By the way, the issue of whether or not Wallace ever really was unaware of the Melrose Garden address he got over the phone (which he used when he asked various people that night for it's location as proof that he was not near his home when the murder may have occurred) is a fair one, but from a type of personal experience I can support the possibility that Wallace did not know of the non-existance of that address.
A small typo: it was Menlove Gardens East. I agree with your point: he may have been unaware of the address. I think Wallace Theorists believe he went over the top in asking questions, though.
As to the wider point, Jeff, you must remember Jonathan Goodman wrote his book without seeing the full police file.
Conspiracy to murder Andrew Borden (a very wealthy man) used to be discussed regularly on the Lizzie Borden forum I was on a few years ago. If two or three people plot to commit murder, nine times out of ten it unravels because one of them can't keep their mouth shut afterwards with a spouse, lover, sweetheart, mother, brother.
It would take an absolute miracle for two or more people to keep mum for decades following Wallace's death. And what motivation would there be? There's no evidence that Wallace hated or loathed his wife, and even if he did why should men who had no bond with him, no allegiance to him, risk their necks to commit the deed for him? (And in those days it would have been literally a neck risking event.)
You make an excellent point here, Rosella (which could be applied to at least one other murder being discussed on these boards). From what I've read over the years, the vast majority of domestic murders are committed by someone, be it a spouse, relative or friend, who knows the victim. I'm sure that there have been domestic murders committed by means of a conspiracy of two or more persons, but I can't think of one right off.
One point that I picked up the last time I read anything on the Wallace Case, is that Supt Moore seemed to concentrate very hard on nailing Wallace at the expense of investigating suspicions surrounding Gordon Parry. I recall that Moore apparently didn't even interview certain persons who may have been able to help his inquiries.
We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze
When I knew less about the case and since one witness claimed to have seen him talking to a man shortly before he returned home, I thought maybe Wallace hired Parry to do it.
And now you know more, you believe it was Wallace, but how does this fit in with the Lily Hall evidence you mention above?
“As a mental exercise,” said noted crime writer Edgar Lustgarten, “as a challenge to one’s powers of deduction and analysis, the Wallace murder is in a class by itself.”
He is surely correct. So here is my challenge to the Commissioners, Inspectors and everyone else on this site. I believe I place all the key evidence before the Cold Case Jury in my book. Where does the known evidence lead?
I'd love to know your views, and you can compare it to my own (which I give in the online Postscript).
One point that I picked up the last time I read anything on the Wallace Case, is that Supt Moore seemed to concentrate very hard on nailing Wallace at the expense of investigating suspicions surrounding Gordon Parry. I recall that Moore apparently didn't even interview certain persons who may have been able to help his inquiries.Graham
Graham, this is correct. The police concentrated all their efforts in finding confirming evidence against Wallace, and left glaring inconsistencies in the statements of Parry and others.
I don't think Hall's account may mean anything even if it really was Wallace she saw. I also wonder if Julia was already dead when Close got there and that it was not actually her that he saw.
Hall's account has great significance. Why would Wallace deny meeting someone after he had gone to great lengths (according to the Wallace Theory) of getting noticed for the previous hour?
Who did Close see if Julia Wallace was dead when Close arrived? Surely it could only have been William Wallace - 6'3" tall with a mustache - who did a great job of impersonating his wife - 5ft tall and petite. Is this a mistake you would make? Close had delivered milk to the Wallaces for nearly two years. He knew the couple by sight and to speak to.
Close said he had spoken to Julia that night. What possible evidence is there to deny this claim? I suggest it would have to be overwhelming evidence of Wallace's guilt and that the murder was committed by 6.30pm. Unfortunately, if this were the case, there would be no mystery to solve.
Location: McWopetaz Metroplex, Illinois U. S. of A.
Wallace could have run into some stranger who was passing through and said something to him he later thought might be incriminating like-Have you seen police around? Of course it may not have been Wallace at all.
Yes, there is a theory, posited by another, that it was a crouching Wallace who made like Julia at the door. We don't know for sure how much attention Close was paying or how well he saw "her". Some of Close's testimony seemed to be what he thought but didn't exactly know. If it was Julia and Wallace did it then that was about the last minute of her life.
This my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, that is, if I'm not joking.
I don't think Wallace had the time to commit the murder, nor do I think he had any motive to do so. By all accounts, he and his wife were quietly content.
According to Thomas Slemen in "Murder on Merseyside" (Hale 1994), the houses in that street were all built at the same time, by a single builder, who imprudently used a single model of lock for all the doors. Mr. Slemen's source relates that he discovered this when he came home tipsy one night, and unlocked and entered the wrong house. Furthermore, Slemen reports that prior to the murder, there had been an outbreak of burglaries on the street.
We don't know for sure how much attention Close was paying or how well he saw "her". Some of Close's testimony seemed to be what he thought but didn't exactly know. If it was Julia and Wallace did it then that was about the last minute of her life.
But he SPOKE to Julia whom he had known her for nearly two years. This makes any impersonation/misidentification theory implausible, surely?
Close's testimony WAS poor, but this only undermines the police's case for the timing. Close originally said he delivered milk at 6:45pm and then changed this to 6:31pm at the trial, and appeared very uncertain about this revised time when cross-examined. But if he delivered milk at the later time, everyone agrees Wallace did not have time to commit the crime (he had three minutes to kill, wash, dress, tidy up, stage robbery, deal with the murder weapon)