Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

** The Murder of Julia Wallace **

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

  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
    In fact, I might add that one as my question for Mark Wallace on the podcast?
    A descendent of the secret son of William and Julia?

    We know you meant Mark Russell.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by etenguy View Post

      A descendent of the secret son of William and Julia?

      We know you meant Mark Russell.
      Just checking that you were paying attention Eten
      Regards

      Sir Herlock Sholmes.

      “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

        I agree unless Wallace had done a recce and spotted the perfect place for disposal

        I may have asked this before but do we know if the police checked all of the ash bins that Wallace might have had access to?
        Wallace if guilty, had any amount of time he required to plan things such as ‘will I wear gloves’ what weapon to use’ where to hide them afterwards ’’ how confusing can I make the whole thing for the investigators’ etc. I’m sure he wasn’t ‘slow’ to the point of simply dropping the iron bar in an ash bin!The weapon for example may have been dropped down a pre made hole in soft earth perhaps in the church yard, who can guess?
        On the Qualtrough name, CCJ I see the genealogy lists only up to 1901. I was looking at the site ‘Forebears.io ‘after entering ‘incidences of the name Qualtrough in 1930 in UK. ‘ the map of England shades in red the area where the highest population of Qualtrough existed , Cumberland shows the only area of significance, but doesn’t mention numbers unfortunately ,the rest of England not coloured at all. There is an option to switch to the date 1881. and this shows similar results but in a reduced area of the Cumberland region. However your genealogy find makes nonsense of all that, so we’ll move on.

        Stephen Qualtrough As a side issue, in his family tree ,he examined the Qualtrough involvement in the Wallace murder case, dated 25 may 2012. He thanks John Gannon the author for his assistance with information gleaned from police files.
        Listed and within minutes of Wolverton street are: Henry Trehearn Qualtrough,of 6 Heyes street he was a telephone operator at Liverpool xchange, St. John street. John Qualtrough, of 4 Hunt street ,(who was at the greyhound track at time of phone call on the 20th.) Also grandfather John lived in the next street over ,Fowler street.
        A little further away was William Qualtrough , of 146 Molyneux st. Then there was a workshop belonging to the family at 74 Windermere st. Then there was a Richard James Qualtrough of 8 Northumberland Terrace. All presumably checked out by the police with regards to the phone call.
        John Qualtrough who was at the dogs on the night of the phone call was the one insured by the Pru and who’s agent was a Mr. Bott .he lived not too far from Menlove Gds. In south Liverpool at 92, Woolton road Wave tree. Interesting I thought that Wallace’s clients are pretty much ‘Clubmore/Anfield, but Mr. Bott has to travel out to Anfield for John Qualtroughs dues. Anyway I guess it was what it was.
        I have often wondered why Wallace didn’t have a bike (or a map). Good point actually ,did the police consider the option that Wallace may have made his tram in plenty of time , because he had the use of a bike? Just a stab in the dark, only his travel time would have been about 3 minutes

        Comment


        • I’m sure he wasn’t ‘slow’ to the point of simply dropping the iron bar in an ash bin
          The only reason I mention the ash bin was because i don’t think that we know when these bins were emptied but Wallace was likely to have known. Would the police have begun any search for the weapon in the dark? So my point is what if Wallace knew that the ash bins were emptied in the very early hours of Wednesday morning? The weapon, if it would have been found at all, would have been discovered at the yard where the ash was dumped.

          A question would also be - why would a Mr X take the weapon away from the house and then dump it if it couldn’t be connected to himself?
          Regards

          Sir Herlock Sholmes.

          “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

          Comment


          • .
            I have often wondered why Wallace didn’t have a bike (or a map). Good point actually ,did the police consider the option that Wallace may have made his tram in plenty of time , because he had the use of a bike? Just a stab in the dark, only his travel time would have been about 3 minutes
            Because no one ever mentioned seeing Wallace on a bike I assume that it was never considered.
            Regards

            Sir Herlock Sholmes.

            “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

              The only reason I mention the ash bin was because i don’t think that we know when these bins were emptied but Wallace was likely to have known. Would the police have begun any search for the weapon in the dark? So my point is what if Wallace knew that the ash bins were emptied in the very early hours of Wednesday morning? The weapon, if it would have been found at all, would have been discovered at the yard where the ash was dumped.

              A question would also be - why would a Mr X take the weapon away from the house and then dump it if it couldn’t be connected to himself?
              No I agree.As noted by Eten, why take it away at all, I’m simply of the opinion that it would not be too difficult to hide the bar in a place where it would never be seen again.

              Comment


              • I do think it rather odd though, that Stephen Qs. discovery, was that all of his relations were settled in the concentration of Wallace’s neighbourhoods.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                  In fact, I might add that one as my question for Mark Wallace on the podcast?
                  I think I might submit a question asking Mark his view about the nature of the intended crime. Whether Wallace or someone else, was the intended crime the murder of Julia Wallace or was the intended crime burglary and the murder not planned. I have formed a view already, but it is not set in stone, and it would be interesting to hear the view of someone recently immersed in the crime and all the evidence.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by etenguy View Post

                    I think I might submit a question asking Mark his view about the nature of the intended crime. Whether Wallace or someone else, was the intended crime the murder of Julia Wallace or was the intended crime burglary and the murder not planned. I have formed a view already, but it is not set in stone, and it would be interesting to hear the view of someone recently immersed in the crime and all the evidence.
                    Etenguy, check the post re "checkmate


                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by moste View Post
                      I do think it rather odd though, that Stephen Qs. discovery, was that all of his relations were settled in the concentration of Wallace’s neighbourhoods.
                      It certainly shows that Wallace or anyone else might easily have come across the name somehow and it stuck in their mind as unusual.

                      Regards

                      Sir Herlock Sholmes.

                      “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

                      Comment


                      • Regarding the contents of the cash box, might Wallace have removed them earlier in the day? He could have burnt the postal orders, cheques etc. (either at home or on his round) and spent the money at a busy shop where they were unlikely to remember him. Julia would not have noticed the items missing, assuming she paid the window cleaner with cash from her handbag.

                        On a minor point, Parry could have sold his story (spiced up and, if necessary, altered) to a magazine or newspaper. The petty crime he indulged in indicated a desire for easy money, so I am surprised he did not do this - particularly if he was not involved

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Ven View Post

                          Etenguy, check the post re "checkmate
                          Thanks, Ven. Will have a look.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by NickB View Post
                            Regarding the contents of the cash box, might Wallace have removed them earlier in the day? He could have burnt the postal orders, cheques etc. (either at home or on his round) and spent the money at a busy shop where they were unlikely to remember him. Julia would not have noticed the items missing, assuming she paid the window cleaner with cash from her handbag.
                            That would have been a good strategy, Nick. Better than transferring to the jar up-stairs or adding to his wallet. He might have concealed or spent the money if he took the money before he left for his rounds.

                            Originally posted by NickB View Post
                            On a minor point, Parry could have sold his story (spiced up and, if necessary, altered) to a magazine or newspaper. The petty crime he indulged in indicated a desire for easy money, so I am surprised he did not do this - particularly if he was not involved
                            I seem to remember someone, (Roger Wilkes, I think, or someone on his radio programme about the murder), saying that Parry was approached in the past but refused to discuss the murder. I can imagine he wanted to be free of any association and left to get on with his life.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by etenguy View Post

                              I seem to remember someone, (Roger Wilkes, I think, or someone on his radio programme about the murder), saying that Parry was approached in the past but refused to discuss the murder. I can imagine he wanted to be free of any association and left to get on with his life.
                              Jonathan Goodman and Richard Whittington-Egan turned up on his doorstep.

                              Regards

                              Sir Herlock Sholmes.

                              “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                                Jonathan Goodman and Richard Whittington-Egan turned up on his doorstep.
                                Thanks Herlock

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X