Olivia Brine and Harold Denison – Full Statements

The statements of Olivia Brine and Harold Denison, courtesy of John Gannon.

Statements taken to determine the whereabouts of Gordon Parry on the night of the murder.

Harold English Denison 26/01/1931:

43, Knocklaid Road.
26.1.31.

Harold English DENNISON, 29, Marlborough Road says:-

I have known R.G.Parry for two years. I called at 43 Knocklaid Road on Tuesday 20th inst. about 6p.m. My aunt Mrs.Brine lives there. When I called Mr.Parry was there. He remained till about 8.30p.m. when he left.

(Signed) H.E.Denison.

Olivia Alberta Brine 26/01/1931:

43, Knocklaid Road.
26.1.31.

Olivia Alberta BRINE says:-

I am a married woman, my husband is away at sea. I have known R.G.Parry about two years. Just before last Christmas he commenced calling with my nephew William Denison, 29, Marlborough Road. At about 5p.m. to 5.30p.m. on Tuesday the 20th inst. Parry called at my house. He came in his car. He remained till about 8.30p.m. when he left. Whilst he was here a Miss Plant, Gloucester Road called. My nephew Harold Denison also called.

(Signed) O.A.Brine.

This entry was posted in Case Files, Statements. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Olivia Brine and Harold Denison – Full Statements

  1. David Metcalf says:

    Great site this!!I’ve been fascinated with the Wallace case for many years, thanks to my late Dad.Read numerous books, watched stuff on TV, listened to the radio etc.And I’m convinced Parry is definitely involved…even if he wasn’t the murderer.The Olivia Brine statement, along with Dennison, seems to provide Parry with his alibi for the night of the murder.But exactly WHY was he at her house in Knoclaid Road between 5.30 and 8.30 that night?Neither Brine nor Denson’s statements give even the slightest indication as to the reason for Parry’s presence.And why no statement from Phylis Plant, who was also there?

  2. David Metcalf says:

    Hi,Sorry for such a late reply.Just want to say that my Dad wasn’t the Metcalf who was around Wolverton Street in 1931!! No relation, as far as I’m aware. But he was really interested in murder cases generally, and particularly this one, what with it being local.
    But I definitely find the Olivia Brine alibi/statements really odd. Between roughly 5.30 and 8.30, five people spent time at 43 Knoclaid Road….yet we have no idea what they did or talked about. What was the purpose of the visits by not only Parry, but also Denison and Plant? We don’t even find out what time Plant arrived or left. Parry claims in his statement that he “finished business at 5.30”…so if we take him at his word, and he WASN’T there on business, then why exactly why WAS he there? Indeed, as I’ve already said, why were any of them there, other than Brine and her daughter, who obviously both lived there. Were Brine or Plant Standard Life clients of Parry possibly? And I wonder if there was any connection between the Brines, Parry’s parents, and also the Williamsons, who Parry visited later that evening, when he received the 21st Birthday invitation. I agree with Antony Brown when he describes this as a very fragile alibi. As Brown also points out, the statements provided by Parry, Brine and Denison all seem to dovetail very neatly, despite none of them explaining why they were there or what they were doing for the best part of three hours!! The fact that 35 years after the murder, Parry still wasn’t prepared to tell Jonathan Goodman he’d been at Brine’s house for three hours simply adds to the mystery. As Brown says, both Olivia Brine and Denison were still alive when Goodman spoke to Parry in London in 1966, so he may not have wanted Goodman to go looking for them to ask questions. But if he truly had nothing to do with this case, and was totally innocent, then Goodman questioning Brine and Denison wouldn’t have worried him…they’d have confirmed his alibi if it were genuine.So why was he so determined not to tell anyone he’d spent those three hours at Olivia Brine’s house?? We’ll almost certainly never find out now, but could it be that Parry never was at 43 Knoclaid Road that night? Or even if he was, not for as long as he claimed? Very strange!! Sorry for the long post by the way, but I’m convinced there’s something not quite right about this particular aspect of the case.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *