Julia Wallace Murder Case

Ged, I think John Parkes' testimony was on the whole accurate in the sense that I think Parry did come by the garage and perhaps revealed some info incidentally that made Parke's suspicious, I just think certain details such as the glove in a box and specifically the cape and oilskin boots were ridiculous. I believe Parry was Qualtrough, I do not believe he committed the actual murder. Parkes was an old man at the time of this 'confession' and one wonders completely about his mental facilities and its accuracy.

Rod I agree with you, Too many details point to Parry being Qualtrough, but too many point to him NOT being the murderer. One author about the case once wrote that whoever Qualtrough was he murdered Julia Wallace the next night, well I think that guy was wrong!

There's some mind-boggling stuff about Bamber, such as the police radio logs show that while Bamber and the Police were waiting outside the farm, the Police saw a figure moving in an upstairs bedroom. [later dismissed as "shadows" or "trick of the light"]

The logs also show that the police marksmen "communicated" with a person inside the farm, while Bamber stood with Police outside...

The logs also show that Nevill Bamber phoned the police before Jeremy, and the Police phone number was the last number dialled on the office phone, which verifies Jeremy's version of events.

Sheila Caffell's body was moved by the Police as is clearly demonstrated by police photos. Jeremy was accused of this.

Bamber's relatives produced the silencer days later, after handling it together with a pair of Sheila's menstrual blood-stained knickers.

Julie Mugford and Bamber's relatives both went to the police the same day one month later to accuse Jeremy. Coincidence or collusion? Jeremy, the adoptive son, stood to gain everything, including the grandmother's estate. The relatives persuaded her to change her will, before going to the Police.

The medicines Sheila was on have subseqently been linked to numerous similar incidents of murder/suicide and the manufacturers have paid out millions in compensation...

The evidence against him was incredibly thin, and the 10-2 guilty verdict was the minimum possible to convict.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Acrosstheuniverse

Ged, I think John Parkes' testimony was on the whole accurate in the sense that I think Parry did come by the garage and perhaps revealed some info incidentally that made Parke's suspicious, I just think certain details such as the glove in a box and specifically the cape and oilskin boots were ridiculous. I believe Parry was Qualtrough, I do not believe he committed the actual murder. Parkes was an old man at the time of this 'confession' and one wonders completely about his mental facilities and its accuracy.

Rod I agree with you, Too many details point to Parry being Qualtrough, but too many point to him NOT being the murderer. One author about the case once wrote that whoever Qualtrough was he murdered Julia Wallace the next night, well I think that guy was wrong!

---

But he wasn't an old man when he made the initial testimony as soon as it became clear WHW was arrested for it. Would Parry not have had time to clean up at his partner in crimes house before going to Lily Lloyds later in the night (as he was only really there for the latter part according to her revised 'partly true' alibi) Wilkes says his mental facilities were fine when they interviewed him in Sefton General. Incidentally, it was Wilkes who claims that Qualtrough was the murderer. Although I do now think this 'another chap' whether it be Marsden or Rod's chap pretending to be Qualtrough calling on WHW could be true, I still wouldn't rule out Parry himself.

GED, that is a very good point that didn't occur to me. Although it doesn't change the fact that I think Parkes testimony was mostly accurate...I just don't think Parry committed the actual murder. The specific details we know about what Parkes said also were only relayed when he WAS an old man.

In my view, Parry definitely had a partner...or two... I mean all we have to go by on at this point is conjecture and what reason would Parry have to commit the murder himself? The cash motive has always bothered me. Why then not plan a way to get BOTH of the Wallace's out. Yeah it's true maybe he didn't intend to murder her...but I don't know it seems like such an elaborate plan with such a high risk. While I could see Parry doing something ilicit (such as getting paid for sex as has been suggested whether you accept that or not), it stretches the imagination of him going to such lengths and concocting such an elaborate plot for such a low reward and high risk. Also the plot is a mastermind one with the phone call, address etc... and as Murphy pointed out Parry was no criminal mastermind. I think there was definitely another 'brain' behind the plot.

Rod, sorry for straying a little from the subject but I think it is somewhat of an appropriate forum as there are similarities between the two murders; Murphy implies that both men were guilty. I have to say the Jeremy Bamber case is one I know little about. Not super well known in the US, I did see an A and E special on it around 2006 I think. From what I could tell, I saw huge problems with the case especially regarding a lock to the basement or something? I think I'm right in that this made me think he might have been innocent although maybe this is the evidence that the police used against him to imply guilt? I can't remember many details of the case. I also saw something more recent on the case which led me to believe he was probably innocent. Really shocking and awful is that's true. What I remember being my certain conviction is there was not enough to convict him. Hopefully, they can do the right thing as they did in the Martin Tankleff case in Long Island, NY. (one of the worse injustices EVER) Sorry to insult British jurisprudence, as I generally think Britain paved the way for the jury system, but a 10-2 margin being enough is pretty abysmal. America has it right; 12-0 or mistrial.

Just another obvious point against PARRY...his obsession with "21st birthdays"..he told BEATTIE he was trying to arrange something in Mr WALLACES line for his daughters 21st birthday..he told Jonathan Goodman a new alibi on the doorstep that he was engaged in trying to organise a 21st birthday! He was at the time of the murder,actually trying to get an invite to LESLIE WILLIAMSON'S real 21st birthday party(to which I think Lily Lloyd had already been invited,as its obvious LW was keen on LL as he says she was a lovely girl,so no wonder RGP was determined to get an invite)..LW is the same man who rang in to Radio City,but no one at the time knew who he was!! Incidentally,I'm sure that PARRY'S sister was only a small child at the time so anything she said about the police & RGP could only have come from her brother!!! IAN(FJumble)

yes IAN, amazing police didn't (maybe didn't want to) pick up on that. Parry being Qualtrough is quite obvious at this point to me.

Is it a mastermind plan though?

You want to gain access to a known insurance agents house so what better way than to get a message to him to visit the other side of town.

Then wait and watch.

I fully agree with all the recent posts ..ie PARRY is QUALTROUGH & had a partner in crime..possibly his friend the shadowy figure Joseph Caleb Marsden(as ID'd by MARK R!)It would appear that perhaps the original plan was just to get WALLACE away from Wolverton Street whilst they stole what they thought was a reasonable & worthwhile sum! Its difficult to imagine why they would plan to actually kill JW(unless she had something against one of them)so surely this is just a robbery that went wrong & ended in poor JULIA being battered to death.True to charcter & what we know,consumate liar & conman RGP managed to convince the police that his alibi was watertight..when it was clearly full of holes & cobbled together to suit the circumstances.The police didnt seem to bother much with MARSDEN???? if, in fact, he WAS the other partner? If it was the 2 young crooks,in 1931 they would be very aware that they BOTH faced the hangman's noose..even IF RGP was able to convine the police that he was little more than a getaway driver,which of course he wasnt...but agreed,he doesnt seem like a mastermind,his careless "21st birthday" obsession proves that... Does this synopsis actually need a MASTERMIND..after all if it was just a robbery that went horribly wrong,then it was just the robbery that was "planned"..it hardly needed a Prof.Moriarty to plan that!! IAN(FJumble)

What a great thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lindylou

.. and here is the little shop 'up the slope' :)


It's a shame to see it derelict, it used to be thriving. I remember very well the Irish people who owned it.

---

Wish I had a quid for everytime I passed it on the way to and from school.
And the ice in the back entry in winter,you could get some speed up going down then smack, into the wall.Pick yourself up and then do it again down the narrow one.Just aswell there wasn't much traffic because there was no stoppin until you hit the road.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GNASHER

What a great thread.


Wish I had a quid for everytime I passed it on the way to and from school.
And the ice in the back entry in winter,you could get some speed up going down then smack, into the wall.Pick yourself up and then do it again down the narrow one.Just aswell there wasn't much traffic because there was no stoppin until you hit the road.

---

Yeah we used to do that with our roller skates too :)

Ian, have you read Murphy's book? I think Murphy, while I disagree with a lot in his book, makes a pretty convincing case that the robbery was staged and it was a planned murder.

acrossthe universe...YES, I read it avidly when it first came out & I was very impressed at the outset with his research..especially JULIA'S real age!! He linked the known events/times etc..but then blew it for me by eventually believing RGP'S highly dubious alibi(s) & suggesting that WALLACE was the killer...which I feel is IMPOSSIBLE for all the much repeated reasons!!Again,although I have returned to the book again recently.. the lack of an index is very frutrating & time consuming. I'm hoping the promised new book will perhaps give us more on the PARRY plus A.N.OTHER(MARSDEN-?)theory. As you can see,I'm very happy with PARRY'S involvement as QUALTROUGH & car driver..but I'm reluctant to go with MARSDEN without any evidence,other than that he knew PARRY & was mentioned by WALLACE..though,WHW didnt actually name him as a suspect!!! IAN(FJumble)

I too am impressed with Murphy's chapter on Julia. However, despite a copy wedding cert and his text saying they were married in 1914, the caption to the tin chapel where they wed says 1913 - an elementary mistake.

I can't agree with WHW being the murderer or even being involved.

Even more laughable (in Wilkes book) is the suggestion that it was Wallace dressed as Julia who answered to door to Alan Close. Clutching at straws or what?

Also Wallace carried on with his diaries and knew that he didn't have long left when confronted with the ultimatum of an operation or not. If he was of such an astute mind, much has been made of his 'class 3' chess playing. I'm sure he'd have left a note in his diary boasting how he'd fooled the best brains of the Liverpool constabulary and Special branch, knowing that he'd be in his grave when the entries were found.

The fact? it was a weapon from the lounge would indicate it wasn't premeditated though, so I too would edge towards a robbery gone wrong or a staged robbery. Parry just knows too much about it and wasn't where he said he was to make me think he didn't have something to do with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IAN DAVID FRYER

but I'm reluctant to go with MARSDEN without any evidence,other than that he knew PARRY & was mentioned by WALLACE..though,WHW didnt actually name him as a suspect!!! IAN(FJumble)

---

It'll be interesting to see this new evidence about Marsden and the money he was marrying into etc that John Gannon's new book will tell us about.

Thanks GED,yes I thought the idea of WHW in drag was almost as preposterous as HEMMERDE's ludicrous notion that he did it naked!! Another thought..when WALLACE returned home,he thought initially that there was someone in the house..IF he was right, then the real killer (maybe MARSDEN?) must have fled out of the back door into the back-entry..missing the JOHNSTONS by seconds! Obviously, if the JOHNSTONES had seen a fleeing figure coming from next door,then WHW would have been off the hook at once. I know the police made no effort to trace the people on the tram on the monday night..but if just one witness had seen WHW on his way to the chess club,then he couldnt have been QUALTROUGH..
If the "little SWIFT" looked like the car I think it was,then the idea of hosing it INSIDE doesnt look so unlikely.I'd love to know why there was only ONE glove & why it was inside a box(cardboard or wooden?)...pity WILKES didnt clarify in 1981,when PARKES was still around..& also get an idea of what RGP's collegue looked like!!! IAN(FJumble)

Parry told Goodman and R.W.Egan that he'd promised his father not to talk about the case. I wonder what that means and why. It's almost like a no comment statement that always smacks of guilt to me.

Thanks GED....yes,I suspect PARRY'S father at least suspected his son of some involvement,but we'll never know on that one. However, I also wonder if PARRY senior bought RGP the little SWIFT & had it registered in his name to save on the insurance cost,as young drivers would pay more premium, even in 1931.If he used ATKINSONS GARAGE for servicing & repairs, it seems likely,from what we know of his methods, that he wouldnt pay his bills & firms tend to keep files on unpaid debts(as I know from personal experience!!)With the garage,even in 1981, being in a "time-warp",it's possible some records survive...we could learn a lot with the Reg.No.!!! IAN(FJumble)

A friend has just told me that the "box" was the old name for what we now call the glove compartment...now it makes more sense!!!

I'd somehow always thought it meant the glovie. Why one glove though or are we to assume one that Parry would reach in and take the other one out too.

Thanks GED.Glad we are up & running again! I'd never heard that name---box for glove compartment--- before,but it makes a lot more sense.PARKES seems very clear that it was just one glove & goes on to give a description of a mit type glove.The killer wore gloves presumably to avoid leaving fingerprints..as his prints were not found on the gaslight which he must have turned out,as the room was in darkness when WHW returned at 8.45. IAN(FJumble)

On this day in 1909 Richard Gordon Parry was born. January of course has a few Wallace anniversaries.

The PARRY's next door neighbour,LES HILL claimed RGP was interviewed for over 3 hours at Atkinsons Garage..strange that there is no police record of this interrogation(?). Stranger still that John Parkes never mentioned it or indeed any of the Atkinson family for that matter..one wonders if it really took place or is another notion that PARRY himself floated to clear his name..like he told his baby sister that the police had thoroughly checked his clothes for blood even removing the seams..hmm.... I also wonder if the bloodied glove which John Parkes describes in such detail ..really a mit with no individual fingers... had a thumb & if so was for a left-hand or a right-hand...not a big point unless only one of the suspects was for example left-handed...IAN(FJumble)

Yes, it's very mysterious that all the Parry statements are missing. Now if that was a government case today there would be uproar and cries of a conspiracy/cover-up etc. Too fishy for him not to be involved somewhere and it makes Wilkes' (what could seem far fetched) proposition about a 'conspiracy of silence' more plausible.

Haven't had time to read all the posts since my last visit so apologies! Regarding Lily Lloyd - I think it is common knowledge that she wasn't in the cinema on the Tuesday night but as typifies this case, it is all rather 'shadowy'...One of my first recollections of the case was when my mother told me years ago that one (gossip??) theory was that Wallace had dressed as Julia, and that he impersonated her. Wilkes also mentions Hemmerde's junior at the trial, (Leslie Walsh) was convinced of this theory. It is preposterous of course - Wallace was 6"2 and Julia 5"3. Wallace surpassed himself not only as a murderer extraordinaire, but also as an impersonator of the calibre of Rory Bremner - first the telephone voice - then making himself look a foot shorter:) Mind you, as a kid, the idea of Wallace speaking in a high falsetto voice rather freaked me out:shock:
Ged, I've been working on the manuscript over the last few days. I can put more into it now I'm over the flu!!

Gordon Parry was surely R.M. Qualtrough. During the 1981 Radio City phone-in, one of the callers was a lady who worked at the telephone exchange at the time in 1931, but didnt take the actual call(s).She stated that all the telephone girls felt the caller wasnt WALLACE as "Qualtrough" pronounced the name of the City Cafe in the rather affected way of City "CAFAY" rather than the expected City "CAFEE"..this drew attention to the caller & they all agreed it surely was not WHW!! Presumably,as local girls,at least some of them may well have been aquainted with the familiar Man From The Pru.... IAN(FJumble)

Parkes says of Parry: page 237 of Roger Wilkes - The final verdict.

'He was such a liar. He could spin a yarn and get away with it. He had this habit of coming up into the kitchen over the garage, picking the phone up and calling people he didn't know, and talking to them. (And of course, Parry was in this dramatic society and it was nothing for him to alter his voice). He could alter his voice like you changing a shilling'


That and the 21st birthday event fresh in his mind but twisted a bit to fill out the phone call to entice WHW to Allerton - yes, Parry was Qualtrough alright.

Hi Ian

I would have liked to hear how Parry and Wallace pronounced 'cafe'. I suppose either could have emphasised the pronunciation to 'cafay'.
On a police report (I think by Herbert Gold) he states that Beattie said the voice was gruff and that it was disguised...This is, to me, mischief making by the police to get a conviction. Beattie testified that the voice he heard was nothing like Wallace's...and that it would be a stretch of the imagination to think anything like that...

Ged, I have to laugh when I hear Parkes! "He was such a liar - he could spin a yarn! I told him once that I didn't trust him"

Thanks MARK. Clearly the girls at the telephone exchange thought the pronounciation odd & commented as such.Surely the consumate actor RGP was far more likely to say CAFAY for affect? Why would the staid WHW draw attention to himself by using a non local version of the word rather than what the girls regarded as the "normal" way of saying cafe? Listening again to Ted Holmes on the telephone phone in,he doesnt actually confirm that Lily Lloyd was working at the Clubmoor Cinema on the murder night..so maybe Murphy is correct. Do you know if PARRY was relying on this point for his alibi or did it not matter whether she was working or not? PARKES was clearly frightened of PARRY!! IAN (FJumble)

This is a great thread - haven't had a chance to read it all!!! how long has it been going:handclap:

Have read most of the books, heard the radio doc, seen the movie - just can't get my hands on the Wyndham-Brown: anyone read that?

I wonder what Parry's daughters would think of all this speculation still going on about their father?

Serpico, I have read that book. For some reason, it was at a Strand bookstore in NYC and I read parts of it there. It is definitely one of the harder books to get a hold of on the Wallace Case. You can order it for 160 pounds online! (Who are they kidding.) Not much new, the book was written in 1933 right after these events and around the time of Wallace's death from kidney failure. Just a general summation of the case, if I recall correctly the author hints towards his belief in Wallace's guilt.

Parry's youngest daughter should be around 60..apparently when tracked down in Wilke's book local people, including his daughter had not even heard of Parry's connection to the case. As nothing has been proven, if she and others related to Parry are aware of it I am sure they believe in his innocence.

I think it is clear Parry is Qualtrough, and as clear that he did not commit the murder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IAN DAVID FRYER

Thanks MARK. Clearly the girls at the telephone exchange thought the pronounciation odd & commented as such.Surely the consumate actor RGP was far more likely to say CAFAY for affect? Why would the staid WHW draw attention to himself by using a non local version of the word rather than what the girls regarded as the "normal" way of saying cafe? Listening again to Ted Holmes on the telephone phone in,he doesnt actually confirm that Lily Lloyd was working at the Clubmoor Cinema on the murder night..so maybe Murphy is correct. Do you know if PARRY was relying on this point for his alibi or did it not matter whether she was working or not? PARKES was clearly frightened of PARRY!! IAN (FJumble)

---

I think it unbelievable that WHW would use a call box so close to his home...Judging by the statement in Murphy's book. it would appear that Lily Lloyd being with Parry was more for the later part of the evening of the 20th. I think around 9.00pm.

I have the WF Wyndham-Brown book. It is expen£ive to say the least!! It was reprinted more recently but STILL expen$ive!!

Today would have been Jonathan Goodman's 79th birthday, and yes, he was born three days before the murder in 1931!! He died on January 10th 2008. Still sadly missed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by serpico

This is a great thread - haven't had a chance to read it all!!! how long has it been going:handclap:

---

The first post on this thread was Jan 20th 07, so in 3 days time the thread will be 3 years old :)

(actually, I thought it was longer) .. well, it could be - - the first post is quoting Ged, so there must be some of the thread missing.

.. get yer detective thinking caps on that one Ged & Mark :RAP: .. I would have thought the thread was going long before 2007
Is the begining of it missing ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lindylou

The first post on this thread was Jan 20th 07, so in 3 days time the thread will be 3 years old :)

(actually, I thought it was longer) .. well, it could be - - the first post is quoting Ged, so there must be some of the thread missing.

.. get yer detective thinking caps on that one Ged & Mark :RAP: .. I would have thought the thread was going long before 2007
Is the begining of it missing ?

---

I'm not sure lindylou - my first post on the thread was in 2007 if I remember correctly. Like you say though, that first post is quoting Ged so it looks like there was maybe more earlier posts or another earlier thread??

On this day in 1931 at approx 7.15 tonight. The Qualtrough call was made from Rochester Road, Cabbage Hall triangle to Cottle's city cafe - or is that 'cafay' ?

Hi GED with the actual telephone box long gone(it should have gone to Liverpool Museum!)cant actually revisit the site tonight..but I might detour to Wolverton Street tomorrow before the Reds match....was WALLACE a Red,I doubt it ..but I bet QUALTROUGH was a Blue!!IAN (FJumble)

:)

Today is the 79th anniversary of the murder of Julia Wallace. On this day in 1931 William Herbert Wallace was doing his rounds in Clubmoor, those whom he met and called on gave statements as to his demeanor, some good, some bad.

What is known for sure is Julia was last seen alive by milk boy Alan Close just after 6.30. Wallace himself states he left the house at 6.45. When he returned around two hours later after a failed trip to Allerton to find R.M. Qualtrough, his 4th attempt to gain access to his house resulted in him finding Julia on the floor of the lounge, dead.

Next door neighbours, the Johnston's were with him by now. 'look what they have done to her', 'They've finished her off' were some of Wallace's mutterings. But did he know he and they would find her like that because she was like that before he left for Allerton. I doubt it as he never had the time to leave his house and make it to his first tram, he also was not covered in blood as the medical experts stated he would have been.

Did he know she would be there like that though because he's set it all up? I can't reason with that. His behaviour after the appeal did not see him in a romantic relationship with anybody else and his dairy entries talk of his missing Julia and how Julia would have loved his new home on the Wirral.

The police investigation went on into the small hours and beyond with floodlights provided by the fire service. Crowds will throng the area tonight as Liverpool play Spurs with all but a handful probably unaware of the events that unfolded in Wolverton Street 79 years ago tonight.

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/mpl?la...18413320274304

Google Street View...