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

[WallaceWackedHer]

So your leaning toward an Anfield burglary gang then?

Well, somewhat, but with a twist in the involvement of Gordon and probably Marsden.

The reason I say this is that the house at Menlove Gardens was hit by them one month earlier. If it wasn't for that evidence there would not be anything in particular to say "yeah these are the guys alright", because many different housebreakers used the same exact techniques. But IMO that is kind of suggestive as they would definitely be familiar enough with the streets there to know that East isn't real - or even just that West/East would be odd numbers unless the 25 is pot luck. These guys hit around 30 homes in Allerton - 20 to 30 homes were also hit in Anfield.

I will say, given Parry called, there is a chance he was told to say West but messed up saying East.

But given that familiarity with Menlove Gardens (it's not like the Gardens were regularly burgled...), in combination with some other aspects of how housebreaker gangs operate like the use of drainage grids, and the blatant involvement of Parry (for at least the call - and more unless Parkes is a complete and utter liar), AND the fact they were out purposefully going on a crime bender before they'd be jailed while out awaiting trial...

I think it paints a picture.

And what I think is this:

Gordon Parry (who was a thief as we know), knew someone who was either part of that gang or knew members of it... And thus would be familiar with Menlove Gardens. Either Marsden is also involved or Parry knew of the Qualtrough name through him and used it in hopes Wallace would recognize the name as being a Prudential client and assume it's a genuine business call without digging into it so they could loot the insurance money when it'd have the most in it.

This man he knew may have been the accomplice.

The criminals who broke in at Menlove Gardens South had disposed of stuff at the corner of the Gardens where it meets Menlove Avenue... If you search Menlove Gardens on the newspaper archive it's like, random meaningless mentions, then suddenly reports of this gang breaking in there followed right after that by reports on Wallace being lured out there.

Now when the crime was committed, although in other robberies they did manage to find cash boxes etc. with Gordon being involved they're going to know exactly where it is and expect there to be a lot of money in there being the night before pay-in day.

Julia looks like she had brought someone into the house IMO. I say this because although she might go into the parlour to play piano like Wallace said she sometimes did while he was at chess, the appearance to me is a tad more consistent with her admitting someone.

Amy Wallace said if any stranger had called at the door, her kind nature would mean she'd admit them to keep them out of the cold. These are 16 or 17 year old youths here so likely would be viewed less as a threat too.

Fred Birtles and Robert Fisher would sometimes knock at homes in advance with a fake inquiry as a kind of recon before the gang broke in - like Parry they were "well dressed" so probably would give off a more trustworthy impression. If they got an answer, Julia may have grabbed the first thing she saw to go answer the door (like you may do when rushing to answer door for the postman), and if Amy's right would invite them in.

At the back of the house at this exact same time someone is gaining entry through the back and taking off their boots as we know they did. Maybe they get into the home by climbing a drainpipe and entering an upper story window since that was what they usually did. Although it is true some gangs used skeleton keys... Either way, they find a way in without forcing anything.

They go for the cashbox and make noise, Julia notices, the person(s) in the parlour bash her over the head. Of course, these criminals are a very particularly nasty bunch and beat 70 year old women to near death before so there's also a chance they just straight up bash her without provocation if, for example, they thought it would make it easier to rob the place or she had something on her they wanted.

RARE TIDBIT: Wallace muttered about Julia's rings being missing from her fingers. If those weren't found, it's not true that only the cash box was looted.

Wallace barely ever went into the spare bedroom, so unless he was super intimately familiar with Julia's possessions I wouldn't rely on his accuracy on saying nothing's touched. And nobody mention the mink coat please, that's like the most conspicuous thing to try to run away carrying lol.

---

What are your honest thoughts on this guys?

The call is a unique thing (though: one contemporary book said fake calls to get people out of the house was a common trick??????)... But the indications towards that group of people overrides that one slight difference.

A lot of stars align. Though if not for the Menlove Gardens break in it would sound Slemen-tier to go in on them like they had anything to do with it. Lol. I am basically building a case on that alone - and then some other things e.g. drainage grids, "one final spree", yadda yadda, fit.

[John G]

As I've argued before, the only way a case can be made against Wallace is by creating some sort of Marvel Comic super anti-hero, equipped with a number of special powers. And it's argued that is not only plausible but likeky!

Thus, it requires a complete rejection of the foresnic evidence by a number of experts, Even though those asserting the theory are not forensic experts and didn't view the crime scene.

Thus, the unanimous view of the forensic experts is that the assailant would have blood on his person. Even Dr McFall, who made a number of errors and was a witness for the prosecution, conceded this, agreeing that the assailant would at least have hot blood on his left hand and lower down.

If you considet the crime scene there was blood splatter everywhere-6 foot high on the walls, and low down on the violin case, for example.

How did Super Shield Man avoid all of this? If he holds his super shield too high the bottom half of his body would be unprotected and he wouldn't be able to see. Too low and the lower half of the body is unprotected. And the hand holding the weapon is also unprotected.

Neither would he have heen able to predict the direction of blood flow- unless that was another of his special powers- so such a strategy would be a crazy gamble anyway.

Neither has any sensible explanation been provided for how he disposed of the murder weapon, unless he also had the power to make solid objects invisible.

If he was Qualtrough then he also had the ability to disguise his voice so effectively that a man who knew him for eight years didn't recognise it, despite the fact that there is zero evidence he could mimic voices, so presumably this was another special power.

He would also have to have committed all the elements of the crime in super quick time and be completely dependent on Close noting and remembering the time he called, and to be honest about it (he did neither of those things) even though Close didn't call at a regular time and didn't even have a watch. It was only by a miracle that Wallace was provided with an alibi, i.e. by James Wildman, something he couldn't possibly have predicted, unless foresight was another of his many special powers. Oh dear, at least against Parry we have some evidence of substance, i.e. Parkes' evidence, which was believed by Dolly Atkinson, someone who actually knew him at the time, not just someone who's never met him, but has decided they can perfectly assess his character, i.e. veracity, on the basis of a short radio broadcast.

Against all of this implausability, explaining how Wallace couldn't have done It, what evidence is there that he did do it? Er..there isn't any!

[moste]

Moste, the housebreakers who robbed Menlove Gardens South a month before Julia was killed (and who were out awaiting trial indulging in what they term "a final spree" when Julia was killed), were viciously assaulting women of over 70 years old in broad daylight to make off with their purse.

It actually seems like these people would not have any issue whatsoever with battering Julia - in fact I'm not sure they would even bother with a plan to avoid detection, these seem like the absolute worst of society who would legitimately just batter her without caring. And of course, MacFall the "expert" said both 3 to 4 blows, as well as 11 to 12, or whatever it was...

He also gave two different times of death.

Other criminals who had been caught having very brutally murdered a person during commissioning of a robbery, in more than one case caving the person's skull in with a blunt instrument, said they had done so because "dead men don't tell tales." I saw more than one report of this, dead women with extensive head wounds in their own apartment/home.

It seems like criminals back then were far more callous than even the worst burglars we see today.

So your leaning toward an Anfield burglary gang then?

[WallaceWackedHer]

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.

Moste, the housebreakers who robbed Menlove Gardens South a month before Julia was killed (and who were out awaiting trial indulging in what they term "a final spree" when Julia was killed), were viciously assaulting women of over 70 years old in broad daylight to make off with their purse.

It actually seems like these people would not have any issue whatsoever with battering Julia - in fact I'm not sure they would even bother with a plan to avoid detection, these seem like the absolute worst of society who would legitimately just batter her without caring. And of course, MacFall the "expert" said both 3 to 4 blows, as well as 11 to 12, or whatever it was...

He also gave two different times of death.

Other criminals who had been caught having very brutally murdered a person during commissioning of a robbery, in more than one case caving the person's skull in with a blunt instrument, said they had done so because "dead men don't tell tales." I saw more than one report of this, dead women with extensive head wounds in their own apartment/home.

It seems like criminals back then were far more callous than even the worst burglars we see today.

[moste]

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.

McFall, was a self centred, egotistical ,pompous jerk to all accounts. He made a complete hash of his involvement with his post mortem of Julia and his account as a witness, (reading between the lines of the eminent pathologist Keith Simpson,) should have rendered him,‘not required in court’

[moste]

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.

[Herlock Sholmes]

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?

[WallaceWackedHer]

Okay here you go, check these newspaper clippings:

https://www.williamherbertwallace.com/case-files/housebreaker-news-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.

[WallaceWackedHer]

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.

[WallaceWackedHer]

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?

[WallaceWackedHer]

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:

http://www.williamherbertwallace.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/scullery.jpg

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

[Ven]

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

no blood on roof or anywhere else in house supports this

[WallaceWackedHer]

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.

[Ven]

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

[WallaceWackedHer]

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.