Move to Murder: Who Killed Julia Wallace?

[moste]

HS, so we have:

6:35PM. According to his trial testimony, David Jones delivers the Echo to No. 29. He sees no lights on (there is a deep fanlight window above the front door) or hears no one inside. He also sees no one else in Wolverton Street.

Inference 1: Julia and William Wallace are in the kitchen with the hall door closed.

Inference 2: Given testimony of teenagers (and broadly consistent with both Holmes and Johnston), Alan Close had not yet arrived to deliver milk.

6:36PM. Julia retrieves the Echo and takes it back to the kitchen to read.

Justification: The newspaper was found on the table by her seat - open at the centre pages, I believe.

6.37PM. Alan Close knocks on the door of No. 29. He leaves a can of milk on the doorstep and goes to No. 31. Julia retrieves can and returns to fill the jug in her kitchen. Close returns to No. 29. James Wildman is at No. 27 delivering a paper. He looks across and sees Close with the door of No. 29 wide open.

6:38PM. Julia returns to front door with the empty can and hands it to Close, with whom she exchanges a few words. The front door closes.

We can slip in the staging of the burglary between these two times, but Julia returns to the kitchen quite soon after the knock and I wonder if that gives Wallace sufficient time (I think your best bet is to stage the robbery and open paper after the murder). In any case, what does Wallace retrieve from the cash box? He stated 30-40 silver coins, four notes, a postal order and a cheque were taken. And where does he place them? In my Wallace reconstruction, I had him remove notes which he burned (i.e. he lied about the coins). One idea for you: he takes the coins from the cash box and places approximately £1 in Julia's handbag, and pockets the rest with the notes. Another version would be he places the notes upstairs in his jar. Both of these two actions require more time than we have at this point in the timeline.

Sorry If I'm being naïve, why are we moving money around? isn't that a pointless exercise re time being of the essence?
Now, if Wallace had engineered this 20 minute (approx.) scenario. Why would he NOT come to the door with Julia to have himself seen by Close, cementing a definite situation whereby Wallace has absolute proof that he was still home at 6 35 pm ?wouldn't this be even more helpful to an alibi ?

[Herlock Sholmes]

HS, so we have:

6:35PM. According to his trial testimony, David Jones delivers the Echo to No. 29. He sees no lights on (there is a deep fanlight window above the front door) or hears no one inside. He also sees no one else in Wolverton Street.

Inference 1: Julia and William Wallace are in the kitchen with the hall door closed.

Inference 2: Given testimony of teenagers (and broadly consistent with both Holmes and Johnston), Alan Close had not yet arrived to deliver milk.

6:36PM. Julia retrieves the Echo and takes it back to the kitchen to read.

Justification: The newspaper was found on the table by her seat - open at the centre pages, I believe.

6.37PM. Alan Close knocks on the door of No. 29. He leaves a can of milk on the doorstep and goes to No. 31. Julia retrieves can and returns to fill the jug in her kitchen. Close returns to No. 29. James Wildman is at No. 27 delivering a paper. He looks across and sees Close with the door of No. 29 wide open.

6:38PM. Julia returns to front door with the empty can and hands it to Close, with whom she exchanges a few words. The front door closes.

We can slip in the staging of the burglary between these two times, but Julia returns to the kitchen quite soon after the knock and I wonder if that gives Wallace sufficient time (I think your best bet is to stage the robbery and open paper after the murder). In any case, what does Wallace retrieve from the cash box? He stated 30-40 silver coins, four notes, a postal order and a cheque were taken. And where does he place them? In my Wallace reconstruction, I had him remove notes which he burned (i.e. he lied about the coins). One idea for you: he takes the coins from the cash box and places approximately £1 in Julia's handbag, and pockets the rest with the notes. Another version would be he places the notes upstairs in his jar. Both of these two actions require more time than we have at this point in the timeline.

As Julia took the empty can back Wallace could have followed close behind and gone straight into the Parlour. He could have just put the contents of the box into his pockets and disposed of them on his way to MGE.

Antony, I can’t recall it being mentioned if Wallace had any cash on him on the night of the murder? I imagine he’d have carried a wallet?

You right that he might have lied about the coins. I don’t recall if any serious effort, or effort at all, was made to tally up exactly what should have been in the cash box? Was this another lapse by the police?

[ColdCaseJury]

Sorry If I'm being naïve, why are we moving money around? isn't that a pointless exercise re time being of the essence?
Now, if Wallace had engineered this 20 minute (approx.) scenario. Why would he NOT come to the door with Julia to have himself seen by Close, cementing a definite situation whereby Wallace has absolute proof that he was still home at 6 35 pm ?wouldn't this be even more helpful to an alibi ?

Re: Money. Wallace cannot be caught with four pounds in cash and coins on him. Nor can it obviously be found in the house (£1 in change in a handbag is plausibly denied). He has to dispose of it to make it look like a burglary.

Re: Wallace coming to the door. That Wallace was in the house when the milk boy called was never really in dispute (the time he called was the issue). So being seen by the milk boy makes no difference, I think. However, Wallace testified that he could not remember the milk boy calling. He would certainly have known if he was in the kitchen. This suggests he was upstairs (washing his face and changing his collar as he claimed OR preparing to kill Julia) OR possibly in the back kitchen OR he lied (and he was in the kitchen). But does he gain anything by lying on this point? Any views?

[ColdCaseJury]

As Julia took the empty can back Wallace could have followed close behind and gone straight into the Parlour.

HS, according to Close's police statement, he waited on the step for "a minute or two" while Julia was in the kitchen. He noticed the kitchen light was on but saw no light from the front room. He saw or heard no other person in the house. I believe it is reasonable to conclude that if Wallace was in the kitchen, he did not nip into the front room at this point.

Re: money disposal. It is possible that he dropped it down a drain while walking to the first tram stop or at MG. But getting rid of of 30-40 coins and notes down a drain might not be as quick or as inconspicuous as he would have liked. And don't forget the police searched the drains. How are you thinking he might have hidden it?

[etenguy]

Re: money disposal. It is possible that he dropped it down a drain while walking to the first tram stop or at MG. But getting rid of of 30-40 coins and notes down a drain might not be as quick or as inconspicuous as he would have liked. And don't forget the police searched the drains. How are you thinking he might have hidden it?

Following this scenario building with interest.

Regarding the money - notes at least - am I correct in remembering there was a jar upstairs that had five notes in it? And didn't Wallace go straight upstairs when he returned to the house? Just a thought.

[moste]

Re: Money. Wallace cannot be caught with four pounds in cash and coins on him. Nor can it obviously be found in the house (£1 in change in a handbag is plausibly denied). He has to dispose of it to make it look like a burglary.

He is sure to have an amount of money on his person though. are you meaning 4 pounds was like a weeks wages in 1931, and therefore too much to expect Wallace to be carrying around?

[Herlock Sholmes]

. HS, according to Close's police statement, he waited on the step for "a minute or two" while Julia was in the kitchen. He noticed the kitchen light was on but saw no light from the front room. He saw or heard no other person in the house. I believe it is reasonable to conclude that if Wallace was in the kitchen, he did not nip into the front room at this point.

As Julia was at the door and about to close it I seem to recall that she said something to Alan Close about his cold and telling him to hurry home? With Close standing on the pavement a few feet away and Julia on the door step the Parlour door was a few feet behind her. The kitchen door and the Parlour door were right next to each other. I don’t think that it’s impossible that William could have gone from the kitchen to the Parlour, whilst Julia was seeing off Alan Close, without Close seeing him. It would have taken William 2 seconds and Close might have either not been able to see past Julia orhe m9ghtjust have been looking away?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Following this scenario building with interest.

Regarding the money - notes at least - am I correct in remembering there was a jar upstairs that had five notes in it? And didn't Wallace go straight upstairs when he returned to the house? Just a thought.

This is a good point an gives me another thought.

As most posters will know by now one of my favourite points against William is the fact that when he returned, supposedly concerned for his wife’s safety especially after seeing a cupboard door torn off, he ignored the Parlour door (which was within touching distance) to go look upstairs. I don’t think that this can be easily explained away (if at all.)

If I’ve had to come up with a reason for this action I’ve usually said that perhaps he just wanted a final look around to make sure that he handed made any obvious mistakes or left anything incriminating. Maybe he wanted to put the notes from the cash box upstairs?

[moste]

As Julia was at the door and about to close it I seem to recall that she said something to Alan Close about his cold and telling him to hurry home? With Close standing on the pavement a few feet away and Julia on the door step the Parlour door was a few feet behind her. The kitchen door and the Parlour door were right next to each other. I don’t think that it’s impossible that William could have gone from the kitchen to the Parlour, whilst Julia was seeing off Alan Close, without Close seeing him. It would have taken William 2 seconds and Close might have either not been able to see past Julia orhe m9ghtjust have been looking away?

This would be part of the plan, to slip into the parlour while Julia was dealing with Close is what your saying ?, Or was he seizing the moment, taking a chance that Close doesn't see him, and be able to say later, "I spotted Mr. Wallace over his wife's shoulder turning into the front parlour".
Nah! I don't think so.

[moste]

Lets say ,for a moment that this was a strike by 'The Anfield Burglar, and since we have very little information on his previous break-ins, lets assume this is the first time that he had been caught red handed by the home occupant. Lets allow that the Burglar may well have lashed out, possibly killing Julia with a single blow, in any event knocking her senseless.
The question is, would the house be left in the condition Wallace and the Johnston's found it? I.E. coins on the kitchen floor, money in bedroom, money in Julia's bag, jewelry , gas meter intact, etc.
I think, though planned well in other respects, the preparing of the house by Wallace as though a break-in had occurred, was poorly done, This and the degree of injury by repeated blows, IMHO.points to her husband as the culprit.
If not Wallace ,then someone that's never been in the equation. One thing that is for sure, a lot of malice\rancor was meted out on poor Julia.

[ColdCaseJury]

As Julia was at the door and about to close it I seem to recall that she said something to Alan Close about his cold and telling him to hurry home? With Close standing on the pavement a few feet away and Julia on the door step the Parlour door was a few feet behind her. The kitchen door and the Parlour door were right next to each other. I don’t think that it’s impossible that William could have gone from the kitchen to the Parlour, whilst Julia was seeing off Alan Close, without Close seeing him. It would have taken William 2 seconds and Close might have either not been able to see past Julia orhe m9ghtjust have been looking away?

HS, According to Wildman, Close was standing on the door step, and Julia was slight and only 5ft tall. However, I can offer a way out. While the front door was open, the vestibule door might have been closed. Personally, I think Close would have mentioned this because his look inside the house would have been so fleeting, but it cannot be definitely ruled out. If you accept this, we have:

6:35PM. According to his trial testimony, David Jones delivers the Echo to No. 29. He sees no lights on (there is a deep fanlight window above the front door) or hears no one inside. He also sees no one else in Wolverton Street.

Inference 1: Julia and William Wallace are in the kitchen with the hall door closed.

Inference 2: Given testimony of teenagers (and broadly consistent with both Holmes and Johnston), Alan Close had not yet arrived to deliver milk.

6:36PM. Julia retrieves the Echo and takes it back to the kitchen to read.

Justification: The newspaper was found on the table by her seat - open at the centre pages, I believe.

6.37PM. Alan Close knocks on the door of No. 29. He leaves a can of milk on the doorstep and goes to No. 31. Julia retrieves can, leaves the front door open but closes the vestibule door, and returns to the kitchen to fill her milk jug. Close returns to No. 29. James Wildman is at No. 27 delivering a paper. He looks across and sees Close with the door of No. 29 wide open.

As Julia returns to the front door, Wallace enters the front room and lights the gas lamp.

Assumption: The vestibule door was closed, allowing Wallace to enter the front room unseen by Close.

6:38PM. Julia opens vestibule door and hands the empty can to Close, with whom she exchanges a few words. The front door closes. Pretending to check his appearance in the mirror, Wallace asks Julia to bring him his mackintosh.

Before we move on to 6:39PM, HS, what do you want to say about the staging? When is the cabinet door pulled off, cash removed from box and coins dropped on the floor? Did you give a definite position on this?

[moste]

This is a good point an gives me another thought.

As most posters will know by now one of my favourite points against William is the fact that when he returned, supposedly concerned for his wife’s safety especially after seeing a cupboard door torn off, he ignored the Parlour door (which was within touching distance) to go look upstairs. I don’t think that this can be easily explained away (if at all.)

If I’ve had to come up with a reason for this action I’ve usually said that perhaps he just wanted a final look around to make sure that he handed made any obvious mistakes or left anything incriminating. Maybe he wanted to put the notes from the cash box upstairs?

We also have to remember though even if not mentioned in evidence, Wallace would (whether for effect because he was guilty or not )would certainly have been hurrying through the house calling, 'JULIA, JULIA!'
Especially since she didn't show while he was supposedly trying front and back doors, can we agree he would be allowed to say ' when I got no response to my calling, I assumed her to be upstairs, possibly early to bed feeling worse , The point I guess I'm making is, if he was calling her name, and I feel sure he would have been, then because he had got no reply, to check the parlour regardless of the proximity of the door , would mean he believed she had fell foul to something or someone, since nothing so sinister had occurred to him by this stage,(since he had been looking for his wife and not taking note of cash on floor or cupboard doors) he ran upstairs, hoping to find her sleeping. I am of course playing devils advocate here , to try and cover all the bases

[Herlock Sholmes]

HS, According to Wildman, Close was standing on the door step, and Julia was slight and only 5ft tall. However, I can offer a way out. While the front door was open, the vestibule door might have been closed. Personally, I think Close would have mentioned this because his look inside the house would have been so fleeting, but it cannot be definitely ruled out. If you accept this, we have:

6:35PM. According to his trial testimony, David Jones delivers the Echo to No. 29. He sees no lights on (there is a deep fanlight window above the front door) or hears no one inside. He also sees no one else in Wolverton Street.

Inference 1: Julia and William Wallace are in the kitchen with the hall door closed.

Inference 2: Given testimony of teenagers (and broadly consistent with both Holmes and Johnston), Alan Close had not yet arrived to deliver milk.

6:36PM. Julia retrieves the Echo and takes it back to the kitchen to read.

Justification: The newspaper was found on the table by her seat - open at the centre pages, I believe.

6.37PM. Alan Close knocks on the door of No. 29. He leaves a can of milk on the doorstep and goes to No. 31. Julia retrieves can, leaves the front door open but closes the vestibule door, and returns to the kitchen to fill her milk jug. Close returns to No. 29. James Wildman is at No. 27 delivering a paper. He looks across and sees Close with the door of No. 29 wide open.

As Julia returns to the front door, Wallace enters the front room and lights the gas lamp.

Assumption: The vestibule door was closed, allowing Wallace to enter the front room unseen by Close.

6:38PM. Julia opens vestibule door and hands the empty can to Close, with whom she exchanges a few words. The front door closes. Pretending to check his appearance in the mirror, Wallace asks Julia to bring him his mackintosh.

Before we move on to 6:39PM, HS, what do you want to say about the staging? When is the cabinet door pulled off, cash removed from box and coins dropped on the floor? Did you give a definite position on this?

No definite position Antony. Of course this is just a scenario and I certainly can’t prove any of it apart from the fact that Wallace and Julia were there. The removal of the cash would have been 10 seconds work of course and the cupboard door is an unknown but it could easily have been 10 seconds too, according to its condition. And so both could have bern done before or after.

[Herlock Sholmes]

We also have to remember though even if not mentioned in evidence, Wallace would (whether for effect because he was guilty or not )would certainly have been hurrying through the house calling, 'JULIA, JULIA!'
Especially since she didn't show while he was supposedly trying front and back doors, can we agree he would be allowed to say ' when I got no response to my calling, I assumed her to be upstairs, possibly early to bed feeling worse , The point I guess I'm making is, if he was calling her name, and I feel sure he would have been, then because he had got no reply, to check the parlour regardless of the proximity of the door , would mean he believed she had fell foul to something or someone, since nothing so sinister had occurred to him by this stage,(since he had been looking for his wife and not taking note of cash on floor or cupboard doors) he ran upstairs, hoping to find her sleeping. I am of course playing devils advocate here , to try and cover all the bases

Hi Moste,

In Wallace’s statement he specifically stated that he’d seen the cupboard door that had been pulled off as he passed through the kitchen. Also, by this stage, Wallace had said that he’d become worried about Julia when he finally accepted that MGE didn’t exist. He’d immediately asked the Johnston’s if they’d heard anything and then he found that he couldn’t get in. So it’s more than reasonable to say that by the time that he reached the kitchen door he’d have been in a pretty heightened state of concern/worry.

[cobalt]

A very detailed scenario which reminds us of how many trades people came to the typical house in the past. In fact, if had Wallace planned his attack immediately after the milk boy left, how could he be certain that the lad might not return due to some mistake in the order, or that another routine caller he had overlooked might not knock at the door?

Wallace as a mild-mannered, stoical type who lashed out in marital frustration is relatively easy to imagine. Much harder to grasp is his motivation for wanting to kill his wife, and actually planning it in some detail with a fake telephone call and anticipating the timing of callers at the door as you suggest.