Speaker 1: In nineteen thirty one, a man returned home one evening
Speaker 1: to a horrifying discovery. His wife was laying dead in
Speaker 1: front of their fireplace. With few clues and no clear evidence,
Speaker 1: suspicion quickly fell on him, making him the prime suspect. Yet,
Speaker 1: nearly a century later, the identity of the true killer
Speaker 1: remains a mystery. While some are convinced he committed the crime,
Speaker 1: others argue that the circumstances around it made it absolutely impossible.
Speaker 1: You see, this is the case that has since earned
Speaker 1: a nickname, the Impossible Murder.
Speaker 2: My name's Ben, I'm Nicole, and you're listening to Wicked
Speaker 2: and Grim, a true crime podcast.
Speaker 1: The following podcast material for mature listener discretion. Happy Friday.
Speaker 1: That is, if you are listening to this today, the
Speaker 1: day the episode's released, which is Friday. If not Happy
Speaker 1: whatever other day of the week you are listening to
Speaker 1: this on.
Speaker 2: Happy Day, hopefully it's Friday, because Fridays are a happy day.
Speaker 1: Fridays are good days weekends. There you know what, Generally,
Speaker 1: people don't typically work as hard on Friday.
Speaker 3: That it had a nickname.
Speaker 1: When I was working my last job, everyone called it
Speaker 1: a fuck It Friday.
Speaker 2: Seriously. Yeah, I don't know if I ever heard this.
Speaker 3: You've never heard of fuck it Friday?
Speaker 1: No?
Speaker 3: Wow, Yeah, it's fuck it Friday.
Speaker 2: Huh, Because lots I felt like when I was like,
Speaker 2: had my other job that Friday was like, oh my gosh,
Speaker 2: it's weekend. I get all the shit done, you know,
Speaker 2: so I can enjoy my weekend. So I don't really
Speaker 2: know if I. Oh, I kind of wish I had
Speaker 2: that mentality. Now.
Speaker 3: Don't get me wrong.
Speaker 1: It was usually never like a matter of someone I mean,
Speaker 1: occasionally it happened where someone was taking fuck it Friday
Speaker 1: upon themselves, but usually it's like, ah, look at that
Speaker 1: dude over there not doing his job. Clearly it's fuck
Speaker 1: it Friday, like, you know, pointing to someone else not
Speaker 1: doing their work. Okay, but I mean it works either way.
Speaker 3: Though.
Speaker 1: You can take it upon yourself to have a fuck
Speaker 1: it Friday, because once in.
Speaker 3: A while I can need that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but maybe that should be some some merch fuck
Speaker 1: it Friday, mad getting grim.
Speaker 2: That would be amazing. But I also feel like right
Speaker 2: now this season, people might need that, you know, just
Speaker 2: like some a day off. It's a busy season.
Speaker 3: Yes, it is.
Speaker 1: Everyone out there is getting a little bit wild, and
Speaker 1: I've noticed it's still I mean, you have that online
Speaker 1: shopping for Christmas and everything right and all the holiday
Speaker 1: seasons stuff, but it's still wild.
Speaker 2: When you go out shopping this time of year, it's
Speaker 2: just busy, like it's almost where did all these people
Speaker 2: come from?
Speaker 1: Yeah, consumerism is at a next level this time of year,
Speaker 1: and it just, I don't know, it drives me insane,
Speaker 1: if I'm being honest.
Speaker 2: But because weren't we out on a Wednesday? It was
Speaker 2: like two or something. I think, I don't know, but it.
Speaker 3: Was I think we went out for lunch.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well no, we went to Winners and it was
Speaker 2: hella busy, and I'm like, aren't these like why aren't
Speaker 2: these people working? Like why is every like the lineup
Speaker 2: was huge? It felt like it was a Saturday.
Speaker 1: So anyway, Yeah, anyways, Honestly, like in this case, it's
Speaker 1: nineteen thirty, I kind of wish I could go back
Speaker 1: to the nineteen thirties. It seems like a nicer time.
Speaker 1: Don't get me wrong. They had their struggles of their
Speaker 1: own two which are probably worse than today, but it
Speaker 1: just seemed like things were at a bit of a
Speaker 1: slower pace back.
Speaker 2: Then, a little more simple, a little more simple sometimes
Speaker 2: sounds nice.
Speaker 1: It does, for sure. But yeah, I'm excited for this case,
Speaker 1: the Impossible Murder.
Speaker 3: Are you for this?
Speaker 2: I'm excited to hear about this too.
Speaker 1: Okay, Well, this mystery, I mean, honestly, it hasn't gotten
Speaker 1: near enough attention over the years in my opinion, and
Speaker 1: it is known as the impossible Possible Murder. And it's
Speaker 1: one of those cases that makes you question everything you
Speaker 1: think you might know. Really Okay, So the story takes
Speaker 1: us back to nineteen thirties England and revolves around an
Speaker 1: ordinary couple. Now, what makes this case so fascinating is
Speaker 1: how controversial the trial was as well, not just the
Speaker 1: mystery around it, but the trial of the case, which
Speaker 1: of course we're going to dive into. So the verdict
Speaker 1: ended up being a first in English legal history. Oh yeah,
Speaker 1: and it left people completely divided, not even like just
Speaker 1: the public, but like some of the courtroom was like
Speaker 1: polar opposites.
Speaker 2: Really, yes, Oh are you telling you're not going to
Speaker 2: tell us right now?
Speaker 3: No?
Speaker 2: Here, I'm like, oh man, he's given us the goods
Speaker 2: right at the start.
Speaker 1: I'm I'm leaving I'm apping you up, is what I'm doing. Yeah,
Speaker 1: some believe an innocent man escaped the gallows, while others
Speaker 1: believe a cold blooded killer ended up walking free as
Speaker 1: a result of this trial. It's one of the two.
Speaker 2: Huh, okay, and.
Speaker 1: It's up for you to decide which is the case.
Speaker 2: Okay, let's do it.
Speaker 1: So if you look at the facts, it's hard to
Speaker 1: see how this accused could have ever been convicted in
Speaker 1: the first place. In my opinion, it's pretty much impossible
Speaker 1: to have committed the crime. Or is it dun dun dune? Okay,
Speaker 1: enough amping you up. Let's get into the case. So
Speaker 1: it all started in a year of nineteen thirty one
Speaker 1: with an individual by the name of William Herbert Wallace.
Speaker 1: He was fifty two years old and he worked in insurance.
Speaker 1: He was an insurance agent for Prudential Financial. William seemed
Speaker 1: like pretty average guy for his age. He was quiet, relatively,
Speaker 1: you know, unremarkable, just living a normal life. Now, no
Speaker 1: one that really sticks out in society, right, just kind
Speaker 1: of blends in. Not that he was like it's a
Speaker 1: bad thing. He was completely happy with that, don't get
Speaker 1: me wrong, right, kind of like your average show exactly now.
Speaker 1: His early years were a bit more adventurous, as he
Speaker 1: worked odd jobs in far off places like India and Shanghai,
Speaker 1: before health issues eventually brought him back to England. Now,
Speaker 1: in hindsight, you can say that these health issues were
Speaker 1: kind of a blessing in disguise because in nineteen eleven
Speaker 1: he would meet Julia, the woman who he would quickly
Speaker 1: fall in love with. Two years later, the two got
Speaker 1: married and settled down at twenty nine Wolverton Street in
Speaker 1: Liverpool's Angfield District. Now, the Wallaces didn't have any kids,
Speaker 1: but they seemed perfectly happy with their quiet life together.
Speaker 1: They mostly kept themselves and even after living in the
Speaker 1: neighborhood for fifteen years, the neighbors never really noticed any
Speaker 1: arguments or tension between the two of them. In fact,
Speaker 1: people described them as a loving and devoted couple.
Speaker 2: And even back then so they didn't have kids, which
Speaker 2: was probably like a super rarity.
Speaker 3: Right, oh one d percent.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean even today if someone's if you tell someone
Speaker 1: that you're not gonna have kids, like they look at
Speaker 1: you sideways.
Speaker 2: They do. But I think it's slowly starting it to
Speaker 2: be more accepted.
Speaker 1: I think they're just slowly accepting it from us. I
Speaker 1: think those close to us are slowly accepting that we're
Speaker 1: not having kids.
Speaker 2: Well, no, I feel like more there's more and more
Speaker 2: people deciding not to have kids. Nowadays, that's true, but
Speaker 2: back then, I feel like you're supposed to be you know.
Speaker 1: Pumpo, like eight eight kids or so for sure, but
Speaker 1: you still get those sideways look. There's more people deciding
Speaker 1: not to but you still get judged the sardlets.
Speaker 2: I always think it's so funny because it's like, I
Speaker 2: don't give you sideways looks when you decide to have kids.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Karen, when your kid is running and screaming to
Speaker 1: the supermarket, I'm not giving you a sideways look, actually
Speaker 1: I am.
Speaker 3: But still that's okay.
Speaker 2: Oh my gosh. No, I feel like, just decide.
Speaker 1: What you'd like one hundred percent, do what you want
Speaker 1: to do, and hey, don't judge with people for how live.
Speaker 1: But these two were definitely living their best life, having
Speaker 1: a great marriage together. They were kid lists just you know,
Speaker 1: doing exactly what they wanted.
Speaker 2: Sounds great now.
Speaker 1: Julia had a creative side, and she was an excellent
Speaker 1: pianist and a watercolor artist. She was fluent in French
Speaker 1: as well, and had what William considered very refined literary tastes. William,
Speaker 1: on the other hand, was into science and philosophy and
Speaker 1: was known as an intellectual, though some found him a
Speaker 1: little bit particular a sorry peculiar at times. Still, though
Speaker 1: he made an effort to embrace the arts, you know
Speaker 1: what his wife was involved in. He even picked up
Speaker 1: violin lessons at the age of fifty, likely so he
Speaker 1: could play alongside his wife.
Speaker 2: Wow. Yeah, okay, I must actually kind of obsessed with
Speaker 2: these this couple.
Speaker 1: Right, they're, like I said, living their best life, just
Speaker 1: doing what they want.
Speaker 2: Well, deciding you want to embrace on her new skill
Speaker 2: at the age of fifty is impressive. But I love that.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of people who, you know, as you
Speaker 1: get older, like oh I'm too old for that, or
Speaker 1: you know, I should have done it when I was younger.
Speaker 1: It's like, hey, it's never too late, and tell it's
Speaker 1: too late, you know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that's great.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: So the couple enjoyed simple pleasures like countryside trips and
Speaker 1: occasional nights at the cinema. But of all Williams hobbies,
Speaker 1: there was one that truly stood out chess. William's chess
Speaker 1: skills might be up for debate to this day. No
Speaker 1: one really knows how good he was. I mean, we'll
Speaker 1: get into a little bit. He obviously had some skill,
Speaker 1: but I digress. He was passionate about the game, though.
Speaker 1: We do know that it was one of the few
Speaker 1: activities that could get him out of the house and
Speaker 1: away from his wife. Unfortunately, in a cruel twist of fate,
Speaker 1: a chess match would set off a chain of events
Speaker 1: that spelled devastation for the couple. It was Monday, January nineteenth,
Speaker 1: nineteen thirty one. The workday had come to a close,
Speaker 1: and William had just arrived for his match in a
Speaker 1: local chess championship. So clearly he had some skill because
Speaker 1: he's in a chess championship right. So before he could begin, though,
Speaker 1: the venue's owner stopped him, explaining that a phone call
Speaker 1: had come in about half an hour before William had
Speaker 1: arrived there. The caller on the other end of the
Speaker 1: phone was a deep gruff voice individual and claimed to
Speaker 1: want to meet William the next evening at around seven
Speaker 1: thirty pm. He said he was a potential client looking
Speaker 1: to set up insurance for his daughter, and his daughter
Speaker 1: had just turned twenty one that day, in fact, and
Speaker 1: then he explained that he couldn't call back later because
Speaker 1: he's busy with celebrating the birthday and everything, so he
Speaker 1: called the venue to kind of leave a message for
Speaker 1: him right. The man gave his name as R. M.
Speaker 1: Qualthrow and provided an address of twenty five men Love Gardens,
Speaker 1: East Mossley Hill. William took the information from venue owner,
Speaker 1: wrote it all down and everything, but admitted he didn't
Speaker 1: recognize the name or the address. He asked around, but
Speaker 1: no one else seemed familiar with it either. As it
Speaker 1: turned out, there was a very good reason for that,
Speaker 1: though William wouldn't discover that until much later.
Speaker 3: Neither would you.
Speaker 2: No, my brain's going wild though.
Speaker 1: No, we'll we'll touch on this here in a moment,
Speaker 1: but we're gonna digress just for a bit now. Whether
Speaker 1: William won his chess match that night remains unclear and
Speaker 1: honestly not important to the story. But I still hope
Speaker 1: he won that shit regardless, Everything that evening seemed normal
Speaker 1: during the event, and soon though he was on his
Speaker 1: way home the next day, January twentieth, nineteen nineteen thirty one.
Speaker 1: We're still, you know, back in those thirties. No big
Speaker 1: time warp is happening here. It started off like any
Speaker 1: other day, any other Tuesday. William spent the afternoon collecting
Speaker 1: insurance premiums from clients, working between three point thirty and
Speaker 1: five forty five PM. Those interacted with him said he
Speaker 1: seemed completely normal, relaxed, chill, cracking jokes, and even enjoying
Speaker 1: a cup of tea with some of his clients too.
Speaker 1: Once he finished his rounds, William likely headed home at
Speaker 1: around six PM. It's here between six thirty and six
Speaker 1: forty five PM at the timeline becomes critical. What might
Speaker 1: seem like a small, insignificant window of fifteen minutes would
Speaker 1: soon become the centerpiece of this entire fucking case. Okay,
Speaker 1: so at this point, Julia was still going about her
Speaker 1: day as usual. We know this because a local milk
Speaker 1: boy stopped by the house around that time to collect
Speaker 1: a routine payment for her or from her.
Speaker 3: Sorry.
Speaker 1: Tragically, it would be one of the last interactions Julia
Speaker 1: had ever had before meeting her untimely death. By seven
Speaker 1: to ten pm, William was spotted roughly twenty minutes away
Speaker 1: from their home boarding a train. As he followed up
Speaker 1: on the mysterious appointment with this RM character, heading to
Speaker 1: twenty five Men Love Gardens East. That same individual you
Speaker 1: know left the message day earlier saying wanted to meet
Speaker 1: up at seven thirty right, okay, right.
Speaker 2: I couldn't remember what time it was with seven thirty.
Speaker 1: Seven thirty m Now, he was unfamiliar with this area,
Speaker 1: so William made a point of asking for directions from
Speaker 1: anyone who might help train operators, police officers, and even
Speaker 1: the odd random passerby. So there were several people who
Speaker 1: could put him in this place at the time. But
Speaker 1: where things got strange is right here. While there was
Speaker 1: a Men Love Avenue and there was also a Men
Speaker 1: Love Gardens West, South and North, there was no Men
Speaker 1: Love Garden East, which was the address that was provided.
Speaker 1: Some people William asked told him this flat out, there
Speaker 1: is no Men Love Garden East, while others assumed maybe
Speaker 1: it does exist somewhere nearby, they just didn't.
Speaker 3: Know about it. Okay, I mean it fits in.
Speaker 1: If there's a Men Love Gardens West, South and North,
Speaker 1: of course there'd be one east, but there wasn't. So
Speaker 1: by eight to twenty pm, Williams search for this elusive
Speaker 1: address had hit a dead end. He was frustrated, and
Speaker 1: he decided it was time to give up and just
Speaker 1: head back home, leaving behind this potential new client.
Speaker 2: That's such a piss off, hey, it is. That's one
Speaker 2: issue we don't have today, because I would just be
Speaker 2: like putting this in Google Maps, you know.
Speaker 1: Exactly a plot in it and Google now. William's neighbors
Speaker 1: were the next to give a timeline of his whereabouts.
Speaker 1: At around eight forty five pm, they were preparing for
Speaker 1: a night out when they heard a knock at their
Speaker 1: front door. When they opened the door to check who
Speaker 1: it was, they found William standing there, and he was
Speaker 1: looking a little confused and definitely a bit uneasy. He
Speaker 1: asked if they had noticed anything strange and explained that
Speaker 1: he'd been trying to unlock both the front and back
Speaker 1: door of his home, but neither key seemed to work
Speaker 1: for him. With the neighbors standing by to assist to
Speaker 1: see if they could help in any way, William tried
Speaker 1: the back door to the home again, and this time,
Speaker 1: for reasons unknown, the key worked.
Speaker 2: Oh okay.
Speaker 1: The door creaked open, revealing a dark house inside, lights
Speaker 1: were out, William stepped in began lighting lamps as he
Speaker 1: moved through the home. He checked upstairs in the bedroom,
Speaker 1: found nothing out of the ordinary, and made his way
Speaker 1: back downstairs. And that's when entering into the sitting room
Speaker 1: when he would have his whirl shattered on the floor
Speaker 1: near the fireplace, laid Julia's motionless body. No, the scene
Speaker 1: was grim. Julia had suffered severe blunt force trauma to
Speaker 1: her head, leaving no doubt that she was beyond help.
Speaker 1: She was beyond she was dead.
Speaker 3: She was dead. Yeah, she was done.
Speaker 1: William immediately called for help, and authorities quickly arrived at
Speaker 1: the scene. However, the initial investigation didn't bring much clarity
Speaker 1: to the situation. If anything, it only deepened the mystery
Speaker 1: and raised more questions than answers.
Speaker 2: Holy shit, and I okay, that's quite a visual, because yeah,
Speaker 2: I was thinking, goes in his house, he turned some
Speaker 2: lights on, but that's not really the case. So it
Speaker 2: would take kind of a little while. You know, he's
Speaker 2: lighting up this house, probably wondering a why the hell
Speaker 2: he wasn't able to get in and be like why
Speaker 2: it is dark?
Speaker 3: Yep.
Speaker 2: And then as you're lighting these lanterns, or whatever the
Speaker 2: hell you're calling them. You see that, Oh that is
Speaker 2: a frickin' nightmare. And a half.
Speaker 1: Agreed, but that's what he was faced with. And yeah,
Speaker 1: and I mean, all things considered, I mean regarding this situation, like,
Speaker 1: it wasn't in any sort of disarray when he looked around.
Speaker 1: It's not like there was shit everywhere, you know, a
Speaker 1: clear struggle or anything. And aside from a few like
Speaker 1: slightly out of place things, it just kind of all
Speaker 1: seemed like, you know, the regular house of course, other
Speaker 1: than you know, ah, my wife's dead right there. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so yeah, so yeah, there was no obvious sign of
Speaker 1: a struggle. Blood was found in only two places, of course,
Speaker 1: near Julia's body and in the bathtub of the home. Notably,
Speaker 1: there was no blood on William's clothes that he was
Speaker 1: wearing that evening. Now, there was evidence of a cabinet
Speaker 1: being broken into, with four pounds missing from the cash
Speaker 1: box inside. Remember this is over it, okay, right, so
Speaker 1: it's four pounds. However, beyond that, nothing suggested a robbery
Speaker 1: gone wrong, and there wasn't the kind of disarrayed expect
Speaker 1: from someone ransacking the place either. One peculiar detail was
Speaker 1: the apparent disappearance of two items, a fire poker from
Speaker 1: the fireplace and an iron bar. Now, that bar reportedly
Speaker 1: was discovered years later during renovation on the house, but
Speaker 1: the poker itself. The fire poker was never found. Many
Speaker 1: believed that it was most likely the murder weapon, given
Speaker 1: how Julia's body was found next to the fireplace and
Speaker 1: the nature of her injuries. Now, despite the search of
Speaker 1: the surrounding area, this fire poker just simply vanished. In
Speaker 1: cases like this, investigators of course naturally follow every possible lead,
Speaker 1: you know, follow the evidence, as they say. Yet with
Speaker 1: the Wallace's nothing significant seemed to emerge from the crime
Speaker 1: scene or the investigation. There was no individual discovered with
Speaker 1: a motive that would want to harm Julia. Julia herself
Speaker 1: was known for being shy, reserved, sticking close to her
Speaker 1: husband and keeping to her It seems almost unimaginable that
Speaker 1: anyone would target her, let alone, in such a brutal way.
Speaker 1: If this wasn't a botched burglary, then what could have
Speaker 1: been the motive. Many believe that whoever this rm quaal
Speaker 1: throw was, that they were the true killer. They were
Speaker 1: the ones who brought William two men of Gardens East,
Speaker 1: which didn't exist as a ploy to get him out
Speaker 1: of the house so they could strike, assuming of course,
Speaker 1: that William an RM weren't the same person.
Speaker 2: Oh what the shit? They could be the same person.
Speaker 3: That's what unbelief.
Speaker 2: Oh, I don't know why. I wasn't expecting that. See
Speaker 2: my brain right now. I was either thinking that something
Speaker 2: bad was going to happen that night when he was
Speaker 2: like you told to go somewhere, or even the night before,
Speaker 2: and this was just like a phone call, like making
Speaker 2: sure he was there kind of thing, right, Because it
Speaker 2: doesn't make sense. He does have this these weekly things
Speaker 2: where he goes in place chess, So why do we
Speaker 2: have to make up this make believe shit too.
Speaker 1: We'll kind of touch on that. Okay, you're totally on
Speaker 1: the right track with your thought, one hundred percent, but
Speaker 1: we'll get there, okay. So in any case, of course,
Speaker 1: with the closest person to the victim, they're usually a
Speaker 1: suspect right away, and such William was put under the microscope. However,
Speaker 1: there were no rumors of infidelity, there were no reports
Speaker 1: of strained marriage, and from the start, public opinion, though,
Speaker 1: was firmly against William to them, the only person to
Speaker 1: have a plausible motive to kill Julia was in fact
Speaker 1: her husband, but there just again seemed to be no
Speaker 1: reason for motive.
Speaker 3: Now, when this.
Speaker 1: Case went to trial against William, this sentiment carried over
Speaker 1: to the jury, who, after four days of proceedings, took
Speaker 1: a mirror one hour and sentenced William to death by
Speaker 1: the gallows. They sentenced William to hang for the murder
Speaker 1: of his wife.
Speaker 2: It was just they were that sure, hey, yes, because
Speaker 2: right now, I'm like, well, I didn't just sit through
Speaker 2: a court case, I guess, but like, doesn't make sense.
Speaker 1: It doesn't, I mean. The verdict came with a severe
Speaker 1: lack of any direct evidence, no quote unquote smoking gun,
Speaker 1: if you will, nothing that linked William to the murder scene.
Speaker 1: He unfortunately wasn't convicted because the prosecution had proven his
Speaker 1: guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. He was instead convicted because
Speaker 1: he was the only suspect they had, and they convicted
Speaker 1: him and sentenced him to death.
Speaker 2: Because nothing else seemed like it could be plausible, I
Speaker 2: guess exactly to them.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 1: However, however, this lack of evidence was very clear, and
Speaker 1: the conviction was simply absurd too many. Even the presiding
Speaker 1: judge took issue with the jury's decision. As I said,
Speaker 1: there was a big split in the courtroom, right, Yeah.
Speaker 1: The judge disagreed with the jury's wrong. He reminded them
Speaker 1: that their duty was to acquit William unless they were
Speaker 1: one hundred percent certain of his guilt and based on
Speaker 1: evidence that he had killed Julia. The judge he even
Speaker 1: emphasized the case wasn't about uncovering who killed Julia. This
Speaker 1: case that they're talking about in the courtroom right now
Speaker 1: was strictly whether William was guilty and if so, what
Speaker 1: was the proof that supported that claim. That's what they're
Speaker 1: in the court for, not who killed her. It's did
Speaker 1: he kill her or did he not? And if he did,
Speaker 1: what's the proof? Okay, So, whether William was guilty or
Speaker 1: innocent will forever remain unknown and in contention. But let's
Speaker 1: take a look at the most common arguments for and
Speaker 1: against him. Okay.
Speaker 2: But so that that was like he was found guilty,
Speaker 2: then like that's that he.
Speaker 1: Was found guilty and he was sentenced to the gallows.
Speaker 2: Gosh, Okay, Okay, Like I don't know, it just seems
Speaker 2: so weird. To me that even the judge is like,
Speaker 2: you know, questioning this.
Speaker 1: We'll get back to a little bit of the court
Speaker 1: stuff here too.
Speaker 3: Don't you worry.
Speaker 1: I know where your head's at, and trust me, I
Speaker 1: did that on purpose.
Speaker 2: Of course, you did your kind of torturing us today.
Speaker 2: I'm not gonna lie.
Speaker 1: This is one of those cases where it was a
Speaker 1: torture researching it, because it's all open ended like that.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 1: One major point regarding whether he did or didn't do
Speaker 1: it is the question of motive. William just didn't seem
Speaker 1: to have one. As I mentioned, there's no reports of
Speaker 1: marital issues, there's no secret lovers, and no big insurance
Speaker 1: payout to gain. And if someone were able to pull
Speaker 1: off an insurance scheme, William, being an insurance dealer, would
Speaker 1: have been one to know how to do it instead. Well,
Speaker 1: Julia had been insured, but for just a modest sum
Speaker 1: that was kind of considered average at the time. It
Speaker 1: was just your regular insurance claim. So to top it
Speaker 1: off after her death, William didn't undergo any dramatic lifestyle
Speaker 1: changes either, or for that matter, he just continued to
Speaker 1: live his life. Of course, though it's impossible to know
Speaker 1: what really goes on in a marriage behind closed doors. Right,
Speaker 1: they may have been having more troubles than anyone's aware of.
Speaker 1: So let's play devil's advocate here for a moment. Okay,
Speaker 1: Let's assume that William did want Julia killed. That means
Speaker 1: he would have had to come up with a plan,
Speaker 1: the elaborate plan. Okay, because if he wants or killed,
Speaker 1: he also has to initiate this RM quothro individual, whether
Speaker 1: he's the phone caller or he hires.
Speaker 3: Someone to do it.
Speaker 1: So he's got to come up with this plan, and
Speaker 1: he would have to stage his phone call from a
Speaker 1: fictitious client during a time when everyone at the chess
Speaker 1: club would hear about it. His address at this fake
Speaker 1: men Love Garden East. It would provide him with a
Speaker 1: rock solid alibi for being away from the house when
Speaker 1: his wife is killed. Right, right, So this being a
Speaker 1: potential is supported by a piece of evidence that was
Speaker 1: fann This is something that was discovered. The phone call
Speaker 1: from this RM was traced to a phone booth that
Speaker 1: was just four hundred yards from the Wallace home where
Speaker 1: the murder took place, which means it was very easy
Speaker 1: for William to go to that phone booth and make
Speaker 1: a call right so as the timeline is laid out
Speaker 1: by the prosecution in court. They suggested that William could
Speaker 1: have left his house at seven to fifteen pm, reached
Speaker 1: the phone booth by seven eighteen pm, and made the
Speaker 1: call that was answered at the Chess club at seven twenty.
Speaker 1: They also argued that whoever RM was, they clearly had
Speaker 1: intimate knowledge of William's schedule enough to note that he'd
Speaker 1: be at the chest that night, So who else could
Speaker 1: it have been? So they're saying William on his way
Speaker 1: to the Chess Championship stop by the phone booth, placed
Speaker 1: the call himself, then proceeded to the hall at the venue,
Speaker 1: and then received the message that he himself delivered.
Speaker 2: Shit that kind of makes sense, it does, doesn't it?
Speaker 2: And because then he can ask around that night like
Speaker 2: do you know who this guy is? Like where is
Speaker 2: this oh man? That really makes sense, it really does.
Speaker 1: But William's defense had some strong rebuttals to this theory.
Speaker 1: Even the venue owner himself, who took the call and
Speaker 1: knew William. He noted that RM's voice sounded nothing like William.
Speaker 1: It's plausible that this RM was watching William to leave
Speaker 1: the house waiting for him to pass his phone booth
Speaker 1: before taking that as a signal to act, almost framing
Speaker 1: William from making the call himself. But why didn't RM
Speaker 1: simply attack Julia then and there when William was at
Speaker 1: the chess championship and RM clearly knew that he was
Speaker 1: there at this chess championship, because I mean, hey, he
Speaker 1: placed the call there and he made the plans for
Speaker 1: the next day instead. Why is that the case? It's unknown,
Speaker 1: but the defense team in the court was able to
Speaker 1: provide an important detail on how RM could have known
Speaker 1: William's schedule. See, since William was participating in the championship game,
Speaker 1: his name was listed on the club's public roster, which
Speaker 1: was available for anyone to view, very open in the public,
Speaker 1: probably on a bulletin board in the venue. So it's
Speaker 1: not far fetched to believe that someone could have actually
Speaker 1: planned this simply by looking at that piece of paper,
Speaker 1: knowing he would have been there.
Speaker 2: But then it also makes sense that they would could
Speaker 2: have just done this crime that night exactly.
Speaker 3: Why not just do it that night mm.
Speaker 2: Hmm, instead of like trying to get him out of
Speaker 2: the house again.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Now, some think that RM must have known the
Speaker 1: Wallaces personally at least to some degree. They believed he
Speaker 1: left the message with the venue owner instead of waiting
Speaker 1: to call back and speak to William directly to avoid
Speaker 1: speaking with him and like having his voice record. Right now,
Speaker 1: the most debated aspect of this case, aside from, of course,
Speaker 1: whether William committed the murder or not, is whether William
Speaker 1: could have actually physically committed committed the crime at all.
Speaker 1: And it all boils down to that timeline, that very
Speaker 1: important time window that I said that fifteen minutes. So
Speaker 1: let's go back and take a look at it. If
Speaker 1: you remember that milk boy stopped by and saw Julia
Speaker 1: alive and well at around six thirty pm, and the
Speaker 1: next time William was accounted for was approximately seven to
Speaker 1: ten pm, and this was about twenty minutes away from
Speaker 1: their home, Right, that's where he was spot at, twenty
Speaker 1: minutes away. This means at the very least William would
Speaker 1: have had to leave the house by six point fifty
Speaker 1: pm to reach this location in time. So for William
Speaker 1: to be guilty, he would have had to need to
Speaker 1: kill Julia clean up the scene because it was not
Speaker 1: a dirty scene. Right, there is blood found a little
Speaker 1: bit in the bathtub and at her body, no disarray
Speaker 1: on nothing, so ensure that no blood got anywhere in
Speaker 1: the process, including on himself and his own clothing.
Speaker 3: Hide the murder weapon.
Speaker 1: Maybe even if he did get blood in his clothes
Speaker 1: and he changed them, hide those clothes as well, All
Speaker 1: within twenty minutes. He would have had to commit that
Speaker 1: crime in twenty minutes to be seen at the location
Speaker 1: he was.
Speaker 2: Seen, because he was legitimately seen, yes, over there, yes
Speaker 2: by numerous several people.
Speaker 1: Okay, because remember he asked for directions from police public
Speaker 1: you know. Yeah, Now, as I mentioned, the house was
Speaker 1: quite remarkably clean, with blood contained only around her body,
Speaker 1: bathtub blah blah blah blah blah. And the idea of
Speaker 1: someone working that quickly while escaping the scene leaving it tidy,
Speaker 1: though it seems far fetched, it may not be entirely possible.
Speaker 1: Twenty minute window. People can do a lot in twenty minutes, right. However,
Speaker 1: the prosecution placed a lot of weight on that milk
Speaker 1: boy's claim that he collected Julia's payment at six thirty pm,
Speaker 1: but this wasn't as solid of a timeline as they hoped.
Speaker 1: A local paper girl testified that she saw the milk
Speaker 1: boy at William's door number twenty nine the address as
Speaker 1: she was leaving the neighbor's house number twenty seven at
Speaker 1: allegedly around six forty three. A group of neighbor boys
Speaker 1: backed this up, stating they saw the paper girl leaving
Speaker 1: a few minutes after six forty five. Oh boy, yeah,
Speaker 1: so instead of six thirty, it's six forty five fifteen
Speaker 1: minute difference, yeah, which means William would have had to
Speaker 1: do that in five minute minutes.
Speaker 2: But Kate, but could he have done this after like
Speaker 2: after he got home, you know, when he was like
Speaker 2: struggling with the getting the locks opening the door.
Speaker 1: I don't believe so, no, because he would have gotten
Speaker 1: home and he had the witnesses of his neighbors, you know,
Speaker 1: and it's prior to Again, he would have had only
Speaker 1: a few minutes because he's he was traveling by train, right,
Speaker 1: so he had a I mean, I don't have this
Speaker 1: in the case written out, but he would have had
Speaker 1: a train stub from his time traveling, so that again
Speaker 1: would have left no time for him to commit this
Speaker 1: crime in between arriving and the neighbors witnessing him enter
Speaker 1: the house. Well shit, yeah, huh. Okay, so the case
Speaker 1: has no clear direction. There was no hard evidence against
Speaker 1: William and no compelling leading points heading to anyone else
Speaker 1: at all, no other suspect. Now, Ultimately, William's conviction and
Speaker 1: sentence were overturned due to insufficient evidence. He never saw
Speaker 1: the gallows and he was released.
Speaker 2: Okay, yes, okay.
Speaker 1: Making his case the first in English legal history to
Speaker 1: result in such a decision someone going to hang on
Speaker 1: the gallows and being overturned.
Speaker 2: Okay, Well you a few minutes ago you said something
Speaker 2: about like he didn't remarry and stuff. So I was
Speaker 2: kind of like noted, Okay, if I.
Speaker 1: Leave you on a cliffhanger, I always leave a little
Speaker 1: bit of bread combs for you for you to know
Speaker 1: which direction. And so yeah, I'm glad you caught onto that,
Speaker 1: because yeah, he didn't remarry. He was released and yeah
Speaker 1: he was not found guilty.
Speaker 2: Well this was like the love of his life.
Speaker 3: Yep.
Speaker 2: You know. I kind of wonder though, if there was
Speaker 2: something going on, like if she I, oh, it's just
Speaker 2: terrible to like say bad things like you know what,
Speaker 2: this couple seems so lovely, but maybe she was seeing
Speaker 2: someone else. Or something like you don't.
Speaker 3: Know, right, you don't know.
Speaker 1: So while William was cleared by the courts, night, his
Speaker 1: life never really truly recovered. In the public opinion. He
Speaker 1: was still seen as guilty and the relentless harassment forced
Speaker 1: him to move away. Now Sadly, his health continued to decline,
Speaker 1: as he had moved back to England with health issues. Yeah,
Speaker 1: health continued to decline, and William would die on February
Speaker 1: twenty sixth, nineteen thirty three, a little over two years
Speaker 1: after his wife Julia was murdered.
Speaker 2: Oh probably from like heartbreak too and like the stress
Speaker 2: that he would have yeap oh shit.
Speaker 1: Now. After William's death, his private diary entries were made public,
Speaker 1: revealing his grief and his just utter heartbreak over the
Speaker 1: loss of his wife. He wrote about Julia with deep fondness,
Speaker 1: but also hinted at lingering suspicions. One entry mentioned his
Speaker 1: belief that a colleague from work might have been the
Speaker 1: real killer. At one point, he even considered hiring a
Speaker 1: private investigator to follow this person, though he never named
Speaker 1: them outright or acted on the idea.
Speaker 2: Like before his wife was dead, kind of thing thought about.
Speaker 1: This or like no after she had died, and he's
Speaker 1: writing about the greef grief and loss and who he
Speaker 1: thinks did it is contemplating hiring a pi okay, okay,
Speaker 1: yeah now. Counts differ on the exact circumstances of William's death.
Speaker 1: Some say he passed away after refusing surgery that might
Speaker 1: have saved his life, while others claim that the surgery
Speaker 1: itself is what claimed his life. But either way, his
Speaker 1: final years were far from glamorous, filled with grief and
Speaker 1: unfortunately his declining health. If William was innocent, the question
Speaker 1: remains who could have wanted Julia dead and why whoever
Speaker 1: committed it was methodical enough not to leave behind any
Speaker 1: incriminating evidence, and yet so to the point that here
Speaker 1: we are today where there's no clear answers to who
Speaker 1: killed her back in nineteen thirty one.
Speaker 2: Well, I was just thinking, like, there could have been
Speaker 2: more evidence, right, I mean so much if we were
Speaker 2: to be if this case were to be happening today,
Speaker 2: you know, more things might have been like picked up
Speaker 2: and yeah, potentially.
Speaker 1: So that is the story the murder of Julia Wallace
Speaker 1: aka the Impossible Murder.
Speaker 2: Hm. Wow, And I wonder why he thought it was
Speaker 2: someone at work. Was there anything in there about like
Speaker 2: that he thought maybe Oops, sorry that was loud that
Speaker 2: she had involvement with this person.
Speaker 3: No, not so much.
Speaker 1: Now, I did do a little bit of digging on
Speaker 1: who to this individual could be, and it's pure speculation.
Speaker 1: This individual is someone by the name of Richard Gordon Perry,
Speaker 1: which is a former employee at Wallace's workplace. And I mean,
Speaker 1: maybe this isn't the individual that William was suspecting himself.
Speaker 1: This is just someone that others suspect really right, and
Speaker 1: they believe that he's kind of like motivated by like
Speaker 1: a personal grudge or something. And the guy's like known
Speaker 1: to be dishonest, had a history of petty crime behavior.
Speaker 1: So yeah, like he kind of had access to William's
Speaker 1: schedule and might have known, you know that the house
Speaker 1: would have been empty and stuff, or known that he's
Speaker 1: going to go travel for you know, potential client things
Speaker 1: like that.
Speaker 2: But so it could have honestly just been to hurt
Speaker 2: William I.
Speaker 1: Guess, yeah, most likely a potential revenge or something like that.
Speaker 2: Damn.
Speaker 1: Now, apparently there was also a witness that came forward
Speaker 1: later by the name of Lily Hall claimed that this
Speaker 1: individual confided in her years later about knowing details of
Speaker 1: the crime, and she also recalled seeing him wearing a
Speaker 1: bloodstained coat shortly after the crime. But this is strictly
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just her word.
Speaker 2: Right saying who was wearing a bloodstain?
Speaker 1: That this Richard Gordon Perry that works with William.
Speaker 2: Okay, yeah, huh wow. Wow. Now my brain is just
Speaker 2: like going in circles right now.
Speaker 1: But that is all circumstantial evidence and nothing to go
Speaker 1: on to actually be concrete.
Speaker 2: Man, that is just like a bucket of shit right there.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: But the biggest question mark I have is not like,
Speaker 1: did William do it? Did he not do it? The
Speaker 1: biggest question mark for me is why wait for the
Speaker 1: following day? Why not during that chess championship?
Speaker 2: Yeah? Maybe do they not? It depends maybe how well
Speaker 2: William did at that championship. For how long he'll be
Speaker 2: away potentially, well, it was kind of like up in
Speaker 2: the air, how long he'd be out of the house.
Speaker 3: I don't know, no idea.
Speaker 2: Do you think that it was William?
Speaker 3: I don't.
Speaker 1: I do see him as suspect number one. Most of
Speaker 1: the evidence points to him, but I don't think most
Speaker 1: of the evidence points to him because he did it.
Speaker 1: I think most of the evidence points to him because
Speaker 1: we just don't have evidence for another individual. I think
Speaker 1: that the police unfortunately missed some details. I believe unfortunately,
Speaker 1: whoever committed it was careful enough not to leave behind
Speaker 1: many details.
Speaker 3: And yeah, I don't.
Speaker 1: Think William committed it, but he is the most likely suspect.
Speaker 2: And the fuck that they put his freakin' uh like
Speaker 2: diary shit out there after that's so sad. But it
Speaker 2: was probably I loved when I'm assuming that was just
Speaker 2: trying to like portray his innocence more well.
Speaker 1: And I'm not sure if they like put every single
Speaker 1: word and phrase every page from his diary, but I
Speaker 1: they probably made some like important pages, like some things public,
Speaker 1: you know.
Speaker 2: Well yeah, and too if he had turned down that surgery,
Speaker 2: it was probably like, you know, he wanted maybe to
Speaker 2: just be with his wife again, right, or what was
Speaker 2: the point of living without her or something, which is
Speaker 2: o art breaking?
Speaker 3: I agree. Oh okay, so yeah, there you go.
Speaker 2: This one almost makes me want to cry a little.
Speaker 3: It's a sad one, it really is.
Speaker 1: I mean, don't get me wrong, Like all of them
Speaker 1: are sad, but this one, just because of that relationship,
Speaker 1: tugs at the heartstrings a little, you know, and yeah,
Speaker 1: it gets to you in certain ways. So yeah, hopefully
Speaker 1: you guys enjoyed that one. I had an interesting time
Speaker 1: researching it. It was a little bit of a different
Speaker 1: case being that quote impossible murder scenario. Definitely had my
Speaker 1: head spending a few times. I know that for sure.
Speaker 2: Well you did good. You had me on the ende
Speaker 2: of my seat like almost the whole time, I.
Speaker 1: Know, because you nearly knocked over that stool that one.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I did. I was like really getting into it.
Speaker 1: Well, if you guys are interested in checking out more
Speaker 1: of our social media and everything, check out our description.
Speaker 1: We got all that stuff down there, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook,
Speaker 1: we got merch We've had people sending us in their
Speaker 1: Spotify wrapped this week, and we've been on the top
Speaker 1: of many people's lists, whether it's number one, two, three, four,
Speaker 1: or five, you name it. It's incredible to see and
Speaker 1: thank you so much for all that support. It means
Speaker 1: the world to us. If we could ask you to
Speaker 1: go ahead, if you haven't yet, please give the podcast
Speaker 1: a review. It helps us grow. We are an indie podcast.
Speaker 1: We look after ourselves. We produce it, and those rating
Speaker 1: really help other people identify the podcast as you know, hey,
Speaker 1: something that they might want to see. So we really
Speaker 1: appreciate those ratings. And yeah, I mean a lot if
Speaker 1: you go and give us a rating that you feel
Speaker 1: is appropriate. But if I may suggest five.
Speaker 2: Star, five star, and we love that you're sharing the
Speaker 2: Spotify wrap. That is so cool to see. Kind of
Speaker 2: I get excited this time a year when that comes out.
Speaker 2: It's really cool.
Speaker 1: I get super excited, but also a little bit stressed
Speaker 1: because I'm like, I want to put them all on
Speaker 1: our like Instagram stories, and I hope I'm not missing
Speaker 1: any yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah, which I'm like, we probably have missed a couple,
Speaker 2: but hopefully not. Hopefully not. We're trying our best.
Speaker 3: Send it to us again.
Speaker 1: If we missed it, just message us on Instagram or
Speaker 1: something like that and we'll see if we can find
Speaker 1: your message and put it on up there.
Speaker 2: Yeah yeah, there we go.
Speaker 1: Well, thank you for being here, and of course, until
Speaker 1: next time, stay wicked.