Move to Murder: Who Killed Julia Wallace?

[Herlock Sholmes]

One curious fact of the case is that when Wallace returned to the house the lights were out. For me this points overwhelmingly at Wallace as the culprit as he would have had a very plausible reason for turning them off. I’m yet to hear a suggestion as to why another killer/burglar/sneak-thief would have done the same that comes close to convincing me.

I know that only three three of us appear to be posting at the moment but I’d be interested to hear opinions. Rod’s involved the sneak-thief not wanting anyone outside seeing Julia’s body (through those heavy curtains!) or some such desperation.

[Herlock Sholmes]

So now you have to find a way to place Julia in that parlor NATURALLY, because if someone was invited in first, had there not been two people, it basically rules out the idea of a robbery. Unless the burglar went in there with the express intent of killing her first.

As you probably know, my suggestion is that Wallace, already in the Parlour, called for Julia to bring him his mackintosh as soon as he heard her close the door on Alan Close. Another simple, possible explanation as opposed to having to cope with the contortions of how a mackintosh (that Julia had put over her shoulders) ended up bunched up beneath her body.

[Herlock Sholmes]

One more question.

What are the chances that, for the first time ever since he had lived in that house, Wallace couldn’t get in by the backdoor on the very night that his wife lay bludgeoned to death in the Parlour? Some have said that he might have been nervous but that just doesn’t hold water. If Wallace had been ‘nervous,’ hands shaking etc he’d have said so. He wouldn’t simply have claimed that it was the lock or that the door was locked against him. If his hands were shaking why didn’t he simply ask Mr Johnson to try for him? The lock was faulty, yes, but it had never, ever prevented Wallace getting in before. Only on the night of his wife’s murder.

I think that Wallace had already made up his mind to suggest that the killer had escaped via the backdoor when he’d gone back to try the front door again but the Johnston’s appearance scuppered that suggestion. Wallace still had to provide an explanation though for why he hadn’t been able to access the backdoor on his first attempt. The front door was bolted of course.

Something else that points to a guilty Wallace imo.

[Herlock Sholmes]

ok, one final one and apologies for being boring on this one. I genuinely think that this is important although I’m in a minority. It’s ‘why did Wallace avoid the Parlour?’

Its been suggested that this was perfectly normal for someone searching for his wife after coming home (as the Parlour was a room not in vert regular use) and I would agree, in normal circumstances. And it’s the circumstances that are important. Put yourself in an innocent Wallace’s shoes.

Firstly, whenhe finally gives up on MGE he admits to becoming slightly concerned about Julia. He goes home.

Secondly, he can’t get into the house. It had never happened before but it appears to him that the doors are locked against him. Julia would have known that he would have returned via the front door.

Thirdly, the first thing he asks the Johnston’s when he sees them is if they’d heard anything unusual.

This is a man concerned for his wife’s safety, whilst possibly holding on to the hope of an innocent explaination.

Fourth, his panic increases when he sees that the lights are off as soon as he finally gets in.

And finally, as he gets into the kitchen, he sees the that a cupboard door had been torn off. All hope for an innocent explanation vanish at that point. He was now thinking that his wife might have come to harm. He needed to find her quickly.

So he gets to the hall door. The Parlour door is within reach (no walking required) it would have taken all of three seconds to have checked the room and either found Julia or at least eliminated the room from his search. But no, he ignores it and goes upstairs.

Id suggest that anyone else in that position would have checked the Parlour first every single time.

Im a bit of a broken record on this point but I genuinely can’t understand why everyone doesn’t see this as suspicious.

[WallaceWackedHer]

One curious fact of the case is that when Wallace returned to the house the lights were out. For me this points overwhelmingly at Wallace as the culprit as he would have had a very plausible reason for turning them off. I’m yet to hear a suggestion as to why another killer/burglar/sneak-thief would have done the same that comes close to convincing me.

I know that only three three of us appear to be posting at the moment but I’d be interested to hear opinions. Rod’s involved the sneak-thief not wanting anyone outside seeing Julia’s body (through those heavy curtains!) or some such desperation.

Honestly, for me personally, if I'd just killed someone I would instinctively turn out the lights. Maybe that's not normal lol, but darkness feels safer for some reason. I could see myself doing that.

I asked Rod to come back, I sent him a PM in fact. I really hope he does, just because it's not a fair trial otherwise, as all of us lean on Wallace's invovlement.

As you probably know, my suggestion is that Wallace, already in the Parlour, called for Julia to bring him his mackintosh as soon as he heard her close the door on Alan Close. Another simple, possible explanation as opposed to having to cope with the contortions of how a mackintosh (that Julia had put over her shoulders) ended up bunched up beneath her body.

This works well for me... Except according to MacFall, she had been sitting in the chair, which doesn't quite add up with her bringing Wallace his mackintosh, unless she handed it over and then sat down - but the kitchen was warmer so I'm not so sure she would have stayed in the parlor unless asked to do so. And we are also assuming that he had worn the mackintosh to protect himself from blood splatter right? So in this case you suggest Julia would have it in her hands (or be in mid-process of handing it to Wallace), and Wallace would not have it on - so no protection, unless a different jacket was used for protection which was subsequently disposed off/incinerated.

We also must remember MacFall estimated rigor mortis based on Julia's FAKE age of 50-something, rather than 70. I believe older age = faster rigor is that right? He also did not seem to take into account the room temperature, though evidence appears to suggest that at some point there had been a fire on in the room.

I agree about the parlor, upon noticing the door wrenched off he shoulda been frantic. Especially because he was apparently under the impression an intruder was in the home just a few minutes ago.

But myself and the other forum poster have severe suspicions about the Johnstons and their involvement. There is SO much about them that's sus.

Also I'm wondering, if Wallace was working legit solo, WHO was he playing the door-knock pantomime for? For WHO'S benefit was he gently (supposedly) tapping on the doors? It's plausible you'd do it to be safe (although tbh I'd probably go front door -> back -> front -> neighbor) but I'm not so sure the appearance of the Johnstons was coincidental...

Them "coincidentally" being there is very beneficial for Wallace, and also their presence in the house means any item or fingerprints linking to them are excused.

It requires some more thought on me and the other poster's part. I absolutely cannot believe Mr. Johnston did not know Julia's name. I cannot believe they acted like she was a total stranger. As I said, who sends postcards to complete strangers saying "having a lovely time in Anglesey!", it'd be weird as **** if you barely knew the person. Why not send a postcard to the people living at 27? In a WHOLE DECADE not even ONCE did Mr. Johnston hear the name "Julia" uttered? Despite claiming to have heard many things through the walls, like Amy's visits?... And they hear "gentle" knocks on the front and back doors, but not WRENCHING OFF CUPBOARD DOORS (unless it was done in advance of course)? Randomly visiting relatives at 9 PM at night? WHO DOES THAT? Especially with a 4 AM waking time job? Wallace not mentioning them as someone Julia would admit into the home? Florence claiming to have only ever been in the parlor even though the Wallaces asked them to open and close curtains in their home during their vacation so people would think there was somebody home? It's an almost proveable lie.

Mr. Johnston also told a proveable lie. He told the press Wallace had to "force" the back door open. On trial he said Wallace opened the back door easily without any violence.

They are legit extremely SUS, have a confirmed duplicate key, were the only other fingerprints at the scene other than Wallace and the investigators, and they MUST be placed as potential suspects. I really believe they may have been involved in some capacity.

I find it slightly difficult to think Wallace could've acted totally alone with zero help. We need Antony here to describe the MINIMUM time Wallace could have made it to Smithdown Road in, so we can establish the absolute LATEST he could have left his home. Because even with splatter protection, he still has things to do like incinerating hats and gloves, wiping his face off and then chucking that rag in the fire etc. unless it's all done on his return, and the window of time is undeniably narrow... If he had a car ride to Smithdown he saves an extra 5 minutes, but it's still tight.

I ALSO wonder what the MAXIMUM time Wallace could have got to Smithdown Road in is. Because if he had acted alone, could he have plausibly bullsh*tted an extra 3 minutes off and say he left at 6.42?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Also I'm wondering, if Wallace was working legit solo, WHO was he playing the door-knock pantomime for? For WHO'S benefit was he gently (supposedly) tapping on the doors? It's plausible you'd do it to be safe (although tbh I'd probably go front door -> back -> front -> neighbor) but I'm not so sure the appearance of the Johnstons was coincidental...

Wallace’s performance with the doors was a nothing-to-lose effort for me. By going backward and forward he increased the chances of someone seeing him. Maybe someone looking out of a window from a door opposite? They would have been able to say to the police “I saw Mr Wallace trying to get into his house.” And because Wallace couldn’t have known that he was being watched it would have appeared that Wallace was genuinely having difficulties. If no one saw him then no loss.

I come back to the point though, how likely is it that the backdoor lock completely defeated Wallace for the first time ever on the very night that his wife was murdered. Not conclusive of course but it must at least be considered a point of suspicion against Wallace.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It requires some more thought on me and the other poster's part. I absolutely cannot believe Mr. Johnston did not know Julia's name. I cannot believe they acted like she was a total stranger. As I said, who sends postcards to complete strangers saying "having a lovely time in Anglesey!", it'd be weird as **** if you barely knew the person. Why not send a postcard to the people living at 27? In a WHOLE DECADE not even ONCE did Mr. Johnston hear the name "Julia" uttered? Despite claiming to have heard many things through the walls, like Amy's visits?... And they hear "gentle" knocks on the front and back doors, but not WRENCHING OFF CUPBOARD DOORS (unless it was done in advance of course)? Randomly visiting relatives at 9 PM at night? WHO DOES THAT? Especially with a 4 AM waking time job? Wallace not mentioning them as someone Julia would admit into the home? Florence claiming to have only ever been in the parlor even though the Wallaces asked them to open and close curtains in their home during their vacation so people would think there was somebody home? It's an almost proveable lie.

At this point in time I struggle to see the Johnston’s being involved but I’m not closed to the idea. I’d certainly like to hear a full post on why you and ‘other person‘ believe that they could have been involved. Personally I can believe that they didn’t know Julia’s name. Those were more formal times and one of Julia’s postcards was actually signed J. Wallace and not Julia.

Ill drop something on you though but I can’t recall where I read it. After Mr Johnston left for the doctor and the police he bumped into (I believe) his son-in-law and I recall him saying something to the effect of “Julia’s with Wallace but I need to get her out of there.”

Im certain that I didn’t dream this because I recall mentioning it on the other thread. Perhaps AS would remember?

[moste]

Quote:. I'm certain that I didn’t dream this because I recall mentioning it on the other thread. Perhaps AS would remember?
American Sherlock? I thought Rod got him banned!

[moste]

I'm going to test the method of murder at first opportunity. Using a heavy plastic sheet in place of a mac, and a 15inch piece of construction 1/2 inch rebar as the weapon , and a ripe 12 inch pumpkin as my victim , I shall endeavour to smash the fruit to smithereens, using the 'peek and smash' method. I believe I can say without any doubt I shall succeed in reducing the pumpkin to pulp, without actually witnessing the moment of each impact , Iam fully expecting the fleshy stuff to be everywhere except on my person ,possibly with the exception of my right hand and wrist.

[moste]

On the lock fail situation.
I know a lock smith appeared in court with his opinions on possible problems of wear and rust ,with the front and rear doors . However was the question put,' Can it be said that because of the inside condition of the mechanism ,the lock may well have been operating intermittently,'I don't think there was enough pressure on the expert in this regard.

[moste]

The Johnstons moving the very next day I think had been in the works for a while, not a spur of the moment thing . Also there were other family members present at their house through the early part of the evening . From all that I have read I don't see anything untoward in respect to the Johnstons behaviour. Barking up the wrong tree here me thinks

[WallaceWackedHer]

At this point in time I struggle to see the Johnston’s being involved but I’m not closed to the idea. I’d certainly like to hear a full post on why you and ‘other person‘ believe that they could have been involved. Personally I can believe that they didn’t know Julia’s name. Those were more formal times and one of Julia’s postcards was actually signed J. Wallace and not Julia.

Ill drop something on you though but I can’t recall where I read it. After Mr Johnston left for the doctor and the police he bumped into (I believe) his son-in-law and I recall him saying something to the effect of “Julia’s with Wallace but I need to get her out of there.”

Im certain that I didn’t dream this because I recall mentioning it on the other thread. Perhaps AS would remember?

Mr. Johnston said: "Frank, I have to get Florence out of there as quick as possible!".

Anyway, if for a moment you entertain the idea that Wallace had been totally innocent which I don't tend to buy, then his back door defeating him may make some sense:

Front door on latch -> back door locked (his original assertion was that the door was locked against him which is weird - did he not have a key?) -> Wallace goes back round to the front and Johnston unlocks Wallace's back door -> Wallace goes round the back and "coincidentally" bumps into the Johnstons who urge him to try the back door again, and now it opens easily... Interestingly, Johnston told the Press Wallace had to force the back door open, but in court claimed the door had opened easily and "without violence". I posted his quote earlier, but it is essentially exactly that.

I find it curious he (Wallace) should knock though in any case, he had his own key right? Or was that only for the front door? In any case, what a happy coincidence that his next door neighbors should be there to make the discovery with him, and claim hearing thuds at after 8 PM etc (by the way, all the forensic team agreed she could not have died after 8 - this of course though, may be jaded by Julia's fake age), and what great fortune that anyone should coincidentally come out within those few minutes it took him to perform his little act... "How could Wallace have foreseen that!" One supporting his innocence might ask. But was it really an accidental encounter? Had the Johnstons REALLY been going out to visit a relative randomly at 9 PM when Mr. Johnston would have to be up at 4 AM?

Florence did not ever imply she had not known Julia's name. For decade-long neighbors, regardless of formality, it seems peculiar to me that he should never once have heard her name. Again, they hear Amy's visits through the walls, they seem to hear just about everything - except the vital things of course! Only Mr. Johnston claimed to not know her name, and to my mind he was a little bit weird about it:

Mr. Walsh — Did you hear anything when Mr. Wallace
had gone in ? — ^After he entered the house I heard him
call out twice.

Did you hear what it was ? — No, I could not make out
the name.

Mr. Justice Wright — He called out something ? —
Yes ; a word.

...

And did you hear him call a word ? — Yes, twice.

Might that have been a name ? — It might have been.

The name of his wife ? — ^Y es ; but until that evening I
did not know Mrs. Wallace’s name was Julia.

I only want to get the sort of sound. It was as if he was
calling a name ? — Yes, that is how it appeared to me.

It is odd to me that such long time neighbors on postcard-sending basis would not be on a first name basis, or at least KNOW of the name. If she had kept her name a secret from them, she would've probably signed the card "Mrs. Wallace" or something, otherwise they'd be like "who da f*ck is 'J. Wallace'". Obviously they'd fill in the blanks in seconds, but it seems odd if she had purposefully kept her name hidden to sign her initial...

In an innocent Wallace scenario, however, I have issue with him NOT calling the Johnstons out on this. How can they have only been in the parlor when they'd been entrusted to open and close curtains in the home during the Wallaces' vacation? We see he left them out of the list of people Julia would admit... He also left out all other neighbors yes, but I believe the Johnstons and the Wallaces were closer than the other neighbors, as we know Julia entrusted the Johnstons to look after her pet cat (which she was reportedly over-attached to in an odd way), and sent them postcards.

[WallaceWackedHer]

The Johnstons moving the very next day I think had been in the works for a while, not a spur of the moment thing . Also there were other family members present at their house through the early part of the evening . From all that I have read I don't see anything untoward in respect to the Johnstons behaviour. Barking up the wrong tree here me thinks

That is their claim, yes. Just another coincidence that they are set to move out the very next day?

What of the other family members? Do we have any of their statements? Arthur (the father) used the parlor as his room if I remember right, and the Johnstons said when they heard the thuds at 8.25 to 8.30 PM. They said they thought it was "Arthur taking off his boots in the front parlor", heavily implying they are trying to say the thuds were those of the bar striking Julia (the parlors were adjacent).

Wouldn't Arthur be in a perfect position to hear anything next door? NONE of the family heard the cupboard door being wrenched off? Just the thuds at well after 8 PM, the time at which it was said it was impossible for Julia to have been killed at (or after)?

[moste]

Erm. The Johnstons parlour wasn't adjacent to the Wallace's , I think that would be the Holme's parlour. 27 and 29 front doors are next to each other which means the two sets of stairs are adjacent.

[WallaceWackedHer]

I find it kind of funny that Mr. Johnston's fake testimony is flanked left and top by information that heavily implicates him lmfao. Duplicate key, knowing the home well (they had been in there to open and close curtains, and the floor plans of the homes were identical but mirrored).

"A giant with terrific strength" overcompensating a bit perhaps?