Merla Walpole

Go to Database Search Page

Go to Database Index Page

Charge:	Second Degree Murder
Sentence:	Exonerated After Conviction But Prior to Sentencing
Years Imprisoned:	2
Year Crime:	1965
Year Convicted:	1974
Year Cleared:	1976
U.S. State or Country of Crime:	California
County or Region of Crime:	San Bernardino
City of Crime:
Result:	Judicially Exonerated Released
Summary of Case:	"Maria Walpole and her former husband, Antonio Rivera, were convicted in 1974 of murdering their seriously ill 3-year-old daughter Judy, who disappeared in 1965 when they were living in San Bernardino County, California. In 1973, the skeletal remains of a little girl was found about ten miles from where the Rivera's had lived in 1965. The police determined the child's body was Judy Rivera and she must have been murdered by her parents. The were charged with murdering their daughter. Maria, who had divorced Antonio, had remarried and was known as Maria Walpole. Their defense was they had didn't kill Judy, but because of serious financial problems they abandoned her at a gas station in San Francisco on January 16, 1965, in the hope that when found she would receive the necessary medical care. The jury convicted them of second-degree murder based on prosecution testimony that the remains were those of a girl likely 3 years old who had likely died about the time Judy disappeared. Prior to their sentencing Walpole and Rivera filed a post-verdict motion to vacate the jury's verdict, which the trial judge granted. While they were awaiting their retrial an investigation discovered that the day after they said they abondoned Judy, the San Francisco Chronicle ran a story about the finding of a little girl at a gas station. The girl was located, and the police determined she was likely Judy Rivera. The charges were dismissed against Walpole and Rivera. They were wrongly jailed for two years."
Conviction Caused By:	Skeletal remains found 8 years after they gave up their daughter were erroneously identified as those of their daughter.
Innocence Proved By:	The daughter of Walpole and Rivera turned up alive while they were awaiting retrial after their first conviction was overturned by the trial judge. The charges against them were dismissed.
Defendant Aided By:
Compensation Awarded:
Was Perpetrator Identified?
Age When Imprisoned:
Age When Released:
Sex:	Female
Skin/Ethnicity:	Hispanic
Information Source 1:	"“In Spite of Innocence: Erroneous Convictions in Capital Cases,” Michael L Radelet, HugoAdam Bedau, and Constance E. Putnam, Northeastern University Press, Boston, 1996 pb ed. with new forward ( © 1992)."
Information Location 1:
Information Source 2:	"“Miscarriages of Justice in Potentially Capital Cases,” Hugo Adam Bedau & Michael L. Radelet, Stanford Law Review, November, 1987, Vol. 40, p. 155+."
Information Location 2:
Information Source 3:
Information Location 3:
Information Source 4:
Information Location 4:
Information Source 5:
Information Location 5:
Book About Case:
Book Information:
Book About Case (2):
Book Information (2):
Movie About Case:
Comments About Case:

Go to Database Search Page

Go to Database Index Page

Merla Walpole

Charge:

Second Degree Murder

Sentence:

Exonerated After Conviction But Prior to Sentencing

Years Imprisoned:

2

Year Crime:

1965

Year Convicted:

1974

Year Cleared:

1976

U.S. State or Country of Crime:

California

County or Region of Crime:

San Bernardino

City of Crime:

Result:

Judicially Exonerated Released

Summary of Case:

Conviction Caused By:

Skeletal remains found 8 years after they gave up their daughter were erroneously identified as those of their daughter.

Innocence Proved By:

The daughter of Walpole and Rivera turned up alive while they were awaiting retrial after their first conviction was overturned by the trial judge. The charges against them were dismissed.

Defendant Aided By:

Compensation Awarded:

Was Perpetrator Identified?

Age When Imprisoned:

Age When Released:

Sex:

Female

Skin/Ethnicity:

Hispanic

Information Source 1:

"“In Spite of Innocence: Erroneous Convictions in Capital Cases,” Michael L Radelet, HugoAdam Bedau, and Constance E. Putnam, Northeastern University Press, Boston, 1996 pb ed. with new forward ( © 1992)."

Information Location 1:

Information Source 2:

"“Miscarriages of Justice in Potentially Capital Cases,” Hugo Adam Bedau & Michael L. Radelet, Stanford Law Review, November, 1987, Vol. 40, p. 155+."

Information Location 2:

Information Source 3:

Information Location 3:

Information Source 4:

Information Location 4:

Information Source 5:

Information Location 5:

Book About Case:

Book Information:

Book About Case (2):

Book Information (2):

Movie About Case:

Comments About Case: