Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by Graham 1 hour and 12 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Was the ripper and also the torsomans crimes totally non sexual in nature? - by Herlock Sholmes 2 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Was the ripper and also the torsomans crimes totally non sexual in nature? - by Abby Normal 2 hours ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by NickB 3 hours ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by moste 3 hours ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by Sherlock Houses 3 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Torso Killings: torso maps - (15 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (13 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Was the ripper and also the torsomans crimes totally non sexual in nature? - (13 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (6 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Sergeant Thick's Sketchy Connections? - (6 posts)
Witnesses: Sarah and Maurice Lewis - (4 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Social Chat > Other Mysteries

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #2431  
Old 05-14-2018, 09:12 AM
OneRound OneRound is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 500
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
No. I still wouldnt want to send the man to prison let alone the gallows. At a distance of 87 years i could definitely be wrong. We all could. There could have been a killer with a motive that we arent aware of.

It would be interesting to hear a mock trial on the Wallace case.
Hi again Herlock - I actually thought that's the way you would go. Entirely fair and sensible to my mind.

I totally agree about a mock trial. In his later years, I became friendly with the late actor Eric Longworth (best known - if at all - for a small semi-recurring role in the UK comedy series Dads' Army). It was only after his death that I found out he had played the part of Wallace in a well regarded tv production of the case. I wish I had known that earlier and discussed the role with him.

Best regards,

OneRound
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2432  
Old 05-15-2018, 07:23 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,254
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRound View Post
Hi again Herlock - I actually thought that's the way you would go. Entirely fair and sensible to my mind.

I totally agree about a mock trial. In his later years, I became friendly with the late actor Eric Longworth (best known - if at all - for a small semi-recurring role in the UK comedy series Dads' Army). It was only after his death that I found out he had played the part of Wallace in a well regarded tv production of the case. I wish I had known that earlier and discussed the role with him.

Best regards,

OneRound
I love Dad’s Army but I had to look him up. I remember him well as the Town Clerk. It’s a pity that the tv production appears to be unavailable. It’s certainly not on YouTube.

I just found this obituary.

https://www.thestage.co.uk/features/...ric-longworth/
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2433  
Old 05-16-2018, 02:14 PM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,254
Default

Can I ask anyone reading this thread if the programme that OneRound mentioned is available anywhere? Im assuming not?
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2434  
Old 05-17-2018, 03:18 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,273
Default

Hi Herlock,

I found this, but I don't know if it means it's actually available to view:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5752428...?ref_=tt_dt_dt

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2435  
Old 05-17-2018, 04:26 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,273
Default

Hi All,

Re the 21st birthday policy, was this something that would always have been set up on the young person's 'coming of age', back in the 1930s, or was it normally a policy set up at birth, with the maturity date being when the child reached 21? Could a policy have been set up at the age of 20, for example [as with the real Qualtrough's daughter], to pay out with interest a year later, on the 21st birthday?

I'm just trying to look at the options, but it does seem plausible that whoever made the Qualtrough call would have tried to weave fiction with fact to make it sound like a genuine request for Wallace's assistance. And with careful planning like that, Parry would have been an idiot to mention anyone's 21st party in his statement. So call me biased, but I think this again points more to Wallace as Qualtrough than anyone else.

I keep coming back to what any husband would absolutely need to put in place, before even thinking of carrying out the premeditated murder of his wife, if he had any hope at all of getting away with it. Wallace needed a "Qualtrough" more than any other potential suspect; Wallace needed a plausible alibi more than anyone else; Wallace needed a local bad boy with a robbery motive - someone exactly like Parry, who would arguably not have needed a forced entry; Wallace needed to conjure up reasonable doubt more than anyone else, which a convoluted scenario like this one could well provide. Once acquitted, it wouldn't matter if the police went after Parry or some other local ne'er-do-well and found they had rock solid alibis because Wallace could never be tried again.

If it wasn't Wallace, I'd be looking for someone in the couple's past, more probably Julia's past, with a secretly held grudge against one or both Wallaces, who found out enough information about their current lives to commit the crime and disappear back into obscurity, with nobody being any the wiser.

But even that seems a lot less likely than Wallace, with his own secretly held grudge, acting alone, in his home environment and in complete control, holding all the cards and all the info he needed to do what he ultimately did, and get away with murder. Not a well man anyway, with a limited time left to live, was it his final game of chess, which he was prepared to lose, but played his socks off to win? Was their a hint of triumph in his "Well we did it!"? [or something to that effect]

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov



Last edited by caz : 05-17-2018 at 04:32 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2436  
Old 05-17-2018, 04:45 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,254
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
Hi Herlock,

I found this, but I don't know if it means it's actually available to view:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5752428...?ref_=tt_dt_dt

Love,

Caz
X
Thanks for that Caz. I might contact the tv company
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2437  
Old 05-17-2018, 05:22 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,254
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
Hi All,

Re the 21st birthday policy, was this something that would always have been set up on the young person's 'coming of age', back in the 1930s, or was it normally a policy set up at birth, with the maturity date being when the child reached 21? Could a policy have been set up at the age of 20, for example [as with the real Qualtrough's daughter], to pay out with interest a year later, on the 21st birthday?

I'm just trying to look at the options, but it does seem plausible that whoever made the Qualtrough call would have tried to weave fiction with fact to make it sound like a genuine request for Wallace's assistance. And with careful planning like that, Parry would have been an idiot to mention anyone's 21st party in his statement. So call me biased, but I think this again points more to Wallace as Qualtrough than anyone else.

I keep coming back to what any husband would absolutely need to put in place, before even thinking of carrying out the premeditated murder of his wife, if he had any hope at all of getting away with it. Wallace needed a "Qualtrough" more than any other potential suspect; Wallace needed a plausible alibi more than anyone else; Wallace needed a local bad boy with a robbery motive - someone exactly like Parry, who would arguably not have needed a forced entry; Wallace needed to conjure up reasonable doubt more than anyone else, which a convoluted scenario like this one could well provide. Once acquitted, it wouldn't matter if the police went after Parry or some other local ne'er-do-well and found they had rock solid alibis because Wallace could never be tried again.

If it wasn't Wallace, I'd be looking for someone in the couple's past, more probably Julia's past, with a secretly held grudge against one or both Wallaces, who found out enough information about their current lives to commit the crime and disappear back into obscurity, with nobody being any the wiser.

But even that seems a lot less likely than Wallace, with his own secretly held grudge, acting alone, in his home environment and in complete control, holding all the cards and all the info he needed to do what he ultimately did, and get away with murder. Not a well man anyway, with a limited time left to live, was it his final game of chess, which he was prepared to lose, but played his socks off to win? Was their a hint of triumph in his "Well we did it!"? [or something to that effect]

Love,

Caz
X
Hi Caz,

Excellent points

Its a point that i cant recall hearing before that Parry would have been helping to draw attention to himself by talking about 21st birthdays after hed mentioned one in the phonecall! He could have said ‘on the occaision of her wedding’ for example. I dont think youre biased at all Caz but i know someone who would call me biased for saying so

As you said, Wallace needed the plan more than another suspect. Killing Julia on chess night would have done himself no favours. He needed to show that he’d been deliberately removed from the scene and sent on a wild goose chase.

I agree that if we looked elsewhere for a suspect then it might have been someone that we havent heard of. Someone from Julia’s (and possibly William’s) past with a motive that we are unaware of. The one thing we can be pretty certain of is that this in no way resembles a proper robbery. It was a murder.

Another point that ive raised recently Caz is that it seems a little strange that during the investigation William mentioned Parry as someone that Julia would have admitted to the house at night but he doesnt cast any direct suspicion against him. And yet after he was acquitted he became ‘convinced’ of his guilt even though no new evidence came out. Why?
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2438  
Old 05-17-2018, 05:29 AM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 636
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
Hi All,

Re the 21st birthday policy, was this something that would always have been set up on the young person's 'coming of age', back in the 1930s, or was it normally a policy set up at birth, with the maturity date being when the child reached 21? Could a policy have been set up at the age of 20, for example [as with the real Qualtrough's daughter], to pay out with interest a year later, on the 21st birthday?

I'm just trying to look at the options, but it does seem plausible that whoever made the Qualtrough call would have tried to weave fiction with fact to make it sound like a genuine request for Wallace's assistance. And with careful planning like that, Parry would have been an idiot to mention anyone's 21st party in his statement. So call me biased, but I think this again points more to Wallace as Qualtrough than anyone else.

I keep coming back to what any husband would absolutely need to put in place, before even thinking of carrying out the premeditated murder of his wife, if he had any hope at all of getting away with it. Wallace needed a "Qualtrough" more than any other potential suspect; Wallace needed a plausible alibi more than anyone else; Wallace needed a local bad boy with a robbery motive - someone exactly like Parry, who would arguably not have needed a forced entry; Wallace needed to conjure up reasonable doubt more than anyone else, which a convoluted scenario like this one could well provide. Once acquitted, it wouldn't matter if the police went after Parry or some other local ne'er-do-well and found they had rock solid alibis because Wallace could never be tried again.

If it wasn't Wallace, I'd be looking for someone in the couple's past, more probably Julia's past, with a secretly held grudge against one or both Wallaces, who found out enough information about their current lives to commit the crime and disappear back into obscurity, with nobody being any the wiser.

But even that seems a lot less likely than Wallace, with his own secretly held grudge, acting alone, in his home environment and in complete control, holding all the cards and all the info he needed to do what he ultimately did, and get away with murder. Not a well man anyway, with a limited time left to live, was it his final game of chess, which he was prepared to lose, but played his socks off to win? Was their a hint of triumph in his "Well we did it!"? [or something to that effect]

Love,

Caz
X
Hello Caz,

I think the only way Wallace could have been innocent is if the plan wasn't a plan at all, just a prank of sorts that the caller say Parry, decided to follow up on the next day to check if Wallace had taken the bait then casually visited Julia, while laughing inside at William, and something went wrong. Maybe he decided then and there to rob the cash box (so it wasn't planned) and got busted, then flipped out and smashed poor Julia's head in out of fear and rage at being caught. Of course, the crime scene as we know does not really seem to jibe with this. Maybe Julia mentioned the Qualtrough business and Parry hinted that he was behind it or laughed a bit and gave it away; Julia was not amused and threatened Parry somehow; he flipped out. This version of events does not seem likely though, does it? Again we are left with more questions than answers.

Any scenarios where the call was the 1st step in a purposeful unbroken chain of events, (in essence a plan), points away from anyone other than Wallace being behind it IMO because I think everyone here has done a good job at showing the unlikelihood of a robbery plan, and if anyone wanted to murder JW, Wallace would have to be the number 1 suspect by far, aside from as you suggest a mysterious person from the past which is possible, but also quite unlikely IMO. And even this person's behavior wouldn't seem to make much sense (why not go that Monday night when he knew Wallace was out after seeing him leave, vs. relying on such a strange and convoluted plan that may or may not pan out only to acheive the same exact set of circumstances the following night). In fact the Monday night would be better if such a person was convinced Wallace was headed to the club for chess, since he would be there for many hours, whereas who knows how long Wallace would be out the following night even if he went searching for the bogus address, he might give up at any stage after being told it didn't exist etc...

I think as ONEROUND hinted at, really the only way I could see Wallace as innocent is if this was some sort of weird prank where Parry and/or someone else did it to humiliate poor old fussy Wallace who might have contributed to getting them canned albeit 18 months prior, and then the following night decided to put a cherry on top and visit his clueless, friendly old wife and hear her talk about. Something goes wrong, Parry or a buddy who was involved hints at being behind the call and pranking old Wallace or decides then and there to take the collection money, JW loses it, threatens to tell Wallace, the cops etc. and gets brained for it.

Unfortunately for this theory, the crime scene doesn't really suit it, and it does little to resolve all the unlucky coincidences for Wallace and his own odd behavior which in my mind goes above and beyond simple odd, and "aspergery" and veers into the bizarre for an innocent man.

The whole Qualtrough plot really does seem like the slightly overcooked and cleverly contrived (although somewhat transparent) concoction of an older, self styled intellectual like Wallace much more than any other scenario, doesn't it?

I'm trying my best to come up with good alternate scenarios, but I would say Wallace's guilt remains a 90 to 95 percent or so likely proposition for me.

Not enough to convict--and certainly not enough for the death penalty (which I am for in principle but against in practice unless in cases where the guilt is beyond any doubt such as video recording or un-coerced confession) but certainly much more likely than not.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2439  
Old 05-17-2018, 05:58 AM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 636
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
Hi Caz,

Excellent points

Its a point that i cant recall hearing before that Parry would have been helping to draw attention to himself by talking about 21st birthdays after hed mentioned one in the phonecall! He could have said ‘on the occaision of her wedding’ for example. I dont think youre biased at all Caz but i know someone who would call me biased for saying so

As you said, Wallace needed the plan more than another suspect. Killing Julia on chess night would have done himself no favours. He needed to show that he’d been deliberately removed from the scene and sent on a wild goose chase.

I agree that if we looked elsewhere for a suspect then it might have been someone that we havent heard of. Someone from Julia’s (and possibly William’s) past with a motive that we are unaware of. The one thing we can be pretty certain of is that this in no way resembles a proper robbery. It was a murder.

Another point that ive raised recently Caz is that it seems a little strange that during the investigation William mentioned Parry as someone that Julia would have admitted to the house at night but he doesnt cast any direct suspicion against him. And yet after he was acquitted he became ‘convinced’ of his guilt even though no new evidence came out. Why?
Herlock,

yes I agree, this is the crucial point. The Qualtrough plot hurts anyone else who could have gone the same night with less fuss, but it helps only Wallace by introducing mystery and a bogus alternative suspect.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2440  
Old 05-17-2018, 07:21 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,254
Default

I wonder if Antony’s book will be out before Rod’s
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.