Do you think William Herbert Wallace was guilty?

[Herlock Sholmes]

A little 'strange' - most criminals, by definition, are - but then...


"Life is infinitely stranger than anything which the mind of man could invent. We would not dare to conceive the things which are really mere commonplaces of existence. If we could fly out of that window hand in hand, hover over this great city, gently remove the roofs, and peep in at the queer things which are going on, the strange coincidences, the plannings, the cross-purposes, the wonderful chains of events, working through generations, and leading to the most outré results, it would make all fiction with its conventionalities and foreseen conclusions most stale and unprofitable".

Sherlock Holmes in A Case of Identity, 1891


What a shame you've earned and learned nothing from your subscriptions to the (cough) "Sherlock Holmes Society"...

You obviously haven’t spent your time away from the Forum learning how to debate I see.

Your response, therefore, to any contradictions or anything that doesn’t add up is “ well, mad things happen.” You should have been a Barrister.

Same old boring, childish insults

For someone who mocks someone with an interest in Sherlock Holmes you tend to quote the man pretty often.

[Herlock Sholmes]

. Originally Posted by RodCrosby View Post
I could not be certain of getting the job, so I didn't bother applying...
I could not be certain of winning the lottery, so I didn't buy a ticket...
I could not be certain of being alive in the evening, so I didn't get out of bed in the morning...

And so, according to that wonderful piece of logic, when coming up with a plan there’s no need to try and elimininate things that could go wrong.

‘Qualtrough’ - “ hey Gordon I’ve just thought of around 8 ways that this plan could go completely t*ts up!”

Parry - “Don’t worry about it. S*@t happens. You never know, we might be lucky?”

‘Qualtrough’ - “If you say so Master.”

Parry- “I do. Now off you go a steal the cash while I take all the risks drinking tea at a friends house.”

‘Qualtrough’ - “You know best o wise one.”

[RodCrosby]

Yawn...

Logic - and vaporising "straw-man" arguments - is my speciality...

They did try to eliminate everything that could go wrong.

Remember?
'It was planned with extreme care and extraordinary imagination...', James Agate in Ego 6, 1944

Anything that could have gone wrong - except the unforeseen event that actually did go wrong - would have been inconsequential, and afforded a risk-free exit from the plot at every step...

Therefore, every reason to proceed with such a clever plot...

[Herlock Sholmes]

Yawn...

Logic - and vaporising "straw-man" arguments - is my speciality...

They did try to eliminate everything that could go wrong.

Remember?
'It was planned with extreme care and extraordinary imagination...', James Agate in Ego 6, 1944

Anything that could have gone wrong - except the unforeseen event that actually did go wrong - would have been inconsequential, and afforded a risk-free exit from the plot at every step...

Therefore, every reason to proceed with such a clever plot...

Quoting Agate is pointless and pathetic.

1. Beattie could have forgotten to give the message.
2. Wallace could have had plans for that night.
3. Wallace might just have decided not to go.
4. Julia might have had a visitor that night (sister-in-laws for eg.)
5. Someone in the club could have said “ I know the area well, there’s no Menlove Gardens East.
6. Wallace could have checked during the day on Tuesday and found that MGE didn’t exist.
7. Wallace might have just said to Julia “I’m going out on business tonight.” By not mentioning MGE or Qualtrough there’s no way she’d have let him in.

That’s 7 simple ways where the plan crumbles. There’s only one way that the plan was 100% certain to succeed and that’s if Wallace created it.

Why didn’t our genius Parry wait until Wallace got to the club and either disguised his own voice or got his gullible accomplice to make the phone call. This would have ensured success.

Arguing with you is way too easy Rod

[John G]

Afternoon All,

I keep coming back to Herlock's observation that so many elements were left to chance, any of which could have scuppered Qualtrough's master plan, if the idea was to get Wallace out of his house for a couple of hours on the Tuesday evening for whatever purpose.

Whoever answered the phone to Qualtrough had to take the message seriously, make a note of all the essential details - customer name, time and address - and pass it on faithfully.

Wallace had to attend the chess club that evening and not decide to give it a miss. He and his wife were both, or had recently been quite unwell, and the weather in January would be unpredictable.

Qualtrough couldn't know for sure that Wallace had attended and got the message. He could hardly have followed him all the way to the club after making the call from the box near Wallace's home.

Without knowing if Wallace was even aware of the message on Tuesday morning, Qualtrough would equally have no idea if the Wallaces both woke up feeling well enough for husband to leave wife alone again for a second evening on the trot.

Qualtrough would also have no idea what Wallace's movements were going to be that day, even supposing Wallace himself did and stuck to them. Qualtrough would have to be in position and watching that house - front and back?? - from late afternoon, or he wouldn't know if or when Wallace might return home for tea, and if or when he might leave again.

If it suddenly began bucketing down with rain, for example, would Wallace not sensibly decide to stay indoors, rather than set out on that winter's evening to visit a stranger at an unfamiliar destination? How long was Qualtrough planning to loiter close to the house, waiting to see if Wallace would indeed emerge, before giving up if he failed to do so?

Even if he did see Wallace emerge, how could he be certain that it was in response to his message? If it was, how could he know that Wallace, using the tongue in his head to ask for precise directions, would not ascertain from the first person he met on the way, that MGE didn't exist, and head straight back home?

The only person who had any control over the events of the Monday and Tuesday evening was Wallace himself. And he had total control over his own movements, right up until the discovery of Julia's body in the presence of their neighbours.

Love,

Caz
X

In what way did he have"total control over the events" and his own movements?

[AmericanSherlock]

Obviously, Wallace can control what he chooses to do or not do.

Whereas another planner has to rely on several factors of chance working in their favor for the plan to not be nixed.

Pretty straightforward.

[etenguy]

Obviously, Wallace can control what he chooses to do or not do.

Whereas another planner has to rely on several factors of chance working in their favor for the plan to not be nixed.

Pretty straightforward.

Surely, if this was a plan to steal some takings, and the thief planned for Mr Wallace to be out of the house, he could have easily arranged a ploy to get both people out of the house. It seems to me the murder was not incidental to some thievery, but the intended outcome.

[John G]

Obviously, Wallace can control what he chooses to do or not do.

Whereas another planner has to rely on several factors of chance working in their favor for the plan to not be nixed.

Pretty straightforward.

Obviously, anyone else can choose what to do or what not to do, assuming they have free will.

And Wallace doesn't just need to rely on chance, he needs a series of miracles to work in his favour!

Very straightforward.

[AmericanSherlock]

Surely, if this was a plan to steal some takings, and the thief planned for Mr Wallace to be out of the house, he could have easily arranged a ploy to get both people out of the house. It seems to me the murder was not incidental to some thievery, but the intended outcome.

Absolutely agree

[AmericanSherlock]

Obviously, anyone else can choose what to do or what not to do, assuming they have free will.

And Wallace doesn't just need to rely on chance, he needs a series of miracles to work in his favour!

Very straightforward.

John, that is a separate point. I'm sure you will make that plenty in your long post we are anxiously awaiting.

However, your objection to caz is a non starter to mind. I will let her reply for herself though, perhaps I shouldn't have stuck my nose in but it just seemed an odd (and somewhat combative) objection.

As the point is only Wallace can control Wallace. Whether he was capable of committing the crime due to other factors is up for debate. It was clear from the post she was talking about (by Herlock) that the conversation was specifically how difficult it would be for a Parry and accomplice theory to work, given the many things they would have to rely on in regards to Wallace's behavior. Point is only he can decide his own behavior.

Seemed like a conflation of ideas.

[AmericanSherlock]

You obviously haven’t spent your time away from the Forum learning how to debate I see.

Your response, therefore, to any contradictions or anything that doesn’t add up is “ well, mad things happen.” You should have been a Barrister.

Same old boring, childish insults

For someone who mocks someone with an interest in Sherlock Holmes you tend to quote the man pretty often.

True story: I have a crazy uncle who got worse and worse as the years went on, festering hate and anger. Always he is right and the rest of the world is wrong. With few friends or people to call his family because of his behavior. As he got older, the more entrenched in his ways he has become. I am reminded of this here on this thread and of the saying "A leopard never changes his spots". Sad, really.

[RodCrosby]

Interesting insight into your antecedents....Thanks for sharing

Meanwhile...

That’s 7 simple ways where the plan crumbles. There’s only one way that the plan was 100% certain to succeed and that’s if Wallace created it.

Obviously, Wallace can control what he chooses to do or not do.

Whereas another planner has to rely on several factors of chance working in their favor for the plan to not be nixed.

Pretty straightforward.

'The jury was of a type that could not recognize a non sequitur...’ Gerald Abrahams in The Legal Mind (London, 1954)

Perhaps someone else would care to explain to this pair their silly error of fact and logic?

[AmericanSherlock]

Interesting insight into your antecedents....Thanks for sharing

Meanwhile...





'The jury was of a type that could not recognize a non sequitur...’ Gerald Abrahams in The Legal Mind (London, 1954)

Perhaps someone else would care to explain to this pair their silly error of fact and logic?

Is there evidence of you having solved anything? I thought you solved the case. Where is the evidence?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Obviously, anyone else can choose what to do or what not to do, assuming they have free will.

And Wallace doesn't just need to rely on chance, he needs a series of miracles to work in his favour!

Very straightforward.

I can’t understand why you don’t get this John?

If the plan was created by Parry he’s relying on things going right for him that he cannot control and that could very easily have gone wrong. For example (as I said in my last post) Wallace might have discovered that MGE didn’t exist and decided not to go (plan falls.) He And Julia may have had plans for the evening and so he couldn’t go (plan fails.) Wallace might not have mentioned the name Qualtrough or MGE to Julia which would have meant that she didn’t let ‘Qualtrough’ in on the Tuesday evening (plan fails.)

I mentioned 7 ways the plan could have fallen, I think Caz has added a couple. Yet if Parry (disguising hisvoice) or Qualtrough had actually spoken to Wallace by telephone whilst he was at the club they would have been almost certain of success instead of leaving things in the lap of the gods.

If Wallace had created the plan and made the call however he would have known for a fact that he would have gone looking for MGE and that he would have told the police that Julia knew about Qualtrough and MGE.

Wallace needed no good fortune here. Unlike Parry.

[AmericanSherlock]

I can’t understand why you don’t get this John?

If the plan was created by Parry he’s relying on things going right for him that he cannot control and that could very easily have gone wrong. For example (as I said in my last post) Wallace might have discovered that MGE didn’t exist and decided not to go (plan falls.) He And Julia may have had plans for the evening and so he couldn’t go (plan fails.) Wallace might not have mentioned the name Qualtrough or MGE to Julia which would have meant that she didn’t let ‘Qualtrough’ in on the Tuesday evening (plan fails.)

I mentioned 7 ways the plan could have fallen, I think Caz has added a couple. Yet if Parry (disguising hisvoice) or Qualtrough had actually spoken to Wallace by telephone whilst he was at the club they would have been almost certain of success instead of leaving things in the lap of the gods.

If Wallace had created the plan and made the call however he would have known for a fact that he would have gone looking for MGE and that he would have told the police that Julia knew about Qualtrough and MGE.

Wallace needed no good fortune here. Unlike Parry.

I think he doesn't want to get it for whatever reason