The Trail Went Cold – Episode 21 – Renee & Andrew MacRae

November 12, 1976. Inverness, Scotland. 36-year old Renee MacRae and her 3-year old son Andrew leave on a weekend trip, supposedly to visit Renee’s sister. Later that night, their flaming vehicle is discovered at an isolated lay-by next to the A9, but Renee and Andrew have disappeared. In a shocking twist, it turns out that Renee was actually planning to visit Bill MacDowell, a man she’d secretly been having an affair with for years and who also happens to be Andrew’s biological father. While the evidence suggests Renee and Andrew were murdered, their bodies have never been found. Join me for this week’s episode of “The Trail Went Cold” as I examine one of the most famous unsolved mysteries in the history of Scotland.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast on iTunes.

Click here to listen to the podcast on Stitcher.

Click here to subscribe to the podcast on Google Play Music.

The Trail Went Cold is produced and edited by Magill Foote.

All music is composed by Vince Nitro.

9 thoughts on “The Trail Went Cold – Episode 21 – Renee & Andrew MacRae

  • If you’re doing UK based cases, consider looking into the disappearance of Suzy Lamplugh (if you haven’t already; I vaguely remember it being mentioned in a listverse article, but I’m not sure if it was one of yours)! It’s a pretty famous missing person’s case, and even though her possible killer might have been found, it’s not definitively known what happened to her, and her body has never been found.

    • You’re correct, that was featured in one of my Listverse articles. Yes, even though I’ve got a pretty good idea who her killer is, it would still be an interesting case to cover.

  • Interesting story! I was wondering why Rosemary MacDowell is not a suspect. It’s possible Bill was intending on leaving her for Renee, and Rosemary found out. She would be understandably angry and would certainly have motive to kill Renee and Andrew. She certainly seemed to be acting suspicious, taking Bill away from the police station. Why wouldn’t she want him talking to the police? She could have threatened him into keeping his mouth shut and staying with her (it’s not unusual for domestic abuse victims to stay with their abusers, although we typically think of female victims with male abusers). As for the witness, seeing a “man” dragging a “sheep”, did they get a good enough look to determine it was a man?
    Anyway, just a theory, what do you think?

    • I’ve had a few people suggest that theory. I figured Rosemary was covering for her husband, but I never considered the possibility that she might have been directly involved or committed the murders herself. I wish I knew more info about her and if she seemed like the type of person who was capable of violence. It’s one thing to murder your husband’s mistress, but most people would draw the line at harming a two-year old child. I always assumed Bill was the suspect mentioned in the 2006 report submitted to the Crown Office, but now I’m wondering if it could be Rosemary. From that I can tell, all the people who saw the man dragging the “sheep” were a great distance away and since it was nighttime, I’m sure they couldn’t identify him. But even if his wife was the killer, this would point to Bill being involved in the cover-up.

    • Oh yes, I watched that multiple times while preparing this podcast. I probably would have mispronounced Renee’s name if I hadn’t. It’s pretty neat to see a nearly 40-year old TV special about an unsolved mystery.

  • The general agreement going by what is available online, which includes some commentary by people who were closer to the action, is that Bill MacDowell is responsible, but (as yet) unprosecutable. I’m excluding Brian MacGregor’s opinions in this because they are dreadful.

    However even without what has been said elsewhere, I think the fact that Bill is a 4x arsonist and fraudster, given the overall scenario, is substantially damning in itself, as is his wife’s complicity, however far it may extend.

    I did think, at first, it was unlikely Bill would murder his own son, except he wasn’t playing the role of father in his life, and he’s a reckless criminal.

    More recently Bill spoke out in an article for the first time, proclaiming his innocence (and complaining about the harassment he has suffered). It’s tiring to hear these criminals profess innocence or complain about things being unfair – we know they lie constantly, that their word means nothing, and that whatever is done to them is a fraction of what they have exacted on others.

    It might be telling that in that article ('T+KILL+RENEE%3B+Prime+suspect+breaks+his…-a0120675633) Bill says he “can’t escape” and when talking about the new search of Dalmagarry Quarry he says “they should be looking somewhere else.”

    The latter seems like an unbelievably foolish statement, possibly as brash as dragging a “sheep” or pushing a pram alongside a motorway.

    So presuming Bill is guilty, why the crime? Could it be enmeshed with his actual wife? Whatever her reasoning, it’s beyond refute that she is OK with having an adulterous arsonist-fraudster as a husband, one whom she can drag out of a police station. Given Bill’s proclivity to steal and burn, and his wife’s long-term association with him, theoretically Renee could have been the victim of a con for their financial gain. Obviously, if you actually love someone you can’t premeditatively murder them in a cunning plan which takes several hours to carry out.

    Presuming Bill is guilty, I can imagine a situation where Renee was no longer to his net financial gain and she became worthless to him. Comparing this to his known crimes, Renee may have become a liability for Bill and/or his wife, if Renee didn’t get what she wanted, and went after retribution by exposing criminality. The crime resembles a “hit.”

    Possibly, Renee took her son along for persuasive purposes, maybe even for somewhat protective reasons. If the relationship was rocky the idea that “we have a son together” would be a kind of last word in convincing someone to be reasonable, pointing them to an extended, even compulsory future together. If that was an argument she was trying to make, it was decisively snuffed out by someone who couldn’t care less.

    • That’s interesting point about the affair possibly being a con job for financial gain. Being an employee at Gordon MacRae’s company, I’m sure Bill knew how loaded he was and that he was still financially supporting Renee and allowing her to live an upper-class lifestyle after their separation. If Renee and Bill moved to another city together and Gordon found out about the affair, then he might decide to cut his ex-wife off and Bill would no longer have any use for her. Given Bill’s proclivity for fraud, I wouldn’t be surprised if Renee even knew he was embezzling from her husband’s company and he decided to murder her for it.

Leave a Reply