No announcement yet.

The Murder of Julia Wallace (1931) - Full DPP case files

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

  • If you're swinging a blood laden pipe then there will be blood splats on the wall opposite, the ceiling and the opposite wall


    • So therefore, later hits are done with mackintosh over her, and then mackintosh pushed underneath her


      • Originally posted by Ven View Post
        So therefore, later hits are done with mackintosh over her, and then mackintosh pushed underneath her
        Right, okay so the first strike is done without covering, then the bar would be soaked, and the swinging of the bar would place the splatter as it was swung, rather than subsequent splatter being from Julia.

        That makes a lot of sense. I can see that.

        But the burning seems to have preceded that, right? Once it's over her head then I'm not sure how it would come to be set on fire?

        I definitely don't think the jacket is shoved beneath her, simply because it is so obvious and easy (when we know Julia's body was moved) that the jacket goes down first, is stomped out, and Julia's body winds up on top of it at some point while she is being moved.

        I do wonder if maybe the forensics are just embarassingly wrong and the spray on the wall to the left of the fireplace is from the weapon rather than from Julia's head. If that's the case it might completely change the facts of where she was when first hit. Not sure!!!!!


        • The first strike is done with the mackintosh held up as a shield, so the bar is not soaked


          • oh , how i wish i could re-enact a video of this!


            • Originally posted by Ven View Post
              The first strike is done with the mackintosh held up as a shield, so the bar is not soaked
              Right but the bar is making direct contact with her skull and breaking it open, so I think it would get blood upon it from that impact if the mackintosh is a shield.

              Then when the jacket is actually over Julia's head it would provide a barrier so at that point whenever hit, there will be no spray and nothing will get on the bar as the bar is hitting the jacket rather than bare flesh.

              I'm rolling with your suggestion being correct but I'm not a forensic expert. What I'd really like is to get a forensic expert to look at MacFall's notes, look at the crime scene photos, and give a more accurate picture than what the forensics at the time stated... We also have the benefit of knowing (if Murphy and Gannon have the right Julia) that Julia is almost 70 rather than in her 50s, so rigor would set in much faster than they thought at the time.

              I've posted on forensics subreddits etc. many times but sadly, despite a lot of upvoting, never received an answer or opinion.


              • Holding the mack as a shield means he hit her through through the mack, so no direct contact , but this doesn't stop the initial blood spray


                • Originally posted by Ven View Post
                  Holding the mack as a shield means he hit her through through the mack, so no direct contact , but this doesn't stop the initial blood spray
                  I feel like that's not physically possible, am I wrong? How I envisioned the suggestion is that the mack is being held up spreadeagled (since that would provide the most shielding), and the bar is raised and swatted round the shield making direct contact with Julia's head.

                  I feel like to get a hard hit on the skull (which it was, since it actually broke her skull open), it would require an unimpeded strike. Striking through a jacket which is held up, I feel would remove a bit of the force unless the jacket is actually pressed onto Julia's head (or very close to it).

                  And it would also be very very difficult to shield yourself with the jacket in one hand with the other hand holding a bar striking through it... Like at most he can hold the jacket at arm's length if you imagine... And then the trajectory of the bar is downwards (so say forensics), so an up and down motion.

                  How I picture the shield idea is how Herlock described it before, which would be holding it almost like a bullfighting cape, then the free hand swinging up and down in front of it, making direct contact.


                  • yep , that's why i'd like to do a video re-enactment...

                    no blood on roof or anywhere else in house supports this


                    • Going through newspapers again... Reading carefully I see these violent housebreaking offenders WERE probably out on bail and committing their "one last spree" when Julia was killed. They committed robberies not only in Wavertree but also other parts of Liverpool and other cities.

                      This newspaper was issued on Saturday the 24th of January 1931, and says the men committed 5 robberies "last week" while out on bail, which is suggestive they were out recently. Julia was murdered on the Tuesday the week just gone.

                      The names of these men listed (there may be more who were also out at the time but weren't caught committing offences):

                      King, Paine, Hughes, Fisher, Hall.

                      King, Hughes, and Martin are responsible for the Menlove Gardens break-in. The time these gangs struck was usually between 7 and 12.

                      David Martin is a repeat offender who offended again in 1933 and was known to be a serious gangster then. He is responsible for one of the violent attacks on elderly women with Stonehouse.

                      Birtle and Fisher are described as "well dressed", they sound like Parry types. They never entered any homes, they would stand outside and collect some of the takings.

                      For reference it is listed as these men operating in two gangs of four:

                      Shipley, Paine, Birtles and Fisher.

                      Hughes, King, Stonehouse and Martin.


                      Because I believe Parry placed the call, I should like to ascertain some connection. Well the first gang of four seem less evil, Birtle and Fisher were well dressed foppish types like Parry, who never actually entered homes. Shipley the leader expresses regret at the crimes (but then he would wouldn't he), and lives half a mile from Lily Lloyd. As far as I can see he wasn't involved in any violent offences, though seeing as he's the ringleader behind these crimes, maybe he really is as bad as the others...

                      This same Shipley would fall overboard and drown 4 years later in the company of John Payne, Wavertree.

                      Parry might have a connection to Shipley, Birtle, and Fisher - and Parry was known to be desperate for money at the time. Shipley who had ties to both gangs would be aware and possibly even have a hand in the Menlove Gardens robbery as a so-called leader. That could be the link behind the genesis of "25 Menlove Gardens East". R. M. Qualtrough shows either the involvement of Marsden, or Parry remembering the name through association with Marsden.

                      Shipley shoved items down drainage grids (like stolen jewelry), which is what Parkes said Parry told him he'd done with the weapon. Shipley was from an "eminently respectable" family like Parry.

                      The killer would then probably be one of the more "violent" criminals, Stonehouse, Martin, or Hall would be good picks as all three were convicted of violent robbery against the elderly and had almost beat an old lady to death. Stonehouse took the precaution of changing shoes when entering a house which would be helpful if he was the killer in terms of avoiding footprints. Martin had broken into Menlove Gardens in December.

                      Really depends on who was out at the time but if Stonehouse or Martin were out I think they're good calls, as both, especially Stonehouse, are clearly very violent men who don't care about nearly killing random women in broad daylight. Hall seems to deny being violent with the old women he robbed...

                      These men would often break into homes by the window, the one who entered undoing the door for the other two or three who'd be waiting outside to enter. Well there's no way they entered the front bedroom without anyone seeing. The yard was very easy to scale though, and Wallace gave evidence Julia would not bolt the back kitchen door.

                      The curtains of the middle kitchen were closed when Wallace got home so I don't think the middle kitchen window was a means of entry. Maybe looking into statements regarding the middle bedroom would be helpful.


                      If this gang is also responsible for the "Anfield housebreakings" then their conviction after January 24th would provide one explanation as to why those robberies suddenly stopped.

                      There was no forced entry in any Anfield case. What's interesting though is that police assumed that meant dupe key, when it's also possible they did something like enter a window and undo the door from inside.

                      Stonehouse would gain entry into homes by climbing drain pipes and entering an upper story window. Well... Here's the Wallace's back yard:


                      The gang entered homes in the temporary absence of the homeowners usually, which is what happened at 19 Wolverton Street in December.


                      • Given how vicious a few of these thugs are, I truly would not be shocked if, rather than a distraction robbery or sneak thieving, they would simply be like:

                        Gain entry -> knock out old lady -> steal insurance money -> run.

                        In an earlier robbery, the owner of the house had knocked while the intruders were still inside and the crooks were going through a cash box.

                        There's crazy stuff in some of these news articles, I'm not sure why I haven't posted them all yet. I will get them up shortly.


                        I recall on the Radio City show Parkes said Parry had gone back to the garage the next day with "another man". Albeit no mention is made of violence. But during the missing call-in part, didn't others say that Parry had come with two other men issuing threats?

                        Was a physical description ever given?
                        Last edited by WallaceWackedHer; 02-02-2020, 05:22 PM.


                        • Remember there were two "door to door salesmen" knocking on doors on Wolverton Street the day of the murder?

                          Amy Wallace said she thought Julia would allow strangers into the home had they called given her kind nature and how cold the weather was.

                          Say this M.O. is employed at 29 Wolverton Street. Boys knock with some bogus inquiry... Julia invites them into the house... At this time someone's clibming the drain pipe at the back of the house and getting in an upstairs window, as was what was done in other break-ins committed by this group.


                          Let me get these all posted up in full.
                          Last edited by WallaceWackedHer; 02-02-2020, 05:49 PM.


                          • Okay here you go, check these newspaper clippings:


                            The newspaper issue I thought was the 24th (mentioning 5 housebreakings the gang committed "last week" while awaiting trial) is actually the 28th.

                            This means the boys were definitely out and free on the streets in the middle of their "one final spree" when Julia was murdered. These housebreakings were not confined to Allerton like the ones they were accused of having committed previously, but extended all the way over to Southport, and even across the river into Wallasey.


                            • One issue with the idea of throwing the coat over Julia and hitting her through it is that there would have been brain matter and hair on the coat but none was found. I’ve talked to Antony about this and he agrees. Also, how could we account for the blood spatter on the walls?


                              “ Herlock is the cleverest man that I’ve ever met.” - Stephen Hawking.
                              “ I wish that I could have achieved half as much as Herlock.”- Neil Armstrong.
                              “ What a voice Herlock has.” - Luciano Pavarotti.
                              “ I wish that I could dump Harry for Herlock.” - Meghan Markle.
                              “ I know that it’s not good to be jealous but I just can’t help it.” - John Holmes.


                              • Originally posted by Ven View Post
                                The first strike is done with the mackintosh held up as a shield, so the bar is not soaked
                                I do believe that if the first blow was delivered onto the head with a reasonably weighted blunt weapon, even with considerable force , then little or no blood would have issued forth. The victim would naturally crumple and slump to the ground .If a tussle of some kind occurs first , where the woman is manhandled into the mantelpiece, this would facilitate burning of the bottom of the clothing, as alluded to earlier. It’s the following frenzied few moments that speaks to us of ‘maniac’ , a person with intense hatred in their hearts. This was not someone who just wanted to kill her, because two further heavy blows would surely have sufficed. This was like a person possessed with demons, wanting to obliterate the head of a frail little elderly lady. For this reason I’ve always had the ‘attempted burglar,’ as a poor second.
                                As we know ,the biggest percentage of people murdered (outside of terror attacks) is by persons known to the victim, and I think this is the case here. Since the Macintosh is trapped under the body I would suggest that the killer uses something else to hand. If anyone wanted to experiment with the gruesome re-enactment , I would suggest taking a good sized melon into the back garden ,kneel beside it with a bath towel as a shield, and go at it with lets say, a cars ‘tyre iron’ . Don’t let the neighbours see you though, since the appropriate authorities may take you away for assessment.
                                Hold the towel up to your eye level so you can just see the melon, then as you bring down the nut wrench with as much force as you can muster, pull the towel up to the top of your head just a millisecond before contact. Repeat this ten times, Melon ,I would wager would be all across your garden ,and although a couple of splotches would have made it on to the Towel , You will find your person will not have been soiled in any way.
                                Wallace I believe to have been the killer ,possibly as a victim himself to a long time bigoted relationship as mentioned in previous posts , with a woman who taunted his strange sexual preferences, and maybe even threatened him with exposure.
                                The notion of Joseph as the ‘red herring’ tram rider, works really well for me, wish we knew more of his movements.
                                P.S. Be sure and burn the towel on a back yard fire, (to destroy the evidence)preferably coal to simulate the Wallace kitchen fire grate.
                                Last edited by moste; 02-03-2020, 01:02 AM. Reason: Extra thought.