THE wife of the man accused of murdering Suzanne Pilley declined to give evidence in court yesterday.
Andrea Gilroy was called as a witness for the prosecution in the trial of her husband David Gilroy at the High Court in Edinburgh.
Jurors heard her uphold her right not to give evidence as the wife of the accused.
Gilroy, 49, denies murdering the 38-year-old bookkeeper on May 4, 2010, in Edinburgh, or elsewhere, hiding her body and driving away with it in the boot of a car. He further pleads not guilty to trying to cover up the alleged killing.
Gilroy, from Edinburgh, also denies a charge he assaulted his wife on various occasions between January 1, 2009, and May 18, 2010.
When Mrs Gilroy was called to the witness box by the prosecution, she was told that, as the wife of the accused, she had the right to decline to give evidence.
When asked if she wanted to give evidence, she replied: "No." She was told she was free to go.
Jurors later heard from the accused's mother, Grace Gilroy.
The 76-year-old was asked by Advocate Depute Alex Prentice, QC, if she had seen her son on the morning of May 4, 2010.
She said he had called her asking if she had a spare key to his house.
She said he told her he got a taxi when he arrived at her house in the West Pilton area of Edinburgh a short time later.
The court heard she then drove him over to his house, where he let himself in with her key before returning it to her and she drove off.
Mrs Gilroy said he told her he wanted to collect a notebook for a meeting.
During cross-examination, defence QC Jack Davidson asked her if her son seemed himself that morning. She replied: "Yes, I didn't see any difference."
The court also heard evidence from Thomas Cooney, a work colleague of both Gilroy and Ms Pilley at Infrastructure Management Limited in Edinburgh.
He said he had arrived at work at around 9am on the morning of May 4, 2010, and remembers seeing Gilroy walking towards him as he took off his coat.
Mr Prentice asked: "Did he say anything to you?"
Mr Cooney, 46, replied: "He said he was feeling unwell."
The witness added: "During that conversation I did think he looked unwell, he didn't look his usual self. The thought that came into my head at that point was he looked in shock. I think it was his eyes that gave me that appearance of shock."
Mr Prentice asked the witness if he had noticed anything physical about Gilroy. He replied: "I noticed a scratch on his neck."
Emma Speke, 33, a receptionist at Infrastructure Management Limited, told the trial she saw Gilroy on May 4, 2010, at around 8.25am.
Asked whether she spoke to him, she replied: "No, he spoke to me first, he said: 'Hi, by the way I'm in the garage."
She told the court later that morning Gilroy came and asked her for the key to the basement, saying he wanted to look into the plant room where the boiler was.
The court also heard Ms Pilley did not turn up for work that day.
The murder charge alleges Gilroy assaulted and injured Ms Pilley by unknown means in Thistle Street, or elsewhere, resulting in her death.
Prosecutors also allege Gilroy attempted to defeat the ends of justice, taking various steps to avoid detection, arrest and prosecution over the alleged killing.
They include allegations he concealed Ms Pilley's body in the premises of Infrastructure Management and transported it to various locations in Scotland in the boot of a car.
He denies all the charges against him. The trial, before Lord Bracadale, continues.
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