** The Murder of Julia Wallace **

[NickB]

Thanks for the update.

Mark Russell also changed his mind to guilty before (or perhaps while) writing his 'Checkmate' book, but I never heard why. When I bought his book I was hoping for a 'Eureka!' moment.

I wouldn't describe any of those 3 reasons as definitely clinching it, but if there is a tendency for people looking into the case in detail to change their view from innocent to guilty that might be an argument in itself.

In a way I don't want a consensus to form because the idea that his guilt is finely balanced (in my mind anyway) is part of the case's attraction!

[Abby Normal]

Well I didn’t expect to be posing on a Wallace thread again but I’m only posting for a specificreason. Many of you will remember two former Wallace case posters on here… American Sherlock and WallaceWackedHer (both no longer members) WWH went on to create the superb site The Julia Wallace Murder Foundation. He continued to research the case in depth with other contributors (American Sherlock being one) I recommend the site to anyone.

https://www.williamherbertwallace.com/

American Sherlock always favoured a guilty Wallace (like myself) but may have moved away from that solution (I’m unsure) over the years and WallaceWackedHer became firmly convinced of Wallace’s innocence. Sadly, debates became, shall we say, heated?

Recently I looked on the site and got the impression that WallaceWackedHer’s position might have changed but I didn’t have time to read enough so I could have got a mistaken impression so I emailed American Sherlock. He replied to tell me that both he and WallaceWackedHer are now convinced of Wallace’s guilt. He quoted 3 of the reasons for the change of position:


1. The Benzidine test was not a reliable means of testing in terms of accuracy, was rarely used or presented in trials at the time and was not widely known to be something that could catch a criminal out. Wallace would have known this.

2. The chess start time as per a notice board that is on the site was 7:30, not 7:45. If a caller who read the board based their actions on that (Parry for example), then they would see this and a stake out time of Wallace leaving his house at 7:15 or later on the 19th wouldn’t make sense. Also there have been arguments that Wallace could not have been late at all, even a minute for the 7:45 start time. He himself says he arrived there at 7:45 so if the actual time was 7:30, clearly this rule was not “strictly adhered to” as many have claimed.

3. The locks pantomime; It’s hard to say for sure but all sources I’ve found or Calum contacted can offer no reason besides chance for the locks issue that night; promises by Antony to show otherwise were never followed up on. So we are to believe it is just a coincidence on this one very night his wife is murdered he has issues getting in enough to make a fuss so the neighbors come over and discover the body with him? I don’t think so.

The emboldening is my own as this is a point that I used to make strongly and regularly.

I don’t think that the case will ever be conclusively solved. There will always be doubt. I haven’t read anything about the case for a few years now so I’m totally rusty but it will always be an intriguing case. Apart from the ripper case no murder case can touch it as far as mystery and intrigue is concerned in my opinion.

yeah re your boldened point. its murder 101 to set it up so someone one else finds the body or you find with other people. for me its also a little too convenient that on the night of the murder hes locked out. yeah right.

[cobalt]

If Wallace was guilty he had clearly planned out the murder of his wife beforehand, and that would include his finding her body in the company of his neighbours. The locks on the doors is a suspicious element for sure.

But why not kill her earlier in the evening? Wallace had a decent biological knowledge and would have understood estimated times of death per pathology. But he did not have to restrict himself to such a tight time period, from what I can recall. The 'Wallace was guilty' theory has him committing the murder, cleaning himself up and then exiting on his fool's errand all within 10 or 15 minutes? For such a well planned murder- one for which he was eventually acquitted- it does not really fit in terms of planning. What if the milk delivery boy who testified to seeing Julia Wallace had arrived even later? Would he have aborted the plan in perpetuity?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’d say that it had to have been a combination of him needing to be out of the house and it being dark. If he’d killed her during daylight hours suspicions would have been roused that there was no stranger seen anywhere near to the house. Whereas the dark would be seen as reason for this with the killer fleeing down a dark alley. Maybe, and it’s only a maybe, Wallace was one of those reasonably intelligent men who just feel that they are a lot more intelligent than they actually are and that he liked the thought of creating a novel plan to fool the police? As we know, he was a second rate chess player but after he was arrested he said something in print like “I, who have pitted my brains against the best chess minds…” I’m unsure of the exact quote but it might signify a man who felt that a man of his ‘superior’ intelligence hadn’t received sufficient recognition from life. Just speculation of course.

Personally, I don’t think that he would have required a clean up so the whole incident could have been done in a very few minutes. As you say though, the late arrival of Alan Close would added pressure considering that he had to catch three trams.

[Abby Normal]

and whos going to go on a wild goose chase on such a nebulous business lead? whats the first thing you would do? right look at a map so you know where your going.at which point you would realize there is no such place as menlow gardens east, and think its just a crank call. again all too convenient on the night his wife gets murdered. and parry and marsden knew he was married, and that shed probably be home. you dont set up a ruse like this for a robbery when you know someone else will be in the house, or you wouldnt plan on also murdering someone for a theft of a few bucks. makes no sense.

[cobalt]

Wallace might well have chased leads like this in his previous 17 years with the company. The Menlove area was being developed at the time so there is no guarantee that new streets would be on a map. When I drove taxis I had a city map but would go to an exact address I didn't know so long as I recognised the name of the area; often new houses appeared. I would certainly have driven to Menlove Avenue and scouted around a bit and knocked on the odd door in case the address had been relayed incorrectly.

Come January in Liverpool it will start getting dark around 4pm so although darkness would have been required as part of a plan on Wallace's part, it can't be the reason he delayed his attack (assuming his guilt) until about 6.40pm. I think the milkboy is key to the delay, for presumably Wallace intended to commit the crime around 6.15 which left him around half an hour to clean up, set the scene, then go on his pilgrimage to Menlove Gardens. But the milkboy was late, arriving at around 6.35, and if he had received no answer at the Wallace door then that would indicate Julia Wallace was already dead. More damningly for Wallace, he would have to explain why he had left the house almost an hour early to undertake a 20 minute journey at most.

The problem I see with this is that Wallace, if guilty, must have recognised the dangers of compressing a 30 minute crime into 10 minutes. He was a meticulous sort by all accounts and not one of life's risk takers. He could have no confidence about where blood spray would go and if he had sprained an ankle in the attack would have cut a pathetic figure hobbling around Menlove Gardens. I realise it was maybe a case of now or never since he could hardly use the Qualtrough ruse again, but the violent attack (why not employ strangulation?) seems to undermine the elaborate scheme had had conjured up.

[Abby Normal]

Wallace might well have chased leads like this in his previous 17 years with the company. The Menlove area was being developed at the time so there is no guarantee that new streets would be on a map. When I drove taxis I had a city map but would go to an exact address I didn't know so long as I recognised the name of the area; often new houses appeared. I would certainly have driven to Menlove Avenue and scouted around a bit and knocked on the odd door in case the address had been relayed incorrectly.

Come January in Liverpool it will start getting dark around 4pm so although darkness would have been required as part of a plan on Wallace's part, it can't be the reason he delayed his attack (assuming his guilt) until about 6.40pm. I think the milkboy is key to the delay, for presumably Wallace intended to commit the crime around 6.15 which left him around half an hour to clean up, set the scene, then go on his pilgrimage to Menlove Gardens. But the milkboy was late, arriving at around 6.35, and if he had received no answer at the Wallace door then that would indicate Julia Wallace was already dead. More damningly for Wallace, he would have to explain why he had left the house almost an hour early to undertake a 20 minute journey at most.

The problem I see with this is that Wallace, if guilty, must have recognised the dangers of compressing a 30 minute crime into 10 minutes. He was a meticulous sort by all accounts and not one of life's risk takers. He could have no confidence about where blood spray would go and if he had sprained an ankle in the attack would have cut a pathetic figure hobbling around Menlove Gardens. I realise it was maybe a case of now or never since he could hardly use the Qualtrough ruse again, but the violent attack (why not employ strangulation?) seems to undermine the elaborate scheme had had conjured up.

because perhaps he didnt want his wife to realize she was being murdered by her husband. a blitz type wack on the head when her back was turned would do the trick ...quick, she would have no idea what hit her and in line with a violent intruder. and i disagree with your first paragraph, driving around in a taxi to find an address is worlds away from difficult trip on trains and on foot.

i also think too much emphasis is placed on the milk boys time. witness times are notoriously unreliable, and he could have been off. regardless, wallace still could have pulled it off even if the milk boy was accurate. imho milk boy is kind of a red herring.

[cobalt]

I tend to agree that chasing a lead on a dark January evening -which involves having to take three trams- is a bit beyond the call of duty.

I can see that a violent attack makes more sense than strangulation in creating the image of a violent robbery but the risk/reward balance doesn't work for me.

The milkboy originally set the time at 6.45 which was hopeless from the police point of view since Wallace had to have left the house by 6.50 at the latest. The lad scaled it back to around 6.30 but there were two corroborating witnesses who thought the time was nearer to 6.35. They were both teenagers like the milkboy and teenagers are not renowned for being good timekeepers. However they were all engaged in delivery work in the same street and therefore conscious of the time as they went about their duties. There was a church nearby with a clock showing the correct time and the bells were rung on the half hour which helped the youngsters set the time.

[Abby Normal]

I tend to agree that chasing a lead on a dark January evening -which involves having to take three trams- is a bit beyond the call of duty.

I can see that a violent attack makes more sense than strangulation in creating the image of a violent robbery but the risk/reward balance doesn't work for me.

The milkboy originally set the time at 6.45 which was hopeless from the police point of view since Wallace had to have left the house by 6.50 at the latest. The lad scaled it back to around 6.30 but there were two corroborating witnesses who thought the time was nearer to 6.35. They were both teenagers like the milkboy and teenagers are not renowned for being good timekeepers. However they were all engaged in delivery work in the same street and therefore conscious of the time as they went about their duties. There was a church nearby with a clock showing the correct time and the bells were rung on the half hour which helped the youngsters set the time.

hi cobalt
thanks but im still gonna take a pass on milk boys time. i mean he already changed the time by fifteen minutes. hard pass on his accuracy.

strangulation for me is way more risky. what if she gets the upper hand? or fights him off and runs outside or screams her head off? or scratches his face? no. a quick wack to the head.. knocks her out. done.

wearing the mac prevents blood on him amd just stuff it under her to confuse police and contaminate any blood spatter.

it would only take seconds to murder her that way, then plant the mac, stage the robbery and leave. only a matter of a few minutes, ten at most. go on your wild goose chase, make sure alot of people see you including your neighbors as you make a fuss about getting into your mysteriously suddenly inaccessible house.

i dont rule out an intruder, but i lean pretty heavily this was a planned and staged domestic murder. and a not too shabby one at that, although he made some minor mistakes.

[etenguy]

I am of the view that Wallace was more likely than not to have been the murderer - but if so, why such an elaborate Qualtrough plan when there was a far simpler and convincing alibi if he murdered his wife on the Monday while he was at his chess club. There is the milk boy timing evidence that shows that Julia was alive just before Wallace left on his Menlove Gardens escapade, but another (maybe a neighbour) could take that place. Wallace does not need the Qualtrough plan - he could feign the locks issue regardless to ensure he had witnesses to finding the body.

Some might suggest that Tuesday was a better day regarding takings - but that is more a pointer to why someone like Parry might choose the Tuesday rather than Wallace. If Wallace wanted a burglarly gone wrong explanation, the burglar need not know about the best day for it to be effective.

So while I still believe Wallace was more likely the murderer than someone else, the Qualtrough plan existing at all points to another.

[Herlock Sholmes]

There are a couple of good reasons why William would have chosen the Tuesday over the Monday. He hadn’t been to the chess club for three or four weeks so the police might have felt it a little ‘convenient’ that the very day that he’d decided to return to the club was the very day that his wife was murdered. After the Qualtrough phone call the police would naturally have suspected that the caller and the killer were one and the same so all that William had to do was to convince them that he wasn’t the caller. He introduces a ‘Mr X’ by implementing the plan suggesting a robbery gone wrong (with a handy suspect in Parry for him to point the police in the direction of)

It was calculated by the police that William had to have left his house no later that 6.50 to catch his first tram, so even if Alan Close had left by 6.45 William had 4-5 minutes to kill Julia which I believe was ample (especially if he took precautions and thought ahead) What we also have to remember is that it’s very possible, if not likely, that Alan Cross arrived a little earlier. He took his time from a church clock at 6.25 and his reconstructions, done with the police, got him to number 29 in 5 and 6 minutes, so the equivalent of 6.30/6.31. This has been questioned as is almost certainly too early but even if we double those times it still gets Close to the Wallace’s at around 6.37 (the time that he was seen at the door by James Wildman) This would have given William around 12 minutes to kill Julia and leave for MGE.

[cobalt]

HS,

Good reasoning on why Wallace, if guilty, couldn't have used the chess club as his alibi on the Monday. I would add that the Qualtrough/non-existent address is evidence of over-planning a crime. Giving an address which did actually exist- or even better a vague one such as 25 Menlove Gardens- would have been perfectly sufficient to keep Wallace away from his house had an intruder planned a robbery. The non-existent address ruse strikes me as too clever by half. It offers nothing to any intruder but serves an advantage to Wallace in terms of time away from the house, inquiring after the property and of course robbery motive beforehand.

That said, I don't think that anyone could be confident of carrying out a murder in say a 10 minute period and leaving no trace on themselves. The mackintosh as cape scenario strikes me as an impediment in terms of applying blows to the head, and could be no guarantee of avoiding minute blood spray. Shoes and trouser turn ups would be very hard to protect when launching such an attack since the attacker has to move his feet to retain balance.

The theory of Wallace naked whilst wearing the mackintosh removes that problem but narrows the time frame to clean himself up and dress smartly for his sojourn to Menlove Gardens.

[etenguy]

There are a couple of good reasons why William would have chosen the Tuesday over the Monday. He hadn’t been to the chess club for three or four weeks so the police might have felt it a little ‘convenient’ that the very day that he’d decided to return to the club was the very day that his wife was murdered.

Hi Herlock

I agree, but if this were planned in advance, he might have made an effort to attend a little more regularly so that the one date did not stand out.

After the Qualtrough phone call the police would naturally have suspected that the caller and the killer were one and the same so all that William had to do was to convince them that he wasn’t the caller. He introduces a ‘Mr X’ by implementing the plan suggesting a robbery gone wrong (with a handy suspect in Parry for him to point the police in the direction of)

This is true, but given there had been a spate of burglaries, the fact of one more in a series would provide Wallace with a viable alternative suspect (as opposed to Parry who had an alibi and Wallace might have assumed might have an alibi). However, if Wallace had wanted to frame Parry (and not just murder his wife) then the Qualtrough plan does make more sense for Wallace to conjure up.

It was calculated by the police that William had to have left his house no later that 6.50 to catch his first tram, so even if Alan Close had left by 6.45 William had 4-5 minutes to kill Julia which I believe was ample (especially if he took precautions and thought ahead) What we also have to remember is that it’s very possible, if not likely, that Alan Cross arrived a little earlier. He took his time from a church clock at 6.25 and his reconstructions, done with the police, got him to number 29 in 5 and 6 minutes, so the equivalent of 6.30/6.31. This has been questioned as is almost certainly too early but even if we double those times it still gets Close to the Wallace’s at around 6.37 (the time that he was seen at the door by James Wildman) This would have given William around 12 minutes to kill Julia and leave for MGE.

Relying on accurate and precise timings from witnesses who had no reason at the time to commit the time to memory is probably not wise. Therefore, I think we have to accept that there was time for Wallace to have committed the murder before leaving for his tram.

[etenguy]

The theory of Wallace naked whilst wearing the mackintosh removes that problem but narrows the time frame to clean himself up and dress smartly for his sojourn to Menlove Gardens.

Nice post Colbalt, but can I pick up on one point in it (above).

Wallace himself explained how the murder took place (though suggesting it was someone else's actions) in an article in John Bull published on May 21 1932. His version makes more sense in terms of the burning mackintosh (IMHO) than if someone had been naked and wearing the mackintosh.

The link to the article is : https://www.williamherbertwallace.co.../jm_Oooks.jpeg
which is on the site Herlock refered to in an earlier post (The Julia Wallace Murder Foundation - https://www.williamherbertwallace.com ) - which is an excellent, comprehensive and informative site.

The extract pertinent to this point is reproduced below:

He followed my wife into the sitting-room, and as she bent down and lit the gas-fire he struck her, possibly with a spanner. The implement of murder was never discovered.

He had now to kill her. To strike her again while she lay on the floor and him standing over her would mean the upward spurting of blood.

Two strides took him into the lobby, where he had observed my mackintosh hanging, and he held it as a shield between him and her body while he belaboured her to death.

She must have been felled as soon as she lit the fire and before she could regulate the flow of gas. It would have been at full blaze, and as he bent at the fireplace the flame set light to the mackintosh.

Then he would see that the bottom edge of her skirt was burning, and, throwing the mackintosh down, he must have dragged her away from the fire and on to part of the coat, leaving her in the position I found her.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock

This is true, but given there had been a spate of burglaries, the fact of one more in a series would provide Wallace with a viable alternative suspect (as opposed to Parry who had an alibi and Wallace might have assumed might have an alibi). However, if Wallace had wanted to frame Parry (and not just murder his wife) then the Qualtrough plan does make more sense for Wallace to conjure up.
.

Hi Eten,

I do think that William had chosen Parry as his fall guy. The fact that the ‘burglar’ made straight for a cash box that wasn’t in plain view and didn’t really look elsewhere (even after the disappointing haul) would point the police toward inside knowledge. He also knew that Julia would only have let in someone that she knew (at night while she was alone in the house) Then there’s also the fact of his known dishonesty with money which combined to make him an ideal ‘culprit.’ I also think that it was significant that when William gave the police a list of people who Julia would admit at night he gave just names, addresses and occupations. He gave Marsden a slightly longer mention but he pretty much gave Parry a biography. Obviously he couldn’t have had a clue if Parry had an alibi for the time of the murder or not (it turned out that he had of course) but it was worth a punt and he wasn’t reliant on him being found guilty.