer.
Point 2
We analysed the use of the abbreviated term ‘approx’ for ‘approximately’ in all disclosed statements noted in the murder inquiry.
Six police officers used the term once in all statements they noted.
One officer used the term twice in all statements they noted.
Three police officers used the term three times in all statements they noted.
Two officers used the term four times in all statements noted.
One officer used the term five times in all statements noted.
One officer used the term thirteen times in statements. This was 30% of all statements containing the term ‘approx’ – noted by the same officer, Police Office ‘A’, who had the greatest frequency of the words ‘firearm(s)’ and ‘handgun(s)’ in the same statement (52%).
Point 3
In his anonymous letter, William Grant describes the weapon he saw in the hand of Michael Ross as a “big Beretta”; however, he later says the following in a police statement:
“I think it was a gun with a magazine. I am not sure of the names of guns but if shown a picture I would be able to identify it as I got a good look at it. It was highly polished and a silver colour looking new as if off a shelf”
We analysed all statements disclosed for the use of the word ‘Beretta’ which was used in nine separate statements as follows:
- Two taken by DC Michael Harper from members of the clay pigeon shooting club referring to 12-bore Beretta shotguns.
- A statement taken by DI Angus Chisholm referring to a 6.35 mm Beretta pistol.
- A statement taken by DS Alan MacKenzie referring to a 6.35 mm Beretta pistol.
- A statement taken by PC Alan Hards referring to a 6.35 mm Beretta pistol.
- A statement taken by a police officer in Shetland referring to a Beretta handgun for sale in Shetland.
- Two statements taken in Orkney referring to a replica Beretta pistol being shown around in the pubs in Kirkwall.
- A statement taken by Police Officer ‘A’ in 1996 about a possible missing Beretta handgun which was alleged to have existed by the brother of a deceased man who had kept it as a wartime souvenier. The brother had handed in other non-Beretta weapons to PC Eddy Ross for disposal. The brother was able to produce a receipt signed by Eddy Ross dated 3 May 1988.
Point 4
Considering the discoveries in Points 1-3, we analysed exclusively the 235 statements noted by Police Officer ‘A’ to determine if there were any other similarities between those statements and the way that the anonymous letter of William Grant was composed. Police Officer ‘A’ noted 235 out of the 2728 statements disclosed – 8.6%.
In his anonymous letter, William Grant lacks conjunctions in his descriptions as follows:
“It was in toilets”
“balaclava on head”
“he came out of cubicle”
“the way he held hand-gun”
Police officer ‘A’ also lacks conjunctions in some of the statements they noted:
“wearing round necked shirt”
“turning up at side”
“wearing black leather bomber”
“wearing khaki shirt”
“greying at temple”
William Grant describes the attire worn by the person in Kiln Corner toilets to be “dark clothing.”
Police Officer ‘A’ uses the word “dark” repeatedly in statements noted as a descriptive word for colour:
“darkish hair”; “dark top”; “dark trousers”
We submitted to Police Scotland that the circumstances surrounding the appearance of the witness William Grant after 12 years should have raised a high degree of suspicion from senior investigating officers, and the apparent links to evidence held in the case files was ripe for questioning. We asked Police Scotland to fully investigate the circumstances surrounding William Grant and his testimony.
Summary of the Analysis of the Anonymous Letter and Links to Police Statements taken by one Officer
Links:
- The anonymous letter states that the youth in Kiln Corner toilets had “a balaclava on his head but still not turned down”. Police Officer ‘A’ took a statement referring to a suspicious youth in a shop on the day after the murder: “He was a stranger dressed in green trousers, green jacket, green rucksack and a navy blue woolen hat on his head. The reason I noticed him was the blue hat rolled up because you couldn’t see the bottom of it and I thought ‘is that a rolled up balaclava?'”
- William Grant referred to a “Beretta” handgun in his letter but went on to say in his first statement that he didn’t know the “names of guns“. Police Officer ‘A’ noted a statement in 1996 from a man that spoke about a possible missing Beretta war time souvenir handgun and Eddy Ross in the same statement.
- Police Officer ‘A’ used the words handgun(s) and firearm(s) in the same statement 11 times which was 52% of statements taken that used both words. This was a feature of the anonymous letter. The most that any other officer used these two words together was four times. Police Officer ‘A’ was more likely to use both words together in statements they noted than to use the single words ‘handgun(s)’ or ‘firearm(s)’.
- Police Officer ‘A’ used the abbreviated word “approx” 13 times in statements taken which was 30% of all uses of the word. The most that any other officer used the word was five times.
- Police Officer ‘A’ habitually missed conjunctions in their written descriptions in statements taken, which was also a feature of the anonymous letter.
- Police Officer ‘A’ habitually used the word “dark” to describe colour in statements taken in the enquiry, which was also a feature of the anonymous letter.
Trial and Post Trial References to William Grant
Reported in the ‘Orkney Today’ newspaper during the trial of Michael Ross in June 2008:
Trial testimony of William Grant linked to the above newspaper article:
- The above transcript was provided by a member of Michael Ross’ defence team
William Grant’s police statements and evidence at trial had numerous inconsistencies. He was discovered to have lied to interviewing police officers about an incident where he claimed that he’d fought with PC Eddy Ross at a country dance in Orkney and had held him down with his own police baton. Officers spoke to a witness named by William Grant as someone that could corroborate the story; however, he could not do so. William Grant admitted to the officers that he had lied about the incident; however, it was not noted in his police statements. The defence found out about this falsehood through a tip-off from a concerned police officer. William Grant was found in Contempt of Court at the conclusion of his evidence.
Extract from ‘Orkney Today’ trial coverage, 2008:
“Mr Findlay asked if DC Petrie knew Mr Grant and he said, as children, they had gone to the same school”
“In the summer of the murder he told DC Petrie at the club that he had been in Kiln Corner toilets about the time of the murder”
““I never realized he’d seen anything” DC Petrie said”
“Mr Findlay said: “Some time in the summer, knowing you were a policeman, and from childhood, he spoke to you by way of a question and clearly knew you were connected to the murder inquiry. Did he not hint whatsoever that police should interview him?””
“”If I had followed it up, would he have said something?” “I don’t know” DC Petrie said.”
“He did ask if he would be seen by police. He didn’t say he had any information” DC Petrie replied”
During the trial of Michael Ross in 2008, DC Petrie refers to an alleged conversation with William Grant which took place at the Masonic Lodge in 1994. He apparently didn’t see the significance of this conversation at the time of the murder when police were desperately seeking witnesses that had been in the vicinity of the murder at the relevant time. DC Petrie didn’t refer to this conversation in any of the statements he gave in the investigation. The trial was the first time that this conversation was mentioned.
After the conclusion of the trial and prior to sentencing William Grant was interviewed by the Daily Record on 18 September 2008.
Post-trial article from The Orcadian – date unknown
“Acting DS Petrie said that it was one of the proudest moments of his career sitting at the High Court in Glasgow when the jury came back and returned a guilty verdict, knowing that he had assisted in bringing the murderer of Shamsuddin Mahmood to justice”
Charges brought against Michael Ross in 2007
Charge 1
There was nothing to corroborate William Grant’s story about Michael Ross shouting abuse outside the Mumutaz Restaurant. He was the only witness to this charge. The defence attempted to have this charge dropped; however, the Crown refused, as investigated by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission.
Charge 2
On 2 December 1994, Michael Ross admitted to having been in Papdale Woods on 19th May 1994; however, that this constituted a Breach of the Peace according to charging guidelines, is debatable given that it wasn’t reported to police at the time that it occurred and no person was in ‘fear or alarm’. The only link between this incident and the crime committed 2 weeks later was the wearing of a balaclava.
Charge 3
The only evidence that placed Michael Ross near the Mumutaz restaurant on 2 June 1994 was provided by William Grant.
Charge 4
The only evidence that placed Michael Ross in Kiln Corner toilets on 2 June 1994 was provided by William Grant.
We submitted to Police Scotland that there is evidence that there are concerning issues surrounding the witness William Grant. His testimony was treated as the ‘new evidence’ required to bring charges and escalate the case to court. Without it there was insufficient evidence to proceed. We hope that one of the outcomes of the complaint to Police Scotland will be a criminal investigation seeking answers to concerns raised.