Move to Murder: Who Killed Julia Wallace?

[WallaceWackedHer]

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).

Well you could have used it to support the idea that Wallace was innocent... He lies quite a bit on trial and about statements he made etc, and it could be inferred that he is prone to going along with what police say and trying to make his story fit. So lying to defend himself in spite of innocence.

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

I REALLY want those full files. I want to do more research on the Johnstons. I can't say I believe Tom Slemen's idea, but perhaps his book contains the most information about them that is out there?

Also if Wallace was innocent (just again playing Devil's advocate to my current beliefs), the reason he could have ommited the Johnstons from the list of people Julia would admit, could be that he knew they had a beef with her for some reason.

MacFall's initial testimony was that Julia was sitting on the chair as though in conversation when she was hit. This was changed to her either being on the chair or getting up from the fireplace... But if she was in conversation, it would be consistent with the idea of two people in the home at the time. One in conversation with her to distract her attention, and then the other caves her skull in... This can support pretty much any theory where there is more than one person involved btw. But I have my own ideas about what may have been used to convince Julia to allow the person into the home.

I don't want to explore this idea until I have compiled strong evidence and seen that there is no obvious counter or issue with it.

[ColdCaseJury]

Here's an oddity I don't think has been pointed out before...

Mrs. Johnston claims that SHE said "whatever have they used?":


The next day, the prosecution grilled Wallace on HIM having said that. The defence DOES NOT CALL THIS OUT?! Essentially allowing the prosecution to use b.s. evidence against their client. Here's the transcript:

Take from that anything that you may. Wallace denied memory of having said that line just before. I wanted to quote it but I'm on mobile it didn't work right.

You may either infer from this that he is easily led and malleable by suggestions made to him by members of the legal system... Or that he thought he may indeed have said it and then rolled with it. I'll let you decide.

Both are valid views. I am not sure how to look at that.

Oh and also if you agree with the prosecution, that it's weird to assume a weapon from the home had been used, remember MRS. JOHNSTON said that line.

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).

[WallaceWackedHer]

Here's an oddity I don't think has been pointed out before...

Mrs. Johnston claims that SHE said "whatever have they used?":

What did Mr. Wallace do then ? — Mr. Wallace stooped over Mrs. Wallace, and he said, They have finished her ; look at the brains ; and I said, “ Whatever have they used ? ’’ glancing round the room.

The next day, the prosecution grilled Wallace on HIM having said that. The defence DOES NOT CALL THIS OUT?! Essentially allowing the prosecution to use b.s. evidence against their client. Here's the transcript:

And yet you glance round the room, and you say, ‘‘ Whatever have they used ? ” — Quite naturally. You think that is quite a natural remark to make ? — I do.

Take from that anything that you may. Wallace denied memory of having said that line just before. I wanted to quote it but I'm on mobile it didn't work right.

You may either infer from this that he is easily led and malleable by suggestions made to him by members of the legal system... Or that he thought he may indeed have said it and then rolled with it. I'll let you decide.

Both are valid views. I am not sure how to look at that.

Oh and also if you agree with the prosecution, that it's weird to assume a weapon from the home had been used, remember MRS. JOHNSTON said that line.

[WallaceWackedHer]

Hi WWH,

Are you suggesting here that Wallace gave an explanation for why he asked Beattie about the time of the call? This wasn’t the case. His conversation with Moore went:

Moore - You saw Mr Beattie of the chess club last night?

Wallace - Yes. While I was waiting for a tramcar in Lord Street.

Moore - You asked him about the telephone call and what time he received it?

Wallace - Yes.

Moore - You told him the time was important.

Wallace - Yes.

Moore - In what way was it important?

Wallace - I had some ideas of my own. We all have ideas. It was indiscreet of me.

Moore - What were your ides.

Wallace - I cant say why I asked him, I admit it was an indiscretion on my part. I cannot say anything further.

The last couple of responses from Wallace are pretty strange by anyone’s standards.

In Gannon's book there's a statement where he gave the explanation I said. It could also be on trial I'd have to search for it.

[WallaceWackedHer]

Oh uh. Woah. This is really weird. I just found something seriously odd.

How accurate is Wyndham Brown's transcript of the trial? Has he misquoted anything? Or is it accurate?

[WallaceWackedHer]

According to the trial transcript, the police told Wallace on THURSDAY EVENING before the Beattie conversation that the call had been traced to Anfield. It appears he was not told the exact location or time.

Edit: Misread, I see he didn't receive knowledge the time was tracked.

Also how did you get the full file? I contacted Merseyside police and they said I am not entitled to it. Please tell me how I can obtain it.

I have compelling new ideas but I won't air them just yet. I am in desperate need of the file, to do myself and the case justice instead of relying on little nuggets of info spread across 1000000 corners of the internet. Like every day there's some random new factoid.

I think you will all VERY much enjoy the new idea, but I need to accumulate rock solid evidence and see if there's any contradictory information in the file.

[ColdCaseJury]

When pressed hard he gave his explanation, that he thought if Beattie could say for sure it was 7, he would be proven innocent, as he left home at 7.15... Correct. He claimed the police believed his departure time. Except that's bullshit because no witnesses confirmed he had left home at that time, so an earlier time incriminates him more. A later time does not him help much either... unless the police investigated thoroughly the tram and bus journeys for the Monday to place Wallace on one at a certain time. I remain amazed that there is no record of them doing this.

I suggest he didn't know the call was logged but knew the call had come later, and pressed Beattie for accuracy in the OTHER direction (i.e. that the call came later).

According to the trial transcript, the police told Wallace on THURSDAY EVENING before the Beattie conversation that the call had been traced to Anfield. It appears he was not told the exact location or time.

[ColdCaseJury]

The problem with that Moste is how would anyone who didn’t work at the exchange know that the supervisor would log the call? We don’t know that this was procedure or something that this particular supervisor did.

HS, I believe you are correct. I think moste is correct on his other point. I spend a chapter on my book on the call. In summary:

a) The call was logged as NO REPLY i.e. no one was picking up at BANK 3581. In one statement, an operator talks of "being engaged" (I will double check)

b) No fault was diagnosed and corrected by the engineer Leslie Heaton

c) Even if there was NO REPLY, or a fault, the widely-known procedure was to push B to return your coins then start over otherwise your money was LOST

d) If the caller pushed A he lost his two pennies and had to pay two more to reconnect to the operator

e) The above makes little sense given we had a caller who seemed "accustomed to using telephones" (said operators) and claimed to have pushed A when there was no answer

[Herlock Sholmes]

When pressed hard he gave his explanation, that he thought if Beattie could say for sure it was 7, he would be proven innocent, as he left home at 7.15... Except that's bullshit because no witnesses confirmed he had left home at that time, so an earlier time incriminates him more.

I suggest he didn't know the call was logged but knew the call had come later, and pressed Beattie for accuracy in the OTHER direction (i.e. that the call came later).

Hi WWH,

Are you suggesting here that Wallace gave an explanation for why he asked Beattie about the time of the call? This wasn’t the case. His conversation with Moore went:

Moore - You saw Mr Beattie of the chess club last night?

Wallace - Yes. While I was waiting for a tramcar in Lord Street.

Moore - You asked him about the telephone call and what time he received it?

Wallace - Yes.

Moore - You told him the time was important.

Wallace - Yes.

Moore - In what way was it important?

Wallace - I had some ideas of my own. We all have ideas. It was indiscreet of me.

Moore - What were your ides.

Wallace - I cant say why I asked him, I admit it was an indiscretion on my part. I cannot say anything further.

The last couple of responses from Wallace are pretty strange by anyone’s standards.

[WallaceWackedHer]

Maybe he was comparing Beatties time with his own watch, for his own reasons. Maybe Wallace wanted the police to believe he was being stalked.( He will have known that after the murder he would be number one suspect)

When pressed hard he gave his explanation, that he thought if Beattie could say for sure it was 7, he would be proven innocent, as he left home at 7.15... Except that's bullshit because no witnesses confirmed he had left home at that time, so an earlier time incriminates him more.

I suggest he didn't know the call was logged but knew the call had come later, and pressed Beattie for accuracy in the OTHER direction (i.e. that the call came later).

[moste]

I don't think he knew.

If Wallace made the call and thus knew the time of the call had been logged, why would he press Beattie for accuracy on the time of the call? He already had a dead on timestamp with the switchboard. Furthermore, if he had enough knowledge to be aware of call logging, then would he really want the call traced to a box within a few minutes of his house?

Maybe he was comparing Beatties time with his own watch, for his own reasons. Maybe Wallace wanted the police to believe he was being stalked.( He will have known that after the murder he would be number one suspect)

[WallaceWackedHer]

Can anyone corroborate Rod's claim that it's proven Joseph arrived in Liverpool after the murder, beyond the testimony of his own wife? Who I believe was not actually living with him but in Liverpool, so how she could be certain of when he got back into the country I'm not sure.

[WallaceWackedHer]

WE don't necessarily know, but Wallace may have known that in 1931 that the GPO didnt give phone calls away free Willy nilly . How do you mean ' we don't know that this particular particular supervisor did' . It WAS logged ,so its a fair suggestion I think that Wallace believed it would be . It's a very long time ago so all we can do is try and make as good a guess as possible.

I don't think he knew.

If Wallace made the call and thus knew the time of the call had been logged, why would he press Beattie for accuracy on the time of the call? He already had a dead on timestamp with the switchboard. Furthermore, if he had enough knowledge to be aware of call logging, then would he really want the call traced to a box within a few minutes of his house?

[WallaceWackedHer]

The Johnstons not hearing any screams doesn't particularly impress me. If a stranger had gained accessed to the house unbeknown to Julia (maybe she had not locked the kitchen door after seeing Wallace off) ,perhaps whilst she was upstairs in the bathroom, and on her returning back down to the kitchen fancies she heard a sound in the Parlour.
Wack! Never knew what hit her. Not much space there for screaming , nor so much as a sudden in-rush of air. We'll have to agree to disagree on the subject of 'someone would have heard something's
It's a mute point anyway for me, I think Wallace Wacked Her!

I also think Wallace is involved unless anyone can convincingly explain away the points I mentioned in an earlier post, which I can post again if anyone wants to have a crack at it.

It's a shame Rod isn't here, I wonder what happened to him. He is in the "innocent Wallace" camp (as is Antony - albeit less vehemently so), so I'm sure we could have had a good discussion about it. I hope he didn't get banned or something. I'm sure Antony can get him back on here.

And again you see here the glaring issues... There are no signs of forced entry. This can mean only a few options: Wallace admitted the person into the home. Julia admitted the person into the home. The Johnstons (or another neighbor with a fitting key) admitted the person into the home. Or Julia left the doors unlocked (as well as the entry door unbolted - contrary to the initial claim of Wallace - which he did indeed try to back out of).

Of all of those, the initial two seem the most probable. The Johnstons admitting the person would need more evidence to create a convincing narrative (for example, confirmation of an odd fact such as the return of Puss on the night of the murder, if my source is correct, plus other factors). And the latter, I'm afraid I find rather unbelievable. Several reasons why I think it is close to impossible that this is how it happened. For a start, the person obviously knew Wallace well enough to know he goes to chess club, the nature of his business, his address, and where he kept the cash box. Having such knowledge of him and intimate knowledge of the home's interior to instantly locate the cash box, is it likely they would not know he had a wife? If they knew he had a wife, they would not have attempted a forced entry - so getting in through unlocked doors would be sheer incredible luck and CERTAINLY nothing anyone could plan for, especially had Wallace been innocent.

In my mind, had a person snuck in, I would think it more likely that Wallace had given the key to someone, or something along those lines. Since the lack of forced entry rules much of anything else out...

Possibly she had wandered into the parlor and been hit from behind. Although again we need the consensus on whether the killing blow was to the back of the head (taken totally by surprise), or from the front. It is suggested she was in a bent over position, suggesting she was sitting on the chair (this was the strongest suggestion IIRC) or bending down to the fireplace. Also if Puss was in the home she might have attributed slight odd noises downstairs to the cat ambling around

Puss - The ultimate key to the riddle!!!!!

In all seriousness though I do think it should be established whether the cat was missing and turned up on the murder night as my source told me - and also the aspect of silence is only one part of the problem, and surely the intruder was not surprised by Julia's presence...

There is a shopping list of problems that MUST be explained convincingly to prove a solo Wallace crime... As a "Lily Hall Believer" I strongly suspect at least a second party was involved, if not more!

[moste]

The Johnstons not hearing any screams doesn't particularly impress me. If a stranger had gained accessed to the house unbeknown to Julia (maybe she had not locked the kitchen door after seeing Wallace off) ,perhaps whilst she was upstairs in the bathroom, and on her returning back down to the kitchen fancies she heard a sound in the Parlour.
Wack! Never knew what hit her. Not much space there for screaming , nor so much as a sudden in-rush of air. We'll have to agree to disagree on the subject of 'someone would have heard something's
It's a mute point anyway for me, I think Wallace Wacked Her!