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:
Shades of Whitechapel: The Golden State Serial Killer - by Varqm 5 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by rjpalmer 7 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Fisherman 23 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: Too Sensible & Competent - by David Orsam 29 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by Scott Nelson 30 minutes ago.
Scene of the Crimes: Was Whitechapel really any worse than other areas of London? - by Varqm 36 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (78 posts)
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (17 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: Was Whitechapel really any worse than other areas of London? - (6 posts)
Maybrick, James: Too Sensible & Competent - (5 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: The Golden State Serial Killer - (4 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Butchers....... - (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
  #1751  
Old 12-21-2017, 11:27 PM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 583
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham View Post
Hi HS,

As the notice-board carrying 'fixture list' would have been visible to anyone attending the City Cafe, then yes, Parry could have viewed it and realised that Wallace wouldn't have wanted to miss an important match.

Sorry, I meant to add that Crewe was Wallace's boss at the Pru. I said recently that Wallace could have phoned his office to ask about R M Qualtrough and Menlove Gardens East, but he plainly didn't do that. Which I find a little odd.

I can't help feeling that Wallace was constructing an alibi and that he intended to be out of his house at what he saw as being a crucial time. I've read quite recently a theory that Wallace could have hired a hit-man to dispose of poor Julia...well, you never know. I'm beginning to turn against our Willie just a little bit!

I was never an avid student of this case, and felt that Richard Whittington-Egan and Jonathan Goodman, together with Roger Wilkes, had nailed it, after Joe Gaute had discovered Parry's whereabouts, and later when Roger Wilkes tracked Parry down to North Wales. Parry had died not long before (in early 1980) but Wilkes pressed on and subsequently found Lily Lloyd, who had provided Parry with his alibi for the fatal evening and which was shown to be false. Wilkes also found John Parkes, and learned about the 'bloody glove' in Parry's car. For me, these investigators clinched it: Parry was guilty. Now, though, I ain't quite so sure....

Graham
Hi Graham,

Believe it or not but RWE has changed his tune.

He gives credit to James Murphy for having solved the Wallace case (finding WHW guilty) in his 2011 book "Murder on File." (He also wrote a foreword for John Gannon's book, although that might just have been a money ploy but he doesn't actually endorse what JG wrote it appears, just suggests it's a good book.) In his own recent book, he notes that Parry was "rightly eliminated." as a suspect and says Murphy has made an "Exceedingly powerful case" for the guilt of Wallace. I concur with him.

Awhile back when Jonathan Goodman died in 2008 (RWE himself sadly died last year I believe), there were 2 long obituaries, one was in the Guardian and part of it reads:

"Goodman became convinced that Wallace was indeed not guilty and, together with his friend and fellow crime-writer Richard Whittington-Egan, challenged the man he believed responsible. Although subsequent research has shown that Wallace probably was the killer, The Killing of Julia Wallace (1969) was a great success and Goodman's new career took off."


I assume Goodman's family and friends, perhaps RWE himself contributed to this!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1752  
Old 12-21-2017, 11:44 PM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 583
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
A most ingenious paradox, AS.

Very little blood and mess where one would think there would be plenty of both makes it seem implausible that Julia could have been attacked on the spur of the moment by an intruder who never meant to do her physical harm. Why would anyone other than Wallace have taken pains to clean up anything but himself and his clothes?

The very lack of any bloody tracks from the crime scene can only therefore be explained if there were none to leave [which means the killer couldn't have been dripping blood anywhere] or they were cleaned up [by a killer with a good reason to do so].

Love,

Caz
X
Bingo, you've succinctly phrased it better than I ever could!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1753  
Old 12-22-2017, 01:07 AM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 583
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Daniels View Post
Under heavy questioning people have been known to falsely confess to capital crimes.

Surely putting the pressure on someone could get them to say there was the remotest possibility it could have been.

Note how the police forced the milk delivery boy on his times.
Whoever the killer was, he must have taken some risk. (Even if the killer was not Wallace and planned only a robbery, he was taking a significant risk)

Many wife murderers have taken much more significant chances than Wallace did. With an ailing, elderly wife who rarely ventured out, this whole scheme with a mysterious Qualtrough was about the best he could hope for. As far as risks, go this is a minor and benign one in my opinion. As Caz pointed out, reasonable doubt would be there by the very virtue of Beattie announcing to Wallace that someone else had called for him and the whole club discussing it etc.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1754  
Old 12-22-2017, 01:13 AM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 583
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickB View Post
But Wallace did not know if Beattie was that certain, and could not have asked him if he was without creating suspicion.
By virtue of Beattie expressing no suspicion and telling Wallace about it (and the whole club discussing it), Wallace could rightly assume that there would be significant reasonable doubt regardless of what Beattie ended up saying. And of course as we know Beattie DID say the voice wasn't Wallace. But of course, I recognize this is a bit of a circular argument, as one could just say well, that's because it WASN'T Wallace after all
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1755  
Old 12-22-2017, 01:18 AM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 583
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
I agree Nick. It’s always good to look at all the angles. As far as I know I don’t think anyone else has considered a ‘post MGE’ murder before.

For me, I can’t help feeling that it was a planned kill rather than a spur of the moment rage killing. But I could be wrong of course.
For sure.

All the following indicate a planned kill :

1. Julia struck from behind with no sign of struggle whatsoever, no defensive wounds, nothing underneath Julia's fingernails etc.

2. Controlled crime scene, especially blood indicating pre planning.

3. Mackintosh presence indicating pre-planning.

4. Evidence of a poorly staged robbery, similar to many domestic homicides. Money and jewelry that could be taken wasn't. Cash box was replaced suggesting force of habit. Blunt force trauma to head/face causing death extremely common in domestic homicides, extremely uncommon otherwise.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1756  
Old 12-22-2017, 02:15 AM
Graham Graham is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanSherlock View Post
Hi Graham,

Believe it or not but RWE has changed his tune.

He gives credit to James Murphy for having solved the Wallace case (finding WHW guilty) in his 2011 book "Murder on File." (He also wrote a foreword for John Gannon's book, although that might just have been a money ploy but he doesn't actually endorse what JG wrote it appears, just suggests it's a good book.) In his own recent book, he notes that Parry was "rightly eliminated." as a suspect and says Murphy has made an "Exceedingly powerful case" for the guilt of Wallace. I concur with him.

Awhile back when Jonathan Goodman died in 2008 (RWE himself sadly died last year I believe), there were 2 long obituaries, one was in the Guardian and part of it reads:

"Goodman became convinced that Wallace was indeed not guilty and, together with his friend and fellow crime-writer Richard Whittington-Egan, challenged the man he believed responsible. Although subsequent research has shown that Wallace probably was the killer, The Killing of Julia Wallace (1969) was a great success and Goodman's new career took off."


I assume Goodman's family and friends, perhaps RWE himself contributed to this!
Hi AS,

as I said previously I'm really far from being up to speed regarding recent and current developments in this weird case, I did when I read his book go along with Goodman's conclusion. However, reading this thread, I'm beginning to wonder. I guess part of the problem is Wallace himself, his rather academic appearance, his varied scholarly interests, and also not to be dismissed is the fact that he lived apparently quite content in his marriage for 18 years. So what happened? With the best will in the world I can't see either of them involved in an extra-marital affair (but then again not impossible), so if Wallace really did kill her, what caused him to commit such a desperate act? Any ideas, anyone?

Graham
__________________
We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1757  
Old 12-22-2017, 06:42 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 5,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham View Post
I can't help feeling that Wallace was constructing an alibi and that he intended to be out of his house at what he saw as being a crucial time. I've read quite recently a theory that Wallace could have hired a hit-man to dispose of poor Julia...well, you never know. I'm beginning to turn against our Willie just a little bit!
Hi Graham,

The objection to Wallace having had anyone else to do the deed is the very fact that he wouldn't have needed to construct a false alibi, with the whole convoluted Qualtrough business. He could simply have made sure he was well away from home for the duration, and seen by people who knew him.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1758  
Old 12-22-2017, 08:00 AM
Graham Graham is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
Hi Graham,

The objection to Wallace having had anyone else to do the deed is the very fact that he wouldn't have needed to construct a false alibi, with the whole convoluted Qualtrough business. He could simply have made sure he was well away from home for the duration, and seen by people who knew him.

Love,

Caz
X
Hi Caz,

yep, quite so, but in concocting a business reason for being out of the house at a rather non-business time, maybe he felt that would be slightly more convincing than just telling Julia he was nipping down the road to see so-and-so. I'm only speculating, any way.

Bye,

Graham
__________________
We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1759  
Old 12-22-2017, 09:01 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 1,619
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanSherlock View Post
For sure.

All the following indicate a planned kill :

1. Julia struck from behind with no sign of struggle whatsoever, no defensive wounds, nothing underneath Julia's fingernails etc.

2. Controlled crime scene, especially blood indicating pre planning.

3. Mackintosh presence indicating pre-planning.

4. Evidence of a poorly staged robbery, similar to many domestic homicides. Money and jewelry that could be taken wasn't. Cash box was replaced suggesting force of habit. Blunt force trauma to head/face causing death extremely common in domestic homicides, extremely uncommon otherwise.
I’d also add the Qualtrough phone call to those four AS. But it could be argued I suppose that the call could only have been evidence of a planned robbery?
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

Last edited by Herlock Sholmes : 12-22-2017 at 09:10 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #1760  
Old 12-22-2017, 09:06 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 1,619
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham View Post
Hi Caz,

yep, quite so, but in concocting a business reason for being out of the house at a rather non-business time, maybe he felt that would be slightly more convincing than just telling Julia he was nipping down the road to see so-and-so. I'm only speculating, any way.

Bye,

Graham
Hi Graham,

He could have just ‘arranged’ for it to happen while he was at the chess club. It could then have been said that someone had simply learned of Wallace’s hobby and saw their chance.
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
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 10:59 AM.


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