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:
Witnesses: Our Charles Cross - by miss marple 22 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: What was occuring in 1888? - by miss marple 47 minutes ago.
Witnesses: Our Charles Cross - by Sam Flynn 2 hours ago.
Ripperologist: Ripperologist 161 April/May 2018 - by Ginger 7 hours ago.
Witnesses: Our Charles Cross - by GUT 10 hours ago.
Witnesses: Our Charles Cross - by GUT 10 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Witnesses: Caroline Maxwell Alibi ? - (16 posts)
Witnesses: Our Charles Cross - (7 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: What was occuring in 1888? - (6 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - (3 posts)
General Discussion: Mug Shots from 1908-1911 - (3 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: What EAR/ONS teaches us about JtR - (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
  #2031  
Old 03-12-2018, 03:52 PM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanSherlock View Post
I no longer have access to the radio city 3 parter. (I believe you took it down )

However, I distinctly remember them saying "there were some who were welcome to stop in the garage for a drink, Parry was not one of them" also making reference to him being caught rifling thru coats there. He wasn't welcome there.
I remember that too AS. He certainly couldn’t have chosen a worse place to get his car cleaned or a worse person to spill his guts too.

He could certainly have cleaned the car himself. Rod says ‘in the dark’ but Parry would have no reason to believe that he would be suspected that night. He wouldn’t have been expecting a visit therefore. He could have done a clean as best he could then double checked in the morning.

Rod has again called it an ‘ingenious’ plan! But it’s a plan that relies on too many things not to go wrong. Then Parry chooses the worst possible place to get his car cleaned and blabs to someone that doesn’t like him! These are the actions of an idiot.
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2032  
Old 03-12-2018, 03:53 PM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 604
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RodCrosby View Post
People were ignoring what was in the tapes, or inserting stuff that wasn't, and I got tired of correcting them.

Parkes seems to be referring to a wardrobe in the upstairs flat, and perhaps Parry had indeed been banned from there...

But turning up in a car in the early hours? By the time he drove into the garage it would be too late, for Parkes, alone that night, to do anything.

And people subjected to the kind of psychopathic charm that Parry undoubtedly possessed often report going along with it again, because the charmer is so 'entertaining' and 'exciting' even though, objectively, they know they're a bad 'un...
Example, please?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2033  
Old 03-12-2018, 03:54 PM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RodCrosby View Post
The criminals don't have to watch the board. They just have to watch Wallace [or, to be precise, merely watch his route] for about 30 minutes for a maximum of six Monday nights when he is supposed to appear at the club, according to the board... And I've shown how they could have done that, quite easily, from at least one innocuous vantage point on Breck Road.

19th January 1931 was the last possible date they could strike, and they did.


Oh, and as for Parkes, criminals when stressed or in a panic - or out of their depth - often make incriminating actions or statements to friends or acquaintances.

Nothing to see here...
Exactly. They could have watched at any time for Wallace to go to chess and then commit the crime. No need for Qualtrough.
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2034  
Old 03-12-2018, 04:02 PM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 604
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
I remember that too AS. He certainly couldn’t have chosen a worse place to get his car cleaned or a worse person to spill his guts too.

He could certainly have cleaned the car himself. Rod says ‘in the dark’ but Parry would have no reason to believe that he would be suspected that night. He wouldn’t have been expecting a visit therefore. He could have done a clean as best he could then double checked in the morning.

Rod has again called it an ‘ingenious’ plan! But it’s a plan that relies on too many things not to go wrong. Then Parry chooses the worst possible place to get his car cleaned and blabs to someone that doesn’t like him! These are the actions of an idiot.
Exactly.

Also, let's keep in mind the claim is the "Correct Solution" is totally consistent with all the facts.

But this isn't true, it doesn't explain Lily Hall's testimony that she saw Wallace talking to a man that evening which he denied. She was steadfast in her testimony.

Now, I think it is quite possible that Lily was mistaken if not lying, her testimony could imply a conspiracy with Wallace (Which I think is very unlikely).

But the point is that why does Rod reject that testimony where Lily Hall came forward so soon after the crime, whereas Parkes waited 50 years.

In other words nothing is "consistent with all the evidence". Some of the evidence is wrong, speculative etc.

This was pointed out by the thread creator.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdCaseJury View Post
Hi Rod,

I'm away for a few days and there's a flurry of activity on the thread! I've enjoyed your posts.

Now, your theory is that it was a Parry-orchestrated conspiracy, which is original. In your first post you say M was the killer, correct? Surely M going anywhere near Wallace that evening, especially the chess club, was risky. He might have also been seen entering the Wallace house the night later. Ignoring that, how did they know Wallace had taken the bait?

I certainly agree that there are aspects of the call that point to Parry as making the call. But this is consistent with the Prank Call Theory, as AS points out. Forget the Wallace-in-drag scenario, how do you rule this out? In your post you say it is not consistent with all the facts. Are you saying your theory is consistent with all the known evidence? If so, under your theory, why would Wallace deny speaking to a man in Richmond Park at 8:40pm? If you say that Lily Hall was mistaken then you are discounting her evidence, the same as, say, AS can discount that of Parkes. The difference being, of course, Hall made her statement within five days, Parkes waited 50 years.
Wallace's guilt is consistent with more of the evidence than any other scenario IMO. And logically it is the simplest and the least convoluted when we think of Wallace as the killer vs. all the permutations, chances, and lucky breaks we must assume for "Qualtrough" being the killer.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2035  
Old 03-12-2018, 04:12 PM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,013
Default

I think that we can also add that the brutality of the murder points more to a ‘personal’ one than a ‘necessity’ killing. How many blows would it have taken for a man to inflict on a frail old woman before he knew that she was dead? Surely 11 is excessive by anyone’s standard and points more to someone that had a personal reason to kill her (like a build up of resentment over a long period?)
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2036  
Old 03-12-2018, 04:17 PM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 604
Default

Macfall concluded the very 1st blow was fatal. But Qualtrough decided to rain down 10 more for kicks.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2037  
Old 03-12-2018, 04:43 PM
RodCrosby RodCrosby is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: near Liverpool, UK
Posts: 315
Default

The number of blows is not probative. There are plenty of "burglarys gone wrong" which show similar or even greater violence.
__________________
"I make a point of never having any prejudices, and of following docilely where fact may lead me."

Sherlock Holmes, in The Adventure of The Reigate Squires
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2038  
Old 03-12-2018, 04:46 PM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 604
Default

It isn't prohibitive, but it's a clue.

BTW, blunt force trauma to the head/face area is exceedingly common in domestic murders, and exceedingly rare in other kinds including home invasions.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2039  
Old 03-12-2018, 05:12 PM
RodCrosby RodCrosby is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: near Liverpool, UK
Posts: 315
Default

The Correct Solution explains:-

a) the crime plan: why the Tuesday not the Monday, why that particular Tuesday, why that phone box, why 'Qualtrough', why the '21st birthday'.
b) the crime scene: why the replaced cash-box, why the coins, why the mac' and why the missing weapon.
c) Parry's statements: his lies and evasions about his movements on both the Monday and Tuesday nights, yet an unimpeachable alibi for the time of the crime.
d) Parkes's testimony: Parry's lack of blood, the 'glove' that was really a mitten, the subsequent 'visitation' by Parry and A.N. Other.

Therefore, I have solved the Wallace case.
__________________
"I make a point of never having any prejudices, and of following docilely where fact may lead me."

Sherlock Holmes, in The Adventure of The Reigate Squires
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2040  
Old 03-12-2018, 05:13 PM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 604
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RodCrosby View Post
The Correct Solution explains:-

a) the crime plan: why the Tuesday not the Monday, why that particular Tuesday, why that phone box, why 'Qualtrough', why the '21st birthday'.
b) the crime scene: why the replaced cash-box, why the coins, why the mac' and why the missing weapon.
c) Parry's statements: his lies and evasions about his movements on both the Monday and Tuesday nights, yet an unimpeachable alibi for the time of the crime.
d) Parkes's testimony: Parry's lack of blood, the 'glove' that was really a mitten, the subsequent 'visitation' by Parry and A.N. Other.

Therefore, I have solved the Wallace case.
Goodnight

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 01:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.