Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

** The Murder of Julia Wallace **

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

  • I reckon the ‘Burglar finds a murdered body in the lounge scenario’ , Is too fantastic. As indeed is the notion of ‘no connection between murder , and phone call ‘
    On another issue. The 3 year diary. This for me may well be an insurance scheme ,for protection against invasion of privacy , where future accusations may be made of Wallace being a secret homosexual.
    a tool he may produce if ever required , as proof of his lovey dopey relationship with Julia. A relationship apparently doubted by some witnesses .A tool also that proved to be useful as a mechanism in his murder defence.
    Could it be that their marriage was one of convenience, where not only did Julia know of Williams’ sexual preferences from the start , but entered into a contract where she would give her husband license to continue his sexual dalliances ,in exchange for a new life away from Yorkshire and people who disliked her ,financial ,and stress free stability, etc.
    Unfortunately, by the arrival of the 1930s the whole arrangement turned very sour. We can only guess at how sour , but I believe he wanted rid of her ,once and for all.
    ’I claim this as Moste’s theory LoL.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by moste View Post
      Just a word on the idea ‘that a person who was not a regular visitor to 29 Wolverton, knocked on the front door then went to the back’
      I have mentioned before my doubts about Wallace’s traipse back and forth front to back.
      But consider a stranger leaving the front to go to the back. He wouldn’t have a clue which back gate to try, having gone down the block ,down the side alley, along the back alley ..and in the dark.No chance. Unless there was a 29 sign on the gate, which I very much doubt.
      Fair point Moste. I don’t know if you were posting when I mentioned the backdoor earlier? Julia knew that William returned at night via the front door so the backdoor wasn’t going to be used. Julia was in the house on her own at night so naturally she’d have locked and bolted the door. So why was Wallace surprised when he couldn’t get in? He should have expected it to have been locked and bolted against him.
      Regards

      Herlock



      Chairman of the National Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To The Old Established Theories.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by moste View Post
        I reckon the ‘Burglar finds a murdered body in the lounge scenario’ , Is too fantastic. As indeed is the notion of ‘no connection between murder , and phone call ‘

        I don’t think so either but it adds one to the pot.

        On another issue. The 3 year diary. This for me may well be an insurance scheme ,for protection against invasion of privacy , where future accusations may be made of Wallace being a secret homosexual.
        a tool he may produce if ever required , as proof of his lovey dopey relationship with Julia. A relationship apparently doubted by some witnesses .A tool also that proved to be useful as a mechanism in his murder defence.
        Could it be that their marriage was one of convenience, where not only did Julia know of Williams’ sexual preferences from the start , but entered into a contract where she would give her husband license to continue his sexual dalliances ,in exchange for a new life away from Yorkshire and people who disliked her ,financial ,and stress free stability, etc.
        Unfortunately, by the arrival of the 1930s the whole arrangement turned very sour. We can only guess at how sour , but I believe he wanted rid of her ,once and for all.
        ’I claim this as Moste’s theory LoL.
        We can add Moste’s Theory For me there was certainly something strange about the marriage. Then we have Julia’s lies. How can we claim a happy contented Wallace when he admits to depression?

        Regards

        Herlock



        Chairman of the National Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To The Old Established Theories.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by moste View Post
          I reckon the ‘Burglar finds a murdered body in the lounge scenario’ , Is too fantastic. As indeed is the notion of ‘no connection between murder , and phone call ‘
          Hi Moste

          Agree with you completely.

          Originally posted by moste View Post
          On another issue. The 3 year diary. This for me may well be an insurance scheme ,for protection against invasion of privacy , where future accusations may be made of Wallace being a secret homosexual.
          a tool he may produce if ever required , as proof of his lovey dopey relationship with Julia. A relationship apparently doubted by some witnesses .A tool also that proved to be useful as a mechanism in his murder defence.
          Could it be that their marriage was one of convenience, where not only did Julia know of Williams’ sexual preferences from the start , but entered into a contract where she would give her husband license to continue his sexual dalliances ,in exchange for a new life away from Yorkshire and people who disliked her ,financial ,and stress free stability, etc.
          Unfortunately, by the arrival of the 1930s the whole arrangement turned very sour. We can only guess at how sour , but I believe he wanted rid of her ,once and for all.
          ’I claim this as Moste’s theory LoL.
          I think if we were looking for a motive for Wallace, it is likely to be connected to something sour in the marriage. We know Julia was a good deal older than Wallace, though the lie of her age made it to her gravestone. We have one person accusing Wallace of being sexually odd, which certainly ties in with your theory. So a marriage of convenience is certainly possible. And the power Julia would have over Wallace if he was a closeted gay man in 1930s UK could very well lead to the kind of resentment that might build to murder.

          An extension to your theory would be if Wallace had met a man with whom he had become very close - this would supply an accomplice who Wallace could be sure would keep quiet (the stigma of being gay was strong then - not to mention legal consequences). Maybe Wallace spent time with him post murder but of course kept it very discreet. Speculation of course, but if Wallace was the murderer, or involved in the murder it would explain why the voice on the phone was not recognised by Beattie and how Wallace kept himself completely clean of blood.

          I don't subscribe to a Wallace plus accomplice solution, but if I am wrong, then your motive theory also explains how an accomplice might have been recruited into a murder plan.

          Last edited by etenguy; 02-11-2021, 11:57 PM.

          Comment


          • To add to the Wallace plus accomplice theory, it may also explain the mackintosh. If Wallace had an accomplice who actually committed the murder, he may have worn the mackintosh to give the impression he was Wallace so as to avoid Julia being alerted. It might not be a great disguise, but sufficient to fool her for a couple of minutes.

            Wallace had made a point of saying he had worn the mackintosh during the day and changed for his evening journey.
            Last edited by etenguy; 02-12-2021, 12:11 AM.

            Comment


            • Hmmm? Someone objected some time back , that Julia making any attempt to threaten her husband about his ‘unlawful sexual antics, would only result in her ‘shooting herself in the foot’, re, being left high and dry without a penny if William was marched off to prison.
              But then ,although Wallace was said to have a reasonable relationship with his sister in law, we don’t know do we,how well she may have known him?. Perhaps Julia saw Amy as a confidant, a ‘go to person’ if it became necessary. suppose Amy offered Julia a roof over her head if the s*** hit the fan. Wallace may have feared this and saw it as an imminent threat . It doesn’t sound like Amy had too much of a life of it, with her husband enjoying a career out in India , ( what the hell was that all about)?.

              Comment


              • I will just set straight the fact that ,although I very much doubted there being a number 29 on the rear entrance gate, which there was not. there was it seems a metal panel in the brick wall next to the gate with the house number on it . (Looks like a door for the rubbish )However whether this would be spotted in the dark to identify which house you had arrived at, I couldn’t say.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                  This might depend on the time that William filled in his diary. Maybe on a boring Sunday he might have filled it in around tea time and Amy and Edwin showed up in the evening when William and Julia played music for them. William then didn’t bother adding to his diary?
                  Hey Sherlock, ok, let's forget his diary entry ( if entered at tea even knowing that his Sister in law would turn up for the"usual" music) his police statement said there was no music. It's not a defining moment but another example of anomalies. So who told the truth, Edwin or Wallace (twice... that he didn't play music on Sunday night)?

                  Comment


                  • This doesn't solve the mystery but shows that someone is lying... for some reason!...and adds to the other anomalies...

                    Comment


                    • You're not normally this lazy Sherlock...his police reports AFTER the the murder says there was no music... his diary simply backs this up...soooo?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by moste View Post
                        Hmmm? Someone objected some time back , that Julia making any attempt to threaten her husband about his ‘unlawful sexual antics, would only result in her ‘shooting herself in the foot’, re, being left high and dry without a penny if William was marched off to prison.
                        But then ,although Wallace was said to have a reasonable relationship with his sister in law, we don’t know do we,how well she may have known him?. Perhaps Julia saw Amy as a confidant, a ‘go to person’ if it became necessary. suppose Amy offered Julia a roof over her head if the s*** hit the fan. Wallace may have feared this and saw it as an imminent threat . It doesn’t sound like Amy had too much of a life of it, with her husband enjoying a career out in India , ( what the hell was that all about)?.
                        Hmmmm, yes, Moste, but apparently Amy wasn't much of a fan of Julia... I'll go more into this after Sherlock answers the last couple of questions...and Sherlock knows more about Amy's relationship too

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by moste View Post
                          I will just set straight the fact that ,although I very much doubted there being a number 29 on the rear entrance gate, which there was not. there was it seems a metal panel in the brick wall next to the gate with the house number on it . (Looks like a door for the rubbish )However whether this would be spotted in the dark to identify which house you had arrived at, I couldn’t say.
                          The metal panel was the access to the ash bin for the collectors.
                          Regards

                          Herlock



                          Chairman of the National Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To The Old Established Theories.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Ven View Post

                            Hey Sherlock, ok, let's forget his diary entry ( if entered at tea even knowing that his Sister in law would turn up for the"usual" music) his police statement said there was no music. It's not a defining moment but another example of anomalies. So who told the truth, Edwin or Wallace (twice... that he didn't play music on Sunday night)?
                            Do we know that Wallace knew that they were turning up though? Perhaps they just showed up maybe they were passing nearby and decided to ‘drop in’ for a social call to see how Julia was?

                            Or perhaps the Wallace’s expected them to arrive but hadn’t intended to play music until someone suggested it?
                            Regards

                            Herlock



                            Chairman of the National Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To The Old Established Theories.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Ven View Post

                              Hmmmm, yes, Moste, but apparently Amy wasn't much of a fan of Julia... I'll go more into this after Sherlock answers the last couple of questions...and Sherlock knows more about Amy's relationship too
                              Don’t we only have Amy’s say so on that though? Could Amy have been distancing herself from Julia , relationship wise, so that she could avoid police questions, by denying having much knowledge of the couples closeness. After all she took two trams from Sefton Park ,to spend a couple of hours with Julia to see how she was faring head cold and all, and only a couple of hours before her death.All very niggling.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                                The metal panel was the access to the ash bin for the collectors.
                                Ok, got it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X