Amy Wallace, was she involved?

[Herlock Sholmes]

So very little point in me 'dealing' with any of your related points or arguments then. You have it all sewn up, WWH.

What I can't get past very easily is that if this had been an unrelated prank call by Parry, he'd have been happy to leave it to chance whether Wallace would take the bait or not, and would have had no pressing reason to check either way. But crucially, how and when would the message have reached an opportunist burglar that Wallace was definitely going to be out on business for some while on a Tuesday night, enabling him to target the house in his absence? It's a coincidence too far that this criminal just happened to be watching the house, saw Wallace leave and took his chances that he wasn't just nipping out for a paper or cigarettes. Did Wallace mention his plans to the Johnstons, for example, or anyone else who might have taken advantage? There's a missing link in this theory, isn't there?

Love,

Caz
X

There is a ‘missing link’ Caz and it’s not Alan Close

Im not averse to a coincidence (food and drink to conspiracy theorists of course) but this one is just too much for me.

Ill add a point for WWH though...just a thought.

If Parry made the call as a prank and then found out that Julia had been murdered while William had been out of the house due to that call would it have given him a reason for his dodgy Monday evening alibi?

Id also ask though... without watching William on the Tuesday night and with no plans to see him in the near future how would Parry have gotten any enjoyment from a plan that he wouldn’t have know succeeded or not?

[caz]

I do not have any doubt about the caller. Nothing in life is certain but the falsified alibi and then the time he turns up at his only witness Lily's house seals it for me and that's it, permanently. It's false and I can never get past it. I do not accept the excuses provided for it, they are very poor and is not something I can have tested scientifically etc.

So very little point in me 'dealing' with any of your related points or arguments then. You have it all sewn up, WWH.

What I can't get past very easily is that if this had been an unrelated prank call by Parry, he'd have been happy to leave it to chance whether Wallace would take the bait or not, and would have had no pressing reason to check either way. But crucially, how and when would the message have reached an opportunist burglar that Wallace was definitely going to be out on business for some while on a Tuesday night, enabling him to target the house in his absence? It's a coincidence too far that this criminal just happened to be watching the house, saw Wallace leave and took his chances that he wasn't just nipping out for a paper or cigarettes. Did Wallace mention his plans to the Johnstons, for example, or anyone else who might have taken advantage? There's a missing link in this theory, isn't there?

Love,

Caz
X

[WallaceWackedHer]

I really can’t understand why you take the prank call idea seriously. On the same day that this call gets William out of the house on a Tuesday someone just happens to murder his wife in a totally unconvincing robbery-gone-wrong scene? It must be a billion to one chance.

But again youre probably right that it’s difficult to see a point in discussing the case. William is simply not ruled out.

I consider it because the man is sent to a fake address with a fake name with a typical prank call phoney gruff voice, an apparent scam of a couple of pennies that completely contradicts behavior expected in any murder motive, and it's ONLY because there's a murder that it DOESN'T seem like he got punk'd.

Discussing something for decades with complete stagnation and no original thought or piece of research is a waste of time and won't lead to a case more convincing than it already is.

I think you could come up with original musings about William's guilt that haven't been repeated infinitely.

Why does nobody put together the fact that he constantly messes up names and addresses with the fact that R M Qualtrough seems it was supposed to be R J Qualtrough, or that MGE was meant to be MGW. He went to write West in his diary when Beattie gave him the details and crossed it out for East. Why has nobody ever thought that it might help show it's him screwing up details as per usual?

I also don't understand how not one single person in all that time sees that there's this man with a wife nearly two decades older than him, no children, comments from people about him being "sexually odd", the woman's relatives not attending the wedding etc; and yet not even one single person even CONSIDERS like, "wait, hold up, is this a gay man?" I mean COME ON, it's like THE most stereotypical "gay man and beard" type situation possible.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Of course it's a coincidence they appear there just in time for him to have a witness to enter the house with unprompted. If he had knocked for someone It'd seem more contrived.

I really do not trust them at all and their testimony shifts in important ways.

Draper couldn't get in by the back door on several occasions and Julia had to open it from the inside for her. She states the front door lock was not faulty as far as she's aware.

I actually think someone might have still been in the house though. Maybe.

I don't accept forensic opinion from anyone without forensic experience. If several trained professionals tell me the raincoat is out, wasn't used, probably on Julia, then that's what I'm going with. Idc who disagrees unless they have experience. Therefore I cannot accept at this time that the killing was unassisted.

It doesn't matter if Gordon can be dismissed as the killer or being at the scene (which he can unless he's done it with one of Brine's relatives) because you are discussing a message left on a telephone.

There is nothing but gut feeling, no evidence at all, that William would not have another person "in on it". Evidence actually shows as I mentioned that solo William is basically ruled out by science. Better go with lying Alan Close or the accomplice. Otherwise it gets to the stage of just saying William had a ninja suit he put on to kill her so he was fully protected or w.e... Like whatever body part is exposed... We end up getting to balaclavas... Instead of something stupidly easy like him leaving out the back as some person he knows enters.

There's no point discussing the topic because I do think the call is a prank call. If it won't even be considered then it's just a waste of time. The case is always looked at from the call. It's always about the telephone call. People spend so much time thinking about this dumb message that is either the world's worst plan ever conceived, a mistake (by the caller or Beattie), or a practical joke, that nobody even looks at the actual crime.

I really can’t understand why you take the prank call idea seriously. On the same day that this call gets William out of the house on a Tuesday someone just happens to murder his wife in a totally unconvincing robbery-gone-wrong scene? It must be a billion to one chance.

But again youre probably right that it’s difficult to see a point in discussing the case. William is simply not ruled out.

[Herlock Sholmes]

You realize the tram wait times on the Menlove route are not 8 or 9 minutes, he waited the maximum 3 or 4 at St. Margaret's Church he says. 8 or 9 minutes is for the chess club. Repetitions seem to be a waste of time, with repetition of the same points it ends up being the same chatter for a decade as far back as YoLiverpool (as I read the threads there for info I can see it's the same loops of conversation).

It'll just be back to "why didn't he look in the parlour first?" again before long then it's round and round on the Merry-Go-Round, leading to nowhere. Ever. I find it lame.

Everyone knows William told Caird he knew Menlove Avenue, immediately asked Beattie if it's Menlove Avenue, and said he knew there was such a place quite well on trial. The club members advised him the gardens are off the Avenue. He asked the conductors to put him off at MGE.

More likely William who can't even remember what year it is had no idea there was no such place as MGE even if he made this plan. Got it confused with West or something. He was drunk when he made his first statement but messes up addresses and names there (arguably due to drink or trauma).

I think William got to the chess club around 7.50. I don't think he was the last man to arrive from memory. I don't remember if that was mentioned. He said he wasn't sure about going to the club because Julia was ill but she said to go and just not stand around after talking (presumably because of the weather and the fact he'd just recovered - or was recovering - from flu).

You cannot ascertain when he has attended the club by the chart that's established as you know.

It'd show an empty result if his opponent didn't turn up and he turned up on Mondays/Thursdays that weren't even tournament days. They were recognized chess nights each week. I think some results are backfilled (e.g. if he played Chandler at a later date the result would be recorded for the square corresponding to the 19th).

...

I don't much enjoy the Merry-Go-Round. I am hoping to get opinions on the man in a hat who asked for 54 Richmond Park (non-existent) at about 8.35 on the murder night.

What's that all about?

There's something new.

The same loops of conversation still occur because there’s a continuation of excuse making and contortions to excuse everything that William did or said. It’s like a ‘free the Wolverton Street One’ campaign. Virtually everything William did or said shouts out “up to something.” You won’t solve this crime by forensics 90 years later especially with the information we’ve been left with.

So we are left with what we have and what gets brushed under the carpet.

The man man with a hat - I haven’t read the piece but as 54 Richmond Park is irrelevant I’d say that the story is likewise irrelevant or just a typical rumour that arises around celebrated cases.

Your overcomplicating by by looking for conspiracies. The Johnston’s for example aren’t suspicious in the slightest. Absolutely unconnected to the murder. But what I find interesting is the large accumulation of points against William. How many can one man get away with?

As you’ve hinted there’s genuinely probably no point discussing the case if you’re only looking to discus ‘new’ issues.

[WallaceWackedHer]

I can’t see why it’s a coincidence that the Johnston’s were going out? What about the coincidence that Wallace had never been thwarted by the backdoor lock before until the night that his wife lay dead in the parlour?

The joke call idea is almost as bizarre as the Wallace in a dress idea. A complete non-starter for me.

I do do agree that on the face of it Lily timing would appear the most reliable. And you’ll get no argument from me about police errors.

I take my my hat off to you for the work that you’re doing WWH but I see absolutely no reason to alter my opinion as, for me, the weight of what we know heavily favours William. By a mile in fact. Parry can be dismissed as a killer or even being at the scene. And with respect to anyone but if someone tells me that someone can’t use items to prevent himself getting covered in blood then I suspect insanity.

Of course it's a coincidence they appear there just in time for him to have a witness to enter the house with unprompted. If he had knocked for someone It'd seem more contrived.

I really do not trust them at all and their testimony shifts in important ways.

Draper couldn't get in by the back door on several occasions and Julia had to open it from the inside for her. She states the front door lock was not faulty as far as she's aware.

I actually think someone might have still been in the house though. Maybe.

I don't accept forensic opinion from anyone without forensic experience. If several trained professionals tell me the raincoat is out, wasn't used, probably on Julia, then that's what I'm going with. Idc who disagrees unless they have experience. Therefore I cannot accept at this time that the killing was unassisted.

It doesn't matter if Gordon can be dismissed as the killer or being at the scene (which he can unless he's done it with one of Brine's relatives) because you are discussing a message left on a telephone.

There is nothing but gut feeling, no evidence at all, that William would not have another person "in on it". Evidence actually shows as I mentioned that solo William is basically ruled out by science. Better go with lying Alan Close or the accomplice. Otherwise it gets to the stage of just saying William had a ninja suit he put on to kill her so he was fully protected or w.e... Like whatever body part is exposed... We end up getting to balaclavas... Instead of something stupidly easy like him leaving out the back as some person he knows enters.

There's no point discussing the topic because I do think the call is a prank call. If it won't even be considered then it's just a waste of time. The case is always looked at from the call. It's always about the telephone call. People spend so much time thinking about this dumb message that is either the world's worst plan ever conceived, a mistake (by the caller or Beattie), or a practical joke, that nobody even looks at the actual crime.

[WallaceWackedHer]

You realize the tram wait times on the Menlove route are not 8 or 9 minutes, he waited the maximum 3 or 4 at St. Margaret's Church he says. 8 or 9 minutes is for the chess club. Repetitions seem to be a waste of time, with repetition of the same points it ends up being the same chatter for a decade as far back as YoLiverpool (as I read the threads there for info I can see it's the same loops of conversation).

It'll just be back to "why didn't he look in the parlour first?" again before long then it's round and round on the Merry-Go-Round, leading to nowhere. Ever. I find it lame.

Everyone knows William told Caird he knew Menlove Avenue, immediately asked Beattie if it's Menlove Avenue, and said he knew there was such a place quite well on trial. The club members advised him the gardens are off the Avenue. He asked the conductors to put him off at MGE.

More likely William who can't even remember what year it is had no idea there was no such place as MGE even if he made this plan. Got it confused with West or something. He was drunk when he made his first statement but messes up addresses and names there (arguably due to drink or trauma).

I think William got to the chess club around 7.50. I don't think he was the last man to arrive from memory. I don't remember if that was mentioned. He said he wasn't sure about going to the club because Julia was ill but she said to go and just not stand around after talking (presumably because of the weather and the fact he'd just recovered - or was recovering - from flu).

You cannot ascertain when he has attended the club by the chart that's established as you know.

It'd show an empty result if his opponent didn't turn up and he turned up on Mondays/Thursdays that weren't even tournament days. They were recognized chess nights each week. I think some results are backfilled (e.g. if he played Chandler at a later date the result would be recorded for the square corresponding to the 19th).

...

I don't much enjoy the Merry-Go-Round. I am hoping to get opinions on the man in a hat who asked for 54 Richmond Park (non-existent) at about 8.35 on the murder night.

What's that all about?

There's something new.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

Basically, I've been keeping the pot boiling, Wallace was waiting for someone to go head to head with. Herlock, he's a left field crackpot, and much else, but he's got this case at heart, and wants a genuine conclusion. He's not pushing a conclusion. And, in spite of my advice, he's no book deal, our Wallace is actually impartial. That's why he's missed your input. We all have.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I know that you know very well that Gordon was a stuck-up drama boy, not a lout. He's described as toffee-nosed and wore suits every day. Foppish.

Asking for the address is worthless, it didn't need to be asked at all. This is worthless to discuss. I do not accept any of the excuses for the falsified alibi, and that is my basis for essentially cementing Gordon (as in him specifically) not the details.

The LAUGHABLE police who should of course be mocked ("the law" is completely cuck btw, as an aside) did not even re-question him on this. What if he had a real alibi and there was an explanation? Well now I'll never know. Well done detectives. The cops everyone's hot for are incompetent (especially Moore who turned up drunk and then used and flushed the toilet). Everyone is incompetent. There were 1001 ways to verify whether William had actually rang himself.

The cops heard William give a statement using the word cafe. Why didn't they comment on his pronunciation? Useless. Completely useless. A drunk loser with a Hitler moustache (well, Chaplin tash at the time lol), some narcissist professor who smokes opium all day and can't be assed to do his job right, a whole Motley Crue of retards. If TERRIBLE chess player William outsmarted them it's no wonder really. I think anyone could.

Lily's timing is probably more accurate as you know.

I don't think it's a plan I think it's a joke call. If it's a plan I think the details are wrong by mistake. The details and actions fit a joke better in every aspect. The fact the R. J. client is apparently a nuisance client is one detail of many.

My current thinking is that the telephone message is a practical joke.

...

You will recall OJ Simpson dashed home and caught a plane, that was for a real trip. Maybe William doesn't even know it's a fake trip until he gets there. Or maybe he twigs that it's BS and that Gordon probably rang him and knows he can frame him.

But it doesn't work because I'm interested in the hard forensic stuff and so if I'm told he didn't do it alone, he didn't do it alone as far as I'm concerned... Then the issue then is that he's got someone in under 24 hours to agree to kill his wife or at least assist him...

P. D. James's suggestion however, is that he was already planning to kill her. I wouldn't rule that out, except I keep in mind there are now at least two corroborations for an event showing most definitely his care for her wellbeing a month earlier.

...

I peg the neighbours as liars. I don't think your first port of call is to just straight up murder someone without there being some kind of obvious tension or heated exchanges. The police force a lot of people are cuck for flagged them as liars (along with Crewe - these are the only ones flagged up) so if you love the cops people may finally take seriously the suggestion that they shouldn't just be taken at their word.

I suggested possible blackmail if he knew they or one of their family members had robbed #17 on the 20th December just gone. Be seriously wary of these people, especially if William is an innocent man they are the first people who haven't been cleared to have been at the scene of the crime and handled the body etc. They are also in the perfect position logistically to have done it. So are any other neighbours, but they're next door and claims to hear through walls, Florence can hear Julia when she's out in the yard in conversation.

Another accepted coincidence that these lovely innocent people just so happen to be there. But yet a prank call is meant to be too far.

I can’t see why it’s a coincidence that the Johnston’s were going out? What about the coincidence that Wallace had never been thwarted by the backdoor lock before until the night that his wife lay dead in the parlour?

The joke call idea is almost as bizarre as the Wallace in a dress idea. A complete non-starter for me.

I do do agree that on the face of it Lily timing would appear the most reliable. And you’ll get no argument from me about police errors.

I take my my hat off to you for the work that you’re doing WWH but I see absolutely no reason to alter my opinion as, for me, the weight of what we know heavily favours William. By a mile in fact. Parry can be dismissed as a killer or even being at the scene. And with respect to anyone but if someone tells me that someone can’t use items to prevent himself getting covered in blood then I suspect insanity.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Herlock, my undead mate, I think Wallace himself has Parry down as not the planner. I'd love to hear the eight pro Wallace points. This is why we missed you.

So now I’m a zombie

The ways that the plan could have fallen apart if Parry was the planner are

1. William decides not to go to chess ( a reading of the board at the club would show that Wallace had unplayed games. He hadn’t been to the club since before Xmas.)

2. Someone forgets to pass on the message to him .

3. William thinks the message too suspicious ( who would know about the. Club and that he’s be there that night/ Why doesn’t Q use his own insurance agent/ Why ask specifically for William when that wasn’t his area, William wasn’t exactly a legend in the insurance world/ Why did Q ask for his address then ask for him to go to MGE/ If Q had got his daughters 21st on who would leave the arranging of a policy so last minute/

4. After trudging around Clubmoor all day William decides that he can’t be bothered to go to MGE.

5. Someone at the club tells him that he knows the area and there was no MGE.

6. On the Tuesday William takes the very obvious step of checking a map or directory to discover - no MGE. After all, according to him, he was a ‘complete stranger’ to the area (which we know was a lie)

7. He calls his Superintendant Joseph Crewe who lives in the area to ask about directions to MGE.

8. Julia won’t let a strange man into the house. Not only due to fear (it’s after dark, she’s alone in the house, The Anfield Housebreakers at Large) but also she might have considered her reputation. People were far more concerned with gossip and scandal in those days.

Its also worth another point Al. We know that William was an intelligent, well organised, meticulous kind of man especially where business was concerned. So why, on the night of the murder, did he only allow himself 45 minutes to a) walk to his 1st tram stop. b) catch 3 trams where any missed connection could have cost him 8 or 9 minutes. c) To get to his destination with only 10 minutes to find an address in a very large area where he was allegedly a complete stranger? The end of MGE might easily have been a 20 minute walk away for all that he knew leaving him 10 minutes late for a business meeting. He misses one connection and he might have been 18 minutes late. Two connections out of three and it’s 26 mins.

Why didnt he he leave earlier? Strangely on the Monday night he only got to the chess club on the stroke of the deadline and he’d gone there regularly.

[WallaceWackedHer]

21st birthdays are hardly rare. If the caller had mentioned a 94th birthday after Parry had been invited to a 94th birthday party i’d call it a big coincidence. The caller had to have a reason for the call and a reason why he couldn’t go to Williams house.

This raises the question about why the caller asked for Williams address? Only William knew that no one at the club would have known his address. The only one that knew his address was Caird who only Wallace would have known wouldn’t be at the club at that time because he went there as soon as he closed his shop.

On the time of the call. Yes Lily’s timing allows Parry to have made the call but her mothers doesnt. We can take our pick.

On dialects. One of the phone operatives specifically mentions the callers pronunciation of cafe as CAFAY rather that CAFF or CAFFEE. What do we deduce from this? Anyone familiar with local accents will tell you that CAFFAY would be considered the posh pronunciation. So who would have been more likely to have used it? Local wide boy Parry or the middle aged man of sophisticated habits?

On the call box. I remember talking about the old boxes with my grandad and I recall him telling me that they were temperamental. Errors could occur without the box being considered out of order.

You mention the plan being a bad one for Wallace? I can think of 8 very simple ways for this plan to have fallen apart for Parry. Everyone of these vanished with William as the planner.

I know that you know very well that Gordon was a stuck-up drama boy, not a lout. He's described as toffee-nosed and wore suits every day. Foppish.

Asking for the address is worthless, it didn't need to be asked at all. This is worthless to discuss. I do not accept any of the excuses for the falsified alibi, and that is my basis for essentially cementing Gordon (as in him specifically) not the details.

The LAUGHABLE police who should of course be mocked ("the law" is completely cuck btw, as an aside) did not even re-question him on this. What if he had a real alibi and there was an explanation? Well now I'll never know. Well done detectives. The cops everyone's hot for are incompetent (especially Moore who turned up drunk and then used and flushed the toilet). Everyone is incompetent. There were 1001 ways to verify whether William had actually rang himself.

The cops heard William give a statement using the word cafe. Why didn't they comment on his pronunciation? Useless. Completely useless. A drunk loser with a Hitler moustache (well, Chaplin tash at the time lol), some narcissist professor who smokes opium all day and can't be assed to do his job right, a whole Motley Crue of retards. If TERRIBLE chess player William outsmarted them it's no wonder really. I think anyone could.

Lily's timing is probably more accurate as you know.

I don't think it's a plan I think it's a joke call. If it's a plan I think the details are wrong by mistake. The details and actions fit a joke better in every aspect. The fact the R. J. client is apparently a nuisance client is one detail of many.

My current thinking is that the telephone message is a practical joke.

...

You will recall OJ Simpson dashed home and caught a plane, that was for a real trip. Maybe William doesn't even know it's a fake trip until he gets there. Or maybe he twigs that it's BS and that Gordon probably rang him and knows he can frame him.

But it doesn't work because I'm interested in the hard forensic stuff and so if I'm told he didn't do it alone, he didn't do it alone as far as I'm concerned... Then the issue then is that he's got someone in under 24 hours to agree to kill his wife or at least assist him...

P. D. James's suggestion however, is that he was already planning to kill her. I wouldn't rule that out, except I keep in mind there are now at least two corroborations for an event showing most definitely his care for her wellbeing a month earlier.

...

I peg the neighbours as liars. I don't think your first port of call is to just straight up murder someone without there being some kind of obvious tension or heated exchanges. The police force a lot of people are cuck for flagged them as liars (along with Crewe - these are the only ones flagged up) so if you love the cops people may finally take seriously the suggestion that they shouldn't just be taken at their word.

I suggested possible blackmail if he knew they or one of their family members had robbed #17 on the 20th December just gone. Be seriously wary of these people, especially if William is an innocent man they are the first people who haven't been cleared to have been at the scene of the crime and handled the body etc. They are also in the perfect position logistically to have done it. So are any other neighbours, but they're next door and claim to hear through walls, Florence can hear Julia when she's out in the yard in conversation.

Another accepted coincidence that these lovely innocent people just so happen to be there. But yet a prank call is meant to be too far.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

21st birthdays are hardly rare. If the caller had mentioned a 94th birthday after Parry had been invited to a 94th birthday party i’d call it a big coincidence. The caller had to have a reason for the call and a reason why he couldn’t go to Williams house.

This raises the question about why the caller asked for Williams address? Only William knew that no one at the club would have known his address. The only one that knew his address was Caird who only Wallace would have known wouldn’t be at the club at that time because he went there as soon as he closed his shop.

On the time of the call. Yes Lily’s timing allows Parry to have made the call but her mothers doesnt. We can take our pick.

On dialects. One of the phone operatives specifically mentions the callers pronunciation of cafe as CAFAY rather that CAFF or CAFFEE. What do we deduce from this? Anyone familiar with local accents will tell you that CAFFAY would be considered the posh pronunciation. So who would have been more likely to have used it? Local wide boy Parry or the middle aged man of sophisticated habits?

On the call box. I remember talking about the old boxes with my grandad and I recall him telling me that they were temperamental. Errors could occur without the box being considered out of order.

You mention the plan being a bad one for Wallace? I can think of 8 very simple ways for this plan to have fallen apart for Parry. Everyone of these vanished with William as the planner.

Herlock, my undead mate, I think Wallace himself has Parry down as not the planner. I'd love to hear the eight pro Wallace points. This is why we missed you.

[Herlock Sholmes]

21st birthdays are hardly rare. If the caller had mentioned a 94th birthday after Parry had been invited to a 94th birthday party i’d call it a big coincidence. The caller had to have a reason for the call and a reason why he couldn’t go to Williams house.

This raises the question about why the caller asked for Williams address? Only William knew that no one at the club would have known his address. The only one that knew his address was Caird who only Wallace would have known wouldn’t be at the club at that time because he went there as soon as he closed his shop.

On the time of the call. Yes Lily’s timing allows Parry to have made the call but her mothers doesnt. We can take our pick.

On dialects. One of the phone operatives specifically mentions the callers pronunciation of cafe as CAFAY rather that CAFF or CAFFEE. What do we deduce from this? Anyone familiar with local accents will tell you that CAFFAY would be considered the posh pronunciation. So who would have been more likely to have used it? Local wide boy Parry or the middle aged man of sophisticated habits?

On the call box. I remember talking about the old boxes with my grandad and I recall him telling me that they were temperamental. Errors could occur without the box being considered out of order.

You mention the plan being a bad one for Wallace? I can think of 8 very simple ways for this plan to have fallen apart for Parry. Everyone of these vanished with William as the planner.

[WallaceWackedHer]

Only 'almost' certainly, WWH?

Doubts creeping in?

If it was just a prank call, Parry went to some trouble to a) make it from a call box near to Wallace's home address; b) make the call at a time when Wallace could reasonably have made it himself, before going on to the chess club; and c) make sure the call could be traced to that particular box and at that particular time. How would any of that have made sense if Parry was not seeking to frame Wallace for the call, or for any crime that might be committed the following evening, but just wanted a laugh at his expense, imagining him searching in vain for Menlove Gardens East and the mysterious Mr Qualtrough? Or was this all just a terribly unfortunate coincidence for Wallace, that the call was traced and he was suspected of making it, because of the time and place, and what happened to his wife the following night while he was asking directions from all and sundry?

Why would Parry not have made the call from a box much nearer the chess club, where he could see if Wallace was going to attend and make sure his call was picked up and the hoax message taken down before Wallace actually entered the premises? Parry wouldn't then have needed or wanted the call to be traced.

Love,

Caz
X

I don't think you understand the mentality behind people placing calls like this. You are treating it like a complex riddle where he'd go down there and stuff. I don't think that's how people do these things.

Probably spur of the moment. Possibly spurred by a chance sighting but also potentially sheer coincidence. And by the tone of the voice he is not remotely nervous, and to operators very casual. He does not seem to care overly about the success or failure of the thing.

I do not have any doubt about the caller. Nothing in life is certain but the falsified alibi and then the time he turns up at his only witness Lily's house seals it for me and that's it, permanently. It's false and I can never get past it. I do not accept the excuses provided for it, they are very poor and is not something I can have tested scientifically etc.

Out of every statement ever made in the entire case this is the most flagrant falsification. Maybe if the incredible police force had re-questioned him as they should have it could be known with certainty. But then there would hardly be a mystery.

(Otherwise I would investigate Johnston as the caller because then the entire Stan confession would be a match. The details about the murder and the weapon - but not a modern type crowbar, the old style - are a match which warrants taking it very seriously, as well as the mention of strange obscure facts. Right now it isn't a full match and also specific elements don't make sense which is why I have contacted Tom Slemen... He's added stuff to what Stan actually said, so I can't tell what bits he's adding. I want the testimony as it was said exactly.

Stan himself might be the killer or know the killer. He's the one giving specific and now verified details about the murder, it's only his word Johnston told him. Hence I requested his full name too so I can check where he lived at the time, his line of work etc.

I would also look at Wallace and John premed slightly, or chess club members because someone else could be there at the place, even with Gordon there could be in fairness, but there are quite a few things I could explore. Which I CAN'T because Gordon called.)

...

If the caller scammed a couple of pennies there's no way to square that with how a killer would act. Even a burglar really. The long exposing of your REAL voice and implanting yourself into people's mind is completely abnormal.

The operators would be called for regardless of whether he'd pulled this little stunt. The chief of police requested the location of the box before knowing it had been noted also, btw. I don't understand how a random citizen could be expected to somehow know or even suspect the police could not possibly do this.

Menlove Gardens East and Qualtrough also do not make sense for anyone. If it's a real plan it IS a bad one. I could go into a LOT of depth about this. It makes more sense as a joke with those details.

If Mr. Wallace did it (and as I understand he must have assistance for this to be plausible) I think East and R. M. is a mistake. He mixes up names places and dates very often which would sit well with that. Though he was intoxicated on Brandy when giving his first statement.

If anyone did it as a scheme to rob the joint or murder the woman I also think the details are a mistake.

...

The details of the message as well as the general demeanour of the caller and the gruff tone when delivering the message squares with a typical prank call better than anything.

If there had been no crime would you actually assume the call was taken down wrong? Or would it look like someone had pulled a fast one on him? I think it would look blatant that he had been "had" and not that there had been any mishap in the taking of the message.

As I mentioned I would have liked more details from Mr. Greenlees and for that individual to be searched for in case he had been called out on some fake errand too.

So I have disconnected the events. Only John Parkes' statement makes it seem planned if the details are intentional, and the fact the iron bar is NOT the weapon damages his testimony.

[WallaceWackedHer]

Only 'almost' certainly, WWH?

Doubts creeping in?

If it was just a prank call, Parry went to some trouble to a) make it from a call box near to Wallace's home address; b) make the call at a time when Wallace could reasonably have made it himself, before going on to the chess club; and c) make sure the call could be traced to that particular box and at that particular time. How would any of that have made sense if Parry was not seeking to frame Wallace for the call, or for any crime that might be committed the following evening, but just wanted a laugh at his expense, imagining him searching in vain for Menlove Gardens East and the mysterious Mr Qualtrough? Or was this all just a terribly unfortunate coincidence for Wallace, that the call was traced and he was suspected of making it, because of the time and place, and what happened to his wife the following night while he was asking directions from all and sundry?

Why would Parry not have made the call from a box much nearer the chess club, where he could see if Wallace was going to attend and make sure his call was picked up and the hoax message taken down before Wallace actually entered the premises? Parry wouldn't then have needed or wanted the call to be traced.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz, the problem is you aren't addressing the things that point to Parry being the caller. What you are talking about is trying to disentangle it logically because it seems to make sense that Wallace is the caller. The facts don't point to that, no matter how impressive the logic is. I think it is the wrong starting point when we have some facts that need to be dealt with.

First, please deal with this:

The caller mentions a 21st birthday party, and it was not a planned thing (I have seen you try to say maybe Wallace did this to frame Parry.) If you read the call transcript, he was caught out a bit by Beattie's questioning and forced to quickly answer. Parry in his alibi mentions arranging a 21st birthday (Leslie Williamson's). Parry barged in to Lily Lloyd's music lesson at 735, a perfect fit for having made the call then heading there after which was en route to her house and a few minutes drive away. I trust Lily's timing more than here mother as she knew her lesson started 10 minutes later than normal. The voice was said to certainly not be Wallace by Beattie ( I know you think he could have fooled him), also the dialect was local dialect, Wallace was from out of town. John Parkes (whose entire testimony is admittedly questionable) says Parry was in the habit of making prank calls. The box was found to be in perfect working order and it is clear the caller scammed for a free call. An interesting behavior for a man planning a murder of his wife...

If you could deal with these things or at least address them, that would be nice. I think it is cool to have a difference of opinion and argue nicely about it, but it seems those who think one way just gloss over facts that point another way. At least explain why you think the facts are wrong or why it doesn't lead to the conclusion I get from it rather than ignoring it and just repeating reasons why logically it seems Wallace is behind it.

Particularly caller mentioning 21st and Parry mentioning planning a 21st his alibi (but the transcript shows a caller caught out a bit and saying the 1st thing that popped into his mind), not a planned mention, and the caller scamming a free call needs to be dealt with imo. That is extremely odd if Wallace is the caller for both of those things imo. Also, the timing of the call dovetailing perfectly with a Parry arrival right after, although I suspect one can argue that there is coincidences of timing surrounding Wallace too (as you did eloquently in your last post), so perhaps these cancel eachother out.

PS. This glossing over of facts that point in the other direction is not a criticism directed solely at you, it has been done by both sides of this debate here and particularly by someone whose theory was featured in a book recently I think people get a theory in mind and because they strongly believe in it, there is a tendency to dismiss out of hand anything that points in another direction altogether.

I think we should all try to get to the bottom of this and deal with every fact, whichever way it points and then agree to disagree if we still do.