Move to Murder: Who Killed Julia Wallace?

[WallaceWackedHer]

I found some disturbing new information. It turns out that William didn't fraudulently add the diary entries on, there's several witness accounts he really did freak about her being late home and went to the police station even. This is a mark against a crank call although that does fit the other facts, makes it far more coincidental.

It's a bit odd, feels almost like advanced planning to seem innocent after he bumps her off (so people will be like: No way he did it, look how freaked he was over her coming home late!), or ofc legit innocence... But then the timing is odd that he's freaked over her potentially being dead a month before she's murdered.

What I did find peculiar is apparently one of William's supervisors "Albert" apparently visited the home in the period between that and her death (roughly a month) and Julia allegedly had randomly relayed to him how panick-stricken William had been by her late return weeks earlier... Peculiar thing for her to randomly bring up? I've never heard of any "Albert" before.

[WallaceWackedHer]

Just posting some more in my private little echo chamber...

Has anyone ever considered the possibility that William had a ride from Parry to the third tram on the kill night? And possibly even to the chess club on the night prior?

I read Gordon's statement again, not only does he give a false alibi, but he also states he picked up Lily from some place where she was giving a lesson, and for whatever reason says he doesn't even know the area from where he picked her up. From a day or two days ago. So yeah I am afraid it indeed takes a huuuuuge leap of faith to believe that was an accident.

Something else to consider is that Lily Lloyd claimed he told her he was just at Park Lane after he got back LATER that night. The mother said he was going to LARK Lane?...Might have been vice versa. But of note, one of them was near the chess club. So could we potentially believe he had picked up Wallace and dropped him off, skipping the tram ride and allowing him to beat the clock after William himself placed a call (although I still don't think it was him, a Liverpudlian accent is very difficult to fake in a way that sounds natural)? This would negate the danger of lying about the tram route because nobody on any tram could have seen him if he'd taken a car.

Another potentially more sinister reason would be if he had gone down there to check William arrived at the cafè. if he was going to do this for sinister reasons, would he have admitted where he was off to to Lily's mother and Lily? If he'd made a prank call you could argue there's a chance he might.

Now... Secondarily, William was ALSO not seen on the first two trams on the night of the killing despite his striking figure. Again, if he'd had a ride to the third tram stop, this is going to extend his window of time to act and allow him to beat the clock.

Is there a serious issue with that? I shall see... I have also got in contact with Merseyside police and other sources. ALL authors completely omit a bunch of statements for god knows what reason. I want them ALL. Even statements from extreme periphery people like Albert, William's coworker who Julia had told about the freak out over her being late home.

[Sherlock Houses]

Hope you'll excuse my intrusion here. I am a Liverpudlian [and I come from the Spion Kop] and have been interested in this very perplexing murder mystery on and off for a few years but I'm probably nowhere near as knowledgeable about it as most on this thread.
I'm very familiar with the area around the the three Menlove Gardens as I take my dog most days to Calderstone's Park, literally a stone's throw away. Not that it has much bearing but my sister's brother-in-law Steve actually lives in Menlove Gardens West and has done for a good number of years now.
Like many others I find the choice of the name R.M Qualtrough most intriguing. I won't pretend to have read this entire thread so I don't know if anyone has remarked about the following.... In his fruitless search for the fictitious 25 Menlove Gardens East, William Wallace stated that he knocked at the door of 25 Menlove Gardens West and spoke with the occupant, a Mrs Katie Mather. There's probably nothing to it but her husband's name was Richard. Given that there are 676 different permutations of two-letter initials the odds of an R.M. living at this particular address are pretty high indeed. Significant or not, who can say ?

[WallaceWackedHer]

Hope you'll excuse my intrusion here. I am a Liverpudlian [and I come from the Spion Kop] and have been interested in this very perplexing murder mystery on and off for a few years but I'm probably nowhere near as knowledgeable about it as most on this thread.
I'm very familiar with the area around the the three Menlove Gardens as I take my dog most days to Calderstone's Park, literally a stone's throw away. Not that it has much bearing but my sister's brother-in-law Steve actually lives in Menlove Gardens West and has done for a good number of years now.
Like many others I find the choice of the name R.M Qualtrough most intriguing. I won't pretend to have read this entire thread so I don't know if anyone has remarked about the following.... In his fruitless search for the fictitious 25 Menlove Gardens East, William Wallace stated that he knocked at the door of 25 Menlove Gardens West and spoke with the occupant, a Mrs Katie Mather. There's probably nothing to it but her husband's name was Richard. Given that there are 676 different permutations of two-letter initials the odds of an R.M. living at this particular address are pretty high indeed. Significant or not, who can say ?

Actually the input of any local with information like this is vital.

Through the grivepvine I recently heard two separate witness have testified that William was bixeual and hired rent boys to sexually satisfy him (I'm uncertain 70 year old Julia could). And further, that of course Julia was quite religious. John Gannon suppressed this infomration unscrupulously even thought it one of the biggest breakthroughs in the case since some extra testimonials in Gannon and the Wilkes Radio show. Bigger in fact. Perjury really...

If true, that would be completely monumental, and unacceptable information to keep from people... Anectally my nan said that back in those days you coul potentially actually be jailed if you were outed as gay, and certainly lose friends etc. In other words it basically ruined your life completely.

So even the Gannon theory then would need a small wrewrite. Considering the incredible guide he made eLilven his initial conclusion wouldn't detract. But a rewrite of it woud be as such:

1) Sometime AFTER the diary entry with the freaking out William, Julia had learned that William was using rent boys. I don't believe she necessarily knew their names.

2) Julia cared about his wife, he was bisexual, so he cared about her too. But she may have been threatening things like divocrce or exposue, which could be dangerous to those he was involved with.

3) Marsden was about to marry the love of his life. This information would ruin basically his entire life, he doesn't have all that much choice, the blackmail is very strong here.

4) Gordon might not even be a rent boy, but informants say that yes he was. I FEEL he wouldn't care but he did have a fiancé himself and it would have ruined his reputation as a "badboy" and life to an extent. I'm think moreso poor Gordon was tricked or paid off.

5) William is still calm through all this because he can back out at ANY time. I'm sure that because I DO buy he cared about Julia, he would have tried multiple times to change her mind and move past this. But she refused.

6) The last time woud have been around 6.40. There's simply no reconcilliation... So off William goes in his new jacket (the one he wore earlier MAY still be weit as it was left in the hall to dry). He tells Julia Marsden is calling on business (she doesn't even know Marsden is a rentboy - and does she DEFINTIELY even know him at all)? Either way he comes in the back admitted by William.

Of course if you're going to go into someone's home and murder them, doing so from the froont door of terraced housing seems iffy.

7) Marsden hangs up his jacket in the hall. By mistake he takes Williams rather than one of the others like a chump. Hence William's "her mackintosh; and my mackintosh" comment.

10) Did he put it on? Well, maybe. Of course the satest thing is to chuck it over her head. Do you buy there's odds he might have done that? If he did, then he's a true sucka because he overshot the jacket onto the fire and was forced to bash her head in the anyway.

11) Now, of course William is biding his time. He knows his wife's probably battered. But he needs to give Marsden time to check everything is in order about the scene and tidyness. So he gives him until a little after 8 when he finally returns.

12) Lily Hall sees William and Marsden in tne try. OF NOTE: She describes his outfit the same as Green's tetimony.

13) Marsden leaves, potentially to get ride from Gordon.

And then William's checkmate move...

If he makes it seem Gordon and Marsden did it, they're likely done for. TWO disgrunted Pru employees, specifically targeting Pru takings as revenge, and a name that links directly to Marsden. Ouch.

[Sherlock Houses]

Less than four days after Julia's murder this extremely interesting article appeared in the Liverpool Echo of
Saturday, January 24th 1931. Whether or not the article has any bearing on her brutal murder is obviously open to
question but I feel sure you'll agree that the various locations mentioned and the description of the very agitated
taxi customer give rise to much further food for thought and speculation. Apart from the 3 inch height discrepancy
it's almost as if William Wallace or a remarkable lookalike is being described.
Fascinating.........

[WallaceWackedHer]

Less than four days after Julia's murder this extremely interesting article appeared in the Liverpool Echo of
Saturday, January 24th 1931. Whether or not the article has any bearing on her brutal murder is obviously open to
question but I feel sure you'll agree that the various locations mentioned and the description of the very agitated
taxi customer give rise to much further food for thought and speculation. Apart from the 3 inch height discrepancy
it's almost as if William Wallace or a remarkable lookalike is being described.
Fascinating.........

Yes, especially considering two separate authors (one a playwright) speculated that the murder weapon was taken away in an umbrella, which the man who took that taxi had upon him.

And the apparent sighting of Amy Wallace with William at 20:10 that night near the ferries, the sighting by Mr. Sydney Green saying William is 5'10, and the sighting by Lily Hall giving the same exact outfit as described by Sydney Green who had given William's height as 5'10.

---

Here's something else to consider... And this to me is the most puzzling, the fact that all the books and trial text and everything are completely contradicted by the crime scene photos in many cases... First of all, it is abundantly clear from morgue photographs that Julia's largest wound is actually on the front of her head (on the left of her head, above the ear and toward the front side - her entire skull is literally caved into her brain). The wounds on the back of her head are slim and not deep, they look almost like laceration marks, no skull fracturing. It reminds me of Michael Peterson's wife's wounds, which his defence now tries to claim were from an "owl attack".

Everything you read ALSO makes you expect the parlor looks like the elevator scene from The Shining. But no, actually the room is cleaner than a f-ing SHOWROOM. I can imagine an estate agent leading clients around the parlor telling them they get a free dead body ornament centerpiece, it's THAT clean. I dare anyone to spot even a single drop of blood apart from the pool around Julia:

https://i.imgur.com/6R4hePP.png

https://i2-prod.liverpoolecho.co.uk/incoming/article9453133.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/JS65711382.jpg

https://d6jf304m27oxw.cloudfront.net/the-killing-of-julia-wallace-an-impossible-murder/wallace-parlour-murder-scene.jpg

I dare anyone to show me where the blood is. It must be MICROSCOPIC specks. From what we read it's apparently all over the chair, violin case, photographs, walls (up to 7 foot)... WHERE?! The place is so clean it's like something from Homes Under the Hammer.

But what's curious...

Is that this would align quite well with Julia Wallace being poisoned. Once the heart stops, blood no longer sprays. Instead, what would happen, is that it would simply leak and pool underneath where the wound is opened up, via gravity. Any specks on the walls etc. would be off of the weapon or something of that nature.

If Julia was poisoned then there IS no time factor concern, and no concern about "cleaning up", because there's zero spray. It'd be like hitting a boxing bag with an iron bar, to get blood on you you'd have to physically get it onto some item and then flick that item at yourself. And we do see half eaten scones left in the kitchen. Suppose she is poisoned, and the scene is staged, and her skull caved in, to give the impression of a burglary-turned-murder to prevent any investigation into potential poisoning. Just consider that... William would have the most motive out of anyone to do this (instead of just injecting a tonne of morphine into her Shipman style), because he lectures in chemistry and has a laboratory in his own home.

It's not something I EVER would have thought if there were no photos, but it is simply what the crime scene photos suggest. Because honestly, you won't find any visible blood in any photograph of that room that isn't the pool on the ground. The other thing you may consider is that it was simply meticulously cleaned... I think the mackintosh was not worn to protect from spray (I reiterate - WHAT spray?). One side is heavily covered, I think that is just the side that was in the pool that came out of Julia's open head wound.

[WallaceWackedHer]

Also to add to the above I think it becomes important to point out this fact... That the Holme family statement suggests Alan Close knocked on the front door which was opened. About 5 minutes later they heard a sound like "somebody falling to the ground", then the door shut.

Another thing:

IF Julia was poisoned, that would mean she could have died ANYWHERE in the house, because there would be no blood (just maybe some furniture or ornaments knocked over - maybe that broken cabinet door and coins on the floor could be such a thing), she could be dragged into the parlor and THEN battered which would give the appearance she had died there.

If she had died when taking in the milk but before returning the empty jars, she may have been in the kitchen.

A slower acting poison, of course, could mean that she would be dead later, depending on how fast it acted, perhaps even while William was out. Do not forget he entered the home alone before his neighbors accompanied him. Do not forget his neighbors are potential suspects as well. But he could have administered the blows when he was in the house by himself. Although the blood in the body may not leak like that if she had been struck down too long after death. I do not know much about these things.

But for certain, it would completely eliminate the niggling blood spatter problem. And as per the photos, I cannot for the life of me, no matter how much I zoom in, or even in the colorized image, find even a single speck of blood visible to my eye anywhere other than the pool around Julia which could well be expected to form even if her heart had already stopped beating and she was then bashed.

---

...There's also the possibility that she died from poisoning but the person harbored so much resentment towards her he couldn't help but bludgeon her. But paired with the crime scene, it's more along the lines of a burglary-gone-wrong staging.

The blood "drop" in the toilet pan is certainly bigger and more prominent than any blood mark on the walls, sofa, violin case, or photographs etc. in the parlor.

William also had said that he had thought Julia had "had a seizure" when he went into the parlor. We know a high number of fatal poisons cause seizures.

[Ven]

Ok, here's my earth shattering(?) view on the Julia Wallace murder.

This paper I put together started out as a resource document, that morphed into the basis for a book/screenplay several months ago... but was unable to post it on Casebook. I had to write it this way to help me get my thoughts in order and explain how I think I happened. By reading the casebook threads I can see that all sorts of "possibilities" abound, however if you go down any of these paths then it also raises the possibility that a troop of travelling Ninjas committed the crime... just because there's no evidence against it seems to make it somewhat plausible. I have tried to stick to the evidence that is available from the trial transcript, witness statements, additional facts/comments made by you guys, etc.

I am not a writer by trade and have tried to acknowledge all parties I have drawn information from. If what I have presented is not proper, please advise and I will redo to make it valid.

I think you'll like this version Herlock... maybe not you WWH so much!
I look forward to the constructive feedback!

https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/track?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3Ade7582e3-1009-48df-b179-1a8dcae7d556

[MK114]

Yeah I vote for ninjas!

Excellent point Ven you would make an outstanding defense attorney. We dont need facts or evidence. Maybe O. J. did it.

I don't believe evidence is something some are concerned with.

We can play what if's all night. The fact is over 90 percent of people are murdered by someone they know. Add in the victims of domestic homicide and it's even higher. The fact her husband is asking everyone what time it is and hes out looking for a address when he has never visited a client at their address and I believe we have our suspect. Then his goon buddy shows up to have his car cleaned with evidence of the crime in his vehicle.

This is not a who dunnit.

Respectfully,
MK114

[WallaceWackedHer]

Ok, here's my earth shattering(?) view on the Julia Wallace murder.

This paper I put together started out as a resource document, that morphed into the basis for a book/screenplay several months ago... but was unable to post it on Casebook. I had to write it this way to help me get my thoughts in order and explain how I think I happened. By reading the casebook threads I can see that all sorts of "possibilities" abound, however if you go down any of these paths then it also raises the possibility that a troop of travelling Ninjas committed the crime... just because there's no evidence against it seems to make it somewhat plausible. I have tried to stick to the evidence that is available from the trial transcript, witness statements, additional facts/comments made by you guys, etc.

I am not a writer by trade and have tried to acknowledge all parties I have drawn information from. If what I have presented is not proper, please advise and I will redo to make it valid.

I think you'll like this version Herlock... maybe not you WWH so much!
I look forward to the constructive feedback!

https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/track?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3Ade7582e3-1009-48df-b179-1a8dcae7d556

Cheers for that. Give me a minute I'll go through it.

Parry is the man who placed the telephone call. Evidence does not support William as the caller except that the waitress (when the caller was purposefully putting on a gruff voice) thought it sounded like an older man. He'd have to have lied about his route before even knowing he'd been logged for it to even be possible.

In the regular sounding voice heard by operators, they identified a local accent. But William grew up in Yorkshire, moving to Liverpool late in life, and would have had a different accent.

[WallaceWackedHer]

Okay so, just so you know, the discovery of the iron bar years later is uncertain. At the time of the murder the police actually removed the entire fireplace unit from the wall, so if a bar was there they should have found it. The poker was missing and unaccounted for.

There's good evidence that Wallace was not relying on Alan Close for his alibi. Alan Close was not even going to come forward and tell police about his alleged sighting, he was just forced into it by the other young children he had told. Alan Close is a very poor witness, he fell asleep and laughed constantly in court, even on the stand, he's not reliable... Despite Alan apparently being the crucial element of his alibi, when Alan did not come forward, William made zero mention of him... When asked who aside from him last saw his wife, he never mentioned the milk boy and thus easily might have ended up with no alibi.

The local shop name as the caller name is not as likely as the name being meant to reflect R J Qualtrough who was a known and reasonably notorious client among some agents of the Pru (known for being difficult). Given the call is about insurance business, the link makes sense.

The street name has no reason to be fake and the name no reason to be peculiar. He doesn't need to be gone for 2 hours, a trip there and straight back would be adequate if he was just trying to show he was elsewhere when his wife was killed. Apparently he has this masterful way of killing her and getting out in an impossible timeframe as well, so there's really no reason. A fake address only has negatives. I doubt he's well versed in forensics but the poor estimate with such a wide berth should not have been possible if the correct tests for the time of death were carried out (they were not)... ALL forensics believe Julia died at 6 PM. MacFall said he doesn't give a **** what the milk boy claims he saw and that it's 6 PM.

A random believable name like Paul Jackson at Menlove Gardens West works far better as a plan. A believable name and a real address he could see exists and visit. All he needs is maybe a tram conductor and perhaps residents of Menlove West and he can return home... Maybe try 26 North and South, and 25 Menlove Avenue. But it's altogether unnecessary.

Considering the evidence is stronger that Gordon Parry placed the call, I think the call is a prank and William killed Julia due to something relating to Amy. I'm not sure William even knew he'd been tricked until later, rather, I would say he's amped up due to killing Julia and that's why he acts so weird.

Given the evidence of the scene, the parlour fire has been on for at least a little while since Julia has scorched grid marks on her skirt (says Gannon) which would match the safety grid on the fire... So it had to be on for a little while to have heated up like that... William's raincoat is under Julia, it's the same raincoat he had worn before his return home at around 6 PM... So when Wallace gets home at 6, the parlour fireplace may realistically have already been on (due to Amy's visit - she claims she was taken into the kitchen but on previous occasions she was received in the parlour), and Wallace already has his raincoat on. The stars are aligned right there.

---

It's also worth a mention that Amy is a name which often pops up among lesser known witnesses. And the information that Amy was into bondage was not created by author Colin Wilson, it was a member of parliament. Goodman also describes Amy as domineering. It is then weird when William mentions the missing dog whip (firstly, why does he own a dog whip, secondly, why would you randomly mention something you haven't seen in 12 months).

[Ven]

Hi MK114

Definitely not Ninjas…no footprints on the parlour ceiling.

re the "cleaned car" issue...it appears to me as a little weird -
1. would you go and get your car sprayed out at a commercial garage?
2. Why say "They'll hang me if they find that" when you're getting a non-accomplice to spray out the blood.
3. Would a senior Police Officer really just ignore the testimony? When it was supposedly done by someone who knew William. Also, there is no corroboration that the statement to police was every made...just someone that came forward 50 years later!... a lot later than a certain little milk boy!
4. If there's all that blood in the car, how did it not get anywhere else in the house? (I hope my explanation for the lack of blood anywhere made sense).

Ven

[Ven]

Cheers for that. Give me a minute I'll go through it.
Parry is the man who placed the telephone call. Evidence does not support William as the caller except that the waitress (when the caller was purposefully putting on a gruff voice) thought it sounded like an older man. He'd have to have lied about his route before even knowing he'd been logged for it to even be possible.
In the regular sounding voice heard by operators, they identified a local accent. But William grew up in Yorkshire, moving to Liverpool late in life, and would have had a different accent.
Hi WWH,
Firstly, thank you for taking the time to read my paper. I obviously didn’t write it well enough based on all your comments but it is its first public outing so thank you again.
It looks like we’re going to have a very hearty discussion on the matter. I look forward to it! I firmly believe you are entitled to your opinions…even if you are are wrong!
William had been living in Liverpool for 16 years. Would he have not picked up a Liverpool accent by then? 99.99% of the people he spoke to, on his daily rounds, had a Liverpool accent. I know when I called home from a holiday in America (a long time ago) my family asked why I was talking funny! After 16 years he would be able to do a very good impression anyway, I think.
As far as what route he said he took on the Monday, I reason that he would have said the one he usually did, regardless. If he didn’t do it, then that’s the route he took. If he did do it and knew the phone call was logged he would definitely say it and lastly, if he made the call but didn’t know it was logged, he would still say his usual route otherwise the police would ask ”Why, if you’re going to the chess club would you catch a tram from near the phone kiosk? Which isn’t your normal route?”
Unlike the following evening, when he carried on like a pork chop, and was therefore remembered, he could have taken any mode of transport and not be remembered at all. I catch a tram every day, to and from work, and could not possible tell you, if asked a week later “Do you recognise this person being on your tram?” whether that person had been on my tram that day. Also consider that, back then, everyone wore very similar clothing…this goes for other “witness” sightings as well, but more on that later. Also, even at that time of night, the trams ran every 9 minutes or so, they would only do that if lots of people were travelling at that time of night. So, lots of trams, lots of people, similar clothing, everyone only worried about themselves….
Wow, your second post is gonna take forever to respond to!!

[WallaceWackedHer]

One of the books from the time says about the accent. I don't think he spoke like a local Liverpudlian. There are also then two fake voices. A first fake one used when talking to the operators, then a second and totally different fake one (but with the same accent) when talking to the waitress and Beattie... Plus first hand testimony that it was not his voice. Like even when trying to imagine it was Wallace faking a voice, those who knew him and heard it, said categorically that it wasn't him.

The guy just didn't place a call to himself.

Meanwhile there is another person who can be placed in the right place at the right time who completely frauded his whereabouts, and who was well known to place calls like that one regularly. And also a man who apparently pronounced the word cafè in the kaffay form as heard by operators.

Gordon Parry is the caller. Straight up. Waterhouse's version of Wallace having Gordon call is more likely than Wallace being the man who rang. Wallace as the caller does not fit at all, it's just cooler for the air of mystery.

However in either case the details of the call are just not good for the purpose (which would make me believe Gordon on orders of Wallace had accidentally bungled the details). I mean it literally fails INSTANTLY since he's told, essentially as soon as he gets to Menlove, that the address does not exist (as well as Deyes at the club the night prior saying he knows North, West, and South but has not heard of East). The non-existence of the address was also a big point for the prosecution... And choosing a name that can be linked to someone he supervised at the Pru (Marsden - Parry's close friend)? How exactly is that wise?... The address could seem clever to a person thinking up such a scheme, but using that name that can somewhat link back to them would be clearly stupid to anyone who was plotting a crime.

There absolutely does not need to be so many alibis, he already has Beattie having taken the phone call, he doesn't need to cement it in the minds of other chess club members at all. It's entirely unnecessary. Asking conductors for Menlove West works exactly as well. So would being a nuisance in some other minor way.

The whole timing thing is just incidental. If he was so bothered about Alan Close being the crux of him living or dying, he would have mentioned him being the last person he knows of to have seen her alive. Especially when Alan seemed like he wasn't gonna say anything about it.

Wallace is a failure of a chess player and didn't even know what year it was (a recurring problem, evidenced by diary entries predating the murder by a fair bit as well). How is he pre-empting 1001 things, then putting the cash box back up and leaving his jacket under Julia's dead body like a fool? The apparent complexity of the phone call doesn't match the pitiful staging of the crime scene, which seems like a staged robbery even to a 5 year old.

If he is going to tell Amy all this and have her turn up to ensure Julia doesn't know about the trip (how would she know if William never told Julia?), he'd have her place a phone call, because she's an accomplice at that point... If she went there for some premeditated reason it would just be so she could later claim Julia had discussed the trip.

Also regardless of the confirmed phone box fault, the caller pressed button A before the voice on the other end had answered, which everyone at the time knew is something you did not do (you pressed it only after you heard the voice of your correspondent).

...

I'd also take note of the difference in Wallace's behavior on the chess night, and then the murder night... On the chess night he's preoccupied with the match and excitedly explaining how he won and what moves he played. The next day he's acting rather erratic and entirely different from the day prior.

When giving testimony, Wallace's statements about his chess night are concrete and unwavering. He never seems rattled. For the following day and night, he constantly contradicts himself and makes mistakes... Though having said that Wallace is a man who blatantly suffers from memory trouble so I guess it's harder to judge.

Julia was far richer than William when they married. If anyone was using anyone for cash it was Wallace using Julia. Julia owned and rented out a fancy expensive home, while Wallace had to send his dad to die in an infirmary.

...

All in all though, the call SEEMS like a prank call, while the murder SEEMS like it was carried out in a very haphazard spur of the moment way - hence awful staging attempts... Intuitively it looks like that's the case.

If Wallace had premeditated the murder of his wife, she was very poorly with bronchitis. If he had slipped some of his magical chemicals to her he'd EASILY get away with it. It would look like Julia died from the illness.

The mackintosh wasn't placed on Julia's head while she waited for a surprise. Doing that WOULD have been the intelligent way to avoid blood spray, but the fact there's blood sprayed all over the walls (and IIRC no brains on the jacket- but there might be) shows this was NOT done.

[Ven]

WWH #2876
Okay so, just so you know, the discovery of the iron bar years later is uncertain. At the time of the murder the police actually removed the entire fireplace unit from the wall, so if a bar was there they should have found it. The poker was missing and unaccounted for.
Lots of things are uncertain in this case. The police removed the front piece but they weren’t renovating. Regardless, as the bar was bloodless , as I explained in my paper, William could have taken it with him a disposed of it anywhere.

There's good evidence that Wallace was not relying on Alan Close for his alibi.
No there isn’t.

Alan Close was not even going to come forward and tell police about his alleged sighting, he was just forced into it by the other young children he had told. Alan Close is a very poor witness, he fell asleep and laughed constantly in court, even on the stand, he's not reliable.
Not sure how that makes a young kid unreliable. Kids that age may not understand the importance of things.

.. Despite Alan apparently being the crucial element of his alibi, when Alan did not come forward, William made zero mention of him... When asked who aside from him last saw his wife, he never mentioned the milk boy and thus easily might have ended up with no alibi.
Alan eventually came forward. William doesn’t need to mention him if Alan says he saw Julia at 6.30+
The local shop name as the caller name is not as likely as the name being meant to reflect R J Qualtrough who was a known and reasonably notorious client among some agents of the Pru (known for being difficult). Given the call is about insurance business, the link makes sense.
Not sure of this history. If he was a regular client, why would “the phone caller" use this name to ask for William, the existing Qualtrough must have had an agent already!...and to call WW at his hobby.. not workplace… too many issues here.

The street name has no reason to be fake and the name no reason to be peculiar. He doesn't need to be gone for 2 hours, a trip there and straight back would be adequate if he was just trying to show he was elsewhere when his wife was killed.
The longer the time, within reason of course, the harder it is to determine TOD…. As shown in the JTR threads.

Apparently he has this masterful way of killing her and getting out in an impossible timeframe as well, so there's really no reason.
Not impossible, my paper shows that. If he waits for Julia to come back in and kills here straight away and then leaves, not having to shower and change etc. 3 minutes max.

A fake address only has negatives.
No, only positives, as explained in my paper… did you read it all?

I doubt he's well versed in forensics but the poor estimate with such a wide berth should not have been possible if the correct tests for the time of death were carried out (they were not)... ALL forensics believe Julia died at 6 PM. MacFall said he doesn't give a **** what the milk boy claims he saw and that it's 6 PM.
In that same paragraph you say the forensics would prove it, but they were not carried out correctly, but the time of death is…. !!! you lost me here big time!!

A random believable name like Paul Jackson at Menlove Gardens West works far better as a plan.
Not for me…no worries though.

A believable name and a real address he could see exists and visit. All he needs is maybe a tram conductor and perhaps residents of Menlove West and he can return home... Maybe try 26 North and South, and 25 Menlove Avenue. But it's altogether unnecessary.
Unnecessary for you. Qualtrough is not altogether "unbelievable".

Considering the evidence is stronger that Gordon Parry placed the call,
Disagree, no evidence at all that it was GP.. .Who saw his car, him anyone? Even WW at the telephone kiosk? GP MAY have been in the area but so was WW.

I think the call is a prank and William killed Julia due to something relating to Amy. I'm not sure William even knew he'd been tricked until later, rather, I would say he's amped up due to killing Julia and that's why he acts so weird.
So you still don’t have a motive…I think I gave a very good one.
WW tricked about what…and why later?

Given the evidence of the scene, the parlour fire has been on for at least a little while since Julia has scorched grid marks on her skirt (says Gannon) which would match the safety grid on the fire... So it had to be on for a little while to have heated up like that
How long does that take?

... William's raincoat is under Julia, it's the same raincoat he had worn before his return home at around 6 PM...
And would have taken it off when he came inside, and hung it in the entrance hall… who eats dinner in their raincoat?

So when Wallace gets home at 6, the parlour fireplace may realistically have already been on (due to Amy's visit - she claims she was taken into the kitchen but on previous occasions she was received in the parlour), and Wallace already has his raincoat on. The stars are aligned right there.
No, but fireplace could have been on earlier…not a biggie…especially if was still warm from Amy’s visit as you say.

It's also worth a mention that Amy is a name which often pops up among lesser known witnesses.
Funny, as independent I was of this site for the last 9 months, I came up with Amy as being involved.

And the information that Amy was into bondage was not created by author Colin Wilson, it was a member of parliament. Goodman also describes Amy as domineering. It is then weird when William mentions the missing dog whip (firstly, why does he own a dog whip, secondly, why would you randomly mention something you haven't seen in 12 months).
No comment on this… if you believe the rumour about her sexuality, do you believe the rumour about William’s sexuality (which I covered)? Whether they had an affair doesn’t affect my case. I believe Amy and William were close but that relates back to my paper regarding why Amy was in Liverpool and that William may have been like a big brother to her because her husband was overseas so much.

Thanks again for reading my paper WWH. Did you like or agree with any of my reasonings?
Did you like my Appendices… I particularly like the photo and cartoon images!

Ven

(Sweet avatar still to come)