Move to Murder: Who Killed Julia Wallace?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I'm happy to disagree with anyone, who has a proper argument to make.

But if you come on here, airing your prejudices and fancies, and worst of all, then try to support them with disinformation, false logic and misrepresentation of the facts.

Well...

YOU
WON'T
GET
PAST
ME

Simple, really...

I left you behind months ago

[moste]

I know we will in all probability never get to the bottom of it all. But there are a few things which we can consider a given.
The very nature of Julia’s wounds and the devastating carnage of the scene , leaves one in no possible doubt, that the killer was full of hatred. This is one reason and maybe the main reason I believe Wallace was guilty. If a burglar entered the house and was taken by surprise , I can see him ,(if of a violen nature,) clouting her across the head to render her incapacitated,so that he could make his escape.
The only exception to this is , a maniac who has a thirst for blood , and this is something he likes to do. This doesn’t work ,obviously ,because this was a very isolated case.
I think there is a big clue in the fact that there was a,what could only be discribed as 11 frenzied blows in the murder, when the killer would surely know that she was long gone after 4 or 5.
This killing was full of emotions like hatred ,veangence, and the like.
I would really like to have a chat about this case with a person with a degree in human psychology, and a few years under his belt as a police assisting profiler.

[RodCrosby]

Except it was 4.

Until MacFall changed his mind to come up with the "frenzy" theory.

And then changed the time, so Wallace "could" have done it. [except he even messed that up!]

To suit the "Jiggery-Pokery" Brigade... [the fond nickname for the Liverpool Police at the time]

[Abby Normal]

I know we will in all probability never get to the bottom of it all. But there are a few things which we can consider a given.
The very nature of Julia’s wounds and the devastating carnage of the scene , leaves one in no possible doubt, that the killer was full of hatred. This is one reason and maybe the main reason I believe Wallace was guilty. If a burglar entered the house and was taken by surprise , I can see him ,(if of a violen nature,) clouting her across the head to render her incapacitated,so that he could make his escape.
The only exception to this is , a maniac who has a thirst for blood , and this is something he likes to do. This doesn’t work ,obviously ,because this was a very isolated case.
I think there is a big clue in the fact that there was a,what could only be discribed as 11 frenzied blows in the murder, when the killer would surely know that she was long gone after 4 or 5.
This killing was full of emotions like hatred ,veangence, and the like.
I would really like to have a chat about this case with a person with a degree in human psychology, and a few years under his belt as a police assisting profiler.

hi most
well I have neither, but I do follow a lot of true crime. and whereas on the face of it the overkill seems to point to a personal crime andfull ofhatred, ive seen a lot where it was simply a burgle gone wrong and for whatever reason the killer just went overboard. usually along the lines of wanting to make sure she was dead to get rid of the witness or simply losing it and kept going.

[Herlock Sholmes]

hi most
well I have neither, but I do follow a lot of true crime. and whereas on the face of it the overkill seems to point to a personal crime andfull ofhatred, ive seen a lot where it was simply a burgle gone wrong and for whatever reason the killer just went overboard. usually along the lines of wanting to make sure she was dead to get rid of the witness or simply losing it and kept going.

I’d say that it was less likely for a sneak thief who was fully prepared to be identified by Julia at any future time should he have been arrested. If she’d caught him in the act all he had to do was scarper. Nothing would have changed as far as he was concerned. No one heard any screams but even if they had he’d have been well away when anyone got there. Phones were a rarity in people’s homes and I’d suspect that no one in Wolverton Street would have had one so the police wouldn’t have been there for minutes.

[RodCrosby]

I left you behind months ago

...in the real world
while I continue to orbit Planet Stupid

[RodCrosby]

If she’d caught him in the act all he had to do was scarper.

And people are never killed in their own home by burglars or robbers, sneak-thieves, etc. Nevereverever...?

I handed you your ass on this before, like I always do.

[etenguy]

I’d say that it was less likely for a sneak thief who was fully prepared to be identified by Julia at any future time should he have been arrested. If she’d caught him in the act all he had to do was scarper. Nothing would have changed as far as he was concerned. No one heard any screams but even if they had he’d have been well away when anyone got there. Phones were a rarity in people’s homes and I’d suspect that no one in Wolverton Street would have had one so the police wouldn’t have been there for minutes.

You are quite right Herlock, although of course it does happen. The burglar may have panicked, Julia may have blocked his exit or any number of other scenarios. Having said that, on balance I think Julia's murder was the intent, as I believe you do. I am not convinced it was Wallace though. I still cannot see how the timings would have worked if it had been him. Not to mention, he didn't wash blood off and not a single drop was found on him.

[etenguy]

Hi H.S

Good post, thought provoking. And to take up your item 8.
For what it’s worth here’s my Two penny worth,
Knock on street door, Julia reassures herself door is locked.
“Yes, who is it” (through the door) “My name is Mr. Qualtrough, I have an appointment with Mr. Wallace”. “ Oh dear, there must be a mix up somehow, my husband isn’t here just at the moment, you will have to call his office tomorrow and sort it out with him” .
“Is it possible I could come in and wait? “(a question I agree would be too foreward for 1931). “I’m sorry I’m really quite unwell and am off to bed, you’ll have to rearrange a meeting tomorrow. Goodnight Mr. Qualtrough.
Having learned a fair amount of Julia’s mind set. I believe this is a very likely scenario .
P.s Remember, ( if I’m not mistaken) there was the hum around the neighbourhood of a burglar being active.

Possibly moste - though if she opened the door and refused admission as you speculate, he may have forced his way in and that is what might have led to her murder.

[RodCrosby]

There's really only one scenario that fits the crime scene.

[Abby Normal]

There's really only one scenario that fits the crime scene.

what is it? and if its the one in antonys book please still tell. I am planning on getting it anyway once it becomes available in the US.

if you don't want to do it publicly you can pm me.

[etenguy]

There's really only one scenario that fits the crime scene.

I believe there are at least two:
a) a robbery that ended in murder
b) a murder disguised as a robbery.

There are probably other more imaginative scenarios, but one of these two is most likely to explain what happened. The crime scene evidence supports either option a or b and of itself is inconclusive. Any chance of solving this case will, I think, require evidence outside of the crime scene - as you have sought to provide to support the Parry/accomplice theory.

[moste]

Possibly moste - though if she opened the door and refused admission as you speculate, he may have forced his way in and that is what might have led to her murder.

Actually I was musing that the brief conversation was conducted through a locked door.

[Herlock Sholmes]

There's really only one scenario that fits the crime scene.

Correct.

Wallace did it.

No need for imaginary gullible accomplices.
No need for a plan almost totally reliant on luck.
No need for an idiot accomplice taking away a bloodied weapon for no reason.
No need for the unbelievable avoidance of the Parlour.
No need for Wallace’s Indiana Jones-like perseverance in searching for a non-existant address in an area that he’d visited several times.
No need for a laughable and unprovoked admission of guilt.
No need for witness to lie to give him an alibi.

No need for any of it.

Wallace fits.

He’s the only suspect really.

[Herlock Sholmes]

what is it? and if its the one in antonys book please still tell. I am planning on getting it anyway once it becomes available in the US.

if you don't want to do it publicly you can pm me.

It’s in the comedy section if you want to read it Abby.