THE FAMILY of the ex-engineer convicted of murdering bookkeeper Suzanne Pilley five years ago have told of their shock that the latest bid to have the decision overturned has been quashed.
David Gilroy, 52, was sentenced to life in prison five years ago for the murder of ex-lover Suzanne Pilley in 2010.
Ms Pilley, 38, disappeared on her way to work in central Edinburgh in May 2010 but her body has never been found.
Gilroy asked for his case to be considered by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, claiming he had suffered a miscarriage of justice.
The commission said it has now completed its review and the case has been closed.
When Gilroy later appealed his conviction it was rejected. He also failed in a bid to have his case looked at by the UK Supreme Court.
The SCCRC has not published its reasons for the rejection.
Mr Gilroy's family said they are now considering "what else we can do" to support him in his "quest to clear his name in the hope that a fresh inquiry will take place which may stand some chance of uncovering the truth".
They said:"We are shocked not just at the decision but also at what seems to us to be many instances where the Commission's analysis has fallen far short of a full and fair investigation into the detail of the application which David, supported by us, made to them in November 2014."
They added:"The thing is there will be no closure on this case until the police are faced up with looking in a different direction for the answer as to what happened to Suzanne Pilley on 4th May 2010."
Gilroy was sentenced to life in prison after being found guilty of her murder in March 2012, but he continued to protest his innocence.
Ms Pilley (below), who had previously had an affair with married Gilroy, had set off on her usual journey to work in Edinburgh city centre but never arrived.
The jury in Gilroy's trial heard he was driven by jealousy, maintained a front of normality and embarked on a series of acts to cover up his crime.
He took Ms Pilley's body to a secret grave, believed to be in remote Argyll.
When Gilroy later appealed his conviction it was rejected and he failed in a bid to have his case looked at by the UK Supreme Court.
The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission announced its review of the case in January 2015.
The Gilroy family added: "In the 200 pages of reasoning which the Commission have issued there are errors, misunderstandings as to what the evidence entailed but also point-blank failure to engage with some flaws in the evidence.
"This is especially true of the CCTV which was said to place Suzanne Pilley in Thistle Street as well as to hold the police to account for failing to gather CCTV of obvious relevance or even to account for why this was not done."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article