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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[WallaceWackedHer]

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.

It's literally proven he couldn't do that at walking speed - even purely walking and doing NOTHING else he has to be speeding to get 5 minutes, which is one of the times they apparently fairly got in the "reconstructions".

It is not 6.30. It's not. Really. If you want to suggest he's jogging around even though nobody has ever suggested such a thing (e.g. Elsie Wright who crossed paths with him) then you can do that. But if he's walking at an ordinary pace he's not making it in 5 minutes.

The fact they ever got 5 minutes proves they are forcing him to speed walk (at the LEAST). Much like their sprinting leaps onto moving trams to get the time they wanted in the tram "reconstructions".

The reality is this: They felt 100% certain Wallace did it, but didn't think they could convince a jury if they told the actual truth that he would have about 5 to 10 minutes. Surely in part because they're failing to see the possibility that staging of a burglary could be done both before the murder or even on his return home.

I can promise you the times in their reconstructions are wholly inaccurate. There's really no question about it. It's a fact. If they're sprinting and jumping onto trams like a Bond movie (which I hope you can admit is unfair), what are the odds they're doing a fair recreation of the milk round?

[WallaceWackedHer]

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.

They literally said they sprinted to reach the tram, and that they got onto a moving tram car. Literally in black and white in those exact words. No ambiguity.

Some of them aren't even getting on at the tram stop Wallace claimed. Which is a smart idea given he could have lied, but obviously a note should be made of that.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Wildman had previously told his mother that he’d seen Close at the Wallace’s door at around 6.35. He later said 6.37 as he claimed to have seen that the time was 6.35 (by the clock) and that it took him 2 minutes to get to the Wallace’s (to deliver a newspaper next door.) He attempted to explain why he’d said 6.35 to his mother by saying that he was in a hurry which Hemmerde explained was hardly a timesaver, saying 6.35 instead of 6.37. I recall Murphy making a point about the hands of the clock. He visited the area and looked up at the clock from the position that Wildman had done and found that it would have been quite easy to have misread the clock by a couple of minutes due to the angle and the hands.

[Herlock Sholmes]

They literally said they sprinted to reach the tram, and that they got onto a moving tram car. Literally in black and white in those exact words. No ambiguity.

Some of them aren't even getting on at the tram stop Wallace claimed. Which is a smart idea given he could have lied, but obviously a note should be made of that.

Where did they say this? I’ve just re-read their testimony and no walking speeds were mentioned except for Fothergill’s “good walking speed” reply.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It's literally proven he couldn't do that at walking speed - even purely walking and doing NOTHING else he has to be speeding to get 5 minutes, which is one of the times they apparently fairly got in the "reconstructions".

It is not 6.30. It's not. Really. If you want to suggest he's jogging around even though nobody has ever suggested such a thing (e.g. Elsie Wright who crossed paths with him) then you can do that. But if he's walking at an ordinary pace he's not making it in 5 minutes.

The fact they ever got 5 minutes proves they are forcing him to speed walk (at the LEAST). Much like their sprinting leaps onto moving trams to get the time they wanted in the tram "reconstructions".

The reality is this: They felt 100% certain Wallace did it, but didn't think they could convince a jury if they told the actual truth that he would have about 5 to 10 minutes. Surely in part because they're failing to see the possibility that staging of a burglary could be done both before the murder or even on his return home.

I can promise you the times in their reconstructions are wholly inaccurate. There's really no question about it. It's a fact. If they're sprinting and jumping onto trams like a Bond movie (which I hope you can admit is unfair), what are the odds they're doing a fair recreation of the milk round?

One mile is 1,760 yards. If this takes 20 minutes to walk, then 500 yards would take about 20*500/1760 minutes which is 5 minutes 41 seconds. I'd give the answer as "5 or 6 minutes".

. The 5-minute walk. The 5-minute walk, also known as the “pedestrian shed” is considered to be the distance people are willing to walk before opting to drive. Based on the average walking speed a five-minute walk is represented by a radius measuring ¼ of a mile or about 400 meters.

400m = 437 yards

I don’t see a single issue with these timings. We’re heading into conspiracy theory territory here. A minute or two either way makes no material difference. What was dishonest was the Defence trying to stretch the time to 6.45 when it obviously wasn’t.

[WallaceWackedHer]

400m = 437 yards

I don’t see a single issue with these timings. We’re heading into conspiracy theory territory here. A minute or two either way makes no material difference. What was dishonest was the Defence trying to stretch the time to 6.45 when it obviously wasn’t.

If a minute or two doesn't matter then please admit the truth. 5 minutes is faster than the average walking speed even if he's ONLY walking.

Are you suggesting there will be absolutely no difference in the time it takes when he's calling at multiple houses etc? Because that has to be the suggestion - in COMBINATION with him speed walking - to arrive at 5 minutes. It's nonsense, it's not something that can be debated because it's mathematically proven to be nonsense.

And one of the officers, not the first bunch, literally used the term sprinted, that exact word. It was when he was asked if they got onto a moving tram car. He said though they indeed sprinted to get it, it had stopped and wasn't moving when they boarded.

That sounds like a fair test...

If we're gonna start going extremes (6.30 is an extreme, completely bogus time), why then ignore the evidence of Elsie Wright who heard the 6.30 church bells before she saw Alan Close who had not yet delivered to the Wallace home? 6.30 is very literally picking and choosing evidence to fit whatever you want it to fit, and ignoring everything else. It's no different than Rod.

I don't even see the reason to falsify the reality, do you really need that extra 5 minutes to believe in William's guilt? If it was 5 minutes later you think he's innocent?

[WallaceWackedHer]

Do you realize that even the prosecution don't believe what they're implying about Alan Close?

I have an interview with Mr. Walsh here. He says neither him nor Hemmerde believed it was possible and that they are certain Alan spoke to Wallace who was faking a woman's voice and wearing a dress. I swear to god.

He says it was dark so the height difference wouldn't matter... I do agree I think Wallace would've been caught off guard by Alan if he was involved in some way, I really don't think his arrival was ever accounted for.

Even they don't believe the line they put forward is plausible.

[moste]

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 though.

The police photo , I believe I have in the ‘Wilkes’ book shows the cupboard door directly below the shelf with the cash box on it. If this is correct I can’t think of another reason why the hinge would be ripped off , other than being stepped on , in an attempt to reach the 7’ shelf, can you?

[moste]

The police photo , I believe I have in the ‘Wilkes’ book shows the cupboard door directly below the shelf with the cash box on it. If this is correct I can’t think of another reason why the hinge would be ripped off , other than being stepped on , in an attempt to reach the 7’ shelf, can you?

If the killer was say, less than 5’ 9” . It was almost certainly the Anfield burglar that done it. If the killer was Wallace, then he cleverly staged it.

[moste]

Does anyone know whether the Anfield burglaries stopped, after January 20th?