If you have any information on this case, please leave a comment below.
Information?
Do you have any information regarding this case? Rumours? Eyewitness accounts? If so please post on the following page:You are also encouraged to comment on any posts you wish.
Hi Calum
I thought you’d like to know that Ann Dennis (Merryweather) died in Feb. 1882, not 1892, in Brompton, Northallerton.
Mike
Thank you for the information.
Julia’s head was literally smashed in.
This I find concerning that unless we are talking about a random psychopathic killer just happening on poor Julia’s home it leads me to a more ‘ personal more grudging more sustained violence we see in marital or relationship murders.
The conundrum for myself is that I believe Mr Wallace to be innocent so how or where does that all take me?
Well cutting to the chase the following is what I believe:
a ) Julia set up someone to make the call to get her husband out of the house.
b ) Reason might be a secret lover or some personal transaction be that verbal or otherwise.
Perhaps she knew that her husband was seeking homosexual rent boys and wanted information ( perhaps from that person themselves ). NOTE :Not only was homosexuality illegal at that time but the curtain twitching had perhaps already begun and Julia wanted it to stop.
c ) The mackintosh was used to cover Julia so her killer did not have to witness what they were doing / had done.
So who was the murderer?
That is long deep buried and almost certainly we shall never know the name and the horrible twist is even poor Mr Wallace had no idea whatsoever.
It is likely that little to know money was taken ‘ even though Mr Wallace said he thought they had ‘ he probably was himself deeply confused of making sense of the non sensible.
That is my opinion based on much of what I have read that never seems to be touched upon.
I do not know with certainty that Mr Wallace was indeed homosexual but from what I have deemed likely of this case and from hearsay at that time I believe my comments are probably nearer the truth.
Thank you for reading
Thanks for your comment. So regarding the mackintosh, forensics I consulted do not believe it had been over her head during any of the assault. The reason for their conclusion is that the investigators at the time did not find any what he calls “true tears” in the fabric which would be expected in such a case. The investigation at the time of course was very shoddy (the lead forensic examiner did not find blood on an unspecified cushion in the parlour which was found and handed to the City Analyst for example).
The jacket was also moreso underneath the body. Apparently from what I have been told by professionals, the jacket was not likely used by any assailant for the purposes of shielding himself from blood. Not standing, nor kneeling (a sort of halo effect would be expected in the latter case apparently). More effective if it had been worn but this would still not work to entirely protect the assailant.
I am told the most plausible idea is that Julia had it on her in some way. Whether wearing it, holding it, or whichever, and when she went into the fireplace (causing those grid scorches on her skirt) the mackintosh also caught light.
I have tried unsuccessfully to hunt down an actual model of this fireplace to test how long the fire would need to have been on in order for the radiants to heat up to the degree that would be necessary to cause the burning at the scene.
In support of your idea, according to William if you believe that he’s an innocent man, Julia convinced him he should go to chess (as opposed to staying home when she’s sick) as well as convincing him to go out on the business trip when he discussed it with her.
For the modern forensic input I documented those here:
https://www.williamherbertwallace.com/case-files/modern-forensic-expert-analysis-of-the-crime-scene/
https://www.williamherbertwallace.com/case-files/modern-forensic-expert-analysis-of-the-crime-scene-2/
You may be interested to know that a significant archive of papers relating to this murder is to be auctiioned by Alan Partridge auctioneers in Liverpool on the seventh and eighth of August 2024. It includes some hitherto unseen mortuary photographs, briefs to defence counsel et cetera.
I missed this. Who got them?
Thank you so very much for your reply on this most hideous and perplexing crime.
Michelle.
Hello there,
I have slightly raised eyebrows at the phone caller to the chess club saying his name as ‘R.M’ Qualtrough. If that was me I’d simply say Mr Qualtrough or perhaps Robert Qualtrough (or Richard or whatever). It just seems a bit odd and almost too thought out.
Also, and this simply a trivial aside, if I recall correctly, Wallace ended up playing against a Mr McCartney as his original opponent Chandler (apt!) hadn’t shown and I have often wondered if this is possibly Jim McCartney, father of Paul or if not one of his uncles. I understand it isn’t a highly unusual name but neither could you say it is a particularly popular surname either and off the top of my head Jim (Paul’s Dad) would have been in his late twenties/early thirties at the time. Happy to be ridiculed for this ponderance of course! Great site by the way.
William Ager.
Marriages Jun 1937 (>99%) FREE BMD
Qualtrough Eileen M to George Wallace Bucklow 8a 523 Scan available –
Bit of a coincidence !
Andrew Pearson says:
July 30, 2024 at 9:42 am
You may be interested to know that a significant archive of papers relating to this murder is to be auctioned by Alan Partridge auctioneers in Liverpool on the seventh and eighth of August 2024. It includes some hitherto unseen mortuary photographs, briefs to defence counsel et cetera.
Hello Andrew. I am sorry to have missed this post too. Any further news on this auction. Who acquired them and for how much?
Thanks, Ged.
I googled and found this:
https://auctions.adampartridge.co.uk/auction/lot/lot-julia-and-herbert-wallace-an-extensive/?lot=102651&au=100
I would like to record my profound disappointment that the forum section of the Julia Wallace Foundation website has been discontinued. While it is true that the number of regular contributors was low, there must have been many inactive readers of the debate who will also miss this facility. I do agree that to be regularly confronted with the same old/ same old arguments is trying and my personal solution was to ignore them. It is the inevitable cost of free speech that we have to tolerate those impervious to logical argument. While closing down this facility may provide personal satisfaction it deprives many of us from a much valued activity.
Michael,
I totally agree with you. What happened to RM and Ged? I was actively checking the site daily in order to read the posts. I was actually in the middle of reading the entire thread attempting to discover whatever it was that came between those two guys. In the beginning, they’re both really nice and complimentary to one another, and I was looking for whatever the event was that turned them against one another. I got a laugh out of early posts from that Levin guy who told me “NO QUESTIONS!” but submitted countless worthless posts of stupid rhymes. I miss the forum section and hope I at least hear back from you. It’s a great site once you get past all the proclamations of “Occam’s Razor!”, talking about the Amanda Knox Case (no relation at all), and dumb statements about The Beatles. In the end, I still think her husband bashed her head in and got away with it. Thanks, and good luck to you.
Many of these people don’t know anything about professional investigations, are (typically) a bit lower in intellect than average, and have no relevant knowledge or expertise… Therefore to maintain the factual and historical integrity of the site, the whole page was deleted. You can find Ged on his Facebook page, but you must keep in mind these are like “Ripperologists”, it’s more of a hobby thing for them and does not reflect reality.
That is also why Michael’s great telephony information was blitzed with it, because it added confusion only to eventually confirm the same thing that was already presumed before (that the call was traced). It can be difficult to maintain a very factually accurate site, especially with such old cases!
This page in particular is for new information etc. tip offs, things noticed in photos or files that were missed, and so on.
Hi RMQ,
If the current posters are generally of low intellect and with no knowledge on investigative methods then contribution might be restricted to ex-detectives with a post graduate qualification.
Isn’t it ironic that in a court of law the fate of the accused is determined by precisely these dullards without special knowledge and yet, accepting the premise for the sake of argument, such people are unwelcome on an internet forum!
It is often the outsider, not blinded by groupthink, who can spot flaws and loopholes in a case which have eluded the professional investigator.
I have no problem with my confirmation of the traceability of the Qualtrough call being blitzed. It is as you say merely confirmation of something which had anyway been accepted as fact. Such exercises are not a waste of time however.
I am currently working on the reliability of the NR/7.20 pm docket prepared by A Robertson. And I wonder if someone can help me: does this docket bear the number of Bank 3581 or only Anfield 1627?
Thanks for any help you can provide.
Michael Fitton M Sc.
Hi Information Please,
Thanks for your reaction to my post – very much appreciated and I agree with the points you raise. I make occasional contributions to the Lindbergh kidnap forum based in the USA and that too has deteriorated into a ping pong match between two posters with opposite views. However in this case the negative opinion of other posters seems to have calmed down the protagonists and normality is returning albeit slowly. It seems to be an inevitable fate of forums that this will happen from time to time but closing the shop because you don’t like the customers is not, in my opinion, the answer.
Best wishes,
Mike
Some information found out by Tillymint and Rod.
The Miss Plant referred to by Olivia Brine is not a Phyllis Plant but Annie Muriel Plant born 1911 who lived with her parents at 158 Gloucester Road, Tuebrook. She married a Richard Hill in 1933.
Also: The Dennison brothers father Willing English Dennison was listed as a Kinematographer working from an office in Dale st in 1921. his job was to distribute movies to cinemas. By 1931 he was working away at sea. Their mother Amanda was Olivia Brine’s sister.
Can you please substantiate the claim that it’s actually some other random woman with the same surname? What is this based on, people just couldn’t find a Phyllis on an Ancestry search but could find an “Annie”?
I’ve unapproved a bunch of posts for now because I need the claim that Phyllis Plant is “Annie” to be confirmed before I can allow it to be posted. You may have noticed this is a legitimate information page, not the comments section. Could someone provide evidence for this claim? If yes then I will re-approve it.
This site isn’t a forum by the way Michael. It’s intended to be encyclopaedic. I believe Ged kindly shared the Facebook group link with you? Casebook also exists for this case and that is also an actual forum you can sign up to.
Jury system sucks. Juries should be experts in particular fields from other parts of the country with no connection to anyone in the case and no biases. I wouldn’t want a guy who can barely make a bowl of cereal deciding whether I get the electric chair.
Olivia Brine clearly says a Miss Plant of Gloucester Road called. The only Miss Plant living in Gloucester Road was Annie Muriel Plant b1911 (making her likely 19 y.o.) so it is not some other random person.
Got it. Not changing it just yet (but will do soon): At 19, she was living by herself there or? No sisters etc? I assume there’s a mother Plant but you’re suggesting she is a “Mrs” or not a Phyllis at all?
What date is the census she’s getting Annie from?
Gannon provides a total of zero pieces of proof that the name is Phyllis. It matters nothing for the case of course but shows a diagraceful lack of diligence if a 5 second Ancestry site search bar can disprove him.
Michael’s phone exchange info is confusing and unnecessary. It’s like if someone came in like “maybe it wasn’t the 7.06 tram” then eventually after some back and forth with some tram museum people saying “yep there was no way to know” were told yeah it was something that could be known and here’s some proof. It’s already known the call was “traced” and that the tram was 7.06. Michael challenged an established fact, diligently worked to prove the fact, but the lead was bogus and pointed straight back to the established fact being true. Hence better left off despite the efforts.
OK Calum, it is your site.
Some other info
Annie Muriel plant was born 24th March 1911 in Llandrillo, N. Wales. The 1911 census shows her as an infant living with her mother Kate Plant’s family. Kate had married Frederick Philip Plant in Liverpool in June 1910. The 1921 census shows the family living at 158 Gloucester Road, Tuebrook. Frederick was a painter. The electoral roles confirm that they were resident at the same address up to 1939 with no other family called Plant living in that street during this period. Annie Muriel married Richard Hill (plasterer) in Liverpool in 1933. Info courtesy of Tillymint if you want to use it and credit her, up to you.
I searched my site and found I only referenced it on one page, the main murder story page. I updated this now:
“Gordon Parry’s alibi? He had spent the afternoon with a Mrs. Olivia Brine, her daugher Savonna and nephew Harold Denison, with reference from Mrs. Brine to another woman- “Miss Plant, Gloucester Road”- also calling at the house. Contributor Tilly Mint suggests this “Miss Plant” was likely the 19 year old (just a couple of years younger than Gordon) “Annie Muriel Plant” of 158 Gloucester Road, Tuebrook.”
Please check, thanks. Also following the confirmation, I re-approved the initial post you submitted regarding this.