Move to Murder: Who Killed Julia Wallace?

[WallaceWackedHer]

I now have access to the British Newspaper Archives. ****'s about to get REAL son. I'm angered they don't have the Liverpool Evening Express from the 30s, as I know the January 23rd (or something) issue mentioned the case, and the black tabby cat.

[WallaceWackedHer]

From Goodman's book:

There had been a certain amount of corruption within the police force before the strike; but now it increased: a few nasty sores became a rash. The force became overstocked with dishonest policemen—“bent Jacks”—some of them only slightly bent, but a lot of them bent almost double. In at least one division a Chicago-style protection racket was organized. Some members of the force took up housebreaking, either as a spare-time occupation or to ease the monotony of long spells of duty. This often led to situations wherein the criminals investigated their own crimes. Needless to say, they never solved them.

By the way Antony I also bought your book... Unfortunately the first part was really annoying, because it was fictionalized retelling, and to someone trying to research the case, it's impossible to know what parts of conversation are invented for the story etc., and what parts are REAL. It was very frustrating... Then I got to Part Two and Three which fortunately had new information.

Here's the thing man:

The statements Wallace is giving, it's honestly like he has dementia or something. He called Parry "Mr. Gordon R. Parry", says he was visiting "A.M. Qualtrough", at "Menlove Avenue East". He doesn't know the name of his own cleaning lady who he had seen many times (enough for her to have an idea as to the state of their marriage). Marsden coming to his home and saw him take down the cash box "often", despite you saying he could only have covered Wallace for three days. Thomas "McCarthy". Saying Qualtrough requested a meeting on "tuesday the 21st". Thinking the conductor pointed him to the 5A when he yelled at him to take the 7. Leaving himself 10 minutes upon arrival to get to an address HE DOESN'T EVEN KNOW THE LOCATION OF.

He didn't even know what ******* trams to take without asking so him even making it in time is sheer luck.

He also "THINKS" he took a certain route when going to the chess club. Important if he'd been guilty, as if any bus/tram witnesses came forward to say they saw him on a certain route he'd be ****ed obviously.

Was he really this stupid? Because I see he wasn't promoted in 16 years of dilligent work for the Pru, so maybe he really was that foolish. You realize him having like, dementia or something would be a STRONG sign to his innocence, as it would explain how he was so easily tricked, got so much stuff wrong, "lied" (perhaps unwittingly), retracted countless statements, denied multiple statements (for example, the conductor) and Lily Hall's sighting.

On Lily Hall's sighting I see you have contested it. Gannon contests himself:

What Lily Hall actually said at the committal trial was, ‘One went down the entry and the other down Richmond Park but I do not know whom.’ When Scholefield Allen (Wallace’s defence counsel) asked her to clarify this, Lily Hall said, ‘The man went down the entry opposite the institute.’ The entry opposite the ‘institute’ (Parish Hall) was the entry leading from Wallace’s back door into Richmond Park: the entry Wallace had used upon leaving his back door to begin his journey to Menlove Gardens East earlier that night – and the entry he had told Inspector Gold he had used upon his return.

She originally did not say she saw them part. Maybe she added that on, being convinced of Wallace's guilt. What's more important is if she matched what outfit he was wearing in her first statement (if this could not otherwise be known), as that would show she saw him. Even if she made up the bit about what directions they went in.

[WallaceWackedHer]

Quote: Does anyone know who lived at 27 Wolverton Street? Were there any other suspicious neighbors? Hi wwh .that would be the Holmes family ( no relation to Sherlock)

Where did you get that? I need to buy more books so I don't make stupid ideas lol.

I assume of course the family was quickly ruled out. If they were home and corroborated the silence next door, then that would tend to help the Johnstons by corroborating their claim of hearing nothing.

But if number 19 was truly burgled in December AND there was no forced entry, AND the crime scene was basically identical (pillows and blankets chucked upstairs, cash container stolen from and replaced), then either Julia's murder was purposefully made to look similar to implicate the "Anfield housebreaker", or the two crimes are LEGITIMATELY linked...

If linked and this information isn't just made up, then we see that evidently somebody had advanced knowledge of the location of BOTH these nest eggs. It is said that Parry or Marsden had to have done it because of the cash box... But we see the same thing had apparently been done at number 19 just weeks earlier.

Surely Draper worked for more homes than just #29? She had not been to work since the 7th I believe, so may not have known Wallace was ill, but may have known his work schedule etc. which she could have relayed to another party... I would wonder if Julia had had plans for the night which were cancelled due to her illness, if not for her being found killed in the parlor, with no sign of struggle etc.

The Anfield burglar is also claimed to be one person right? But what you may have is a group or multiple individuals? Little burglary syndicates like that would definitely not be anything new. More extensive information on the Anfield burglaries would no doubt be of great use, and also whether the homes that were hit had employed a cleaner or whatever, and if all other crimes involved forced entry.

---

Also what of the link between Wallace's dog whip, Amy Wallace's paddle (and what Collins claimed she did with it lol), and the "sexually odd" comments? Amy Wallace said she had called at the home to see Julia. The Johnstons said they could always hear Amy's visits, so did they hear this one? And was it usual for Amy to visit Julia alone (rather than just going there to see Wallace)? Had Julia discovered something which necessitated her silencing?

---

But yes I feel I must get more books as I'm thinking things which book information could rule out. I read the cat was missing for MULTIPLE days so that is even weirder. If true maybe it was indeed used by someone to try and get the reclusive Julia out of the home, or used to gain entry, then left outside after the crime. That's if it really was MULTIPLE days which would stretch the boundaries of believability in that climate, that the cat should choose to stay out on the street, and that if it was staying with a neighbor who had innocent intentions, why they did not tell Julia who was worried sick.

Btw if it's true the Johnstons were asked by the Wallaces to open and close their curtains during their vacation, then we know they were lying about having only been in the parlor/never having been in there before.

[moste]

Quote: Does anyone know who lived at 27 Wolverton Street? Were there any other suspicious neighbors? Hi wwh .that would be the Holmes family ( no relation to Sherlock)

[moste]

???????????

Dozey of the seven Dwarfs!? He's on the wrong thread

[WallaceWackedHer]

By the way, curious that Wallace "didn't know the name" of Draper the cleaning lady... Even though the cleaning lady had supposedly seen them both together enough to form an opinion that they were on "friendly terms". Was she paid in cash every time? Were there ever cheques made out to her etc? I mean lmao wtf is going on here? He knew her address but not her name? Man.........

Seems like Mr. Johnston's claim of never knowing Julia's name.

[WallaceWackedHer]

I’m certainly not criticising you for exploring all avenues WWH as you might come up with something previously unnnoticed that could lead us to solving or getting close to solving the case but it’s my opinion, and I have been wrong in the past (it was on June 3rd 1987 btw) that the cat played no part in this unless we believe that the Johnston’s were a part of some plot and I just can’t see it. I think the cat might have gone AWOL for awhile and then returned and slipped inside when the Johnston’s entered. The Johnston’s going out at just that time was simply a minor coincidence (although 8.45 does seem rather late for going out visiting.) I also can’t see any reason to involve Marsden (Gannon’s nympho-Julia theory has never washed with me) He was about to marry well, had a decent job and his future looked good so I can’t see why he’d want to involve himself in a robbery. Wallace could have gotten the name Qualtrough from the shop, from somewhere or someone in his past or from talking to Marsden. I don’t think that the Johnston’s knew about Wallace’s MGE excursion. Yes they could hear through the walls but bumps and doors closing etc. I think that the chances of them hearing a normal conversation spoken at a normal level would have been zero.

The fact that Wallace denied knowing about the bar is an interesting one. Whilst firelighting might have been left to Julia or Sarah Draper you would think that Wallace would have been aware of the bar’s existence? A defender might say though that it was simply something that Wallace paid no attention to because he never used it. Personally I agree with you that it is suspicious.

Talking of Sarah Draper, let’s add another theory. What if she knew about the cash box (likely) and gave this information to an associate and (here’s the good bit) what if she went on a shopping trip for Julia and to the house key with her and had a duplicate made?

I've just gone through Goodman's book. I can see some of the facts are wrong, but I have learned a fair bit of new information...

The cat came in when the constables arrived it would appear. Julia had freaked out about its disappearance because she was particularly fond of, and attached to, the cat. Apparently she was so distressed about its disappearance that she could not concentrate on Wallace's conversation on the night of the 19th. Exactly how it managed to get out of the home is unexplained, and why it had apparently chosen to STAY out during the harsh climate is also completely unknown and nonsensical.

I also see that there had been 6 people in the Johnston's home (maybe actually 4?). Did NONE of them hear any hint of an intruder or noise?

I also learned that the iron bar was rusty, while no rust was found on Julia. I think this would quite show that, if it had been used, then it had been wrapped. Killers have used such tricks in the past to avoid getting blood on the weapon (e.g. wrapping it in newspaper). And of course the poker that had been "thrown out with the ashes".

There seems to be conflicting information as to whether or not Wallace was actually a good employee. I mean he worked 16 years without a promotion? But apparently was considered a dedicated worker? Though despite his dedication he completely fumbled on details of the client he was going to meet. I think he told someone he was to meet "Qualthorpe"?, which is a bit ridiculous considering he'd repeated the name like 20 times. As well as thinking he was called A. M. Qualtrough and mixing up the address he was meant to be headed to... Was this USUAL of Wallace (given his 16 years with no promotion), was he truly a bit of a bumbling fool? Or a good employee?

What I have read, is that at 19 Wolverton Street, an almost identical crime had taken place near the end of 1930. No sign of forced entry, only the savings had been stolen from, and the container returned. The bedroom upstairs had also been "ransacked". So was the killing of Julia Wallace a "copycat" crime trying to make it look like the same burglar had carried out this deed to divert police attention? Was it genuinely the same person and, for reasons unknown, Julia had been in the parlor? There were no more "Anfield burglaries" after this event... I also wonder if Draper had worked for any other houses on the street? As this may have allowed her to supply a burglar with important information about the location of money, or indeed perhaps she herself may have had access to those homes?... Residents were also known to allow their neighbors access to their homes during vacations (e.g. to open and close curtains to give the illusion of occupancy), during which times, again, someone cunning could have noted in advance the location of items.

Does anyone know who lived at 27 Wolverton Street? Were there any other suspicious neighbors? Supposedly there had been no forced entry at #19 and we know that keys fit multiple doors on the street. If it can be discerned WHO could possibly have had keys that would fit both 19 and 29 Wolverton Street it might be a good lead. Apparently a man at #33 had accidentally wandered into the Wallace household while drunk, believing it to be his own home.

Is all of this information I have found falsified or true?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’m certainly not criticising you for exploring all avenues WWH as you might come up with something previously unnnoticed that could lead us to solving or getting close to solving the case but it’s my opinion, and I have been wrong in the past (it was on June 3rd 1987 btw) that the cat played no part in this unless we believe that the Johnston’s were a part of some plot and I just can’t see it. I think the cat might have gone AWOL for awhile and then returned and slipped inside when the Johnston’s entered. The Johnston’s going out at just that time was simply a minor coincidence (although 8.45 does seem rather late for going out visiting.) I also can’t see any reason to involve Marsden (Gannon’s nympho-Julia theory has never washed with me) He was about to marry well, had a decent job and his future looked good so I can’t see why he’d want to involve himself in a robbery. Wallace could have gotten the name Qualtrough from the shop, from somewhere or someone in his past or from talking to Marsden. I don’t think that the Johnston’s knew about Wallace’s MGE excursion. Yes they could hear through the walls but bumps and doors closing etc. I think that the chances of them hearing a normal conversation spoken at a normal level would have been zero.

The fact that Wallace denied knowing about the bar is an interesting one. Whilst firelighting might have been left to Julia or Sarah Draper you would think that Wallace would have been aware of the bar’s existence? A defender might say though that it was simply something that Wallace paid no attention to because he never used it. Personally I agree with you that it is suspicious.

Talking of Sarah Draper, let’s add another theory. What if she knew about the cash box (likely) and gave this information to an associate and (here’s the good bit) what if she went on a shopping trip for Julia and to the house key with her and had a duplicate made?

[Herlock Sholmes]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

???????????

[WallaceWackedHer]

What does a number of tragedies mean I wonder!

Well I'm trying to sign up to the British Newspaper Archive. Their website isn't working right but I've contacted them.

If I sign up I will surely be able to get details of these events in the Liverpool Echo (annoyingly they don't have the Express at the right dates and times).

[WallaceWackedHer]

WWH, the authority on the cat is Goodman. It re-appeared between 9pm and 10pm, through the open front door. I hope that helps.

It does help. But he cannot give a more precise time as to when it went missing? I will buy his book. There are so many apparent coincidences in the case that you have to wonder if they really ARE coincidental:

The disappearance and reappearance of Puss, the Johnstons coming out just in time, the Johnstons hearing everything, except the sound of someone else at the door or commotion in the house etc., the sighting by Lily Hall of an apparent Wallace doppelganger at the right place and time, Wallace actually turning up at the chess club to get the message AND taking it seriously despite the oddity, R M Qualtrough's similarity in name to a Marsden client, the fact Wallace didn't look in a directory or call the Pru, the fact Wallace was even going on that trip when he left home which couldn't have been known by anyone except Amy Wallace, Julia, and the Johnstons (they said they could hear Amy's visits through the wall), the call being logged, the fact Wallace didn't know he had an iron bar in his own house (by the way, we only have the maid's word that such an item was ever there), no bloodied assailant running from the scene.

HOW MANY of those can possibly be coincidence? Are we really to believe that all of those are just a happy coincidences?

Did you know there were rumors Wallace was having an affair with the maid ("charwoman", but to neighbors etc. they probably saw her as a maid). Has anyone ever suspected the maid of colluding with someone? I solely say this because if Wallace is an innocent man, I doubt he would have never seen the iron bar, so perhaps there never was one... And then it raises questions... And she would certainly be able to tell any intruder where they can find the cash box etc. and be privvy to any private details she overheard in conversation while working there.

Just throwing out tonnes of random ideas here. Brainstorm session.

---

But most of all I want details on the other robbery in Wolverton Street in December 1930. At number 19 I believe, and the date the cat vanished, as this may be telling.

I don't believe Johnston's confession, because Julia was in the parlor, HEAVILY suggesting she had admitted a guest. HOWEVER, many of the details do match, and their suspicious behavior and coincidences surrounding them warrants careful and deep thought as to the possibility of their involvement.

I truly believe with enough information and thought the crime can be solved as best as possible, to where there aren't glaring issues.

[moste]

What does a number of tragedies mean I wonder!

[ColdCaseJury]

WWH, the authority on the cat is Goodman. It re-appeared between 9pm and 10pm, through the open front door. I hope that helps.

[Observer]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[WallaceWackedHer]

There's also another extremely obscure factoid nobody seems to know. Apparently Amy Wallace had owned a paddle used for sexual purposes. Weird BDSM sexual purposes. I'm not sure I'm allowed to post the details lol because it's pretty ****ed up.

And Wallace for no rhyme or reason randomly told police he had a dog whip (typical BDSM item) which had been missing for 12 months. Why he would bring up an item he lost a year ago beats me, and the fact he would even say that, like admit to them he owned such an item, is kinda ******* strange obviously...

It's said Wallace and Amy couldn't have been having an affair. Why? Joseph wasn't even in the country. And both Amy and Wallace seemingly share the same strange interest in bondage. As well as William looking near identical to Joseph, so a good stand-in.

We also know Amy Wallace had called to see Julia earlier. Was this a regular habit of hers?

...

Maybe BDSM interest is what Parry meant by "sexually odd".

...

Also did you know Parry was a singer who sung along to Lily Lloyd's piano accompaniment? Julia was a pianist herself. Parry was described as being a "friend" to the Wallaces.

So perhaps both of Parry's claims, the "sexually odd" thing and "musical interludes" thing are vindicated.

---

Perhaps we could establish motive as Julia discovering the affair, or Wallace discovering Parry was having an affair with his wife. Parry apparently was into some other woman much older than himself, I forget the name, so perhaps he had a fetish for that kind of thing.