Do you think William Herbert Wallace was guilty?

[RodCrosby]

As Caz said, in this plan how could they be sure that Julia would let ‘Qualtrough’ in. Even if she recalled the name she didn’t actually know him. Wallace was clear that she would only admit people that he knew. It’s even possible that Parry knew that too. Nope this plan doesn’t hold water.

You need to study this case a little more before expounding on it, grasshopper.

OLIVER: Had you at that time considered the possibility of a man coming and giving the name “ Qualtrough ” to your wife ? Looking at it now, if someone did come and give the name of “ 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 knew all about the business.


OLIVER: If she had let him in, where would she have taken him ?
WALLACE: Into the front room. There is no question about that.

[RodCrosby]

Good points. Also, how is the mackintosh’s presence explained in this ‘plan?’

Mrs. Wallace was intent on leaving the house and summoning help, perhaps on a pretext of her own. She as a matter of course would put on a mackintosh when leaving the house on a cold night.

"Qualtrough" couldn't let her do that, of course...

[Herlock Sholmes]

You need to study this case a little more before expounding on it, grasshopper.

OLIVER: Had you at that time considered the possibility of a man coming and giving the name “ Qualtrough ” to your wife ? Looking at it now, if someone did come and give the name of “ 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 knew all about the business.


OLIVER: If she had let him in, where would she have taken him ?
WALLACE: Into the front room. There is no question about that.

Empty gloating again. Utterly irrelevant. The point is that Parry wouldn’t have known that! How could Parry expect Julia (someone that he knew was a pretty timid person who wouldn’t let strangers in) to let in a complete stranger!! Even if she had heard his name once! If Parry had gone himself then he might have had a reason to be confident of being admitted. It’s not much of a plan if they couldn’t even be reasonably certain that they would get in is it?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Mrs. Wallace was intent on leaving the house and summoning help, perhaps on a pretext of her own. She as a matter of course would put on a mackintosh when leaving the house on a cold night.

"Qualtrough" couldn't let her do that, of course...

It gets better!

Your theory (for want of a better word) presupposes that Mr X intended to steal the cash without harming Julia. So he would be trying to win her trust; acting normally. Why would she be suspicious? Wouldn’t she think that anyone up to no good would be a tad suspicious if she suddenly put on her husbands mackintosh and said ‘I’m just popping out for a loaf of bread!’ Leaving him in the house on their own?!

Did ‘Qualtrough’ kill her and then take off her coat?? Or did he make her take off the coat, then kill her and then put it under her dead body? Just curious.

[RodCrosby]

Empty gloating again. Utterly irrelevant. The point is that Parry wouldn’t have known that! How could Parry expect Julia (someone that he knew was a pretty timid person who wouldn’t let strangers in) to let in a complete stranger!! Even if she had heard his name once! If Parry had gone himself then he might have had a reason to be confident of being admitted. It’s not much of a plan if they couldn’t even be reasonably certain that they would get in is it?

He wouldn't know, but what criminal does know for certain that their plan will succeed? Does that stop criminals from implementing their plans? Some do work, some don't, some even go disastrously wrong...

Parry knew this was "the best shot" at stealing the money. He knew the plan "might" work. If it didn't, so what? Nothing lost, and little danger in trying [so he thought].

And "Qualtrough" was not a "complete stranger". He was someone her husband believed in, from one of the wealthiest areas of Liverpool...

False logic and 20/20 hindsight don't cut it, I'm afraid.

[caz]

"Is the deduction too obvious:"

Not any kind of "deduction", but desperate theorizing about a subject outside your competence.
Shock horror: three different people (of at least two different social backgrounds) describe, in their own different subjective human language, a brief telephone conversation (different words spoken to each person).... well... DIFFERENTLY !

How do we describe perceived vocal qualities?
The short answer: not very well. The average person easily recognizes familiar or famous voices, yet would have difficulty describing them in words. Language has not been as well developed for vocal characteristics as it has for appearance. People can be tall, bald or wrinkled, but how do we describe how they sound?

Despite their training, vocologists and voice researchers also disagree about exact descriptions of vocal qualities.

http://www.ncvs.org/ncvs/tutorials/v...l/quality.html

Try focusing on the actual evidence of the case.

A subject not outside of my own personal experience is that of how the human voice travels along the telephone wires and is received at the other end of that marvelous invention. The level of clarity is nowhere near the same as the normal human ear enjoys when listening to someone in the same room. I was married to an engineer who knew these things and used to explain them to me. If he were here now he'd be able to use more technical terms to explain the science.

It's not always the case, therefore, that we recognise familiar voices instantly. We will sometimes need the context of the call to confirm who is speaking, but 99.9% of the time it will be a subconscious process because their first sentence will complete the picture for us, with or without them giving their name. I know this to be true in my case. It has happened with at least three different people over the years, when I've picked up the house phone to hear someone simply say "Hello" then wait for me to respond, assuming I'm going to know who it is instantly, only for me to hesitate or, worse, ask "Who's calling?" if they don't immediately give me a clue. One was a very old girlfriend of mine; another was a very good male friend; and the other was my husband! For a long while there had been no occasion for him to call me at home from anywhere, so when he began a new job and called me for the first time during the day, I just wasn't expecting to hear his voice and it wasn't the same as when we were talking face to face.

When someone calls and presents as a stranger, we have to work that much harder to process what they want and who they really are, and may hardly register their voice at all. This would have applied especially in a case of someone on a deadly serious mission, calling in the guise of a stranger with an unfamiliar name, and asking for a message to be passed on to themselves. That would be almost impossible for the average unsuspecting person to contemplate in the first place, never mind process over the humble telephone - but also rather tough to admit later that they could have been duped in this way! Poor Beattie would have been in a quandary, because he obviously hadn't recognised the voice as Wallace's at the time and would have felt awful if he later wavered and said he couldn't be 100% sure it wasn't him. Yet how could anyone be 100% sure of that unless they knew the real caller's identity?

Love,

Caz
X

[RodCrosby]

It gets better!

Your theory (for want of a better word) presupposes that Mr X intended to steal the cash without harming Julia. So he would be trying to win her trust; acting normally. Why would she be suspicious? Wouldn’t she think that anyone up to no good would be a tad suspicious if she suddenly put on her husbands mackintosh and said ‘I’m just popping out for a loaf of bread!’ Leaving him in the house on their own?!

Did ‘Qualtrough’ kill her and then take off her coat?? Or did he make her take off the coat, then kill her and then put it under her dead body? Just curious.

You forget that Qualtrough made an error. He spilled coins from the box all over Julia's hearth !

Plenty reason to arouse Julia's suspicions and provoke her fateful decision to resolve to leave the house and/or confront Qualtrough in the parlour.

It is recognised that the Police hopelessly compromised the crime scene, even moving Julia's body and the mac, so it's impossible to say now exactly where the mac was positioned.

But certainly not impossible it was over her shoulders, or over her arm, for it to have ended in the position it was ultimately positioned [by the Police].

As I have indicated previously, the forensics strongly suggest Julia was attacked in a frontal assault. It was Oliver [for the defence] who suggested Julia was attacked from behind while lighting the fire, and there is nothing really to support such a contention, and much against.

[Herlock Sholmes]

He wouldn't know, but what criminal does know for certain that their plan will succeed? Does that stop criminals from implementing their plans? Some do work, some don't, some even go disastrously wrong...

Parry knew this was "the best shot" at stealing the money. He knew the plan "might" work. If it didn't, so what? Nothing lost, and little danger in trying [so he thought].

And "Qualtrough" was not a "complete stranger". He was someone her husband believed in, from one of the wealthiest areas of Liverpool...

False logic and 20/20 hindsight don't cut it, I'm afraid.

Oh I see

He goes to the trouble of the phonecall scam on the off-chance that Julia might, if they were lucky, let him in? I appreciate your words of wisdom.

[Herlock Sholmes]

You forget that Qualtrough made an error. He spilled coins from the box all over Julia's hearth !

Plenty reason to arouse Julia's suspicions and provoke her fateful decision to resolve to leave the house and/or confront Qualtrough in the parlour.

It is recognised that the Police hopelessly compromised the crime scene, even moving Julia's body and the mac, so it's impossible to say now exactly where the mac was positioned.

But certainly not impossible it was over her shoulders, or over her arm, for it to have ended in the position it was ultimately positioned [by the Police].

As I have indicated previously, the forensics strongly suggest Julia was attacked in a frontal assault. It was Oliver [for the defence] who suggested Julia was attacked from behind while lighting the fire, and there is nothing really to support such a contention, and much against.

Can we be sure that the coins weren’t spilled during the attack rather than before it?

Don’t you think it more likely that Julia would have put on her own coat and not her husbands?

There are many things that aren’t impossible but you can’t keep relying on them to prove a theory.

[RodCrosby]

Oh I see

He goes to the trouble of the phonecall scam on the off-chance that Julia might, if they were lucky, let him in? I appreciate your words of wisdom.

And of course no-one would ever think of using the telephone to pull off a scam... Or not even trying unless it was "guaranteed" to work?

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=telephone+scams&oq=telephone+scam&aqs=chrome.0.0j69i57j0l4.5549j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Do you actually ever read any of your own stuff before pressing "Post"? Just askin'

[Herlock Sholmes]

Oh and of course Julia would have immediately recognised the coins? She wouldn’t possibly have thought them Qualtrough’s own coins?

[Herlock Sholmes]

And of course no-one would ever think of using the telephone to pull off a scam... Or not even trying unless it was "guaranteed" to work?

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=telephone+scams&oq=telephone+scam&aqs=chrome.0.0j69i57j0l4.5549j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Do you actually ever read any of your own stuff before pressing "Post"? Just askin'

If you put a plan together Baldrick the first part of the plan, the bit that you tend to focus on, the issue that might cause you sleepless nights is......that you want it to work. You don’t leave elements to chance as far as you can. In this case Parry knew how reluctant Julia was to let people in. This would be the first part of any plan. How do we get in? In your world the answer is ‘well, although Julia never admits strangers (and whatever you say, Qualtrough was a stranger to her) let’s just hope that she breaks the habit of a lifetime and let’s you in. If not, we’ll go for a pint and a game of dominoes. Come on!!!

[RodCrosby]

Oh and of course Julia would have immediately recognised the coins? She wouldn’t possibly have thought them Qualtrough’s own coins?

Thank-you for unconsciously answering my last question.

Every woman of her house knows her own house, her own kitchen and her own hearth, and whether or not coins have suddenly appeared on it.

I submit Julia's first thought would not be "Oh, Mr. Qualtrough must have innocently dropped his own coins there, for some bizarre reason. [And I'm too stupid to ask myself 'What the hell was he doing in my kitchen, anyway?']"

when a more obvious immediate reaction springs to mind...

Your favourite programs are on at the moment on CBeebies. You surely don't want to miss them?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBeebies

[Herlock Sholmes]

You need to study this case a little more before expounding on it, grasshopper.

OLIVER: Had you at that time considered the possibility of a man coming and giving the name “ Qualtrough ” to your wife ? Looking at it now, if someone did come and give the name of “ 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 knew all about the business.


OLIVER: If she had let him in, where would she have taken him ?
WALLACE: Into the front room. There is no question about that.

A rather obvious response to that one is:

If Wallace set up the non-existent Qualtrough as his wife’s killer then of course he would say that his wife would have let him in!

[Herlock Sholmes]

Thank-you for unconsciously answering my last question.

Every woman of her house knows her own house, her own kitchen and her own hearth, and whether or not coins have suddenly appeared on it.

I submit Julia's first thought would not be "Oh, Mr. Qualtrough must have innocently dropped his own coins there, for some bizarre reason. [And I'm too stupid to ask myself 'What the hell was he doing in my kitchen, anyway?']"

when a more obvious immediate reaction springs to mind...

Your favourite programs are on at the moment on CBeebies. You surely don't want to miss them?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBeebies

Remind me again where the body was found? Where’s the evidence that Julia saw the coins?