Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Tumblety, Francis: Tumblety - Hermaphrodite. - by DirectorDave 26 minutes ago.
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by Sam Flynn 40 minutes ago.
General Police Discussion: The single source question - by MysterySinger 1 hour and 5 minutes ago.
Tumblety, Francis: Tumblety - Hermaphrodite. - by Wolf Vanderlinden 1 hour and 21 minutes ago.
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by Trevor Marriott 1 hour and 27 minutes ago.
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - by Trevor Marriott 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Goulston Street Graffito: The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL - (44 posts)
Tumblety, Francis: Tumblety - Hermaphrodite. - (11 posts)
General Police Discussion: The single source question - (8 posts)
General Victim Discussion: What does this picture remind you of? - (3 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Greetings from the past - (2 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Social Chat > Other Mysteries

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1291  
Old 09-11-2017, 03:10 AM
ColdCaseJury ColdCaseJury is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: England
Posts: 278
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
Regarding the cash box, what do you think of this theory? A sneak thief removes the cash box whilst Julia is out of the room. He then takes out the notes and pockets them. However, Julia returns unexpectedly, catching him in the act. She calmly asks him to replace the cash box and await the return of her husband; this he agrees to do. Unfortunately for Julia, he changes his mind and decides instead to silence her, before making his getaway.
John G, very possible. It is not the scenario I depict in my reconstruction of Parry and Accomplice theories, but yours would work, too. Possibly the killer was asked to leave, changed his mind when in the hall, grabbed the mackintosh... There are many variations. I think the key aspect of the sneak-thievery is that it explains why the cashbox was replaced. This I cover in my book, of course, giving credit to Hussey, who first suggested it in his Parry theory (1972).

So, the two key theories for the cashbox replacement seem to be:

Sneak-thief who is caught just after the act;

Wallace staging a robbery and (arguably) making a mistake.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1292  
Old 09-12-2017, 07:49 PM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 275
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdCaseJury View Post
John G, very possible. It is not the scenario I depict in my reconstruction of Parry and Accomplice theories, but yours would work, too. Possibly the killer was asked to leave, changed his mind when in the hall, grabbed the mackintosh... There are many variations. I think the key aspect of the sneak-thievery is that it explains why the cashbox was replaced. This I cover in my book, of course, giving credit to Hussey, who first suggested it in his Parry theory (1972).

So, the two key theories for the cashbox replacement seem to be:

Sneak-thief who is caught just after the act;

Wallace staging a robbery and (arguably) making a mistake.
Let's assume it was a sneak-thief for the sake of argument. There are 2 and only 2 possibilities--either it is someone Julia knows or it is someone she does not know.

If it is someone she knows (Parry or anyone else she would let in to the house), then the person is going to be caught anyway or best case it will be his word against the Wallaces. But it will be obvious what has happened when William returns home from his fruitless journey and eventually they find that money is missing and put 2 and 2 together. It would seem to me that such a person would have to be willing to kill Julia to ensure getting away with it. Yet the whole point of the sneak theft would be to go undetected and not have to resort to violence. Since Julia was attacked from behind and with the mackintosh etc. it becomes hard to explain this away with the theory that the thief panicked. Where did the weapon come from? Why was Julia calmly putting out the fireplace when murdered and not in close proximity to the cashbox? Indeed, you yourself suggest the killer probably had an opportunity to leave and then changed his mind and came back to lay waste to poor JW. Your original Parry theory had a similar premise behind it. Put simply, if the killer was someone known to Julia, then he had no reason to think he could get away with the sneak theft in the first place. The difference between being caught by her in the moment and suspected later is negligible. Now maybe such a person wasn't thinking clearly and flipped out reflexively upon being caught. But as I will demonstrate in the alternative scenario, regardless of who the killer was, the attack on Julia appears to have been done with at least some momentary forethought; an attempt to hush her rather than a face to face encounter. (Unless of course the killer was Wallace, in which case he certainly had his own motives separate from this dichotomy!)

So what if the killer was someone JW did NOT know? First, we have to theorize on why she would let them in, or at least how such a person could rely on the fact that she would as part of an elaborate plan. This is where the Accomplice theory comes in to play.

Note: It could also work if "Qualtrough" is working alone as well. By passing himself off as "R M Qualtrough", he figures Julia will let him in to clear up the confusion. This is also assuming William will have told Julia about the whole deal, which I think is a fair assumption.

But we have similar problems here. If it is someone Julia does not know, then why is such a person desperate to silence her? Perhaps a spur of the moment freak out could explain it, a panicked rage at being caught. But that is not what the crime scene suggests. It speaks of someone pre-meditating the attack, even if over a minute or two, being asked to leave etc and then changing their mind. Why? Also money WAS taken. So why not, if suspected by JW, just leave if you are unknown to her. Again the crime scene does not imply a direct confrontation where momentary fear or rage could explain it. At most, it seems it was someone who was about to leave and then thought better of it because of the need to silence Julia. This does not mesh with a person unknown to her who has already successfully completed a robbery IMO. Also note nothing more was taken although it could have easily been after she was bludgeoned.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1293  
Old 09-13-2017, 02:43 AM
Charles Daniels Charles Daniels is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 63
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
Antony,

Regarding suspects. There is always the possibility that Julia had a secret lover, who was not one of the 15 people named by Wallace. Indeed, it's possible they conspired to get Wallace out of the house that evening so they could be together. This individual could then have murdered Julia and staged a robbery.
There was a long period of Julia's life where there isn't a clear picture of what was happening with her. Isn't that correct?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1294  
Old 09-13-2017, 11:04 AM
John G John G is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,987
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Daniels View Post
There was a long period of Julia's life where there isn't a clear picture of what was happening with her. Isn't that correct?
Yes, indeed. In fact, not much is known about her at all prior to the marriage with William. And, of course, she even lied about her age at the time of her marriage and subsequently: her marriage certificate states she was 37 when she was actually almost 53.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1295  
Old 09-20-2017, 03:00 AM
Charles Daniels Charles Daniels is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 63
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
Yes, indeed. In fact, not much is known about her at all prior to the marriage with William. And, of course, she even lied about her age at the time of her marriage and subsequently: her marriage certificate states she was 37 when she was actually almost 53.
Well then, I can't help but see another possibility here.

If we accept Wallace's testimony that she would only answer the door for someone she knew.

Then we obviously have a pretty wide opened door here for Julia to know very many people whom were unknown to Wallace.

One of these people from her past could have called up the chess club to get Wallace out of the way and to confront Julia.

Perhaps an old abusive lover?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1296  
Old 09-20-2017, 01:13 PM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 275
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Daniels View Post
Well then, I can't help but see another possibility here.

If we accept Wallace's testimony that she would only answer the door for someone she knew.

Then we obviously have a pretty wide opened door here for Julia to know very many people whom were unknown to Wallace.

One of these people from her past could have called up the chess club to get Wallace out of the way and to confront Julia.

Perhaps an old abusive lover?
Hi Charles, I continue to believe WHW was guilty with moderate conviction, but of the other possibilities this is probably my favorite. The operators also said the caller sounded like an old man. This could obviously mean it was Wallace himself or Parry faking his voice, but I always thought that was interesting.

Julia appeared to be an odd character. Not only did she fudge her age by 15 years but none of her family attended her wedding or funeral. As has been said here, we know little of her past or relationships she may have had or possibly was running away from.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1297  
Old 09-21-2017, 02:32 AM
Charles Daniels Charles Daniels is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 63
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanSherlock View Post
Hi Charles, I continue to believe WHW was guilty with moderate conviction, but of the other possibilities this is probably my favorite. The operators also said the caller sounded like an old man. This could obviously mean it was Wallace himself or Parry faking his voice, but I always thought that was interesting.

Julia appeared to be an odd character. Not only did she fudge her age by 15 years but none of her family attended her wedding or funeral. As has been said here, we know little of her past or relationships she may have had or possibly was running away from.
Well this is fascinating.

Surely if she had become so completely estranged from her family that they couldn't be bothered to lay her to rest after her murder .... then that hints at a much darker past than the cute little closed scenario that often gets explored.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1298  
Old 09-21-2017, 08:41 AM
John G John G is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,987
Default

Here's an interesting point. At the trial Wallace stated that the bedroom light was turned down when he arrived home, even though he said it was left on when he left. In fact, he stated, "We always left it on if either of us went upstairs in the evening to wash or do anything; the gas was never turned out, it was left on."

Had Julia been entertaining in the bedroom?

Last edited by John G : 09-21-2017 at 08:54 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1299  
Old 09-21-2017, 08:54 AM
John G John G is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,987
Default

Wallace also stated that his wife would admit someone calling themselves Qualtrough:

Roland Oliver QC: "Looking at it now, if someone did come and gave the name 'Qualtrough' to your wife on that night, do you think she would have let him in?"

Wallace: "Seeing I had gone to meet a Mr Qualtrough, I think she would, because she new all about the business."
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1300  
Old Yesterday, 12:27 PM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 275
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
Wallace also stated that his wife would admit someone calling themselves Qualtrough:

Roland Oliver QC: "Looking at it now, if someone did come and gave the name 'Qualtrough' to your wife on that night, do you think she would have let him in?"

Wallace: "Seeing I had gone to meet a Mr Qualtrough, I think she would, because she new all about the business."
hi John, what do you think of the idea of Wallace telling Julia all about the business himself to make sure she would admit Qualtrough (since he set up the murder himself)? Is that what you are getting at?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.