Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Do you think William Herbert Wallace was guilty?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
    "THE SOLUTION", entirely consistent with the evidence...

    FACTS
    Parry had a car. Parry had criminal propensities. Moreover, Parry had demonstrated his criminal propensities extended to cars. (the North John Street incident, and others)
    At the risk of stating the obvious, a car is a very useful tool for a criminal to have. It enables one to move very quickly from one place to another, and is ideally suited for stalking people. Wallace was a particularly easy target to stalk, with his distinctive height and dress, and probable poor eyesight.
    Parry was intimately acquainted with the Wallaces, the layout of their home and Wallace's business methods around Anfield and Clubmoor. Parry was also intimately acquainted with the City Cafe and the North John St. area.
    Parry may have borne a grudge against Wallace, or the Prudential, or both. In any case, he was aware of the criminal opportunities offered at the Wallace home.
    Parry was accomplished at amateur dramatics, and could plausibly have disguised his voice.
    Parry seemed to have a large circle of friends, and it's possible some of them had criminal propensities similar to his own (he would later be convicted of car theft, acting with others).
    However, Parry would know (as it transpired, correctly) that the finger of suspicion would automatically point to him if anything untoward occurred at the Wallace house...

    Therefore, how to achieve his goal of robbing Wallace and the Prudential while ensuring his liberty?
    Parry needed a plan, an alibi and an accomplice....

    THE PLAN
    Parry had 'cased' the Wallace house on many previous occasions during his visits. He knew exactly where the money was kept in the kitchen. He had witnessed Wallace's methodical, plodding dedication to his job. He knew Wallace might fall for a telephone message (in 1931 ownership of a telephone signified wealth. That was something he had learned during his own time working for the Pru. "A telephone call is a great prospect!" all the boys said...) He further knew of Wallace's well-publicised chess-matches held at the City Cafe. He had often seen Wallace there, and acknowledged him on the occasions Parry was at the Cafe for his amateur dramatic nights. What better place to leave a spurious telephone message for Wallace? Is it just a co-incidence that the last time Wallace recalled seeing Parry in the City Cafe was in November 1930, just as the chess championship listing was posted up on the board?

    Like most young men with a new car, Parry had travelled far and wide across Liverpool at all hours, exploring its highways and rat-runs. One evening he had wound up in Mossley Hill and, turning his car into Menlove Gardens, he had discovered this triangular affair had no Menlove Gardens East. How curious! he remarked to himself, committing the fact to memory.

    Later, this address came to mind as a location to which Wallace might be lured. Parry was meticulous in his planning. How long might it take for Wallace to get there? Parry spent an evening in his car following trams from Belmont Road to Menlove Avenue. He watched them stop at Smithdown Rd, disgorging passengers, who then boarded another tram on to Penny Lane and Menlove Avenue. Nearly 30 minutes! And the same on the way back, don't forget. A whole hour. Throw in the time it would take for Wallace to walk from/to Wolverton Street, and knowing that pettifogging old Wallace would not leave Menlove Gardens or Mossley Hill until he had exhausted all possibilities, and that time would rise to about an hour and a half. Tops, say. Plenty of time for someone to screw the Wallace house. But that someone can't be me, for obvious reasons...

    Enter Mr."M", another wide-boy in Parry's own mould, perhaps a little older. Parry and "M" go through the plan several times, while stalking Wallace around Anfield in the car. There he his! the old bugger! What a lark! To see the look on Wallace's miserable face when he realises he's been had.

    THE CRIME
    Monday 19th January, 1931, 7.00pm. Parry and "M" sit in the car at a vantage point where they can see Wallace heading for the tram. Wallace appears at about 7.14pm. Mr "M" exits the car and follows Wallace to the tram stop. Perhaps he even boards the tram and follows Wallace all the way to the chess club, just to be sure. Parry makes the Qualtrough phone-call to the City Cafe at 7.15pm. Parry, who has convictions for robbing phone boxes, cannot resist bamboozling the operator into giving him a free call. The Anfield exchange logs the call. He is nervous, and Beattie's non-committal responses lead Parry into a slip. To impress upon Beattie the urgency of his message Parry dreams-up on the spur of the moment "my girl's 21st" [Parry is expecting a formal invitation to a 21st birthday party for "his girl" and himself from Leslie Williamson.] On hanging up, Parry jumps back in his car and makes the 3-minute drive to Missouri Rd, arriving a little after 7.20pm. Perhaps later that evening Parry travels into Liverpool city centre to rendezvous with "M", or to observe Wallace leaving the chess club a little after 10 pm. In any event they calculate that Wallace has taken the bait, and go through the final preparations for the following night...

    Tuesday 20th January, 1931. Wallace returns to Wolverton Street a little after 6pm. After tea and scones with Julia, Wallace prepares for his journey to Mossley Hill. The newspaper drops on the mat, and a few minutes later, at around 6.40pm Julia takes in the milk from Alan Close. At around 6.45pm Wallace and Julia walk down the back-yard, and Wallace takes his leave, Julia bolting the back-yard gate. Julia commences clearing away the tea things, then sits down to read the Liverpool Echo at 7pm....

    She has reached the middle-pages of the paper, when just after 7.15pm she hears a faint rapping on the front-door letterbox. Startled, she rises and approaches the front door.
    "Who's there?" she calls.
    "Is Mr. Wallace there?" a voice replies.
    "Who is it?", Julia repeats.
    "I have an appointment with Mr. Wallace. My name is Qualtrough!"
    Julia opens the door.
    "I'm sorry I'm a little early. I take it Mr. Wallace got my message?" says Qualtrough.
    "Yes, but..... I don't understand. I suppose you'd better come in Mr. Qualtrough. There seems to have been a misunderstanding."

    Julia Wallace shows Qualtrough into the front parlour, and she stoops to light the fire as Qualtrough carries on chatting. "I don't understand it Mrs. Wallace. I was very clear in my message, that I would be coming here tonight at 7.30pm to see your husband on an important insurance matter..." Confused, and a little embarrassed, Julia bids him sit on the chaise-longue. "I'm very sorry, Mr. Qualtrough, but there has obviously been a mix-up. I cannot understand it. How odd? Would you mind waiting until my husband returns? Let me take your coat..."
    "Not at all, Mrs. Wallace.." says Qualtrough, as he hands her his coat.
    "Would you like a cup of tea? I don't suppose my husband will be long, once he realises the mistake."
    "No thank-you. Indeed, my wife will explain to him what has occurred.", says Qualtrough as he relaxes into the cushions on the chaise-longue... Julia notices Qualtrough is wearing a pair of leather gloves. It must be cold outside, she muses to herself.
    Julia leaves Qualtrough in the parlour, hangs up his coat in the hall and returns to the back kitchen, her mind a whirl. How could William make such a mistake? How awful. Poor Mr. Qualtrough, coming all this way. William will be annoyed with himself when he gets back. But I suppose he's not to blame. It must be that something got garbled on the telephone at the chess club...

    Julia, a bit nervous and cold after answering the front door needs to spend a penny. The effects of the previous cups of tea are now working, and in any case Julia suffers from long-term incontinence... She traipses up the stairs to the bathroom.

    She cannot hear Qualtrough creep quietly into the vestibule, and slip the bolt on the front door... Entering the middle kitchen, Qualtrough hears the floorboards creak in the bathroom directly above him. He moves straight to the bookshelves to the left of the range. In a flash, he has jumped on a chair, taken down the cash-box and broken its catch. Qualtrough snatches the bank notes and replaces the box. He does not notice in his haste that a few coins have scattered on the floor to the right of the range... Qualtrough hears the chain being pulled above him, and quietly slips out of the kitchen and back into the parlour. ...

    Julia clumps down the stairs and enters the parlour. "Are you sure you wouldn't like a cup of tea, Mr. Qualtrough?"
    "No thank-you" he replies quietly.
    Julia vaguely notices that Qualtrough has not yet taken-off his gloves....

    While pottering around the kitchen and back-kitchen, Julia notices some coins on the floor. An uneasy feeling begins to rise in the pit of Julia's stomach. Where is William? Dear God, let him return soon to deal with this strange man...

    Julia looks at the clock on the mantelpiece in the kitchen. It is a little past 8pm. Where did William say he was going? Mossley Hill? Julia is not a native of Liverpool, and she does not have an intimate knowledge of its geography. But she has a funny idea Mossley Hill is not far from Calderstones Park, where she and William spent a pleasant afternoon recently. Gulp. That was quite a long way. They were there for several hours. Panic begins to rise in Julia's breast for the first time. What to do... What to do.... I can't confront him, but I can't stay in this house a moment longer with him! Calm down, Julia!
    Julia enters the hall, and quietly takes down William's mackintosh from its hook. She detects an aroma of William on it, which gives her a little comfort....

    "Oh, Mrs. Wallace!"
    Julia freezes. "Yyyess?"
    "Would you come here a moment?"
    Julia enters the parlour with the mackintosh over her right arm.
    "Going... somewhere?" asks Qualtrough, nonchalantly eyeing the mackintosh.
    "Why no! Well, yes, I .. I just need to ask the neighbours something. The cat! I think they have my cat!" Julia stammers, her eyes fixed on Qualtrough's still leather-clad hands.
    Qualtrough sees the fear in her eyes, and rises from the chaise-longue. "Perhaps I'd better go..."
    "Yes! No... wait a minute. My husband will be back any moment. I.. I'm going for... just next door for a moment."
    "I can let that happen!" says Qualtrough, grabbing her left arm, and flinging her across the room. Julia Wallace falls in a heap, partially over the gas fire, losing her grip on the mac', which immediately catches light. In a panic, Qualtrough snatches the iron bar from next to the fire and batters Julia over the head. "Damn you, you silly cow!" Blood spurts from right to left across the room, and Julia rolls over onto her back near the settee. She is still alive, and moaning. Qualtrough grabs the mac' away from the fire and pats down the flames with his feet. He rolls Julia on to her front and administers another 10 blows to the back of her head with the iron bar...

    Qualtrough runs upstairs and quickly searches around for further valuables. In the middle-bedroom he finds a jar. "Just my luck! Stinking 'Treasury Notes' - about to be phased out, and probably traceable in any case... Leave this crap [Parry, you bloody idiot...]"

    Qualtrough glances at his watch. Christ! It's nearly twenty-past eight. Time to be going. Better take that iron bar with me...
    Qualtrough retrieves his coat from the hall and slips out through the back kitchen. He pauses at the yard-gate for a moment, listening for any sound, before slipping the bolt and exiting down the alley. He turns right into Redbourn St, down the alley, then crosses Lower Breck Rd, and goes into the darkened recreation ground, his pre-arranged pickup point. It is two minutes since he left number 29 Wolverton Street...

    It is a little after 8.20pm. Richard Gordon Parry looks nervously at his watch. "Well, Mrs. Brine, I'd better be getting off to Lily's now. Thanks for the tea..." Parry leaves 43 Knocklaid Rd and jumps in his car, and realises he needs more cigarettes. He has been chain-smoking all evening. It is a 40 second journey from Number 43 Knocklaid Rd to the Post Office on Maiden Lane. Another 30 seconds and Parry is off again, up Maiden Lane. He turns left into Townsend Lane. Parry is beaming. "I wouldn't miss this for the world!", he chuckles. "To see the look on that old fool's face, as he trudges back to Wolverton Street. He'll be getting off his tram anytime now. That'll teach you, Wallace, to poke your nose into my affairs!"
    Parry turns left at the Triangle into Lower Breck Road, and left again into the pitch-black darkness of the recreation ground. The journey from the Post Office has taken a little over three minutes...

    "M" emerges from the shadows and slides into the passenger seat. "How did it go?", asks Parry breathlessly, grinning from ear to ear.
    "M" is tense, his face ashen. "Badly..." he tersely replies.
    "How do you mean?" asks Parry.
    "Well, there wasn't much money, and.... she's not as daft or as doddery as you said she was... She smelt a rat, and I...I had to give her a 'tap'...", says "M".
    "That's a gutter..." Parry replies, the grin instantly disappearing from his face.
    "Listen Parry..." says "M", "you are in this with me up to your neck. Take me home now and.....Get Rid of These!" "M" pulls out a pair of leather gloves from his pocket, and stuffs them into the glove compartment in front of him. He simultaneously slips an iron bar from his sleeve onto the footwell floor....

    Later, in the early hours, Parry slips the bar down the drain outside Dr. Curwen's house on Priory Road, and takes his car for a wash at Atkinsons' Garage...

    A week later, having regained a semblance of calm, Parry and "M" return to Atkinsons' together, and intimidate vulnerable John Parkes into silence.

    Rod, I believe you've posted the same thing on the YOLIVERPOOL boards. It is not at all entirely consistent with the facts. But, you do have good prose

    Comment


    • Yes, I did, in skeleton form. [the thread was locked several years ago].

      I'd be interested in which bits are not [substantially] in accordance with the evidence, or at least not inconsistent with the same.

      The timings, and geography, are based on my own conservative tests in the locality in 2009, btw.

      Why was the highly-unusual name Qualtrough used, is a good starting point...
      Last edited by RodCrosby; 01-24-2017, 06:04 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
        Yes, I did, in skeleton form. [the thread was locked several years ago].

        I'd be interested in which bits are not [substantially] in accordance with the evidence, or at least not inconsistent with the same.

        The timings, and geography, are based on my own conservative tests in the locality in 2009, btw.

        Why was the highly-unusual name Qualtrough used, is a good starting point...
        Sorry, I don't have the ability to create an elaborate response which I will provide later because I am on my phone, but I enjoy conversing over this topic.

        Are you suggesting the name Qualtrough comes from the Isle of Man, where Parry had ancestors?

        Otherwise, I believe anyone including Wallace was as likely to have known of the name as Parry or anyone else.

        I agree the caller mentioning the 21st would be a slip by Parry if he was guilty and requires some explaining and perhaps indicates an attempt at framing or diversion if one believes Wallace was the sole guilty party. (as I do)

        Comment


        • The name Qualtrough was used, because it was intended Mrs. Wallace would remember it, and lower her guard to admit "Qualtrough" to the house the following evening...

          As an aside, growing up near Liverpool, and hearing of this case from childhood [my late grandfather was a member of the same chess club, who believed implacably in Wallace's innocence] the name sounded Russian, and in all oral recitations of the case I heard from many sources it was pronounced "KWOLTROFF"...

          Comment


          • Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
            The name Qualtrough was used, because it was intended Mrs. Wallace would remember it, and lower her guard to admit "Qualtrough" to the house the following evening...

            As an aside, growing up near Liverpool, and hearing of this case from childhood [my late grandfather was a member of the same chess club, who believed implacably in Wallace's innocence] the name sounded Russian, and in all oral recitations of the case I heard from many sources it was pronounced "KWOLTROFF"...
            Rod, I always thought of the name as "Qwahl-troh" Might be an American thing.

            Do you not think it odd that the insurance agent Wallace did not consult a map, and was content to arrive around the time of the business appointment without knowing exactly where he was going?

            If say Marsden or someone very much like him was planning to rob the place, how did he think he could get away with it? Why even bring a bar inside if he wasn't expecting to use it? Are you suggesting the pair was willing to murder "if things went wrong"?

            Comment


            • Of course, I now accept that the Manx surname is pronounced in the way you state.

              However, the point is surely that it is a very unusual name (outside of the Isle of Man), and is a ready-made talking-point. The fact that every person who related the case to me in the Liverpool area thought it ended in "-OFF" is rather telling, I think.

              "How do you spell it?" "How do you pronounce it?" [I believe there are no fewer than 9 different ways of pronouncing 'ough' in the English language]

              One could well imagine the same conversation taking place at 29 Wolverton Street on 19/20th January 1931 between Wallace and his wife.

              Why not "Smith"? It was intended to be highly memorable for a reason.

              Btw, I don't think Marsden was the killer, although the possibility exists that the killer's first name began with "M", I think.

              On your final point, such crimes are commonplace. Planned robbery of the elderly or infirm by subterfuge, which escalates to murder.
              Last edited by RodCrosby; 01-24-2017, 07:10 PM.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
                Of course, I now accept that the Manx surname is pronounced in the way you state.

                However, the point is surely that it is a very unusual name (outside of the Isle of Man), and is a ready-made talking-point. The fact that every person who related the case to me in the Liverpool area thought it ended in "-OFF" is rather telling, I think.

                "How do you spell it?" "How do you pronounce it?" [I believe there are no fewer than 9 different ways of pronouncing 'ough' in the English language]

                One could well imagine the same conversation taking place at 29 Wolverton Street on 19/20th January 1931 between Wallace and his wife.

                Why not "Smith"? It was intended to be highly memorable for a reason.
                Rod, I don't see why any name wouldn't work if the goal was to have Julia let them in. Surely the main point would be to say that they were the person who Wallace left to meet on business, rather than saying a name itself that would register with Julia, because she had heard it before and it was unusual. If she knew Wallace was headed on business (an assumption Parry and Marsden would have to have made if guilty), then she would let Marsden in regardless of whether the unusual name registered or not it seems to me. It is immaterial in my opinion.

                Comment


                • You seem to be admitting the plausibility of my general theory, while trying to deny it on the grounds that it might have been overcooked a bit by the perps...

                  I don't think it was either Parry or Marsden who entered the house.

                  What would be the point? Both were known to the Wallaces, both instantly named by Wallace to the Police, and would be immediately arrested as "open and shut" suspects if either of them had managed to enter the house and steal anything. Not a good plan, obviously.

                  It was someone unknown to the Wallaces, but the guiding hand was someone who knew everything (Parry).

                  Parry was in exactly the right place to set it all up.
                  Parry was in exactly the right place to make the call.
                  Parry was in exactly the right place to pick up the perp on 20th Jan (and I think his statement of his movements is lies, to cover up this fact)
                  Parry was in exactly the right place to be implicated later (Parkes' statement, supported by at least two other witnesses, albeit hearsay)
                  Parry was in exactly the right place to indicate he and an accomplice were involved (Parkes' further statement, about the later visitation from Parry and "another", which both Wilkes and Parkes himself both entirely missed the significance of...)
                  Last edited by RodCrosby; 01-24-2017, 07:42 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
                    You seem to be admitting the plausibility of my general theory, while trying to deny it on the grounds that it might have been overcooked a bit by the perps...

                    I don't think it was either Parry or Marsden who entered the house.

                    What would be the point? Both were known to the Wallaces, both instantly named by Wallace to the Police, and would be immediately arrested as "open and shut" suspects if either of them had managed to enter the house and steal anything. Not a good plan, obviously.

                    It was someone unknown to the Wallaces, but the guiding hand was someone who knew everything (Parry).

                    Parry was in exactly the right place to set it all up.
                    Parry was in exactly the right place to make the call.
                    Parry was in exactly the right place to pick up the perp on 20th Jan (and I think his statement of his movements is lies, to cover up this fact)
                    Parry was in exactly the right place to be implicated later (Parkes' statement, supported by at least two other witnesses, albeit hearsay)
                    Parry was in exactly the right place to indicate he and an accomplice were involved (Parkes' further statement, about the later visitation from Parry and "another", which both Wilkes and Parkes himself both entirely missed the significance of...)

                    Not at all; I was showing that your theory about the name being unusual implicating someone other than Wallace does not make sense to me given the scenario you put forth. That does not mean I agree with the scenario.

                    Comment


                    • "...On Monday evening the 19th instant, I called for my young lady, Miss Lillian Lloyd, of 7, Missouri Road, at some address where she had been teaching, the address I cannot for the moment remember, and went home with her to 7, Missouri Road at about 5.30pm and remained there until about 11.30pm when I went home.

                      On Tuesday the 20th instant, I finished business about 5.30pm and called upon Mrs Brine, 43, Knockliad (sic) Road. I remained there with Mrs Brine, her daughter Savona, 13yrs; her nephew, Harold Dennison (sic), 29, Marlborough Road, until about 8.30pm. I then went out and bought some cigarettes – Players No 3, and the Evening Express from Mr Hodgson, Post Office, Maiden Lane, on the way to my young lady’s house. When I was turning the corner by the Post Office I remembered that I had promised to call for my accumulator at Hignetts in West Derby Road, Tuebrook. I went there and got my accumulator and then went down West Derby Road and along Lisburn Lane to Mrs Williamsons, 49, Lisburn Lane, and saw her. We had a chat about a 21st birthday party for about 10 minutes and then I went to 7, Missouri Road, and remained there till about 11 to 11.30pm when I went home.
                      I have heard of the murder of Mrs Wallace and have studied the newspaper reports of the case and, naturally, being acquainted with Mr and Mrs Wallace, I have taken a great interest in it. I have no objection whatever to the police verifying my statement as to my movements on Monday the 19th and Tuesday the 20th instants.

                      Signed) R G Parry.
                      24th January, 1931."


                      The first highlighted part is lies. Parry was out and about in his car in the immediate vicinity of Anfield and the Wallace house, the phone box, and did not arrive at Lily Lloyd's until around 7.35pm on the Monday night, according to her and her mother's statements.

                      The second highlighted part I suspect is lies. The over-specificity [why the need to "remember" the exact point he turned a corner and remember to go for his accumulator, suddenly being very exact about the route, unless it's a carefully rehearsed cover to conceal something else - namely that he took a three-minute detour in the opposite direction to the vicinity of the Wallace house, to pick up his partner - an entirely plausible scenario, also?]

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
                        "...On Monday evening the 19th instant, I called for my young lady, Miss Lillian Lloyd, of 7, Missouri Road, at some address where she had been teaching, the address I cannot for the moment remember, and went home with her to 7, Missouri Road at about 5.30pm and remained there until about 11.30pm when I went home.

                        On Tuesday the 20th instant, I finished business about 5.30pm and called upon Mrs Brine, 43, Knockliad (sic) Road. I remained there with Mrs Brine, her daughter Savona, 13yrs; her nephew, Harold Dennison (sic), 29, Marlborough Road, until about 8.30pm. I then went out and bought some cigarettes – Players No 3, and the Evening Express from Mr Hodgson, Post Office, Maiden Lane, on the way to my young lady’s house. When I was turning the corner by the Post Office I remembered that I had promised to call for my accumulator at Hignetts in West Derby Road, Tuebrook. I went there and got my accumulator and then went down West Derby Road and along Lisburn Lane to Mrs Williamsons, 49, Lisburn Lane, and saw her. We had a chat about a 21st birthday party for about 10 minutes and then I went to 7, Missouri Road, and remained there till about 11 to 11.30pm when I went home.
                        I have heard of the murder of Mrs Wallace and have studied the newspaper reports of the case and, naturally, being acquainted with Mr and Mrs Wallace, I have taken a great interest in it. I have no objection whatever to the police verifying my statement as to my movements on Monday the 19th and Tuesday the 20th instants.

                        Signed) R G Parry.
                        24th January, 1931."


                        The first highlighted part is lies. Parry was out and about in his car in the immediate vicinity of Anfield and the Wallace house, the phone box, and did not arrive at Lily Lloyd's until around 7.35pm on the Monday night, according to her and her mother's statements.

                        The second highlighted part I suspect is lies. The over-specificity [why the need to "remember" the exact point he turned a corner and remember to go for his accumulator, suddenly being very exact about the route, unless it's a carefully rehearsed cover to conceal something else - namely that he took a three-minute detour in the opposite direction to the vicinity of the Wallace house, to pick up his partner - an entirely plausible scenario, also?]
                        Well I'm sure it was checked and verified that he did in fact pick up his accumulator, it was likely an attempt to make his alibi more cast iron for the murder night (which it in fact was)

                        He did seemingly lie or equivocate about his actions on the 19th for the phonecall, probably due to being a murder suspect and therefore naturally trying to obfuscate any suspicion away from himself, which worked until Lily Lloyd recanted (assuming she was honest and not just spurned.)

                        Still, that does not imply guilt.

                        I find Wallace's actions on the night of the murder traversing around creating a scene, not consulting a map etc. more aberrant than Parry's "over-specifity".

                        Comment


                        • Why would an innocent Parry have any reason to lie about his movements on the Monday night? Yet lie egregiously, he did...

                          The list of Parry's suspicious behaviours (including outright lies) taken together are the smoking gun in the case. All far beyond mere co-incidence, imho, whereas, as we know, the minor points against Wallace are far more nuanced, and "cancelled out by something else."

                          What are the things that "cancel out" the case against Parry? Nothing that I can see. The error has been to see Parry as the killer. He was far too clever for that, but he knew what happened...

                          The facts are suggestive of Parry stalking Wallace also. In the Cafe, November 1930, On a bus, January 1931, In Missouri Road, January 1931. Knows all about Wallace's chess [did know/did not know inconsistency], his music, his playing bowls (Police statement). Wallace "a very peculiar-looking man, immensely tall" [to Goodman, 1966]

                          Oddly, in 1931 when almost the whole of Liverpool was taking an emotionally charged position, either strongly for or against Wallace's guilt while he was awaiting his trial, Parry seemed the only person unusually detached from the drama, expressing mere disinterested "sadness" at Wallace's predicament. (Parry's friend Tattersall, quoted in Wilkes[1985])

                          A guilty conscience?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by AmericanSherlock View Post
                            Do you not think it odd that the insurance agent Wallace did not consult a map, and was content to arrive around the time of the business appointment without knowing exactly where he was going?

                            If say Marsden or someone very much like him was planning to rob the place, how did he think he could get away with it? Why even bring a bar inside if he wasn't expecting to use it? Are you suggesting the pair was willing to murder "if things went wrong"?
                            Several points.

                            a) Liverpool was at the exact peak of its growth and population in 1931. New streets were springing up all the time. Maps may have been out of date almost as soon as they were printed, and therefore almost useless.
                            b) His fellows at the chess club, including Beattie, encouraged Wallace in going, offering suggestions. No-one said. "It doesn't exist."
                            c) Even if someone had said "there's no East, only North, South and West" would Wallace not assume that Beattie had simply misheard, and take it upon himself to find Qualtrough at the correct address, surely one of only three adjacent possibilities?
                            d) Wallace probably had an emotional reason. For the first time in his life, probably, he had been "recognised" as a worthy professional, by a stranger who was seeking his advice, publicly in the presence of his peers. Pride is a very powerful motivator to respond diligently to such an unexpected invitation.
                            e) There is a slight possibility Wallace did at some point consult a map, but decided nevertheless to embark upon the journey for one of the above reasons. Perhaps his lawyers felt it would be better for him to "forget" that fact, as it would not sit well with the jury. Better perhaps to present Wallace as a bumbling naif, rather than someone who would have to admit going on a wild-goose chase against his own better judgement.

                            On your second point, these crimes are commonplace. My own grandmother, in her eighties, living no more than a couple of miles from Anfield, was burglarized on several occasions, sometimes by people who entered the house on a pretext, once even being threatened with a poker...

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
                              Several points.

                              a) Liverpool was at the exact peak of its growth and population in 1931. New streets were springing up all the time. Maps may have been out of date almost as soon as they were printed, and therefore almost useless.
                              b) His fellows at the chess club, including Beattie, encouraged Wallace in going, offering suggestions. No-one said. "It doesn't exist."
                              c) Even if someone had said "there's no East, only North, South and West" would Wallace not assume that Beattie had simply misheard, and take it upon himself to find Qualtrough at the correct address, surely one of only three adjacent possibilities?
                              d) Wallace probably had an emotional reason. For the first time in his life, probably, he had been "recognised" as a worthy professional, by a stranger who was seeking his advice, publicly in the presence of his peers. Pride is a very powerful motivator to respond diligently to such an unexpected invitation.
                              e) There is a slight possibility Wallace did at some point consult a map, but decided nevertheless to embark upon the journey for one of the above reasons. Perhaps his lawyers felt it would be better for him to "forget" that fact, as it would not sit well with the jury. Better perhaps to present Wallace as a bumbling naif, rather than someone who would have to admit going on a wild-goose chase against his own better judgement.

                              On your second point, these crimes are commonplace. My own grandmother, in her eighties, living no more than a couple of miles from Anfield, was burglarized on several occasions, sometimes by people who entered the house on a pretext, once even being threatened with a poker...
                              Well to me, the incorrect address is a red herring in the sense that it doesn't really matter and wouldn't really help either Wallace (assuming he was the caller) or Qualtrough. I think it could be argued it was more the mark of Wallace overthinking it and creating an elaborate scheme than an outsider Qualtrough (Parry in your scenario). Why would Parry or someone like him risk Wallace looking up the address and finding it did not exist and not going at all? Better to just have him go to a real address and be told there was no one there named Qualtrough. He would be gone long enough and would probably search anyway in the neighborhood, thinking he had misheard it.

                              I think the wrong address would be an unnecessary risk for someone other than Wallace to take. I guess you could argue if the goal was only robbery then they might not be so pressed to get everything perfect. It is also possible the caller said West, and Beattie relayed the info incorrectly.

                              Whatever the case, James Murphy also notes that Wallace had visited Calderstone Park many times, Joseph Crewe his superintendent's home, and Amy Wallace's home on Ullet Road. He had to be more familiar with the area than he let on.

                              Another note...JW showed no sign of struggle or distress. It appears she was attacked from behind lighting or putting out the fire. That does not mesh with a robbery gone wrong---it hints at an assassin--pre-meditated murder.

                              Comment


                              • The only risk in an incorrect address would be one that was unambiguously incorrect. "Mr. Simpkins of 25 Qualtrough Gardens, Mossley Hill", for example, could easily be verified as non-existent in advance.

                                Perhaps whoever dreamed up "25 Menlove Gardens East" rightly guessed that - if the bait was taken - Wallace might not unreasonably knock at the other Gardens, buying a little more time for the robbery at Wolverton Street to be completed.

                                Remember, I think it was only Sydney Green the first person to tell Wallace unequivocally that there was no such address (he thought). Wallace stated that prior to this a woman coming out of a house in MG North had actually suggested East might be a continuation of MG West!

                                Just because Wallace had occasionally visited specific places in the general area, it surely does not give him omniscience about the existence of every street? Can any of us honestly state otherwise? I certainly wouldn't have an encyclopaedic knowledge of a district three or four miles from my own. I might know the main thoroughfares (Menlove Avenue, for instance) but certainly not every obscure residential side-street.

                                Wallace was told at the chess club that the Gardens existed, and exactly where to find them (off Menlove Avenue). I don't think there's anything suspicious about him setting off, armed with that information, ready to make further enquiries, if necessary, when he got there. There was no SatNav in those days, or Google Maps, and Wallace was the kind of guy, I guess, who imagined himself as the pro-active, get-up-and-go type, as many people of that era did. "Ask a Policeman" was a catch-phrase of the times, and Wallace duly did just that, once he had exhausted his own devices.

                                The forensics do bear further analysis, but McFall and the Police made such a balls-up of the scene and the inferences they drew from it, it's hard, I think, at the distance of 86 years, to exclude every particular scenario in which Julia might have been attacked.

                                Only a jury of half-asleep idiots thought Wallace was guilty. Almost everyone else, those who knew him, the Court of Appeal, the Trial Judge, the Church of England, the Prudential Staff Union, et al thought Wallace was innocent.

                                Even Tattersall (Parry's mate), who only met him once, briefly, didn't think he could have done it [while Parry, of course, was seemingly the only man in Liverpool who wouldn't proffer an opinion...]

                                Everything to me screams "Parry" in big red neon lights, although the twist is, he wasn't the actual killer. A clever one, indeed!

                                Btw, the 1981 radio shows should still be available via this link.
                                I've read that book Ged, really enjoyable. Am I right in remembering that Murray concluded by saying Wallace was the murderer and had got the timing absolutely spot on, discrediting the evidence of a milk or paper boy by saying he could have misread the clock when saying what time he had seen Julia alive. The man From the Pru was released on video in USA but doesnt appear to have been done so here.

                                Very atmospheric to hear people who were there on the night. Hal Brown's testimony is quite moving, in demonstrating that Wallace almost certainly hastened his own death, through grief and despair...
                                Parkes and the two Atkinsons who support him also come across well, I think. Parkes' fantasy about the borrowed waders being involved in the crime adds credibility, in an odd way....
                                A simple man (probably with slight learning difficulties), unburdening himself virtually on his death-bed, and trying to make sense of everything in his childlike way.
                                Last edited by RodCrosby; 01-25-2017, 12:10 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X