We'll see what happens!!!
Fraser's defence has featured the issue of his wife's ringsNat Fraser's defence team has rubbished claims a jury would still have found him guilty had evidence about his wife Arlene's rings been available at trial.
Fraser, 48, was jailed for life in 2003 after being found guilty of murdering his wife.
Her body was never found after she went missing in Elgin, Moray, in 1998.
Peter Gray QC said fresh evidence of two police officers cast doubt on the Crown's main theory about the murder, meaning it was not a fair trial.
The prosecution case had included claims that Fraser placed Arlene's engagement, wedding and eternity rings in the bathroom of her house several days after she vanished.
Evidence has since emerged that two police officers may have seen the rings in Arlene's house shortly after she disappeared.
Fraser's defence claims he suffered a miscarriage of justice because the advocate depute in the trial made Arlene's rings the "cornerstone" of his case.
The Crown has argued that the evidence against Fraser was "overwhelming".
Arlene Fraser went missing from Elgin in 1998
The Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh earlier heard John Beckett QC, for the Crown, claim the officers' evidence would have helped the prosecutor.
However, Mr Gray said it was "wholly artificial" for appeal judges to consider what the Crown might have done had they been aware of the evidence.
"If the cornerstone of the Crown case has been on an inaccurate premise then, in my submission, it is extremely difficult to see how the appellant can have had a fair trial," said Mr Gray.
"This is a very unusual case because the Crown proceeded on a basis on which it now recognises was inaccurate, and in the context of a fresh evidence appeal it would be wholly artificial to start looking at what may have happened if the Crown had presented the case in a different way, because that didn't happen."
The judges will deliver a decision on the appeal later