Move to Murder: Who Killed Julia Wallace?

[moste]

Hi WWH, I point this out in my book (trial section) but didn't draw any inference... to me, it's not clear what inference to draw. Apart from the defence was not that great, something that Hussey was very damning about (and IIRC he lists all their failures).

The perculiarity that was William Wallace : It seems inconceivable to me that a man discovering his wife layed out on the parlour floor with her head smashed open and contents spilled out , should utter the words 'whatever have they used' ? This was either a complete fabrication , or there is something seriously wrong with Wallaces head! Mrs. Johnston may have thought this, but surely wouldn't have voiced this in front of Julias husband. And another one, ' They've finished her, Look at the brains'. Maybe it's just me, but I can't identify with this level of coldness and indifference from a man refering to his dead wife.

[WallaceWackedHer]

I can concur with your observations on felines, I have been owned by one or two over the decades since childhood.
Given the locale of the Wallace's home, and the extremely inclement weather they were experiencing at that moment in time , always assuming Julia was a responsible and caring friend to Tiddles, and given the time of year ( probably not out 'Tom catting ) I would say the pet was being kept/held indoors.

What is annoying me to no end, is that I can't find a picture of the back door to see if they had a cat flap installed.

Here's the front door:



No cat flap.

Here's a picture from the yard:



The door is to the right behind the drainpipe. If we could see that door and there's no cat flap, then there is absolutely no way Puss could have gotten back into the home without someone bringing her back in.

On top of that of course, as we established, it's highly likely the cat not returning home would not be of its own volition (given the weather and time of year), and that Julia was likely too sick to have gone out looking for and successfully found the cat, then you have a credible excuse to enter the home for an intruder:

Returning Puss to Julia.

But the lack of any cat flap would PROVE with absolute 100% certainty that someone brought the cat in. I do already think the cat was being held or something of that nature, given the circumstances, but I'd rather make it UNDENIABLE if possible that it hadn't just wandered in at the time of the murder by sheer coincidence.

[moste]

Via the shop, the name "Qualtrough" was in the public domain for locals.

Further, each Pru agent had about 500 customers at any one time. So between the three of them (Wallace, Parry and Marsden), at least 1500 customers; what's the chance that whatever name was chosen, there was a match to a name of one of their Pru customers? A bit like the birthday paradox, I expect it is far higher than you think (get 70 people in a room you are almost guaranteed that two of them will share a birthday).

I suggest both of these facts undermine the too-much-of-a-coincidence argument. That said, there could be a causal connection. The problem is that neither Parry or Marsden was questioned or investigated thoroughly.

Researching the name Qualtrough as posted a few months back . Rod claimed there was approx. 18 Qualtroughs, living in Liverpool in 1931 and claimed this made it 'not uncommon' I protested Liverpool had a population of approx. 800,000 plus and this made the name rare.
Further stuff I discovered ,, by far, of all England, the heaviest concentration of Qualtroughs in 1931 were centred in and around the Cumberland coast line in the North West, surprise ,surprise, right where Wallace grew up. ( Million ,Cumberland) So, if Wallace said' Ive never heard of that name before ' he was almost certainly lying . In any event it could easily be a name a guilty Wallace may decide on compared with say, myself ,who doesn't mind admitting ' I had never heard that name before in my life untill the Wallace case.

[moste]

The cat's disappearance was clearly considered unusual enough to have been reported in the first place. Did you know it was featured in the local newspaper?

I should like to know exactly how long the cat was gone for. Remember this was January, the height of winter.

On the 20th of January 1931 in Liverpool it was 9 degrees celsius and raining heavily. On the 19th of January it was 7 degrees and raining heavily. On the 18th it was 8 degrees and raining heavily. You see the pattern here? Even being gone for "at least 24 hours" in this weather would be pretty brutal.

This doesn't strike you as strange in any way? That the cat should decide willingly to stay out in the cold and rain, then coincidentally turn up just as/after Julia is murdered?

Did you know that cats tend to stay within a 5 house radius of their home? Even "outdoor cats" are rarely more than a block away.

Can anyone see by images of the doors taken at the time whether the Wallaces even had a cat flap?

I can concur with your observations on felines, I have been owned by one or two over the decades since childhood.
Given the locale of the Wallace's home, and the extremely inclement weather they were experiencing at that moment in time , always assuming Julia was a responsible and caring friend to Tiddles, and given the time of year ( probably not out 'Tom catting ) I would say the pet was being kept/held indoors.

[WallaceWackedHer]

My sister-in-law has 2 cats and one of them regularly ‘disappears’ for a day or two then just shows up again.

The cat's disappearance was clearly considered unusual enough to have been reported in the first place. Did you know it was featured in the local newspaper?

I should like to know exactly how long the cat was gone for. Remember this was January, the height of winter.

On the 20th of January 1931 in Liverpool it was 9 degrees celsius and raining heavily. On the 19th of January it was 7 degrees and raining heavily. On the 18th it was 8 degrees and raining heavily. You see the pattern here? Even being gone for "at least 24 hours" in this weather would be pretty brutal.

This doesn't strike you as strange in any way? That the cat should decide willingly to stay out in the cold and rain, then coincidentally turn up just as/after Julia is murdered?

Did you know that cats tend to stay within a 5 house radius of their home? Even "outdoor cats" are rarely more than a block away.

Can anyone see by images of the doors taken at the time whether the Wallaces even had a cat flap?

[WallaceWackedHer]

Via the shop, the name "Qualtrough" was in the public domain for locals.

Further, each Pru agent had about 500 customers at any one time. So between the three of them (Wallace, Parry and Marsden), at least 1500 customers; what's the chance that whatever name was chosen, there was a match to a name of one of their Pru customers? A bit like the birthday paradox, I expect it is far higher than you think (get 70 people in a room you are almost guaranteed that two of them will share a birthday).

I suggest both of these facts undermine the too-much-of-a-coincidence argument. That said, there could be a causal connection. The problem is that neither Parry or Marsden was questioned or investigated thoroughly.

I don't really buy it. How many Pru agents were there? There were not very many Qualtroughs in Liverpool. What are the odds one of them should be with the Pru to begin with? IIRC 2 out of the 8 were, and both of those 2 were related to each other, and one had dealt with Mr. Marsden, sharing the same first initial as well. So you don't only have the coincidence of the name, but also the coincidence that, out of all the employees at the Pru, one of those two specifically dealt with Marsden. It's not like Wallace, Parry and Marsden were the only Prudential agents.

I also heard whispers that R J Qualtrough was a troublesome and complaining customer, so is more likely to have been a name known of by employees if true.

I think most agree the crime appears well planned and strategized, that's the general consensus? So say Wallace is innocent right? The objective is to lure him away from his home, so the objective of the call would be to make it sound as plausible as possible to increase the odds he makes the journey. Why pick such an enigmatic name rather than something generic? It makes no sense to me...

Furthermore, the idea that the name of the shop was used, rests moreso on it being something thought up in the spur of the moment, which contradicts the idea of such careful planning. Like the caller had no idea what name they were even going to use when they went to the booth or to stake out Wallace's home, they passed the shop and were like, "PERFECT!" They could've seen it in advance but it's still a strange name to use if your aim is to convince someone it's a genuine call.

It's up to you to decide which coincidence is bigger, and what better fits the complexity of the crime. That the name links easily to one of two men Wallace named as prime suspects, or that there was also a shop with that name in the area.

If the name was super generic like R M Smith I'd have an easier time buying the idea it was a coincidental link to Marsden.

[Herlock Sholmes]

My sister-in-law has 2 cats and one of them regularly ‘disappears’ for a day or two then just shows up again.

[ColdCaseJury]

WWH, on your point #9:

9) The sudden re-appearance of the missing and ever-enigmatic Puss. Who, on a side note, despite the parlor door apparently being open, had not approached Julia or tracked bloody pawprints around the home shortly after the crime had occurred, and was apparently not at all exhibiting any sign of anxiety over what was clearly a savage attack, not hiding, not running out of the home (if they had a cat flap), etc. Cats are NOT unconscious beings, if they felt they were under threat they would most certainly exhibit signs of fear or anxiety... And those are just a few on-the-spot points on top of Puss's mystical reappearance.

According to Goodman, the cat had been missing at least for 24 hours at the time of the murder.

[ColdCaseJury]

Yes there was a butcher shop... But I happen to think it was based on R J Qualtrough. The coincidence is just too much that he's linked not only to the Pru but specifically to Marsden. And then consider that Wallace names Marsden as one of his prime suspects quickly.

I don't think the shop was visible from the box, and I think most will agree this was probably a planned crime? I don't think it was a spur of the moment invention...

So whoever called or set up the call had time to carefully consider the name they would use - and by apparently incredible coincidence, the one they chose nearly completely matches a Pru client who had dealt with Marsden... If Marsden knew this alias was used, I should strongly doubt he would carry out the murder the following night, because quite clearly he would be spooked at the prospect of the alias connecting him to the crime, which it almost immediately was.

Via the shop, the name "Qualtrough" was in the public domain for locals.

Further, each Pru agent had about 500 customers at any one time. So between the three of them (Wallace, Parry and Marsden), at least 1500 customers; what's the chance that whatever name was chosen, there was a match to a name of one of their Pru customers? A bit like the birthday paradox, I expect it is far higher than you think (get 70 people in a room you are almost guaranteed that two of them will share a birthday).

I suggest both of these facts undermine the too-much-of-a-coincidence argument. That said, there could be a causal connection. The problem is that neither Parry or Marsden was questioned or investigated thoroughly.

[WallaceWackedHer]

To be honest WWH I’ve been interested in the ripper for 30+ years (not so much these days though) but I’ve only been interested in the Wallace case for just over a year and it was mainly through the other thread. I quickly got hooked, read more and more and got into the debate more.
I intend to go back a re-read the books on the case as a refresher as I’ve been distracted recently by a family bereavement. That said I wanted to mention a point from Gannon. It’s been awhile since I read the book but you say that the name Qualtrough naturally points to Marsden as he had a client of that name? But wasn’t there some kind of shop with that name? Is my memory playing me false here? If there was such a shop then couldn’t Wallace simply have seen this and the name stuck in his memory and when he needed a memorable name.....?

Yes there was a butcher shop... But I happen to think it was based on R J Qualtrough. The coincidence is just too much that he's linked not only to the Pru but specifically to Marsden. And then consider that Wallace names Marsden as one of his prime suspects quickly.

I don't think the shop was visible from the box, and I think most will agree this was probably a planned crime? I don't think it was a spur of the moment invention...

So whoever called or set up the call had time to carefully consider the name they would use - and by apparently incredible coincidence, the one they chose nearly completely matches a Pru client who had dealt with Marsden... If Marsden knew this alias was used, I should strongly doubt he would carry out the murder the following night, because quite clearly he would be spooked at the prospect of the alias connecting him to the crime, which it almost immediately was.

[Herlock Sholmes]

And I mean you guys have had probably like a decade of discussion, so I've got a lot of catching up to do

To be honest WWH I’ve been interested in the ripper for 30+ years (not so much these days though) but I’ve only been interested in the Wallace case for just over a year and it was mainly through the other thread. I quickly got hooked, read more and more and got into the debate more.
I intend to go back a re-read the books on the case as a refresher as I’ve been distracted recently by a family bereavement. That said I wanted to mention a point from Gannon. It’s been awhile since I read the book but you say that the name Qualtrough naturally points to Marsden as he had a client of that name? But wasn’t there some kind of shop with that name? Is my memory playing me false here? If there was such a shop then couldn’t Wallace simply have seen this and the name stuck in his memory and when he needed a memorable name.....?

[WallaceWackedHer]

I just think there are things about the Johnstons which are suspect, of their own doing rather than anything that could've been "put upon them"...

When I say put upon them, what I mean by that is, the R M Qualtrough moniker quickly and easily leads to Marsden. I don't think Marsden would willingly take part in a serious crime where an alias linking easily back to him was used. If he took part, I don't think he knew what alias was used, and I don't think Parry knew the connection... I would rather suggest that Wallace had briefed them separately. And also I think this crime was planned some time in advance, so parties aware of the alias would have time to consider the implications of using it for them...

There's even a chance that Marsden wasn't involved/Parry made the call on a false pretext... With that said, it does seem a turn of luck for him that he should have had such a good alibi for the time of the murder (although it could be coerced by his parents).

But anyway back onto the Johnstons, here are things about them which are a bit weird or coincidental:

1) Them suddenly materializing outside on Wallace's return - coincidence? We are led to believe this, that it was just lucky timing.

2) Mr. Johnston not knowing Julia's name... Despite the couple having lived next door to her for a decade, received postcards from her in their absence saying what a nice time she was having on holiday etc. and apparently the walls were so thin they could hear everything. Especially the visits of Amy Wallace... But not once in 10 years had Mr. Johnston heard the name "Julia" uttered? - I know you all can see why this may be construed as odd.

3) The prosecution made a point against Wallace about him saying "whatever have they used?" - If you think this is suggestive evidence from the prosecution, then remember that it was actually apparently MRS. JOHNSTON who had said that while glancing around the room.

4) Their coincidental move the very next day, like the "Bagel King" Jerry Steuerman.

5) Them hearing basically all of the events of that day, but all other sounds mysteriously absent... They heard Wallace lightly knock on his own door, the milk boy's arrival, conversations with Amy through the walls... Yet suspicious in its absence is their recollection of ANY sound that might indicate someone entering the home. No door opening, no doorstep conversation of a man explaining he is "Mr. Qualtrough" or whatever, that is the claim we are to believe.

6) The Johnstons looked after the Wallace's home (and cat) when they were away on vacation. Supposedly Mrs. Johnston had only ever seen the parlor of that home, and supposedly only ever been in there when Julia was there and Wallace was out... And Mr. Johnston, well apparently he had never stepped foot into the home in his life.

7) Mrs. Johnston, having seen the gruesome sight of the badly battered Julia, with exposed brains, and blood/brain tissue sprayed all over the walls... Consider how she reacted? Would you expect such calmness from Mrs. Johnston having walked in on that?

8) Mr. Johnston is also a short man and could have matched the sighting of Lily Hall.

9) The sudden re-appearance of the missing and ever-enigmatic Puss. Who, on a side note, despite the parlor door apparently being open, had not approached Julia or tracked bloody pawprints around the home shortly after the crime had occurred, and was apparently not at all exhibiting any sign of anxiety over what was clearly a savage attack, not hiding, not running out of the home (if they had a cat flap), etc. Cats are NOT unconscious beings, if they felt they were under threat they would most certainly exhibit signs of fear or anxiety... And those are just a few on-the-spot points on top of Puss's mystical reappearance.

10) They DID have a key for the home. But I am not so sure it was used to be honest... I think Julia willingly admitted someone(s) into the home, and furthermore, I think she had trusted this person(s).

11) Wallace strangely ommited the Johnstons from the list of people Julia would admit into the home. Was he an innocent man who knew there was a riff between them? Was he trying to avoid police investigating the Johnstons more heavily? Or was it simply an oversight?

12) Mr. Johnston apparently had a friend who lived at Menlove Gardens West.

---

The R M Qualtrough moniker, I propose, has the very specific purpose of implicating a Prudential worker in the crime (just as does the stealing from ONLY the cash box). The alias had to have been thought out carefully in advance, and it serves no purpose other than to lead police, with very little effort, to a Prudential client, who by sheer coincidence, had dealt with Mr. Marsden... So is this just a case full of many coincidences? Or a careful plan? You decide...

[ColdCaseJury]

I'm not saying I'm on the "innocent Wallace" train, but you could have used it as a perk in your cause.

This allows me a segue into a brief post about my cause. In writing my CCJ books, I try to adopt a position of neutrality and dramatise events surrounding a historical crime for which the verdict is open to doubt. And I try to include evidence not published before (such as the post mortem report, the engineer's report and Wallace's memoir). My cause is to engage the reader and let them arrive at their own conclusion, which they can register on my website. Indeed, in Move To Murder, only six pages out of over 250 are dedicated to my view on the case, and there are just as many pages on the verdicts other authors have reached.

My own view in this case is that I don't like any theory that much; I have problems with them all. However, I am inclined to believe it was Parry in the call box and that has led much of my thinking. If Wallace was in the call box, then I tend to favour Wallace alone, but the Collaborator theory trumps it if Hall's testimony is also accepted, and so on.

I did not include the Johnston theory in my book largely because many find the confession unreliable; the family deny it was even made. BTW, there was also a rumour that Wallace confessed to the murder on his deathbed, but again it is totally without foundation. Of course, a Johnston/Wallace conspiracy that avoids relying on the confession, should be examined as any other theory. To my knowledge, WWH is the first to postulate this.

[WallaceWackedHer]

Does anyone on here get the impression that WWH is hooked on this case?

I am! You can blame you know who... I just absolutely love stuff like this. My favorite movie of all time is Mulholland Drive. I love this type of thing, where you realistically can come up with answers, but have to use a lot of logic, reasoning, and thinking.

I initially got into the Ripper but now I hate the Ripper case because IMO it is legitimately totally unsolveable. They won't release the police files for one thing, so nobody even has the full details of the case, there's also like 100000 different potential suspects.

But cases like this, Benet-Ramsey, mysteries that can realistically be unravelled... I just get so hooked, I love it haha

And I mean you guys have had probably like a decade of discussion, so I've got a lot of catching up to do

[Herlock Sholmes]

Does anyone on here get the impression that WWH is hooked on this case?