tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30598467.post116524320990653224..comments2023-08-16T12:07:22.995+00:00Comments on The Daily (Maybe): Hanging around the bookshelvesJim Jeppshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17410387006098326671noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30598467.post-21197157145126857012007-01-18T11:28:00.000+00:002007-01-18T11:28:00.000+00:00Yes, I agree, I think the fact that he'd been in t...Yes, I agree, I think the fact that he'd been in the cells for murder before was the crucial point that made him guilty in the eyes of the police, judge and possibly the jury (although how much of this they knew I'm a little unsure - do you know more on that?).<br /><br />It's a very good argument for ensuring that prior convictions are not brought up during a trial - at least until sentancing.Jim Jeppshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17410387006098326671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30598467.post-55143576066789837192007-01-18T05:50:00.000+00:002007-01-18T05:50:00.000+00:00Jim,
I have done quite a lot of research on the c...Jim,<br />I have done quite a lot of research on the case. Rowland had already served 8 years, after being reprieved for the murder of his baby daughter (although he strenuously denied this). The only evidence against him was his wife's testimony, but he maintained she had committed the murder herself ( and there is some evidence to substantiate this). I feel the Manchester police had it in for him because of this, and fitted him up. Prosecution witnesses testimonies are incompatible with each others. Also one of them was a police informer.<br /> Walter Rowland was certainly an exceptionally unlucky man, But I believe he was innocent. I think he is the only person in British criminal history to have been in the condemned cell on two seperate occasions. There is only one other book about the case - THE TRIAL OF WALTER ROWLAND by former judge, Henry Cecil.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30598467.post-69040277961829889422007-01-11T13:54:00.000+00:002007-01-11T13:54:00.000+00:00Are you? how exciting!
I don't know much to be h...Are you? how exciting! <br /><br />I don't know much to be honest, only what I've read in the Encyclopedia of executions and a few bits and bobs I found on the net.<br /><br />It's purely because I didn't want to prejudice the nature of their relationship (and brevity) that I left out some of the, possibly very important, detail and this discussion has drawn out some of the reasoning behind that.<br /><br />It's quite possible their relationship was purely one between a prostitute and a client - but there didn't seem to be evidence for this apart from her profesion.<br /><br />So I'm not sure how much help I could be - but if I can be of service I'm always happy to obligeJim Jeppshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17410387006098326671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30598467.post-40697827682910604202007-01-11T13:44:00.000+00:002007-01-11T13:44:00.000+00:00Jim,
I do appreciate the distinction you make, fo...Jim,<br /> I do appreciate the distinction you make, for as you say, although she was a prostitute he did know her previouisly before her death. perhaops this was yet another reason for the police fitting him up!<br /> You seem to know quite a lot about the Rowland/Balchin case. I am writing a book about it. Can you help?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30598467.post-49284135843212816482007-01-09T12:47:00.000+00:002007-01-09T12:47:00.000+00:00Well actually there seems to be some disagreement ...Well actually there seems to be some disagreement about the actual relationship - but it was clear they had a sexual relationship, so rather than attempt to fill in blanks and potentially get it wrong I chose to go with the factually correct, but possibly incomplete term lover.<br /><br />She may well have been a prostitute but even if she was the nature of the relationship of these two was never pinned down (perhaps deliberately)<br /><br />I felt that just because she was a prostitute didn't entitle me to prejudge the nature of their relationship (after all prostitutes do have lovers, and all we actually know is that these two had been having sex with each other).Jim Jeppshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17410387006098326671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30598467.post-18552449253505144072007-01-09T06:05:00.000+00:002007-01-09T06:05:00.000+00:00Sorry Jim. Olive Balchin was not Walter Rowland's ...Sorry Jim. Olive Balchin was not Walter Rowland's lover. She was a prostitute!<br />Skellport@aol.comAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com