Move to Murder: Who Killed Julia Wallace?

[Herlock Sholmes]

HS
Listen to the tapes.
Then come back and tell us.

I have listened to the tapes. Parkes said that Parry “came round with another chap.” Nowhere does he mention being threatened.

Who knew of Parkes statement?

A driver, a policeman, the Atkinson family and spouses. Gordon Atkinson said that it was discussed openly so you would expect friends to be told, regular customers at the garage perhaps. And yet, apart from Parkes, not one peep of this emerges over the ensuing 50 years.

Does anyone else find it strange that, after the murder, someone comes in to the garage and out of the blue mentions that Parry had borrowed some waders. And then, out of the blue, a policeman tells Parkes that Parry borrowed an oilskin coat from him. Apart from the doubtful fact that Parry would take the incredibly stupid risk of borrowing an oilskin coat for the purpose of robbery and murder from a policeman this must be considered weird.

Additionally, as Rod believes that an accomplice rather than Parry committed the murder, why would Parry borrow waders and an oilskin coat for an accomplice who was trying to bluff his way into Wallace’s house on the pretext of a mistaken business arrangement. Why would he have needed them if his intention was to steal and not kill? Yet according to Parkes this actually happened!

[RodCrosby]

Well, we don't know who did what...

What do you reckon about the stripping down of the car, etenguy?

[Abby Normal]

Not in terms of the main interaction between Parkes and Parry. That is all Parkes. His boss is only reacting to what Parkes told him, he had no input into the content of the story of Parry visiting Parkes. Same with Moore, he heard the story and did nothing. The only reason I think he did that is because he thought Parkes was a time waster.

Perhaps.Or they already had there man convicted.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Maybe we can agree to disagree about how sceptical we are about the Parkes' information. I personally struggle to accept that Parry would go to all the trouble of the Qualtrough plan and the establishment of an alibi to then pretty much confess to someone who is not on the best of terms with him. Wherever we land in the spectrum of believing the Parkes evidence, the case against Parry has merit and is worthy of greater exploration.

Hi Etenguy,

I think that the case against Parry as the murderer can be dismissed. He has a cast iron alibi for the time of the murder. He was only questioned because Wallace himself mentioned him. Rod doesn’t believe Parry to be the murderer but the planner and the man that made the call.

It’s either Wallace, Rod’s theory, Gannon’s Parry/Marsden partnership or some unknown (maybe someone from Julia’s past although there’s no evidence for this of course.) Unless a new suspect or theory emerges of course.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Etenguy,

I think that the case against Parry as the murderer can be dismissed. He has a cast iron alibi for the time of the murder. He was only questioned because Wallace himself mentioned him. Rod doesn’t believe Parry to be the murderer but the planner and the man that made the call.

It’s either Wallace, Rod’s theory, Gannon’s Parry/Marsden partnership or some unknown (maybe someone from Julia’s past although there’s no evidence for this of course.) Unless a new suspect or theory emerges of course.

Or parry working alone correct?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Or parry working alone correct?

I don’t think so Abby. He was with Mrs Brine, her daughter Savona and her nephew Harold Denison from 5.30 until around 8.30. He then went to a Post Office on Maiden Lane for cigarettes so we have the shopkeeper. Then he went to Hignett’s Garage to pick up an accumulator battery for his car, so we have however many people worked at the garage. Then he went to see Mrs Williamson.

So we would, with no good reason, have to call some of these people liars. None of them mention him sneaking out or acting suspiciously. His alibi for the tuesday is very strong. Unlike his alibi for the Monday night at the time of the call though I have to say.

[RodCrosby]

HS
You know there is NOTHING corroborating Parry's movements between 8.30pm and 9.00pm on the Tuesday. And some evidence against Parry being truthful.

Why the misrepresentation, again?

[etenguy]

What do you reckon about the stripping down of the car, etenguy?

You suggest in an earlier post that this might have been on the basis of Parkes' evidence. That may be true. Alternatively, it may have been connected to their own independent suspicion. What they didn't do, unless I have missed it, is either question Parry about the garage interaction nor search the drains for the murder weapon.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Abby,

.
The fact that parkes told his boss who instructed him to wait and then eventually going to the police does have the ring of truth about it as a reasonable narrative.

Perhaps another point worth mentioning is that even after the appeal and over the ensuing years the finger of suspicion was always pointed at Wallace. If innocent then he lived under a terrible shadow and yet in the following years no one came forward. Neither Parkes or any of the Atkinson’s. A journalist would have lapped up the story. Even if they couldn’t have mentioned Parry by name, evidence of a strong suspect might have helped remove some of the stigma from Wallace.

[etenguy]

Hi Etenguy,

I think that the case against Parry as the murderer can be dismissed. He has a cast iron alibi for the time of the murder. He was only questioned because Wallace himself mentioned him. Rod doesn’t believe Parry to be the murderer but the planner and the man that made the call.

It’s either Wallace, Rod’s theory, Gannon’s Parry/Marsden partnership or some unknown (maybe someone from Julia’s past although there’s no evidence for this of course.) Unless a new suspect or theory emerges of course.

I agree - it was a lazy post - i did mean Parry as mastermind.

However, following something Rod posted earlier - Parry had half an hour in which to commit the robbery/murder himself. Rod suggests he visited the Wallace house to meet his accomplice. If he worked alone, he may have committed the crime then. Qualtrough would then be simply to get Wallace out of the house. Perhaps he sneaked in the back door, took the money and replaced the box but was caught by Julia who recognised him and led to her murder. Of course, that would make for a later time of death. Not a serious theory, but just about within the realms of possibility. But only if the timings were a little out for Parry's alibi.

[Herlock Sholmes]

HS
You know there is NOTHING corroborating Parry's movements between 8.30pm and 9.00pm on the Tuesday. And some evidence against Parry being truthful.

Why the misrepresentation, again?

Rod it’s almost an attempt at subliminal messaging when you keep mentioning the word ‘misrepresentation.’ Do you fear being disagreed with so badly that you feel the need to draw censure on people (me?)

After he left Knocklaid Road at around 8.30 (oh and I forgot to mention that while he was there a Miss Plant also called so that’s one more alibi for him) he went to the PO for cigarettes. Why would he lie about that when the police could easily check? Then he went to Hignett’s Garage again a fact that the police could easily checked? If that’s not corroboration what is?

Julia was killed after 5.30 (while he was at the Brine’s) Evidence against that - zero.

[RodCrosby]

You suggest in an earlier post that this might have been on the basis of Parkes' evidence. That may be true. Alternatively, it may have been connected to their own independent suspicion. What they didn't do, unless I have missed it, is either question Parry about the garage interaction nor search the drains for the murder weapon.

Well, to be fair, we don't know what the Police actually did. If Harry Bailey Jnr is not a fantasist, there is no record of the Police stripping down the car, either.

Or of the Police being "in and out" of his house, as Parry himself later claimed to Goodman.

I spent several hours with Antony last year going through the Police file. Others have stated they believe the file to have been "filleted" or sanitised, before finally being released to the general public. Maybe some Police activities never even made it into the file in the first place?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I agree - it was a lazy post - i did mean Parry as mastermind.

However, following something Rod posted earlier - Parry had half an hour in which to commit the robbery/murder himself. Rod suggests he visited the Wallace house to meet his accomplice. If he worked alone, he may have committed the crime then. Qualtrough would then be simply to get Wallace out of the house. Perhaps he sneaked in the back door, took the money and replaced the box but was caught by Julia who recognised him and led to her murder. Of course, that would make for a later time of death. Not a serious theory, but just about within the realms of possibility. But only if the timings were a little out for Parry's alibi.

Hi Eten,

The problem is that for Parry to have been physically involved in any way on the Tuesday night then 4 people would have had to have lied to protect him. Mrs Brine, her 13 year old daughter, her nephew and a visitor. We just don’t have any reason to accuse them of lying.

[Abby Normal]

Abby,


Perhaps another point worth mentioning is that even after the appeal and over the ensuing years the finger of suspicion was always pointed at Wallace. If innocent then he lived under a terrible shadow and yet in the following years no one came forward. Neither Parkes or any of the Atkinson’s. A journalist would have lapped up the story. Even if they couldn’t have mentioned Parry by name, evidence of a strong suspect might have helped remove some of the stigma from Wallace.

Hi friend : )

But parkes and his boss did come forward after wallace was convicted and told the cop moore who came and interviewed parkes right?

Its not there fault the cops didnt beleive them?

They were scared to come forward from the beginning, then finally did, did their moral duty, told the police. In the ensuing years, i could see why they wouldnt press it not wanting to get involved. They told the cops, the ball was in the polices court now to follow up if they saw fit.

And not going to the press with their story goes along with this reluctance no?

[Abby Normal]

As crazy as the whole parry imcriminating himself to parkes sounds, i domt know how many times (and i watch/ read ALOT of true crime) a killer would have gotten away scott free if they just kept there stupid mouths shut.
Im astounded at how many idiots put the noose around there own neck by imcriminating themselves indirectly, directly and more often than not boasting about it or comfessing to someone. Which then leads to there demise.

Along with that, how hesitant, scared and quiet the people will be who are told by the killer. But thankfully did come forward, sooner or later.

So it happens, and quite frequently at that.

Frankly i find the parkes story rather compelling at this point.

Now of course witnesses will come forward and falsely accuse someone they know to be innocent because they are mad at them or whatever, but i see that far less than the former.