** The Murder of Julia Wallace **

[moste]

Caz , it sounds one sided to me. I requested help with the solicitors scribble, and was promptly told there were seed potatoes to get into the ground.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I served 33 years with husband number two, and I regularly point out I'd have got far less for murder.

Maybe you would have got off on Appeal Caz

[caz]

I served 33 years with husband number two, and I regularly point out I'd have got far less for murder.

[OneRound]

Not at all, OneRound. In my experience, and on my third husband, I can confirm that being "a married woman" is very much a full time occupation - but without the pay packet at the end of the week.

I'm afraid I can't help with the deciphering - I have three floors to wash.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz,

Ha! Amazingly Mrs OneRound is still on her first husband - i.e. me. She regularly says everyone is entitled to one mistake.

Best wishes,
OneRound

[caz]

Hi again Herlock - apologies for my approaching this with the speed of a tortoise with a grade A hangover but a brief comment now about the opening wording as now in bold above.

I reckon it's ''woman'' not ''women'' and part of what was probably one option for a fairly typical legal declaration at the time. I think Amy is describing herself as ''a married woman'' as if it were her occupation. If that doesn't get me a spanking from Caz, nothing will!

Amy then uses the word ''say'' as to mean ''do declare as follows''.

Now for the more tricky rest ....

Best regards,
OneRound

Not at all, OneRound. In my experience, and on my third husband, I can confirm that being "a married woman" is very much a full time occupation - but without the pay packet at the end of the week.

I'm afraid I can't help with the deciphering - I have three floors to wash.

Love,

Caz
X

[OneRound]

Regards any financial irregularities, wouldn't they have emerged during the investigation and if there were any suspicions would tge Prudential Staff Union have backed his defence.

Hi Ironmiller - a lot of the financials could have been and probably were checked during the investigation. However, there would still be an element dependent upon what Wallace said was in the cash box when its contents were taken. By way of illustration only (I'm making up the amount), Wallace might have claimed there was £20.00 in it and his / the Prudential records might show that should have been the case. However, that doesn't mean the money was actually there and he hadn't already spent most of it on himself.

That's what I was getting at the other week. However, Herlock politely but effectively rather kicked that idea into touch by highlighting various other personal monies freely and legitimately available to Wallace.

Best regards,
OneRound

[OneRound]

Thank Dupin and Mr and Mrs Moste

I’ve started a ‘deciphering’ thread to leave this for discussing the case.

Thanks for the new 'deciphering' thread, Herlock.

Best,
OneRound

[Ironmiller]

Regards any financial irregularities, wouldn't they have emerged during the investigation and if there were any suspicions would tge Prudential Staff Union have backed his defence.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Thank Dupin and Mr and Mrs Moste

I’ve started a ‘deciphering’ thread to leave this for discussing the case.

[Dupin]

"there’s a line squeezed in below which appears to begin with ‘Mrs Wallace..."

It says "Mrs Wallace was telling us about a burglary about two(ten?) doors down the road!"

The other sentence is
"did not know of anyone in that district [from whom xxx might get business - crossed out] but she thought it was for business"

HTH
Dupin

[OneRound]

...

Im now looking at Amy’s statement written in Munro’s execrable handwriting.

...


Then go to the 2nd paragraph (beginning with ‘On the evening...’ There’s a line ‘were very comfortable and happy, except that Mrs Wallace had a cold.’ Then there’s a line squeezed in below which appears to begin with ‘Mrs Wallace...’ I haven’t a clue.

Then toward the end of the paragraph it says ‘anyone in that district,’ followed by 6 words then one on the next line. ??

.....

Final go, Herlock!

Taking these last two out of order, I believe the 6 words plus the one on the next line are ''but she thought it was for business''.

As for the remaining wording, I'm pretty much stumped and so am hoping Mrs moste can take the honours. I think it starts ''Mrs Wallace was ...'' and ends ''... cold!''. The use of the exclamation mark (in ''cold!'') makes me wonder if it was a somewhat throwaway comment suggesting Julia was prone to colds.

Best as ever,
OneRound

[OneRound]

...

Im now looking at Amy’s statement written in Munro’s execrable handwriting.
...

Then to line 6. The first word of the line is ‘Herbert.’ Then there’s a ^ with what looks like 3 words in the space.

Hi once more Herlock - I think these words might be ''was with me'' as in ''my son Edwin Herbert was with me''. The word ''with'' in the immediately previous line was written and then crossed out which shows her likely thinking and influences me in my reading.

Trusting her son's first two names were Edwin Herbert; if not, this falls down.

Best,
OneRound

[OneRound]

Ok Eten (and anyone else of course)

Im now looking at Amy’s statement written in Munro’s execrable handwriting.

First page. It’s gives Amy’s name and address followed by 4 words ...it looks like “married women will say.”


Then to line 6. The first word of the line is ‘Herbert.’ Then there’s a ^ with what looks like 3 words in the space.

Then go to the 2nd paragraph (beginning with ‘On the evening...’ There’s a line ‘were very comfortable and happy, except that Mrs Wallace had a cold.’ Then there’s a line squeezed in below which appears to begin with ‘Mrs Wallace...’ I haven’t a clue.

Then toward the end of the paragraph it says ‘anyone in that district,’ followed by 6 words then one on the next line. ??

.....wording

BTW after I’ve sorted the hieroglyphs on this post I think I’ll begin a ‘transcription help thread’ as I don’t want to clog this thread even though it’s a little quieter at the moment. (Moste, OneRound and NickB have escaped back to the A6 Thread - who left the door open?)

Hi again Herlock - apologies for my approaching this with the speed of a tortoise with a grade A hangover but a brief comment now about the opening wording as now in bold above.

I reckon it's ''woman'' not ''women'' and part of what was probably one option for a fairly typical legal declaration at the time. I think Amy is describing herself as ''a married woman'' as if it were her occupation. If that doesn't get me a spanking from Caz, nothing will!

Amy then uses the word ''say'' as to mean ''do declare as follows''.

Now for the more tricky rest ....

Best regards,
OneRound

[moste]

Yes I noticed that Moste. I wonder if rumours were emerging already?

I hope that Mrs Moste is fluent in Solicitor’s Scrawl? I pity the Barrister that had to read his notes.

LOL. Said she may need a few days.

[Herlock Sholmes]

My mrs. Is pretty good at this kind of thing , I’ll see if I can get her to translate.

The last sentence on third page was interesting. Like she had been quizzed, ‘Mr.Wallace didn’t come to Ullet road alone Mrs Wallace was always with him.’ Possibly defending herself from the suggestion that there may have been something untoward going on ?

Yes I noticed that Moste. I wonder if rumours were emerging already?

I hope that Mrs Moste is fluent in Solicitor’s Scrawl? I pity the Barrister that had to read his notes.