Times, 19 April 1999

Family outraged as son's lover confesses to “road rage” killing

THE family of the man murdered by Tracie Andrews yesterday accused her of trying to “save her own skin” after she finally confessed to the killing, in a letter from prison.

Andrews, who was jailed for life in 1997 for the murder of Lee Harvey after claiming that an unknown “road-rage” killer had stabbed him 35 times, wrote that she had “lost all control”. The 30-year-old killer, from Alvechurch, Worcestershire, said in the letter that she had felt sick as she cradled her dying fiancé on the roadside after the attack in December 1996.

At her trial at Birmingham Crown Court in 1997, the former model vehemently denied involvement in Harvey's death. Her confession to the killing, which was sent to the News of the World 21 months after her conviction, infuriated his parents, because she claimed that he was a violent aggressor who had pulled a knife on her.

Harvey's mother, Maureen, 53, said: “She hasn't confessed because she's turning to religion or is remorseful - she is doing it to save her skin. She knows that she's got to admit her crime before she can be considered for parole. That is why she's done it.”

While police were still seeking the mythical “road rage” killer, Mrs Harvey had supported Andrews at a press conference, not knowing that Andrews had killed her son. Yesterday Mrs Harvey said: “I wanted to believe that Lee had been killed in a road rage attack. My motherly instinct told me to give her the benefit of the doubt. Now, with the confession, I feel stripped of everything.”

Ray Harvey, Lee's father, 54, said: “Finally - now the truth has come out - our son can rest in peace. We have always known Tracie would one day admit her guilt. At least now the rest of the world knows what she is. She is a lying, evil, murdering bitch.”

The letter says that Andrews flew into a rage after arguing with Harvey about her former lover, Andy Tilston, while driving back from a pub. As the row turned into a fight, she claims that Harvey produced a knife and threatened her with it, and that he dropped it in the scuffle. She wrote: “I fell, I saw the knife on the floor, picked it up and when he went for me again I just reacted with the knife. I must have stabbed him.”

Andrews then decided to concoct the story about a “road rage” killer. “My whole life had ended . . . I knew I had to make it look as though we had been attacked,” the letter read.

Andrews went on to say that had she not lied to police she might now have been serving a sentence for manslaughter instead of murder. She said she had wanted to confess because “the more I keep things bottled up inside the worse I'm making myself feel”.

The letter said that Lee got out of the car and pulled a knife. He “grabbed my hair. He said, ‘See if Andy wants you with a ****ed-up face’ He had a knife and I was scared.

“With that I kneed him, he fell down and pulled me down too . . . He punched me again, I fell, I saw the knife on the floor. picked it up and when he went for me again I just reacted with the knife.

“I must have stabbed him then he stood still . . . and hit me so hard I fell again. I just went mad.”

Andrews wrote: “I went back over to Lee and tried talking, shaking him. I could hear him breathing in a bad way, I saw his eyes go to the back of his head, I could smell this awful smell and I felt the wetness on my hands.

“I knew the police would take me away.”

After the killing a man came to help. “I made up a story about us being attacked. I went to the hospital, I flushed the knife down the toilet.”

Andrews gave the false story to the police. The letter reads: “I do feel I should have been convicted of manslaughter. I should have told the truth in the first place and used my defence.”

She subsequently attempted suicide.

The Harvey family denied that their son had carried a knife. Ray Harvey said: “It is a complete fairy tale. I believe she had taken the knife out with her.”

Both Andrews's solicitor and the News of the World declined to comment on how the letter had reached the newspaper and whether it would be the subject of any payment.


Main Page