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

[Herlock Sholmes]

. printed for the tram, it's in the trial. Someone said they actually lept onto a moving tram after sprinting for it which Oliver questioned them on (though the officer said that while they indeed sprinted for it, the tram had stopped - it wasn't still moving).

Fothergill said when asked that they used a - good walking speed. The phrase - jump on a tram - was used by Hemmerde. A turn of phrase.

Prendergast basically just relays the time the journey took.

Hill said nothing about how fast they were walking.

Gillroy ditto.

Oliver also makes no mention of the speed walked.

I can see no evidence that the so-called Anfield Harriers did anything untoward to arrive at the times stated.

[Herlock Sholmes]

.

Look up how long it takes to walk 500 yards (literally to just walk it, zero deliveries etc.). That's the distance Alan walked. That's an adult's walking speed too. 6.30 is wrong, that's proof.

A scientist online, using what he considered an average walking time, got it to approximately 5.5 minutes. Obviously this is without collecting milk from the shop and making two deliveries.

We don’t know two things, a) how long these stops took and b) how quickly Allan Close walked.

Firstly, it’s not at all impossible that a fit young lad (perhaps eager to finish his rounds so that he could meet up with friends) might have walked quicker than the average time. We can’t know this but it’s possible.

Secondly, he collects milk that’s already waiting on the counter for him - how long? Possibly 10 seconds.

Thirdly, he delivers milk in Letchworth Street. How long for him to knock on the door, have it opened, he hands over the milk (I’m unsure if the customer took bottles or filled a jug but Close just said - took the milk in. Is it impossible that this was the work of a minute or so?

Fourthly, he drops of milk in a garden in Richmond Park. How long? Another 10 seconds.

So combined we get something like 6.75 minutes. Then we have to consider Close’s walking speed. Not everyone walks at an average speed. So it’s not at all impossible that he might have trimmed say 45 seconds off the time leaving 6 minutes.

They reconstructed the walk twice and got times of 5 and 6 minutes.

I see nothing at all impossible or unlikely in any of this. With the Johnston’s and the Holme’s pointing at 6.30 this tends us to look closer to 6.30 than 6.45. Wildman was confident that he was correct of course but why is he more reliable than Close? We can’t be certain but I see no reason for assuming that the police got Close to lie or exagerate. Either way there was enough time for Wallace to have killed Julia.

[WallaceWackedHer]

Hi Moste,

I’ve just tried this ‘reaching’ experiment myself. I’m 6’2”. (Actually I’d always thought that Wallace was 6’4” but I haven’t checked or whether we know his exact height.) The shelves in our kitchen are pretty much 7’ high but we have one that’s nearer 7’8.”

I can reach a box from the 7’ one without a problem. And I know this isn’t completely accurate but I tried taking around 3” off my height by bending my knees (witnessed by someone else to check) and I could still, with a little difficulty, reach the box. This would have made me around 5’9.” We also have to take into consideration that someone of 5’9” might simply have stood on tiptoes. On tiptoes I can just about reach from the 7’8” shelf by the way.

Ive always believed that the cupboard with the door broken off was near to the hallway door and nowhere near the bookshelves. I can’t recall where I got this from though.

At 6'2 your limbs are also longer. I have to edge tins off the top of the kitchen cabinets at a definite 5'11 (though usually I stand on a stool). I think a shorter man would have to step up onto something as a matter of necessity.

Is it possible to find the evidence about the cabinet door?

Looking at the photo again I can't see anything on the right side of the room where the door to the hallway would be, but in any case I think the person would have used their hand on the mantelpiece above the kitchen stove to hoist themselves up. There is a vase right on the brink which might be slightly deterring to someone but overall I think that would be the best option considering the other options are like, shelves.

Re: the tram time tests I looked again and as it turns out, it was actually one of the police officers who said they jumped onto a moving tram. So I guess that is true they really did do that.

A reasonable time seems to be about 18 minutes. If Wallace was very lucky he could have left his back door at 6.48 and hopped the second tram without a wait time. With moderate luck, 6.45 (the exact time he said he left), and with absolutely tragic luck, 6.42. This gives him a window of 4 to 10 minutes given Wildman's time seems correct for Close.

Everything would be staged either prior to the killing or after returning home; nothing but the killing, stamping out of the burning jacket, turning off lights, putting on the other jacket, a brief mirror check, and perhaps a very quick face wipe with a wet cloth needs to be accounted for... Though we must knock off a minute at the very least for Julia to actually go into the parlour and go to light the fireplace after closing the door... So realistically he has 3 to 9 minutes to kill her and leave the house. If we go straight down the middle (which is the fairest of course), say 6 minutes.

I think the extent of burning on the jacket could potentially give a good indication of the time as well. More burning = more time after catching light before it was put out. No doubt the person would have put it out quite quickly in whatever case, but in a case where seconds and minutes count it could help.

As for the weapon it could easily be wrapped in newspaper and then the weapon needn't ever even be removed from the house. In fact if he killed her I think that's precisely what he did.

Wallace is either 6'2 or 6'2.5 by the way. He wrote his height and hat size at the start of every diary he kept lol.

[WallaceWackedHer]

There really is very little issue with Close’s testimony when you read it in full. This was a 14 year old boy being grilled in court by someone trying to show that he was wrong or lying. Cross didn’t waiver on his timings though. He saw the clock at 6.25. He did the route on a reconstruction twice with the police (including deliveries etc) and was timed at 6 minutes and 5 minutes. He didn’t have lots of deliveries. He went into his dads shop on Sedley Street and his cans were on the counter waiting for him so he was in and out. Then he made a delivery in Letchworth Street (knocking at the door in the same way as with Julia) He then goes into Richmond Park and makes one delivery (by simply placing two bottles in the garden) Then it was on to Number 29.

So he basically popped into the shop to pick up milk that was on the counter waiting for him then made a delivery in Letchworth Street then dropped two bottles into a garden on the way to number 29 Wolverton Street. 5 or 6 minutes. I can’t see much of an issue here for a healthy 14 year old lad. Even if we stretch it to 8 minutes it gets him to number 29 at 6.33. Doubling it to 10 minutes still gets him there at 6.35. No issues here for me.

Close said that he’d previously told the other children that he’d been in Wolverton Street and had seen Mrs Wallace between 6.30 and 6.45 which was perfectly true if I inexact. They mention 6.45 and obviously the Defence latch onto this time.

So, to sum up, we have Close’s quite detailed statement backed up by two police reconstructions. We also have Close being firm on this under cross-examination that he would have gotten to number 29 at around 6.30. We have Mrs Johnston saying that the milk was delivered around 6.30 and the Holme’s saying that they heard a knock on the Wallace’s door at around 6.30. Then we have Wildman believing that he’d seen Close at the door of number 29 at around 6.37/6.38.

So who to believe? Or is it likely that the accurate time is somewhere in between? Remember, two adults put the time nearer to 6.30. Either way it wasn’t 6.45 when Julia was last seen alive. There is no problem with the time available for William to have killed Julia unless we have Wallace walking around number 29 like Neil Armstrong on the moon.

Look up how long it takes to walk 500 yards (literally to just walk it, zero deliveries etc.). That's the distance Alan walked. That's an adult's walking speed too. 6.30 is wrong, that's proof.

The police outright said they sprinted for the tram, it's in the trial. Someone said they actually lept onto a moving tram after sprinting for it which Oliver questioned them on (though the officer said that while they indeed sprinted for it, the tram had stopped - it wasn't still moving).

Roland Oliver again used the distance to show that some of the officers in these tests were "walking" at 7.5 mph to arrive at the times they gave. Which is quite literally jogging if you step on a treadmill and set that speed. That's far beyond even fast walking.

These things are actual mathematically proveable facts (as well as being admitted to in court) so it really can't be argued at all. Hence the snide "Anfield harriers" moniker from the defence.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Quote.“About the cash box being on that 7 foot high shelf. Surely anyone of average height could have reached it from the ground?”

Hi, HS. I’m 5’ 9”. and can’t reach a 7 foot shelf in my kitchen without the use of our step stool ,and average height in 1931 was something like 5’ 7”, I believe. Anyway, Wallace at 6’ 2” would not have a problem with the shelf height, consequently either a burglar ( hence the murderer) had tried to use the cupboard door as a peg up , Wallace if guilty took this business into account by making the intruder appear much shorter than himself, cunning ploy ? Or was he not that smart? I say he was.

Hi Moste,

I’ve just tried this ‘reaching’ experiment myself. I’m 6’2”. (Actually I’d always thought that Wallace was 6’4” but I haven’t checked or whether we know his exact height.) The shelves in our kitchen are pretty much 7’ high but we have one that’s nearer 7’8.”

I can reach a box from the 7’ one without a problem. And I know this isn’t completely accurate but I tried taking around 3” off my height by bending my knees (witnessed by someone else to check) and I could still, with a little difficulty, reach the box. This would have made me around 5’9.” We also have to take into consideration that someone of 5’9” might simply have stood on tiptoes. On tiptoes I can just about reach from the 7’8” shelf by the way.

Ive always believed that the cupboard with the door broken off was near to the hallway door and nowhere near the bookshelves. I can’t recall where I got this from though.

[Herlock Sholmes]

. It's conspiracy to say the police manufactured a time when they admitted to literally sprinting to get the tram? It's pretty blatant they were going to make it fit whether it did or not, and them sprinting in reconstructions proves that.

Where do we have proof that they sprinted?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I can see RodCrosby has been coming online but has so far not posted anything. I would really like the missing part of the Radio City show for reasons of completionism and transparency. For the benefit of the general public.

I hope Rod will be so kind as to upload the missing section, or that someone can track down the call in segment of the Radio City show.

Of course I will credit him for it as I did for the John Bull articles (which were higher quality images than the ones I took of them).

There might be a chance that he doesn’t have it WWH. He posted the other three so I can’t see why he’d have omitted the fourth one?

[Herlock Sholmes]

It's conspiracy to say the police manufactured a time when they admitted to literally sprinting to get the tram? It's pretty blatant they were going to make it fit whether it did or not, and them sprinting in reconstructions proves that.

Roland Oliver says Alan's journey is 500 yards. He did not make that trip in 5 minutes while also carrying milk jugs and knocking on doors and emptying and collecting jugs etc. That is more than a 5 minute walk for an adult even without knocking on doors etc. Like 6 minutes even if you were legitimately just walking and not delivering anything.

He didn't do it in 5 minutes. He simply didn't. That should be accepted as a fact. Wildman's time is clearly more accurate. That's the reality.

There's evidence the jacket caught light and was stomped out. Julia's body was pulled out of the fire and dropped on top of it. That's what fits. The defence's proposition is absolutely the most likely. I mean even in one motion because Julia was ultimately moved... The placement of her feet is literally in the opposite direction than it would be when struck unless McFall is COMPLETELY incompetent... So her body was 100% definitely without a doubt moved, and very reasonably ended up on top of the raincoat which was already at that point on the rug.

There really is very little issue with Close’s testimony when you read it in full. This was a 14 year old boy being grilled in court by someone trying to show that he was wrong or lying. Cross didn’t waiver on his timings though. He saw the clock at 6.25. He did the route on a reconstruction twice with the police (including deliveries etc) and was timed at 6 minutes and 5 minutes. He didn’t have lots of deliveries. He went into his dads shop on Sedley Street and his cans were on the counter waiting for him so he was in and out. Then he made a delivery in Letchworth Street (knocking at the door in the same way as with Julia) He then goes into Richmond Park and makes one delivery (by simply placing two bottles in the garden) Then it was on to Number 29.

So he basically popped into the shop to pick up milk that was on the counter waiting for him then made a delivery in Letchworth Street then dropped two bottles into a garden on the way to number 29 Wolverton Street. 5 or 6 minutes. I can’t see much of an issue here for a healthy 14 year old lad. Even if we stretch it to 8 minutes it gets him to number 29 at 6.33. Doubling it to 10 minutes still gets him there at 6.35. No issues here for me.

Close said that he’d previously told the other children that he’d been in Wolverton Street and had seen Mrs Wallace between 6.30 and 6.45 which was perfectly true if I inexact. They mention 6.45 and obviously the Defence latch onto this time.

So, to sum up, we have Close’s quite detailed statement backed up by two police reconstructions. We also have Close being firm on this under cross-examination that he would have gotten to number 29 at around 6.30. We have Mrs Johnston saying that the milk was delivered around 6.30 and the Holme’s saying that they heard a knock on the Wallace’s door at around 6.30. Then we have Wildman believing that he’d seen Close at the door of number 29 at around 6.37/6.38.

So who to believe? Or is it likely that the accurate time is somewhere in between? Remember, two adults put the time nearer to 6.30. Either way it wasn’t 6.45 when Julia was last seen alive. There is no problem with the time available for William to have killed Julia unless we have Wallace walking around number 29 like Neil Armstrong on the moon.

[WallaceWackedHer]

Quote.“About the cash box being on that 7 foot high shelf. Surely anyone of average height could have reached it from the ground?”

Hi, HS. I’m 5’ 9”. and can’t reach a 7 foot shelf in my kitchen without the use of our step stool ,and average height in 1931 was something like 5’ 7”, I believe. Anyway, Wallace at 6’ 2” would not have a problem with the shelf height, consequently either a burglar ( hence the murderer) had tried to use the cupboard door as a peg up , Wallace if guilty took this business into account by making the intruder appear much shorter than himself, cunning ploy ? Or was he not that smart? I say he was.

I don't feel he's that intelligent with that type of thinking. There's decent evidence he's not very good at thinking ahead, not just in his chess skills, but in aspects of his trip around Menlove Gardens - whether real OR fake.

I very much agree with the leg up thing (probably using the cabinet lid as a hand grip as he pulled himself up) and I think it's a plausible suggestion for how that cabinet "lid" came to be broken. Though I cannot manage to see where this so-called lid is or what it came off of, though I've studied the photograph many times.

If Wallace were to empty that cash box, it would be more natural that he would take it down and then empty it, since his feet will be firmly planted on the ground and he can actually do so without trouble. So in that case, he has actually gone to the trouble of putting it back up. This absolutely makes no sense at all in any scenario, except that it was "instinct" to put it back because he's used to doing it. I think that's a poor excuse for something that can't really be explained.

If you imagine a shorter man has stepped up to reach that box, to take it down he has to cradle the box with one hand/arm and then carefully lower himself down. I don't think he could use both hands unless he were standing on an object with more foot space (such as a chair), although it would still be natural to use one hand for some kind of support even then. That would be as opposed to simply remaining where he is and emptying the contents there and then, without ever stepping down onto the ground.

That is a reasonable explanation for why the cash box is up on the shelf, and in my estimation is better than having to excuse the behavior as habit (in a man who - apparently - has this criminal genius tier skill of pre-empting things).

[moste]

Quote.“About the cash box being on that 7 foot high shelf. Surely anyone of average height could have reached it from the ground?”

Hi, HS. I’m 5’ 9”. and can’t reach a 7 foot shelf in my kitchen without the use of our step stool ,and average height in 1931 was something like 5’ 7”, I believe. Anyway, Wallace at 6’ 2” would not have a problem with the shelf height, consequently either a burglar ( hence the murderer) had tried to use the cupboard door as a peg up , Wallace if guilty took this business into account by making the intruder appear much shorter than himself, cunning ploy ? Or was he not that smart? I say he was.

[WallaceWackedHer]

I can see RodCrosby has been coming online but has so far not posted anything. I would really like the missing part of the Radio City show for reasons of completionism and transparency. For the benefit of the general public.

I hope Rod will be so kind as to upload the missing section, or that someone can track down the call in segment of the Radio City show.

Of course I will credit him for it as I did for the John Bull articles (which were higher quality images than the ones I took of them).

[WallaceWackedHer]

It's conspiracy to say the police manufactured a time when they admitted to literally sprinting to get the tram? It's pretty blatant they were going to make it fit whether it did or not, and them sprinting in reconstructions proves that.

Roland Oliver says Alan's journey is 500 yards. He did not make that trip in 5 minutes while also carrying milk jugs and knocking on doors and emptying and collecting jugs etc. That is more than a 5 minute walk for an adult even without knocking on doors etc. Like 6 minutes even if you were legitimately just walking and not delivering anything.

He didn't do it in 5 minutes. He simply didn't. That should be accepted as a fact. Wildman's time is clearly more accurate. That's the reality.

There's evidence the jacket caught light and was stomped out. Julia's body was pulled out of the fire and dropped on top of it. That's what fits. The defence's proposition is absolutely the most likely. I mean even in one motion because Julia was ultimately moved... The placement of her feet is literally in the opposite direction than it would be when struck unless McFall is COMPLETELY incompetent... So her body was 100% definitely without a doubt moved, and very reasonably ended up on top of the raincoat which was already at that point on the rug.

[Herlock Sholmes]

There are various aspects of the case that I have varying levels of confidence in. One that I have a high level of confidence in is the question of the mackintosh. I’d say that it would have been pretty close to impossible under any circumstances for the mackintosh to have ended up where it did by chance. How could she have had it over her shoulders, get whacked on the head and ended up with her head to the door and the mackintosh bunched up underneath her body? Ditto if she was, for some unknown reason, holding it in her hands. It had to be a deliberate placement and that points to Wallace alone.

The evidence points to Close being at the Wallace’s earlier than 6.45. I see nothing wrong with the reconstructed timings. I think that we go into conspiracy theory territory if we accuse the police of manufacturing a time. Initially Close had said between 6.30 and 6.45. We can also add that the Holme’s heard a knock at the Wallace’s front door at around 6.30 (this could only have been Close.) Wildman was an impressive witness who even explained how he always checked the clock to moderate his delivery times. He said that he was in Wolverton Street at 6.35 and he saw Close at the Wallace’s door with the door open waiting for the jug at 6.37/6.38. Wildman was the last survivor of the case and was alive when Murphy wrote his book. He remained absolutely adamant that his timing was correct. Then we have Mrs Johnston who said that the milk was delivered at “about 6.30 that night.” I think that we can say that Julia Wallace closed the door on Allan Close sometime between 6.33 and 6.38.

[WallaceWackedHer]

I haven’t gotten around to reading anything from your second visit yet but I intend to over the weekend. As for the missing cash Wallace said that there was “....one pound Treasury note; ten shilling Treasury notes; about 30 or 40 shillings in silver; a Postal Order for four shillings and six pence...and a cheque....for five pounds seventeen shillings...” So that was 11 notes in total. Rod used to say something to the effect that the notes upstairs were no good to any thief for some reason. I can’t recall why not though.

If Wallace did take the cash upstairs when he got home this gives us another reason why he avoided the Parlour

About the cash box being on that 7 foot high shelf. Surely anyone of average height could have reached it from the ground?

I can’t recall Wallace mentioning the coins tbh.

I will not discuss the parlour thing lmao. But yes that is a reason he might have gone upstairs. About the shillings and notes and all this, is this something we can say is true? Because I mean if it was shown there were four pound notes in the cash box, and then just so happened to be bloodied four pound notes upstairs in a random "ornament" (jam pot) that is clearly incredible important.

Rod is wrong about the notes upstairs what is he talking about? If there is an intruder it's quite possible he didn't go upstairs at all in my view. If he did leave those notes, he left them BECAUSE of the blood smear he saw he had created (or because Wallace knocked on the door or w.e. causing him to abort his actions). But as per how the case was put on trial, just like with the clot on the toilet pan it's ambiguous and therefore probably dangerous to use in any sort of argument.

Really a lot of my thinking on the "intruder going upstairs" thing could be swayed by whether I can confirm Slemen's claim that the burglary a month prior also had the upstairs bedroom with random pillows and blankets tossed around. I will say, that so far, everything he has said and I have checked has turned out to be true. I have not found anything he has claimed to be a lie - for example I verified the names of the residents he claimed had been burgled and they were indeed living at the address he says and which had been robbed... And because of the VERYYYY obscure and weird mention in Johnston's alleged confession regarding the cat, I do believe he really did say that (but he had dementia, so.........). Only someone very aquainted with the case and the Wallaces would pick up something like that.

Of course if that is true (about the earlier burglary having the fake-ransacked bedroom), it seems like there is some sort of common M.O. there which absolutely can't be ignored.

...

You could not reach that box from the ground. I'm 5'11 and can't reach on top of some of the cabinets in my kitchen - if I do I have to use my fingertips to edge stuff off and catch it. It was a little over 7 feet high too (the surveyor said 7'2")... If you did try to reach it from the ground you'd have a damn hard time doing it... And back then the average height was shorter wasn't it.

The defence's suggestion about that raincoat is very reasonable. The fact is that if it was around her shoulders, it is somewhat "attached" to her body... Not so much as if her arms were in it, but still, in a position where I don't think it would just fall straight to the ground. But more importantly - there is evidence the mackintosh caught light and was stamped out (fragments on the hearth rug apparently indicate this)... I can see this happening, then Julia being yanked out by her hair and thus ending up in the position in which she was found - on top of the jacket which had been stamped out on the rug. If any part of Julia's body was on that mackintosh when the mackintosh was yanked out, that could also have shifted her body along with it.

I actually think other suggestions are very difficult to envision. There are so many things that I can think are wrong with the suggestions... Even very minor points like how if the killer was WEARING the jacket which had caught light, you'd probably expect part of his clothing to become singed unless he was nude... And if he was nude he has to get dressed after which adds on time. That's just a minor thing but there is so much - it's very difficult to make it work in your mind's eye.

The defence's proposition however, works, if she was rising from the fireplace or alternatively, midway through bending down while looking towards the assailant.

...

If Wallace is involved in Julia's death I think the evidence is highly suggestive that it had to be a hit job. The open newspaper is practically as good of an indicator as the arrival of the milk boy but not much is made of it. It is possible Julia decided to start reading the paper exactly as it arrived of course, but yet again it's something that's cutting more and more into treading the line of time... And with fingering Wallace as the killer, ANYTHING that could remotely suggest a later time of death is always going to be a bad thing.

And Wallace, he has to get the trams all with zero wait time if he left at the later times suggested by the police, plus the officers who did those tram time tests, some admitted they had sprinted. Milk boy Alan Close, to make the trip in the time the police """reconstruction""" came up with, just to WALK THAT DISTANCE WITHOUT EVEN DELIVERING MILK (500 yards) would take over 5 minutes for an adult, that's without the emptying of milk jugs or waiting at doors etc. So frankly their reconstructed time is a complete and utter farce. I see no reason why it should not just be disregarded entirely. Alan Close did NOT arrive in Wolverton Street 5 or 6 minutes after viewing the clock. He did not!!!!!

[Herlock Sholmes]

. Or a hit job as suggested by Gannon. AKA someone has gone in there expressly to murder her for some reason.

The issue with this of course is that we can’t name a single person who might have wanted Julia dead apart from William. Her social circle was exceedingly narrow so who could she have upset or offended so badly? It’s not impossible of course as we can never know everything that went on.