Move to Murder: Who Killed Julia Wallace?

[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]

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]

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!

[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?

[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.

[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]

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.

[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]

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 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.

[WallaceWackedHer]

You know, if Wallace was behind it he made a HUGE mistake of having killed her in the parlor. It makes burglary so hard to reconcile, since parlor implies Julia admitted a visitor... But then the silence and lack of defensive wounds, and where she was likely at when attacked (on the chair) it indicates with VERY high probability that she was taken completely by surprise.

As in she didn't catch someone thieving.

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.

I noticed Wallace cried when hearing the diary entry about him and Julia enjoying the frosty park. I get the impression from that, and the constable who apparently saw him crying before the killing, that had she been murdered by him it was through necessity. Like she found out something she wasn't meant to know. Or Wallace found out she was having an affair. Something along those lines. I'm not so sure he just randomly became sick of her and did her in... Or was he just a really good actor able to turn on the waterworks when deemed fit?

[WallaceWackedHer]

Double checked ,Joe Crewe 'Lived on Green Lane 3 1/2 years.'

Well IIRC the gardens were a relatively new construction. I can fact check this when on my laptop.

The blood on the door handles thing is causing me some bother. I simply cannot find an explanation for it.

Who would have an incentive to ensure thar? Or did it happen by accident rather than by design (as in did the killer just remove his gloves after killing Julia and not specifically think about keeping handles clean?)... If you hit someone really hard while gripping a bar, would your palms stay clean of the blood that came off of her? I'd tend to think there'd be transfer onto anything you gripped such as handles.

A burglar in a panic I think would have left such marks.

But if Wallace had killed her himself how did his clothes pass the benzidine test? (Or did he change clothes after killing her?) DID he have enough time? DID he stage things in advance. Where did the gloves and hat he would've probably had to wear for protection go? Did the Johnstons take all of that stuff? Did Parry lie about his alibi with Brine and provide a car ride for Wallace to Smithdown and back after, being forced to take the weaponry since he has been tricked into such heavy involvement and now has no choice but to go along with it?

[moste]

Double checked ,Joe Crewe 'Lived on Green Lane 3 1/2 years.'

[moste]

Beattie aside, Menlove Gardens area was/is a very pleasant, leafy suberb of a decent area of Liverpool . Crime of the burglary sort was pretty rife throughout the major city's of England ,middle of a deep depression, unemployment at all time highs, and Liverpools police force in a hell of a mess , strike action abounding, corruption at every turn.

On the Mr. Crewe living apparently in a fog. Unbelievable that he would not know the street formation as close as he was to the triangle. He lived there 8 years didn't he!

[WallaceWackedHer]

It certainly wouldn't/isn't an unsafe place to be knocking at night, I don't know where that came from.

It was Beattie's own words, he told Wallace he should consult a directory because the area is unsafe to be knocking around in and he might be there all night. Wallace shut down his suggestion saying he could inquire.

I believe Beattie's words may have had merit at the time. A home in Menlove Gardens West had been burgled on December the 21st 1930, and on January 22nd 1931 there was a report of a home on Menlove Avenue being burgled. So it does sound like it may have been an area with some issues.

Also I made a mistake. Crewe said he didn't know if there was or was not a MGE, not that he didn't know there was a Menlove Gardens:

To your knowledge, was Mr. Wallace familiar with this district? - No.

Was it ever in his Prudential round? The Menlove Avenue district? - No.

Did you ever know before the case whether or not there was a Menlove Gardens East? - No.

Allen continues: "Here is a man who lives within 1,500 feet and he did not know whether there was a Menlove Gardens East."

By the way, in an innocent Wallace scenario there is the question: "How did they know he was going to his appointment with Qualtrough?" - for example, when they saw him leave how did they know that's where he was going, and not just going to the local newsagents for a pack of cigs? Did they follow him to the tram? Or just see him leave and assume that's probably where he was headed? Perhaps the person knocked and asked Julia if Wallace was home and where he had gone?

But whatever the case, we know one person who knew for certain that Wallace was going to Calderstones: Amy Wallace... We also have a report of a man escaping from near Wolverton at some time around 7, via cab, to Sefton Park where Amy lived (Ullet Road).

We of course only have her word that Julia had told her that Wallace was heading to Calderstones that night (it does help to support the appearance of Wallace's innocence). We must also keep in mind that the Johnstons claimed they could always hear Amy through the walls as she was so loud - but it certainly would have been a huge stroke of luck for them to get that confirmation.

---

I would also add that, it is quite strange, that Wallace having NO IDEA where Menlove Gardens East is (evidently he didn't even know it was off Menlove Avenue, as he had to inquire before he even got to Menlove Avenue as to what trams to take - despite apparently correctly identifying to Julia that he was headed to Calderstones, a route he was familiar with), turned up with only 10 minutes to spare. Could this be because Alan Close was unexpectedly late, meaning Wallace had to leave later than anticipated?

It does not make sense for ANYONE with any sense of punctuality to go on a wild goose chase yet cut the timing so fine. What if MGE had been another 10 minute tram ride away? Was 10 minutes really enough time to leave yourself to search for an address you have NO clue as to the location of?

I would suggest in any case as I mentioned previously, that he possibly had a ride to Smithdown Lane and on the way back, as no fare collectors or conductors on those trams recollected seeing the very distinctive Wallace aboard their tram. This would allow him to "beat the clock" much easier, if true.