Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Move to Murder: Who Killed Julia Wallace?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
    hi eten and Rod

    the plot thickens.lol
    I write fiction as a hobby, so I am prone to flights of fancy. Dorothy L Sayers might have been closer to the truth when she posited that the call was a prank and the murder not connected.

    Wait - didn't she too write fiction!

    Comment


    • The statements first appeared in print in 2001, 70 years after the crime, after almost everyone involved was dead. It is essential to have an understanding of the geography of the area [particularly for the events of 19/20th January], and it would also help to have some knowledge of forensic linguistics, although general intuition might be sufficient to help there.

      Richard Gordon Parry's Statement.

      Tuebrook Bridewell - 23/1/31.

      Richard Gordon PARRY says

      I live at 7, Woburn Hill, and I am an Inspector employed by the Standard Life Assurance Co., 28, Exchange Street East. I have known Mr and Mrs Wallace of 29, Wolverton Street since September 1926, by being in the employ of the Prudential Assurance Co., of which Mr Wallace was an agent. In December 1928 Mr Wallace was off duty ill and I did his work for two weeks. On the Thursday of the first week, and on the Wednesday evening of the second week I called at his house to hand over the cash, and settle up the books. The first time I called Mrs Wallace gave me a cup of tea and some cake while I was waiting for Mr Wallace to come downstairs. It was about 10.0am and I waited in the kitchen. I had been to Mr Wallace's house on several occasions prior to December 1928 on business matters for my Superintendent, Mr Crewe, and had also called several times after that date on similar business. I always looked upon Mr and Mrs Wallace as a very devoted couple. The last time I called at Wallace's was about October or November 1929, and then I called on business for Mr Crewe. The last time I saw Mr Wallace was about three weeks ago on a bus from Victoria Street. I got off at Shaw Street. I know that Mr Wallace is very fond of music, he plays bowls, and I have seen him at the City Cafe in North John Street; he is a member of a Chess Club which has its headquarters there.

      I am a member of the Mersey Amateur Dramatic Society and previous to the production of 'John Glaydes Honour' on November 17th 1930, at Crane Hall, we were rehearsing at the City Cafe every Tuesday and Thursday. It was during these rehearsals that I saw Mr Wallace at the city Cafe on about three occasions. I did not know previously that he was a member of the Chess Club there.

      On Monday evening the 19th instant, I called for my young lady, Miss Lillian Lloyd, of 7, Missouri Road, at some address where she had been teaching, the address I cannot for the moment remember, and went home with her to 7, Missouri Road at about 5.30pm and remained there until about 11.30pm when I went home.

      On Tuesday the 20th instant, I finished business about 5.30pm and called upon Mrs Brine, 43, Knockliad (sic) Road. I remained there with Mrs Brine, he daughter Savona, 13yrs; her nephew, Harold Dennison (sic), 29, Marlborough Road, until about 8.30pm. I then went out and bought some cigarettes, Players No 3, and the Evening Express from Mr Hodgson, Post Office, Maiden Lane, on the way to my young lady's house. When I was turning the corner by the Post Office I remembered that I had promised to call for my
      accumulator at Hignetts in West Derby Road, Tuebrook. I went there and got my accumulator and then went down West Derby Road and along Lisburn Lane to Mrs
      Williamsons, 49, Lisburn Lane, and saw her. We had a chat about a 21st birthday party for about 10 minutes and then I went to 7, Missouri Road, and remained there till about 11 to 11.30pm when I went home.

      I have heard of the murder of Mrs Wallace and have studied the newspaper reports of the case and, naturally, being acquainted with Mr and Mrs Wallace, I have taken a great interest in it. I have no objection whatever to the police verifying my statement as to my movements on Monday the 19th and Tuesday the 20th instants.

      Signed) R G Parry

      24th January, 1931
      Last edited by RodCrosby; 11-21-2018, 04:01 PM.
      "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
      The Accomplice Theory - 'on balance, the best explanation for one of the most puzzling murder cases in British criminal history' - Move to Murder, 2018
      https://www.dropbox.com/s/s0jpn0kyuq...heory.pdf?dl=0

      Compendium of Resources
      https://forum.casebook.org/forum/soc...882#post650882

      Comment


      • Then we have Lilian Lloyd's and her mother's statements

        Lilian Lloyd's Statement

        Lillian (sic) Josephine Moss LLOYD says:

        I am 20 years of age and reside with my parents at 7, Missouri Road. I am a music teacher. I am keeping company with R E (sic) Parry, 7, Woburn Hill. On Monday the 19th inst I had an appointment at my home with a pupil named Rita Price, 14a Clifton Road at 7pm. I cannot remember properly but either Rita Price was late or I was late. It was not more than 10 minutes. I gave my pupil a full ĺ of an hour lesson and about 20 minutes before I finished Parry called. That would be about 7.35pm. I did not see him and when I finished the lesson he had gone. I know he called because I heard his car and his knock at the door and I heard his voice at the door. I do not know who answered the door. He returned between 8.30 and 9pm and remained until about 11pm. He told me he had been to, I think he said, Park Lane.

        On Tuesday the 20th inst Parry called between 8.30pm and 9pm but I think it was nearer 9 than 8.30pm. He told me in answer to my question as to where he had been that he had been to a Mrs Williamsons (sic), 49, Lisburn Lane. I know Mrs Williamson, she is a friend of mine. He told me that he had got an invitation for myself and him to Leslie Williamsonís 21st birthday party in April. I do not remember whether or not he told me he had received the invitations that night but I got the impression that he had. He remained until about 11pm and then went home. He came in his car. I think Parry wore his striped trousers on Monday night and his blue suit on Tuesday and Wednesday, and I think he has worn his striped trousers every day since, but Iím not sure about Friday and Saturday.

        Signed) Lilian J M Lloyd.




        Josephine Ward Lloyd's Statement

        Josephine Ward LLOYD, 7, Missouri Road, says:

        I am the wife of Reginald Lloyd and I have a daughter, Lillian (sic) Josephine Moss Lloyd, 20 yrs. My daughter is a music teacher. She is keeping company with R G Parry of 7, Woburn Hill.

        On Monday the 19th of January 1931 Mr Parry called at my house at about 7.15pm as near as I can remember. I can fix the time as about 7.15pm because my daughter has a pupil named Rita Price, of Clifton Road, who is due for a music lesson at 7pm or a bit earlier every Monday. Last Monday (19th inst) she was a few minutes late and she had started her lesson when Parry arrived in his car. He stayed about 15 minutes and then left because he said he was going to make a call to Lark Lane. He came back in his car at about 9 to 9.15pm and stayed until about 11pm when he left.

        On Tuesday the 20th January Mr Parry called at about 9pm and remained here until about 11pm. He came in his car which he left outside. On Monday and Tuesday nights of last week (19th and 20th) Parry was dressed in a black jacket and vest and striped trousers and spats when he called. On Wednesday and Thursday or Thursday and Friday he was wearing a navy blue suit, I think it was Thursday and Friday because on Saturday he had his striped trousers again.

        Signed) Josephine W Lloyd.

        Josephine Ward Lloyd further states:

        When Parry called at about 9pm or a little after on Tuesday the 20th my daughter told him he was late and he said he had been to Mrs Williamsonís, Lisburn Lane and to Hignetts at Tuebrook about a battery for his wireless. He was wearing his dark overcoat that night. He has a check grey tweed overcoat. He also has a brownish plus four suit and another brown tweed suit.
        Signed) Josephine W Lloyd.
        "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
        The Accomplice Theory - 'on balance, the best explanation for one of the most puzzling murder cases in British criminal history' - Move to Murder, 2018
        https://www.dropbox.com/s/s0jpn0kyuq...heory.pdf?dl=0

        Compendium of Resources
        https://forum.casebook.org/forum/soc...882#post650882

        Comment


        • Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
          The statements first appeared in print in 2001, 70 years after the crime, after almost everyone involved was dead. It is essential to have an understanding of the geography of the area [particularly for the events of 19/20th January], and it would also help to have some knowledge of forensic linguistics, although general intuition might be sufficient to help there.

          Richard Gordon Parry's Statement.

          Tuebrook Bridewell - 23/1/31.

          Richard Gordon PARRY says

          I live at 7, Woburn Hill, and I am an Inspector employed by the Standard Life Assurance Co., 28, Exchange Street East. I have known Mr and Mrs Wallace of 29, Wolverton Street since September 1926, by being in the employ of the Prudential Assurance Co., of which Mr Wallace was an agent. In December 1928 Mr Wallace was off duty ill and I did his work for two weeks. On the Thursday of the first week, and on the Wednesday evening of the second week I called at his house to hand over the cash, and settle up the books. The first time I called Mrs Wallace gave me a cup of tea and some cake while I was waiting for Mr Wallace to come downstairs. It was about 10.0am and I waited in the kitchen. I had been to Mr Wallace's house on several occasions prior to December 1928 on business matters for my Superintendent, Mr Crewe, and had also called several times after that date on similar business. I always looked upon Mr and Mrs Wallace as a very devoted couple. The last time I called at Wallace's was about October or November 1929, and then I called on business for Mr Crewe. The last time I saw Mr Wallace was about three weeks ago on a bus from Victoria Street. I got off at Shaw Street. I know that Mr Wallace is very fond of music, he plays bowls, and I have seen him at the City Cafe in North John Street; he is a member of a Chess Club which has its headquarters there.

          I am a member of the Mersey Amateur Dramatic Society and previous to the production of 'John Glaydes Honour' on November 17th 1930, at Crane Hall, we were rehearsing at the City Cafe every Tuesday and Thursday. It was during these rehearsals that I saw Mr Wallace at the city Cafe on about three occasions. I did not know previously that he was a member of the Chess Club there.

          On Monday evening the 19th instant, I called for my young lady, Miss Lillian Lloyd, of 7, Missouri Road, at some address where she had been teaching, the address I cannot for the moment remember, and went home with her to 7, Missouri Road at about 5.30pm and remained there until about 11.30pm when I went home.

          On Tuesday the 20th instant, I finished business about 5.30pm and called upon Mrs Brine, 43, Knockliad (sic) Road. I remained there with Mrs Brine, he daughter Savona, 13yrs; her nephew, Harold Dennison (sic), 29, Marlborough Road, until about 8.30pm. I then went out and bought some cigarettes, Players No 3, and the Evening Express from Mr Hodgson, Post Office, Maiden Lane, on the way to my young lady's house. When I was turning the corner by the Post Office I remembered that I had promised to call for my
          accumulator at Hignetts in West Derby Road, Tuebrook. I went there and got my accumulator and then went down West Derby Road and along Lisburn Lane to Mrs
          Williamsons, 49, Lisburn Lane, and saw her. We had a chat about a 21st birthday party for about 10 minutes and then I went to 7, Missouri Road, and remained there till about 11 to 11.30pm when I went home.

          I have heard of the murder of Mrs Wallace and have studied the newspaper reports of the case and, naturally, being acquainted with Mr and Mrs Wallace, I have taken a great interest in it. I have no objection whatever to the police verifying my statement as to my movements on Monday the 19th and Tuesday the 20th instants.

          Signed) R G Parry

          24th January, 1931
          Thanks for reproducing this here. The mention of a 21st birthday party is interesting given the Qualtrough telephone call. Coincidence, or did the caller draw on real life for his excuse?

          If Parry's witnesses confirmed his alibi, then either they are all lying or Parry could not have committed the murder.

          So if we assume it wasn't Parry or Wallace, someone else must have murdered Julia Wallace. Perhaps someone she didn't know, in which case the telephone call had the dual purpose of setting up a pretext to call on Julia, ie pretending to be Mr Qualtrough, and also to get Wallace out of the house. That seems a reasonable scenario which provides a strong reason for the Qualtrough call to the Chess Club. (or perhaps I need to turn off my writer side when engaging with true crime).

          Rod - Is this what you meant when you asked who needed Mr Qualtrough to exist?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by etenguy View Post
            Thanks for reproducing this here. The mention of a 21st birthday party is interesting given the Qualtrough telephone call. Coincidence, or did the caller draw on real life for his excuse?

            If Parry's witnesses confirmed his alibi, then either they are all lying or Parry could not have committed the murder.

            So if we assume it wasn't Parry or Wallace, someone else must have murdered Julia Wallace. Perhaps someone she didn't know, in which case the telephone call had the dual purpose of setting up a pretext to call on Julia, ie pretending to be Mr Qualtrough, and also to get Wallace out of the house. That seems a reasonable scenario which provides a strong reason for the Qualtrough call to the Chess Club. (or perhaps I need to turn off my writer side when engaging with true crime).

            Rod - Is this what you meant when you asked who needed Mr Qualtrough to exist?
            Hi eten
            I picked up on the 21 bday party too. Parrys girlfreind was 20. Also he was talking to mrs. williamson about it. Maybe her daughters 21st bday party.
            Maybe mr williamson is qualtrough and made the call?
            "Is all that we see or seem
            but a dream within a dream?"

            -Edgar Allan Poe


            "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
            quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

            -Frederick G. Abberline

            Comment


            • A couple of points.

              Both Lilian and her mother contradict entirely Parry's description of his movements on Monday 19th, the night of the phone call. We can reasonably conclude that he was lying.

              We could ask "Why did Parry imagine he had to lie about his movements on the night before the murder?"

              The phone kiosk was about 1 mile (or three minutes driving time) from Lily Lloyd's home in Missouri Road.
              [There were neither speed limits nor traffic lights anywhere in Liverpool in 1931, so maybe the driving time between the two was even less.]

              Lily Lloyd was in a romantic relationship with Parry. We might think her interest in, and memory of, his movements and explanations should be a bit more sharp than her mother's.
              Anyhow it would be fair to say, from both statements, that he was 'out and about in his car', in the general vicinity of the phone-box, at about the time of the Qualtrough call.

              Lily Lloyd and her mother also state that Parry returned about 90 minutes after his first visit, with an explanation as to where he had been, but with no substantive reason given.

              Lily thought he had said "Park Lane", although her mother heard it as "Lark Lane".
              Both streets do in fact exist and are a considerably distance from Lily's home, about 8 or 9 mile round-trips, respectively, from Missouri Road.

              Again we might decide, on the balance of probabilities, that Lily's hearing was the more accurate.

              I present a 1930 map of Liverpool city centre.

              The red star is the location of the Chess Club in North John Street.
              The blue star is the start of Park Lane.
              They are just 500 yards apart.
              The nearby Custom House, in 1931, was a bustling roundabout, and a well-known meeting place and pick-up point.

              We could ask "Why did Parry race off, on a cold winter's night, into central Liverpool, not long after the Qualtrough call was made, and return without any real explanation for his 8-mile jaunt?"
              Attached Files
              Last edited by RodCrosby; 11-21-2018, 06:38 PM.
              "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
              The Accomplice Theory - 'on balance, the best explanation for one of the most puzzling murder cases in British criminal history' - Move to Murder, 2018
              https://www.dropbox.com/s/s0jpn0kyuq...heory.pdf?dl=0

              Compendium of Resources
              https://forum.casebook.org/forum/soc...882#post650882

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                Hi eten
                I picked up on the 21 bday party too. Parrys girlfreind was 20. Also he was talking to mrs. williamson about it. Maybe her daughters 21st bday party.
                Maybe mr williamson is qualtrough and made the call?
                Remember Abby, Parry mentioned Leslie Williamson's 21st birthday party.

                Leslie Williamson was a young man in 1931.

                50 years later, he rang the Radio City phone-in, and had a lot to say about Parry.

                Unfortunately, these witness statements I have posted did not come into the public domain for another 20 years.
                (I think there was a 70-year secrecy rule, and the first publication was in a 2001 book by James Murphy)

                So neither Leslie Williamson himself nor the panel in 1981 were aware that he had been mentioned in Parry's statement.

                Do you think that Leslie Williamson might have remembered if Parry had called on the night of the murder itself,
                or remembered whether the Police had questioned him or his mother over it, when he took the trouble to call the phone-in?
                Last edited by RodCrosby; 11-22-2018, 05:01 AM.
                "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
                The Accomplice Theory - 'on balance, the best explanation for one of the most puzzling murder cases in British criminal history' - Move to Murder, 2018
                https://www.dropbox.com/s/s0jpn0kyuq...heory.pdf?dl=0

                Compendium of Resources
                https://forum.casebook.org/forum/soc...882#post650882

                Comment


                • Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
                  Remember Abby, Parry mentioned Leslie Williamson's 21st birthday party.

                  Leslie Williamson was a young man in 1931.

                  50 years later, he rang the Radio City phone-in, and had a lot to say about Parry.

                  Unfortunately, these witness statements I have posted did not come into the public domain for another 20 years.
                  (I think there was a 70-year secrecy rule, and the first publication was in a 2001 book by James Murphy)

                  So neither Leslie Williamson himself nor the panel in 1981 were aware that he had been mentioned in Parry's statement.

                  Do you think that Leslie Williamson might have remembered if Parry had called on the night of the murder itself,
                  or remembered whether the Police had questioned him or his mother over it, when he took the trouble to call the phone-in?
                  Parry mentioning the 21 birthday with mrs williamson is interesting. Surely if perry made the Q (im not writing qualtrough every time!) call he wouldnt have mentioned it himself in a police statement! He would be implicating himself.

                  So then thats why i said mr williamson was Q . It was his childs 21 birthday.

                  Is mr williamson the caller and the killer?
                  "Is all that we see or seem
                  but a dream within a dream?"

                  -Edgar Allan Poe


                  "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                  quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                  -Frederick G. Abberline

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                    Parry mentioning the 21 birthday with mrs williamson is interesting. Surely if Parry made the Q (im not writing qualtrough every time!) call he wouldnt have mentioned it himself in a police statement! He would be implicating himself.
                    Alternatively, criminals do sometimes make 'slips', or forget a lie that they have told one person for one reason,
                    and re-use the lie for another reason to another person, especially if they are under pressure.


                    So then thats why i said mr williamson was Q . It was his childs 21 birthday.

                    Is mr williamson the caller and the killer?
                    No-one has ever thought that any of the Williamsons were involved, and there is just no evidence to suggest it.

                    Do you think Parry actually called at the Williamson house on the Tuesday night?
                    We know the Police never took a statement from them, and we can hear what Leslie Williamson said [and didn't say] in 1981.
                    But back to the Monday night, for a moment. Would a fair statement be, from the EVIDENCE,
                    that Parry was probably in the vicinity of the phone box at the time of the call, and later that evening, probably in the vicinity of the Chess Club, four miles away?

                    And that he lied about all that to the Police?
                    "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
                    The Accomplice Theory - 'on balance, the best explanation for one of the most puzzling murder cases in British criminal history' - Move to Murder, 2018
                    https://www.dropbox.com/s/s0jpn0kyuq...heory.pdf?dl=0

                    Compendium of Resources
                    https://forum.casebook.org/forum/soc...882#post650882

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
                      But back to the Monday night, for a moment. Would a fair statement be, from the EVIDENCE,
                      that Parry was probably in the vicinity of the phone box at the time of the call, and later that evening, probably in the vicinity of the Chess Club, four miles away?

                      And that he lied about all that to the Police?
                      I don't think we can say where Parry was on Monday night, only that there is a discrepancy in the statements. I think it is highly likely the women's statements are more accurate and that Parry lied and was perhaps up to no good. It is certainly possible that he was in the vicinity of the call box at the time the Qualtrough call was made, but he may have been somewhere else - given it is likely he lied - up to no good.

                      Now I have satisfied myself about the reason for the Qualtrough call (to allow a stranger to Julia to call on Julia without raising her suspicion and giving that person a reason to be invited in - to wait for Wallace), I am convinced Parry was not the murderer. His alibi for Tuesday is also strong (unless Brine et al contradict him).

                      The last part of the puzzle then is who was the man pretending to be Qualtrough and did he act alone? It is conceivable that Parry masterminded the robbery, made the call but had an accomplice commit the crime. He would do this, in my view, because I think the murder was not planned and of course if Parry called on Julia, she would have known who the thief was.

                      Comment


                      • Let us, for completeness, look at the statements of Olivia Brine, and her nephew, given on 26th January 1931.
                        Unless it is some "grand conspiracy", it seems impossible that Parry killed Julia Wallace, as she was dead before he left Mrs. Brine's.
                        Attached Files
                        "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
                        The Accomplice Theory - 'on balance, the best explanation for one of the most puzzling murder cases in British criminal history' - Move to Murder, 2018
                        https://www.dropbox.com/s/s0jpn0kyuq...heory.pdf?dl=0

                        Compendium of Resources
                        https://forum.casebook.org/forum/soc...882#post650882

                        Comment


                        • Let us then return to Parry's account of his movements on the Tuesday night. He seems to have watertight alibis up to about 8.30pm [Brine], and for after about 9.00pm [Lloyds].

                          'On Tuesday the 20th instant, I finished business about 5.30pm and called upon Mrs Brine, 43, Knockliad (sic) Road.
                          I remained there with Mrs Brine, her daughter Savona, 13yrs; her nephew, Harold Dennison (sic), 29, Marlborough Road, until about 8.30pm.

                          I then went out and bought some cigarettes, Players No 3, and the Evening Express from Mr Hodgson, Post Office, Maiden Lane,
                          on the way to my young lady's house. When I was turning the corner by the Post Office I remembered that I had promised to call
                          for my accumulator at Hignetts in West Derby Road, Tuebrook. I went there and got my accumulator and then went down
                          West Derby Road and along Lisburn Lane to Mrs Williamsons, 49, Lisburn Lane, and saw her. We had a chat about a 21st birthday party
                          for about 10 minutes and then I went to 7, Missouri Road, and remained there till about 11 to 11.30pm when I went home.'


                          He has no fewer than three 'alibis' for this half-hour period, between leaving Brine and arriving at the Lloyds .
                          What do we make of that fact, and what do we make of the alibis?
                          We know the Police never checked them, because we have now looked at all the witness statements in the file.
                          Last edited by RodCrosby; 11-22-2018, 03:25 PM.
                          "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
                          The Accomplice Theory - 'on balance, the best explanation for one of the most puzzling murder cases in British criminal history' - Move to Murder, 2018
                          https://www.dropbox.com/s/s0jpn0kyuq...heory.pdf?dl=0

                          Compendium of Resources
                          https://forum.casebook.org/forum/soc...882#post650882

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
                            Let us then return to Parry's account of his movements on the Tuesday night. He seems to have watertight alibis up to about 8.30pm [Brine], and for after about 9.00pm [Lloyds].

                            'On Tuesday the 20th instant, I finished business about 5.30pm and called upon Mrs Brine, 43, Knockliad (sic) Road.
                            I remained there with Mrs Brine, her daughter Savona, 13yrs; her nephew, Harold Dennison (sic), 29, Marlborough Road, until about 8.30pm.

                            I then went out and bought some cigarettes, Players No 3, and the Evening Express from Mr Hodgson, Post Office, Maiden Lane,
                            on the way to my young lady's house. When I was turning the corner by the Post Office I remembered that I had promised to call
                            for my accumulator at Hignetts in West Derby Road, Tuebrook. I went there and got my accumulator and then went down
                            West Derby Road and along Lisburn Lane to Mrs Williamsons, 49, Lisburn Lane, and saw her. We had a chat about a 21st birthday party
                            for about 10 minutes and then I went to 7, Missouri Road, and remained there till about 11 to 11.30pm when I went home.'


                            He has no fewer than three 'alibis' for this half-hour period. What do we make of that fact, and what do we make of the alibis?
                            We know the Police never checked them, because we have now looked at all the witness statements.
                            There isn't anything especially unusual about his movements that night. He has been seen by a few people, but not unusually high and it seems a natural range of activities. For the important time, in terms of the murder, he was in one place. He fit a few errands in on the way to his girl, but normal stuff. That 30 minutes was some time after the murder, so not the important time to have an alibi.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by etenguy View Post
                              That 30 minutes was some time after the murder, so not the important time to have an alibi.
                              Agreed...unless he still wished to cover up something important, for some reason.

                              Is there anything odd about his language? For example, why was it necessary to identify the exact location where he 'remembered' to call for his accumulator?
                              He does not state at all the route he took to Hignett's, although he is very precise in the route he took away from Hignett's.
                              "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
                              The Accomplice Theory - 'on balance, the best explanation for one of the most puzzling murder cases in British criminal history' - Move to Murder, 2018
                              https://www.dropbox.com/s/s0jpn0kyuq...heory.pdf?dl=0

                              Compendium of Resources
                              https://forum.casebook.org/forum/soc...882#post650882

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
                                Agreed...unless he still wished to cover up something important, for some reason.

                                Is there anything odd about his language? For example, why was it necessary to identify the exact location where he 'remembered' to call for his accumulator?
                                He does not state at all the route he took to Hignett's, although he is very precise in the route he took away from Hignett's.
                                There is more detail in his description than you might normally expect, even down to the brand of cigarettes he bought. I guess whether that is odd would depend on his normal way of communicating. My father-in-law does the same, throwing in detail, but not consistently, but often about journey directions, even naming roundabouts sometimes.

                                In relation to the murder, I'm not sure what he might want to cover up during his 30 minutes of errands.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X