Who Killed Julia Wallace? - New Evidence

[WallaceWackedHer]

I’m unconvinced by this “untraceable poison” argument? Poisoners get caught. Any doubt at all and Wallace is the man with the chemistry lab in the back bedroom. The Qualtrough Plan introduces a third party.

Oh, no, he definitely would have gotten away with it. They're not going to test for the presence of poison on a sickly old lady who was known to have been ill and diagnosed with a lung infection. He might not have thought he would get away with it, but he would.

Poisoners don't get caught often. Not back then anyway. Only when the body count gets steep and the police become suspicious... Even in more modern times women have gotten away with using OBVIOUS poisons like arsenic on several husbands. The bodies aren't even tested for poison it's just assumed they died of natural causes. It takes a VERY keenly observant doctor to even suspect arsenic poisoning, and that's one of the most prevalent poisons used by laypeople.

That's the difference there. Poison victims are often not treated as murder victims, it's just chalked up to natural causes. But if there's a body with its skull caved in, there will ALWAYS be a murder investigation.

If his only sole motive was to get rid of her then it was dumb not to just poison her. I could see him worrying it might be dangerous (albeit far less dangerous than relying on perfect timings etc), but he'd be wrong.

No point dwelling because that's factual. You can keep William being guilty, but just know he was stupid to not poison her if all he wanted was her gone. And wrong if he felt his scheme would be safer... Even today you can much more easily get away with poison (especially small doses over a prolonged period) yet people still use knives and guns. That's just how it is...

[Herlock Sholmes]

The problem with this of course is that William was out at work all day with Julia doing all of the cooking so it’s difficult to see how he could have poisoned her over a prolonged period? We also know that Dr Curwen felt that this wasn’t a happy marriage. Wilson too. So Wallace might have been worried that these two might come forward to plant a seed of doubt in the minds of the police. Whether William ‘missed a trick’ or not it’s down to what William’s perception of the situation was at the time. He might have felt that the risk of poisoning was too great combined with feeling confident that the Wualtrough plan would work.

[Sherlock Houses]

Yes he almost definitely could have gotten away with poisoning Julia. He says as much himself in his articles for the newspapers (which he got paid for lol). Especially given she had bronchitis and was known for being sickly and frail in any case and had even visited the doctor the day prior. It would look like a natural death if the right poison was used...

So one wonders, if he did it, did he simply want to get rid of his wife... Or did he WANT to play cat and mouse with the police? Was outsmarting the law and the cops fun for him? If so you might start considering purposefully planted "clues" put there just to confuse police. Like notes in the vase for example if they were placed by the killer.

If Wallace was so intent on disposing of Julia why not simply give her a good push down the stairs from which she would be unlikely to survive ? Death would probably then be chalked down to an accident and it would avoid the real likelihood of that horrible blood spatter incriminating him. We know that no trace of blood could be found on either his person or clothing.

The police in their early investigations believed that the murderer's clothes would be covered in blood. They were still baffled by the murder well over a week later and one thing policemen hate above all else is an unsolved murder case. Under pressure to find a solution to the case they then looked to the victim's closest family member and started building their case against Wallace. They would stretch the window of opportunity for Wallace to have committed the deed to an unbelievable 23 or 24 minutes [6.31 pm to 6.54/55 pm] when there was much compelling and conflicting evidence to the contrary that it was probably a third of that amount of time.

So we are supposed to believe that some very short time after Julia has brought the milk in [probably much nearer to 6.45 pm than 6.31 pm] and after the evening meal is finished [and Liverpool Echo read], somehow William dupes Julia into entering the seldomly used, cold front parlour and light the gas fire. He then creeps up behind her and bashes the left side of her head in as she's either bending down to light the fire or as she's straightening up. She falls backwards and her body ends up in a slightly twisted position. Then we are supposed to believe that William, in some kind of murderous frenzy, proceeds to bash her on the head eleven more times while she's lying there. All the time magically avoiding any blood spatter from getting on his person or clothes or on anywhere else in the house for that matter. He then has to transform himself very quickly from a near hysterical state into a very composed state before leaving home to keep that 7.30 pm appointment with Qualtrough in Allerton. And maintain that very composed demeanour on the three tram journeys and when encountering all those various people in the Menlove Gardens/Menlove Avenue/Allerton Road area that Tuesday night.

Sorry, but I just don't buy it. A well respected and liked gentleman suddenly becoming the basest of men ???

[WallaceWackedHer]

The problem with this of course is that William was out at work all day with Julia doing all of the cooking so it’s difficult to see how he could have poisoned her over a prolonged period? We also know that Dr Curwen felt that this wasn’t a happy marriage. Wilson too. So Wallace might have been worried that these two might come forward to plant a seed of doubt in the minds of the police. Whether William ‘missed a trick’ or not it’s down to what William’s perception of the situation was at the time. He might have felt that the risk of poisoning was too great combined with feeling confident that the Wualtrough plan would work.

Oh it's definitely not hard to poison someone if you're trying. That's why you have to be so damn careful with your drinks whenever you're out at bars or whatever. Even if he was only home an hour per day.

His perception, who knows. But he missed a trick for sure. Even if they decide to test the body (they won't, Julia had been to the doctor only recently and diagnosed with bronchitis), what are they going to test for? The basics I'm sure. Anything wacky, I'm not as sure.

Check sports doping tests. They have to actually test SPECIFICALLY for the compound or metabolites they are looking for.

It seems dangerous to even let people know this on a public board lol...

[WallaceWackedHer]

If Wallace was so intent on disposing of Julia why not simply give her a good push down the stairs from which she would be unlikely to survive ? Death would probably then be chalked down to an accident and it would avoid the real likelihood of that horrible blood spatter incriminating him. We know that no trace of blood could be found on either his person or clothing.

The police in their early investigations believed that the murderer's clothes would be covered in blood. They were still baffled by the murder well over a week later and one thing policemen hate above all else is an unsolved murder case. Under pressure to find a solution to the case they then looked to the victim's closest family member and started building their case against Wallace. They would stretch the window of opportunity for Wallace to have committed the deed to an unbelievable 23 or 24 minutes [6.31 pm to 6.54/55 pm] when there was much compelling and conflicting evidence to the contrary that it was probably a third of that amount of time.

So we are supposed to believe that some very short time after Julia has brought the milk in [probably much nearer to 6.45 pm than 6.31 pm] and after the evening meal is finished [and Liverpool Echo read], somehow William dupes Julia into entering the seldomly used, cold front parlour and light the gas fire. He then creeps up behind her and bashes the left side of her head in as she's either bending down to light the fire or as she's straightening up. She falls backwards and her body ends up in a slightly twisted position. Then we are supposed to believe that William, in some kind of murderous frenzy, proceeds to bash her on the head eleven more times while she's lying there. All the time magically avoiding any blood spatter from getting on his person or clothes or on anywhere else in the house for that matter. He then has to transform himself very quickly from a near hysterical state into a very composed state before leaving home to keep that 7.30 pm appointment with Qualtrough in Allerton. And maintain that very composed demeanour on the three tram journeys and when encountering all those various people in the Menlove Gardens/Menlove Avenue/Allerton Road area that Tuesday night.

Sorry, but I just don't buy it. A well respected and liked gentleman suddenly becoming the basest of men ???

Yeah well anyone can do these things. Anyone can poison someone or push them down the stairs (e.g. Michael Peterson), yet so often they choose to use rifles, handguns, knives, hatchets... I think If anything he'd have gone with poison rather than a staircase. And he WOULD have got away with that.

He doesn't need to "dupe" his own wife into entering the parlour. Forget that part trust me. And you should reconsider whether Alan Close was even telling the truth. There's some pretty decent evidence he wasn't. We also know Wallace CAN compose himself in an instant so that's a moot point.

As for forensics. MacFail (sic) I believe said there was strong evidence the raincoat was worn when the crime was committed. This included a spray pattern on the jacket and heavy staining on the inner sleeve... There was a girl who slaughtered her family with a shotgun wearing a pink bathrobe and threw it in the trash, the same heavy inner sleeve staining on one side was also present on that garment, and she had worn it for the same purpose. Like MacFail's proposition, the inner sleeve staining was caused by a bloodstained hand passing through it.

In the Wallace home the front parlour fire wasn't the only one that was on. The kitchen fireplace was also alight and still burning when William got home. I think he might get something on his face, albeit not much, and hair if he wasn't wearing a hat... But apart from that I think it would not be very difficult to commit the act and get away clean VERY quickly... If the kitchen fire had been used to torch trousers, socks, gloves and collars. And possibly some sort of hat...

He could/should have put the mackintosh in there but I feel there are a few reasons plausible to explain why this did not happen.

[WallaceWackedHer]

BRAND NEW EVIDENCE

Sorry we got sidetracked a bit there. Here, never ever seen before, here is the handwritten will of William George Dennis (father of Julia Dennis). I hoped it might shed light on how Julia ended up with that fancy Harrogate home.

I can't really read that "old timey" type handwriting though so please see if you can understand it. I can almost not read a single word apart from the obvious.

https://imgur.com/a/Qrdur33

[WallaceWackedHer]

.

.

Tagging because I need some help reading that document (see post and link above). Might explain the bad blood between Julia and her relatives but I just can't make any of it out.

[Sherlock Houses]

I presume you're referring to the top part of the document, WWH, as the rest of it is far more legible, especially with help of the accompanying magnifier.

Anyhow the top part of the document reads as follows....


"Power being reserved of making the like grant to
William Monkhouse the other executor according to
the tenor of the said will

The testator William George Dennis was late of the Railway Inn
in the parish of Northallerton in the County of York.
Innkeeper and died on the eighteenth day of February 1875
at the Railway Inn aforesaid.

Effects Under £600
No leaseholds.
Extracted by WD Walker Sol. Northallerton"

----------------------------------------------------------

Absolutely no mention of the 12 or 13 year old Julia/Juliana in the entire document..

[Herlock Sholmes]

It’s difficult WWH but I’ll give it a go as best I can

First Page:

Power being (served/received?) of making the (?) grant to William Monkhouse the other executor (something ending in ing) to the trust of the said will.

The testated William George Dennis was late of The Railway Inn in the parish of Northallerton in the County of York Innkeeper and died on the eighteenth day of February 1875 at The Railway Inn aforesaid.

Under £600
No Leaseholds
Extracted by WD Walker Solicitor Northallerton.


Best I can do at the moment on that page WWH

[Herlock Sholmes]

I presume you're referring to the top part of the document, WWH, as the rest of it is far more legible, especially with help of the accompanying magnifier.

Anyhow the top part of the document reads as follows....


"Power being reserved of making the like grant to
William Monkhouse the other executor according to
the tenor of the said will

The testator William George Dennis was late of the Railway Inn
in the parish of Northallerton in the County of York.
Innkeeper and died on the eighteenth day of February 1875
at the Railway Inn aforesaid.

Under £600
No leaseholds.
Extracted by WD Walker Sol. Northallerton"

Beat me to it SH.

You made a better job of it than I did.

Have a go at the second page. I’ll read through it too.

[Sherlock Houses]

Beat me to it SH.

You made a better job of it than I did.

Have a go at the second page. I’ll read through it too.

It took me quite a while to decipher that five letter word 'tenor' HS. I thought it said 'trust' too, but then I realised that the writer of the document wrote the letter 'r' in the old fashioned, little used nowadays, style.

The second page is much more legible and easier to decipher....

[WallaceWackedHer]

It took me quite a while to decipher that five letter word 'tenor' HS. I thought it said 'trust' too, but then I realised that the writer of the document wrote the letter 'r' in the old fashioned, little used nowadays, style.

The second page is much more legible and easier to decipher....

When I said I can't read old timey handwriting, I meant I REALLY can't read old timey handwriting lol.

I can SORT of decipher some of it.

It looks like all of his money and possessions went to Ann Dennis... But his wife Ann T Dennis died four years earlier in 1871, so it's not his WIFE. It's the first born daughter, who shares the same name (Ann/Anne M. Dennis). Also to John Dennis, the LAST born son. And to an unknown party, William Monkhouse who lived at Redcar, I can't decipher that surname but I think it's Monkhouse. There's also a Sarah Monkhouse, Annie Taylor, and Henry Brown listed as witnesses.

I think this is them on the census for 1871:

https://i.imgur.com/64j5bdh.png

Their daughter is listed as a "Polly Taylor". It's the step-daughter of William Monkhouse, and there's another, Sarah Taylor. I am not sure who the Annie Taylor who witnessed the will is.

Might be worth some digging since one of the ideas is a wraith from Julia's past having committed the murder... According to this will I can't see how Julia got that luxurious Harrogate house. She must have got something from the death of John Dennis (died at a young age in 1895 it looks like) or the William Monkhouse fellow? I don't really know how these things work so you tell me if that sounds right. I can't find when Ann Dennis (jr.) died, but that's another possible inheritance avenue.

Here's another little factoid... William Monkhouse was married to a MARY Monkhouse, living with his niece and nephew Sarah Burgess and Thomas Williamson in 1861. But was then married to SARAH Monkhouse in 1871 just ten years later, living with two step-daughters, Polly Taylor and Sarah Taylor.

[Sherlock Houses]

It looks like all of his money and possessions went to Ann Dennis... But his wife Ann T Dennis died four years earlier in 1871, so it's not his WIFE. It's the first born daughter, who shares the same name (Ann/Anne M. Dennis). Also to John Dennis, the LAST born son. And to an unknown party, William Monkhouse who lived at Redcar, I can't decipher that surname but I think it's Monkhouse. There's also a Sarah Monkhouse, Annie Taylor, and Henry Brown listed as witnesses.

You're misreading that document, WWH. The Ann Dennis referred to is neither his wife nor his daughter, it is in fact his widowed mother, Ann Dennis. Also, the John Dennis mentioned is not his 6 year old son but his own brother John, a farmer, who was about nine years older.
John Dennis's twin sister, Sarah, was married twice, firstly to Samuel Taylor [hence the 'Taylor' name you mention] in 1846 and then to William Monkhouse in 1866. No doubt at all about the matter.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Do you believe that Julia owned the house at St Mary’s Avenue WWH? Couldn’t she have just lived in rooms there at a time when the other rooms were unoccupied?

[WallaceWackedHer]

Scratch this. Sherlock Houses' information is better.