Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Move to Murder: Who Killed Julia Wallace?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
    Who now even refuse to debate on the same thread as you.
    You may have noticed, he stopped debating me a long, long time ago.

    When he agreed with me on the Correct Solution to the Wallace Case, and wrote a book about it.

    You know, that one you're holding in your hands right now, the one you paid good money to read....


    Herlock and Sherlock (deceased)
    "detectives"
    personal attacks undertaken at our convenience
    Last edited by RodCrosby; 11-15-2018, 11:33 AM.
    "I make a point of never having any prejudices, and of following docilely where fact may lead me..."
    Sherlock Holmes, in The Adventure of The Reigate Squires
    The Accomplice Theory - 'on balance, the best explanation for one of the most puzzling murder cases in British criminal history' - Move to Murder, 2018
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/hc1n5xu7nn...heory.pdf?dl=0

    Compendium of Resources
    https://forum.casebook.org/forum/soc...882#post650882

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
      absolutely-planned murder alibi establishing 101
      Except that all serious students of the crime recognise that that won't fly, since Wallace did absolutely no "alibi establishing" for the period when it would have been most useful to him, and did not attract any attention at all until fully 20 minutes after he had left the house - or the Police (yawn, yet again) made no effort to enquire, lest it weaken their 'case'...

      Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
      I know nothing about this case.
      Fear not. I can recommend an excellent book to get you started...
      Last edited by RodCrosby; 11-15-2018, 01:04 PM.
      "I make a point of never having any prejudices, and of following docilely where fact may lead me..."
      Sherlock Holmes, in The Adventure of The Reigate Squires
      The Accomplice Theory - 'on balance, the best explanation for one of the most puzzling murder cases in British criminal history' - Move to Murder, 2018
      https://www.dropbox.com/s/hc1n5xu7nn...heory.pdf?dl=0

      Compendium of Resources
      https://forum.casebook.org/forum/soc...882#post650882

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
        You may have noticed, he stopped debating me a long, long time ago.

        When he agreed with me on the Correct Solution to the Wallace Case, and wrote a book about it.

        You know, that one you're holding in your hands right now, the one you paid good money to read....


        Herlock and Sherlock (deceased)
        "detectives"
        personal attacks undertaken at our convenience
        I won’t even bother responding to ‘personal attacks’ comment. Everyone hear is free to read through the Wallace thread and come to the only conclusion possible

        It’s understandable when those who disagree with you feel that it’s a waste of time discussing the case with you but it comes to something when even someone who agreed with you wants nothing to do with you.
        Regards

        Herlock






        "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
          Except that all serious students of the crime recognise that that won't fly, since Wallace did absolutely no "alibi establishing" for the period when it would have been most useful to him, and did not attract any attention at all until fully 20 minutes after he had left the house - or the Police (yawn, yet again) made no effort to enquire, lest it weaken their 'case'...


          Fear not. I can recommend an excellent book to get you started...
          Patent drivel.

          The phone call was ‘alibi establishing.’ Especially as we now know that Parry couldn’t have made the call.

          We have a sneak thief who very kindly goes around turning out the lights....yeah of course he did

          We have a sneak thief who was fully prepared for the fact that Julia could identify him and yet this frail old lady so terrified him that he battered her brains out.

          We have Wallace’s magic doors which ‘conveniently’ won’t work just when he needs them

          We have Wallace’s, worried sick that his wife had come to harm, unwilling to reach out his arm and check the Parlour before he goes upstairs.

          We have a sneak thief who was willing to break off a cupboard door (in silence as he was a sneak thief we assume) and yet he couldn’t be bothered to have a look in Julia’s bag for cash.

          We have a ‘Qualtrough’ plan that relied on more luck than a lottery win and yet required absolutely zero luck if Wallace had executed it.

          We have Wallace ‘forgetting’ that he’d been to the MGE area several times before.

          We have Parry, with absolutely no need or compulsion, goes to get his car cleaned at a garage where he isn’t trusted, by a worker who neither likes or trusts him. He leaves a bloodied mitten for Parkes to find (why hadn’t he discarded it) and when Parkes finds it he tells him that if the police found that it would get him hanged. Then usefully the genius Parry even tells Parkes where he’s hid the murder weapon.

          It’s time to put this nonsense to bed. The sneak thief theory is utter drivel. Wallace is overwhelmingly the most likely killer. A blind man could see it.
          Regards

          Herlock






          "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

          Comment


          • #35
            You should try to find an author to publish your theory.

            Strictly fantasy fiction, of course.

            Do let us know when it's on Amazon...
            "I make a point of never having any prejudices, and of following docilely where fact may lead me..."
            Sherlock Holmes, in The Adventure of The Reigate Squires
            The Accomplice Theory - 'on balance, the best explanation for one of the most puzzling murder cases in British criminal history' - Move to Murder, 2018
            https://www.dropbox.com/s/hc1n5xu7nn...heory.pdf?dl=0

            Compendium of Resources
            https://forum.casebook.org/forum/soc...882#post650882

            Comment


            • #36
              Let’s just remind ourselves about those doors.

              From the trial:

              Council: Had you ever known before, the key not to turn in the lock?

              Wallace: No,and we had not been unable to get in with our keys.

              The strange malfunction of the locks only occurred on the night of the murder.

              And about Wallace ‘believing’ the killer was in the house. Something Rod doubts I believe:

              Council: “I thought someone was in the house when I went to the front door because I couldn’t open it, and I could not open the back door.” Do you remember saying that?

              Wallace: No, I don’t.

              Council: Do you still think that, when you returned, someone was in the house?

              Wallace: No, I do not.

              Council: You have given that theory up?

              Wallace: Yes.

              Council: Did you ever believe it?

              Wallace: I might have done at the moment
              .

              This is pretty obvious stuff.

              Wallace was trying to give the impression that the killer was still in the house by pretending that the doors wouldn’t open. (For the first time ever!)
              Regards

              Herlock






              "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
                You should try to find an author to publish your theory.

                Strictly fantasy fiction, of course.

                Do let us know when it's on Amazon...
                I’m just interested in the case. For you it’s just an ego trip.
                Regards

                Herlock






                "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

                Comment


                • #38
                  A question.

                  Apparently Wallace got to the chess club around 7.45. (Seen by Caird.)

                  Wasn’t 7.45 the deadline time for chess matches at the club.?

                  If so, why did the meticulous, punctual Wallace cut it so fine?

                  If 7.45 was the deadline time (I’m relying on memory so I could be wrong) surely Wallace wouldn’t have wanted to risk being late for his match.

                  And was this due to the problems getting through to the club on the phone causing him to miss the earlier tram.
                  Regards

                  Herlock






                  "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                    Let’s just remind ourselves about those doors.
                    Yes, let's...
                    James Sarginson, a locksmith, gave evidence that the lock of the front door of 29 Wolverton Street, which he had examined, had been in a defective condition for a long time. He stated that the part which was operated by the key was worn, and that when the key was inserted into the lock it turned a complete revolution, which allowed the latch to slip back again. There was no indication that it had been damaged recently. He also testified that the lock of the back door was rusty, but in good working order. It required pressure to open it.
                    SUPERINTENDENT MOORE: 'I asked the accused if he would let me have his latch-key. He gave it to me, and I put it in the lock. I worked it for a couple of seconds, and I found out what was the matter. I went outside and pulled the door to me, and locked it, and I opened it at the first attempt; I went in, and said,
                    ‘‘I could open the door all right, but the lock is defective.”'
                    "I make a point of never having any prejudices, and of following docilely where fact may lead me..."
                    Sherlock Holmes, in The Adventure of The Reigate Squires
                    The Accomplice Theory - 'on balance, the best explanation for one of the most puzzling murder cases in British criminal history' - Move to Murder, 2018
                    https://www.dropbox.com/s/hc1n5xu7nn...heory.pdf?dl=0

                    Compendium of Resources
                    https://forum.casebook.org/forum/soc...882#post650882

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
                      Yes, let's...
                      James Sarginson, a locksmith, gave evidence that the lock of the front door of 29 Wolverton Street, which he had examined, had been in a defective condition for a long time. He stated that the part which was operated by the key was worn, and that when the key was inserted into the lock it turned a complete revolution, which allowed the latch to slip back again. There was no indication that it had been damaged recently. He also testified that the lock of the back door was rusty, but in good working order. It required pressure to open it.
                      SUPERINTENDENT MOORE: 'I asked the accused if he would let me have his latch-key. He gave it to me, and I put it in the lock. I worked it for a couple of seconds, and I found out what was the matter. I went outside and pulled the door to me, and locked it, and I opened it at the first attempt; I went in, and said,
                      ‘‘I could open the door all right, but the lock is defective.”'
                      Another pointless post. You are getting increasingly desperate Rodders.

                      We know the door was faulty but Wallace had never been unable to get in before.

                      Council: Had you ever known before, the key not to turn in the lock?

                      Wallace: No,and we had not been unable to get in with our keys.


                      And so I repeat.

                      On the night of the murder. For the first time ever.....ever....Wallace was unable to get in at both doors.

                      Simoultaneous spontaneous door malfunctioning.

                      You can believe it if you need to......l
                      Regards

                      Herlock






                      "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                        Wasn’t 7.45 the deadline time for chess matches at the club.?

                        If so, why did the meticulous, punctual Wallace cut it so fine?

                        If 7.45 was the deadline time (I’m relying on memory so I could be wrong) surely Wallace wouldn’t have wanted to risk being late for his match.
                        Wallace had been travelling to the Club on the same tram - week in, week out - for almost a decade.

                        So the "meticulous, punctual" Wallace, just like anyone, would have found a method to arrive just-in-time for a routine, repeat appointment.

                        [As it happened, his scheduled chess opponent failed to turn up at all...]

                        punctual
                        adjective UK
                        ​arriving, doing something, or happening at the expected, correct time; not late:
                        Cambridge English Dictionary
                        Last edited by RodCrosby; 11-15-2018, 04:01 PM.
                        "I make a point of never having any prejudices, and of following docilely where fact may lead me..."
                        Sherlock Holmes, in The Adventure of The Reigate Squires
                        The Accomplice Theory - 'on balance, the best explanation for one of the most puzzling murder cases in British criminal history' - Move to Murder, 2018
                        https://www.dropbox.com/s/hc1n5xu7nn...heory.pdf?dl=0

                        Compendium of Resources
                        https://forum.casebook.org/forum/soc...882#post650882

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by RodCrosby View Post
                          Wallace had been travelling to the Club on the same tram, week in, week out for almost a decade.

                          So the "meticulous, punctual" Wallace, just like anyone, would have found a method to arrive just-in-time for a routine, repeat appointment.

                          [As it happened, his scheduled chess opponent failed to turn up at all...]

                          punctual
                          adjective UK
                          ​arriving, doing something, or happening at the expected, correct time; not late:
                          Cambridge English Dictionary
                          Desperate nonsense.

                          No one needing to get to deadline for chess match at 7.45 would plan to get there at exactly 7.45. No one. A minute or two late and he might have had to forfeit the game.Trams could be late.

                          Back to the drawing board for you Rodders.
                          Regards

                          Herlock






                          "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Abandoned the lock fantasy have we
                            Regards

                            Herlock






                            "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                              Trams could be late.
                              Yawn...
                              from someone who remembers....
                              'The Liverpool Corporation was the local government body and apart from owning most of the new housing estates they also ran the transport system of cream & green buses and trams which ran like clockwork, there was a bus or tram into the city every fifteen or twenty minutes.'
                              http://www.yoliverpool.com/forum/sho...Days-My-Friend


                              Even more frequently in 1931, actually, every 8 or 9 minutes - as detailed in Antony's book...
                              Last edited by RodCrosby; 11-15-2018, 04:20 PM.
                              "I make a point of never having any prejudices, and of following docilely where fact may lead me..."
                              Sherlock Holmes, in The Adventure of The Reigate Squires
                              The Accomplice Theory - 'on balance, the best explanation for one of the most puzzling murder cases in British criminal history' - Move to Murder, 2018
                              https://www.dropbox.com/s/hc1n5xu7nn...heory.pdf?dl=0

                              Compendium of Resources
                              https://forum.casebook.org/forum/soc...882#post650882

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                                Abandoned the lock fantasy have we
                                As a landlord, holding a couple of dozen properties for 20 years, all I know is that locks are one of my biggest bugbears...

                                a) when a lock 'fails', it seems to fail intermittently. Sometimes it works perfectly, sometimes it seems to be problematic, then 'perfect' again...
                                b) external doors, in particular, seem to exacerbate any lock problem. Wooden doors expand and contract throughout the year.
                                c) when stressed, as in when dealing with a 'problem' at a property, my impression (and it is probably just my impression) is that the above issues seem to loom large. I try the wrong key, or I am too violent - or too timid - when trying to gain entrance. I have to take a deep breath, and start again. Then the door yields....

                                Just my 2c, of course
                                Last edited by RodCrosby; 11-15-2018, 04:50 PM.
                                "I make a point of never having any prejudices, and of following docilely where fact may lead me..."
                                Sherlock Holmes, in The Adventure of The Reigate Squires
                                The Accomplice Theory - 'on balance, the best explanation for one of the most puzzling murder cases in British criminal history' - Move to Murder, 2018
                                https://www.dropbox.com/s/hc1n5xu7nn...heory.pdf?dl=0

                                Compendium of Resources
                                https://forum.casebook.org/forum/soc...882#post650882

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X