A MAN accused of a fatal shooting spree in Skye and Wester Ross had threatened to kill an osteopath who he claimed “ruined his life” and alleged his brother-in-law “tried to gouge his eyes out”, a court has heard.
Finlay MacDonald, 41, denies a charge of murder and two charges of attempted murder after allegedly shooting three people – his brother-in-law and a married couple – on August 10, 2022.
He also denies attempting to murder his wife Rowena MacDonald, 34, by repeatedly stabbing her on the same day in the village of Tarskavaig, on the island’s Sleat peninsula.
A trial at the High Court in Edinburgh has heard that on August 10 2022, MacDonald is accused of murdering his brother-in-law John MacKinnon, after allegedly repeatedly discharging a shotgun at him, in the village of Teangue on the same peninsula.
MacDonald launched a special defence against the murder charge, claiming his “ability to determine or control his conduct was substantially impaired by reason of abnormality of mind”.
The court heard MacDonald denies charges of attempting to murder a married couple, Fay and John Don MacKenzie, during an alleged shooting spree in the village of Dornie, Wester Ross, on the Scottish mainland.
Giving evidence, MacDonald said her husband had been “abusive” towards her, and that she had gone with a male friend, her boss, who she exchanged late night texts with, to visit a house she planned to buy.
She told the court she knew MacDonald had bought a pump-action shotgun in June 2022 as well as ammunition.
She said MacDonald (below) was signed off sick in March 2022 with a back injury and began telling her to sort out life insurance for both of them, and that he visited osteopath Mr MacKenzie, but then became “fixated” on the idea that he had caused “irreparable” damage.
MacDonald said her husband became obsessed with suing MacKenzie – as well as threatening to kill him.
She told the court: “He wasn’t happy – he thought John Don had made his injuries much worse. He claimed that John Don had injured him. He told me that he had ruined his life. He was very, very upset for a very long time, he would rant about it every single day. He was in the process of trying to sue John Don and was trying to get a second opinion.
“He would frequently say ‘I am going to kill him, I’m going to bloody kill him for what he’s done ruining my life’.”
The court heard that in 2013, when MacDonald was eight months pregnant, there was an “altercation” between MacDonald and his brother-in-law MacKinnon.
Cross-examining, defence advocate Donald Findlay KC said: “Do you remember him saying something to you about ‘he tried to gouge my eyes out’?
MacDonald said: “I do actually.”
She agreed MacKinnon would have driven 15 minutes for the “altercation”, which Findlay put to her caused MacDonald to require hospital treatment.
Findlay said: “He had been told something as the result of which he decided to get in the car to assault your husband and try to gouge his eyes out. Did you phone police?”
MacDonald said: “No.”
Findlay said: “Did your husband phone police?”
MacDonald said: “No.”
The court heard that on the morning of August 10, the couple “struggled” over MacDonald’s phone, which had a serious of messages from her male boss, including some saying “virtual hugs” which were sent late at night.
Findlay told the court MacDonald was diagnosed with autism after being taken into custody and described the attack on MacDonald as “frenzied”, but he put it to her that the accused “did not finish the job”.
Findlay added: “He’s a man with autism, he’s a man who fixates, he’s a man who needs routine, a needy kind of a man. He is somebody who has had a problem with his brother-in-law that has resulted in two sides of a family pretty much severing contact until his sister approaches him in the weeks and months before this.
“Then he has health issues, he has a particular issue with a chiropractor and believes his physical life has been damaged. He has a problem in his marriage, you, had lost all interest. He then finds text messages which show a man and you have been exchanging messages; that this man knows what you are planning, knows it’s all coming to a head, knows you have been looking at property. All of that is confronted to your husband in early hours of the morning.”
The trial continues in front of Judge Lady Drummond.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article