Man Denies 'Gerbil' Shooting

THE man accused of murdering of Glasgow gangland figure Kevin 'Gerbil" Carroll has lodged a special defence claiming another or others carried out the shooting. William Paterson's legal team also lodged a list of defence witnesses and productions for the trial, which is now expected to last three weeks. Solicitor advocate Des Finnieston, defending, also gave notice that he intended to challenge prosecution evidence about the locations of mobile phones allegedly used in connection with the murder. Advocate depute Iain McSporran told a preliminary hearing at the High Court in Livingston yesterday that the telephony evidence was crucial to the prosecution case. Paterson is alleged to have been involved in gunning down 29-year-old Carroll outside the Asda store in Robroyston, Glasgow, on January 13 2010. It is claimed that - while masked and acting with others - he repeatedly discharged loaded handguns at 29 year-old Carroll, shooting him on the head and body. The 35 year-old is also accused of fleeing the country for Spain 10 days after the shooting in an alleged attempt to defeat the ends of justice. The indictment claims that on January 23 2010 he boarded a flight from Glasgow to Malaga "to avoid arrest, prosecution and conviction". Paterson further faces a number of firearms charges, including being in possession of a Ruger .357 Magnum gun and 9mm self-loading pistol. It is also alleged that he attempted to defeat the ends of justice by concealing two handguns in shrubbery at an area at the back of Coatbridge Library in North Lanarkshire, and torching a car. He faces a fourth charge of stealing a car on 22 September 2009 in Rutherglen, South Lanarkshire and being involved in the reset of a car or being in the vehicle knowing it had been taken without consent. Paterson - who denies all the charges - is due to stand trial in May in Glasgow. Nominated trial judge Lady Rae raised concerns yesterday that the original estimate that the trial in May would take 12 to 15 court days was wrong. She suggested that 20 to 25 days might be more appropriate unless a substantial amount of evidence could be agreed between the Crown and the defence. She fixed a further hearing for next Friday and adjourned the case.