Limbs in the Loch killer William Beggs has had a bid to have his name cleared turned down by the Appeal Court.
Beggs was jailed for life for one of Scotland's most horrific sex murders in 2001. Sentencing him at the time, the judge Lord Osborne, ordered that he must serve at least 20 years in prison.
His initial trial heard how supermarket worker Barry Wallace, 18, disappeared after a Christmas night out with other Tesco staff in December 1999. Beggs took Mr Wallace back to his flat in Kilmarnock, handcuffed and had sex with him before murdering him and hacking him into pieces.
Police divers on a training exercise in Loch Lomond two days later found parts of the dismembered body. Mr Wallace's head was later found on a beach near Troon, Ayrshire. The court heard that the head had been thrown into the sea during a trip Beggs made to Northern Ireland.
In December 1999, Beggs flew to Jersey under a false name and then travelled on to France. He later surrendered to the Dutch authorities and was brought back to Scotland in January 2001.
During his appeal, his lawyers had claimed that Beggs was the victim of prejudicial pre-trial publicity that meant he did not get a fair trial.
Material that appeared in the press was described as "speculative and hostile", and information about previous attacks on young men, including details of a murder conviction that was overturned on appeal was easily available to potential jury members in papers or on the internet.
Appeal judges Lord Eassie, sitting with Lady Paton and Lord Bannatyne, also heard claim that extradition rules were breached in returning Beggs to Scotland after he left the country following the death of Mr Wallace, that a warrant to allow police to search Beggs' Kilmarnock flat was invalid, and that prosecutor Alan Turnbull QC made "frequent, deliberate, inappropriate and prejudicial comments" during the trial.
It was also claimed that there was a lack of evidence to show that Beggs had sexually assaulted Mr Wallace and murdered him.
However, the judges found that none of the grounds for appeal were sound, and refused the appeal.
Beggs was present in court to hear the judges deliver their decision. Lord Eassie, sitting with Lady Paton and Lord Philip, told him the court had "carefully considered" the arguments put forward on his behalf.
But he said: "The conclusion reached is that none of the grounds of appeal were well-founded. Accordingly, the appeal must be refused."
Beggs showed no emotion as he was led away to the cells.
IN DETAIL
