Let me bury the wife I’m accused of killing
75-year-old charged with death of Maureen, 67, in legal row with family over right to hold burial
A PENSIONER accused of killing his wife is fighting a legal battle with her family for the right to bury her.
Neil Crilley, 75, is charged with the culpable homicide of Maureen in September.
Maureen’s sisters got clearance to lay her to rest. But the funeral had to be axed when Crilley raised a legal challenge.
Today, he will face them in court to argue that he is the right person to bury her.
THE family of a pensioner who was allegedly killed by her husband will today plead with a sheriff for the right to bury her with dignity.
Maureen Crilley’s sisters were finally given clearance by prosecutors to lay her to rest six agonising months after she died.
But the family had to cancel the funeral at the last minute when Maureen’s husband Neil Crilley, 75, stepped in.
Crilley, who is due to stand trial for the culpable homicide of his wife, claims he, as next of kin, is the rightful person to bury her.
Maureen’s sister Katie, 56, said: “We want to bury her in dignity at the earliest date possible.
“We would expect that, under the present circumstances, Neil would respect our feelings and recognise that him taking over the arrangements would be very difficult for Maureen’s family to accept.”
Katie said if they are granted the right to bury Maureen, 67, they don’t want Crilley present.
She added: “Neil wouldn’t be welcome at the funeral. For us, it wouldn’t be appropriate as he still has to face a trial over what happened to Maureen.”
Crilley was charged after Maureen’s death at the couple’s home in Clydebank, near Glasgow, on September 7.
He made no plea when he appeared in court in November and he was released on bail.
Last month, Katie was told by a CID officer that the Crown were willing to release Maureen’s body for burial.
Katie went to her local Co-op funeral parlour in Clydebank and the ceremony was arranged for the following week.
But she was later told by the funeral director that Crilley had been in with a legal document to state he had responsibility for her funeral.
The procurator fiscal was notified of the challenge and a decision was made that Maureen’s body should not be released until the matter was sorted out.
Today, Crilley is due to face Maureen’s family at Glasgow Sheriff Court, where he will argue for the right to bury his wife.
In a writ, Crilley is also seeking to compel the Lord Advocate James Wolffe to intervene and rule in his favour.
Crilley has bought a headstone which he erected in December at a plot at North Dalnottar Cemetery in Clydebank. The former company director has been visiting the plot and laying flowers. Maureen’s sisters believe Crilley intends to be the only person present when Maureen is buried. Katie added: “We don’t know much about what happened in relation to Maureen’s death and we are very mindful that a person is innocent until proven guilty. “But we have rights as family to look after Maureen.” Kate claims Crilley told her h e would be seeking to carry out his wife’s wishes to be buried with only him at the graveside.
She said the family had little to do with Crilley after he married her sister 39 years ago.
Katie added: “None of us have spoken to him much in the last 30 years. They didn’t have children and Maureen was a quiet person who led a quiet life.
“We have always been close to Maureen. We just want to do what is right and get some closure after our bereavement.”
Katie said sisters Margaret Colquhoun, 67, May Mackie, 64, and Helen Jamieson, 62, are all united in the view that they don’t want Crilley at the funeral.
She said she was perplexed that Crilley had arranged to have a headstone erected at the cemetery when Maureen’s body is still lying in a hospital morgue.
Katie added: “I am puzzled as to why someone would lay flowers at a graveside when no body is present.
“Surely it is in everyone’s interests if we conduct the funeral and let everyone move on with their lives.”
Margaret said: “When I discovered that Neil had put up a gravestone, I felt it was out of order, under the circumstances. He has not approached us in any way to ask our views. It has been very upsetting.”
May added: “We want to pay our respects and begin to move on as a family. We feel that Neil is blocking this and it’s not right.”
Helen added: “We hope Neil will see how destructive this is and let us bury Maureen in dignity.”
The family’s solicitor John Flanagan said the delay in burying Maureen was hard on the sisters.
He added: “They have had to endure very painful months since their bereavement and are looking to do what is best for Maureen as soon as possible.
“They feel it’s very insensitive of Mr Crilley to go against the family wishes.”
When the Record approached Crilley at his home, he declined to comment and said only that he would pass our contact details on to his lawyer.