THE VICKY Hamilton murder trial at the High Court in Dundee was adjourned without hearing evidence yesterday.

Peter Tobin denies that on February 10, 1991, at a number of locations in Bathgate, he abducted, compelled or otherwise induced Vicky Hamilton to accompany him to his home in the town’s Robertson Avenue and that he assaulted her, drugged her, struggled with her, compressed or otherwise injured her neck, indecently assaulted her and murdered her.

He also denies that between February 10 and December 15, 1991, at his home in Bathgate, at St Andrew’s Square, Edinburgh, at an address in Irvine Drive, Margate, Kent, and elsewhere, he tried to hide her body and to defeat the ends of justice.

The charge alleges he concealed her body; that he removed and disposed of items of her clothing and footwear and some of her belongings; that he planted a purse belonging to Vicky under a portable building in a bid to mislead police officers into believing she had run away from home; that he cut her body in two and bound and wrapped it in coverings and bin bags; that he disposed of and concealed the knives he used; and that he concealed, transported and buried her body parts.

Tobin’s defence team has lodged a special defence of alibi on his behalf. His position is that between 5pm and midnight on February 10, when the crime was committed, he was in the Portsmouth area, and was then travelling to Scotland and did not return to Edinburgh before 6.30am on February 11.

The trial had to be halted after the morning session on Monday as one of the jurors was unwell and there was a delay of almost two hours before proceedings resumed yesterday.

Lord Emslie then told the jury that one of their number remained unwell. However, she had seen her doctor and there was a reasonable and realistic prospect that she would be able to rejoin the jury the following day.

He said he had to weigh up two issues. On the one hand, the loss of court time should be avoided but on the other he was very reluctant to lose the services of a willing and committed juror at this late stage in the trial.

In the circumstances, he felt the balance of advantage lay in adjourning the trial until today in the hope and expectation that it would be able to proceed with a full jury, rather than trying to make progress with a depleted jury.

The trial continues.