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:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Ben 3 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Abby Normal 5 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Abby Normal 5 hours ago.
Ripper Notes: Status of Ripper Notes? - by C. F. Leon 9 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by rjpalmer 10 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Ben 11 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (11 posts)
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - (2 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (2 posts)
Ripper Notes: Status of Ripper Notes? - (1 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
  #2041  
Old 03-12-2018, 05:16 PM
RodCrosby RodCrosby is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: near Liverpool, UK
Posts: 315
Default

The word is probative, and your assertions are, as usual, wrong.

Close enough to home? On the outskirts of Liverpool, only a few months ago.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...neighbour.html

Tell me again about "exceedingly rare"...
__________________
"I make a point of never having any prejudices, and of following docilely where fact may lead me."

Sherlock Holmes, in The Adventure of The Reigate Squires
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2042  
Old 03-12-2018, 05:18 PM
AmericanSherlock AmericanSherlock is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RodCrosby View Post
The word is probative, and your assertions are, as usual, wrong.

Close enough to home? On the outskirts of Liverpool, only a few months ago.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...neighbour.html

Tell me again about "exceedingly rare"...
I know what word you meant, and I wrote the word I meant.

One example does not a rule make.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2043  
Old 03-12-2018, 05:56 PM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RodCrosby View Post
The Correct Solution explains:-

a) the crime plan: why the Tuesday not the Monday, why that particular Tuesday, why that phone box, why 'Qualtrough', why the '21st birthday'.
b) the crime scene: why the replaced cash-box, why the coins, why the mac' and why the missing weapon.
c) Parry's statements: his lies and evasions about his movements on both the Monday and Tuesday nights, yet an unimpeachable alibi for the time of the crime.
d) Parkes's testimony: Parry's lack of blood, the 'glove' that was really a mitten, the subsequent 'visitation' by Parry and A.N. Other.

Therefore, I have solved the Wallace case.
Only to your own satisfaction Rod and I’m afraid that that’s simply not good enough.

Every statement above can be argued against. For eg. Why replace the cashbox? Because Wallace made an error by force of habit whilst setting the scene to look like the murder was a robbery by the mysterious Qualtrough.

Why is it that you can’t except that someone who wasn’t guilty, but might become a suspect, might lie about his alibi? Yet you can accept without a problem the fact that the plan was full of holes?

Who do we rely upon for the proof of the ‘visitation’ and are they beyond reproach as witnesses.

The crime didn’t have to happen on Tuesday. It’s just a suggestion of yours to make the scenario fit.

Parry’s lack Of blood - he wasn’t involved.

Why the Mac - used by Wallace to shield himself from blood spatter.

Nowhere near solved.
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2044  
Old 03-13-2018, 02:22 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,307
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
It's not a canard Rod. By coming up with a plan we can say that the culprit had given it some thought. Getting Wallace out of the house, getting Mr X admitted to the house knowing of Julia's reluctance to let people in that she didn't know. And let's remember that you'd said that it was a meticulous plan (I can't recall your exact words but that was the gist.) So on one hand we have a meticulous planner but on the other we have someone completely oblivious to or unconcerned about childishly obvious things that could scupper the plan at the outset. You can't have your cake and eat it.

In addition, and you'll have to forgive my memory, when it's been mentioned in the past that Parry could have committed the crime at any other time without a Qualtrough plan and when there was more cash in the house, didn't you give some kind of reason why it had to be that night? If that was indeed the case then your 'sometimes plans just fail...' doesn't really hold up.
Morning All,

This was my point recently. For some reason, whoever committed this horrible crime planned for it to happen on the Tuesday night. Everything hinged on whether Wallace would take the bait. And boy, did he take it.

The plan didn't work out very well if it was all about gaining a few lousy quid - hardly diamonds, as in Rod's example - and if murder hadn't been on the agenda.

But it could hardly fail with Wallace in the driving seat, and murder on his mind. He'd instantly know on arrival at the chess club whether his "Qualtrough" message would be given to him, along with the green light for Tuesday night. Nobody else would be around to scupper his plan - although the milk boy came close [Close - sorry!] by being much later than usual. If Wallace knew his kidney troubles would carry him off, painfully, before too long, the risk of the hangman's noose may not have put him off. He knew he could do the deed, but could he get away with it? Yes, if the jury thought there was reasonable doubt that he could have done it in the time available, and that's precisely what would have spurred him on to act as quickly as possible once he was alone again with Julia, and then get the hell out of the house and put himself about so there would be plenty of witnesses to his earnest attempt to make his own bogus appointment.

As we know from the cases featured in the BBC's recent series, Murder, Mystery and My Family, there would not necessarily have been much blood on him to worry about, despite what was around the room itself, and time of death is recognised today as being almost impossible to pinpoint accurately by science alone, which relies heavily on other known factors, like last sightings, but not so much on stomach contents, which can be highly misleading.

Love,

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



Last edited by caz : 03-13-2018 at 02:27 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2045  
Old 03-13-2018, 02:42 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Devon UK
Posts: 6,307
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
I remember that too AS. He certainly couldn’t have chosen a worse place to get his car cleaned or a worse person to spill his guts too.

He could certainly have cleaned the car himself. Rod says ‘in the dark’ but Parry would have no reason to believe that he would be suspected that night. He wouldn’t have been expecting a visit therefore. He could have done a clean as best he could then double checked in the morning.

Rod has again called it an ‘ingenious’ plan! But it’s a plan that relies on too many things not to go wrong. Then Parry chooses the worst possible place to get his car cleaned and blabs to someone that doesn’t like him! These are the actions of an idiot.
Hi HS,

If the whole point would have been to get any blood cleaned off the car, in the immediate wake of a murder that will shortly make all the headlines for its brutality, would it make any sense at all to get someone else to do it for you? Whether the chap hates your guts or thinks you're a decent enough cove, you'd have to be off your chump to risk it. If that is Rod's argument, that Parry was really that stupid, how did he think up the Qualtrough plan and manage to avoid the hangman?

Love,

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


Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2046  
Old 03-13-2018, 05:28 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
Hi HS,

If the whole point would have been to get any blood cleaned off the car, in the immediate wake of a murder that will shortly make all the headlines for its brutality, would it make any sense at all to get someone else to do it for you? Whether the chap hates your guts or thinks you're a decent enough cove, you'd have to be off your chump to risk it. If that is Rod's argument, that Parry was really that stupid, how did he think up the Qualtrough plan and manage to avoid the hangman?

Love,

Caz
X
Hi Caz,

Rod says that criminals often slip up under the pressure of the situation. This is undoubtedly true. They might leave something at the crime scene or let a word or two slip out that might cause suspicion or simply behave suspiciously in the aftermath due to nerves. That said, I find it bordering impossible that Parkes would have been stupid enough to have taken his car to be cleaned at a garage where he was known, mistrusted and disliked. And then to cap it all, with no prompting, he spills the beans to someone who doesn’t like him. Even to the point of telling him where he’s dumped the murder weapon. I also can’t fail to notice that Party didnt mention a mysterious co-conspirator.
The car wouldn’t have been ‘drenched’ in blood. There was no DNA at that time. He could easily have cleaned it himself. Indeed if Parry had planned this crime surely he’d have factored in cleaning the car. If so he would have surely realised the suicidal stupidity of taking it to Parkes.
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2047  
Old 03-13-2018, 05:43 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,504
Default

Creating a co-conspirator to facilitate a scenario is all well and good but it also means that others can do the same. And so...

We have Wallace wanting rid of his wife (remembering the nurse, the doctor, the servant and the colleague who all said that the Wallace’s marriage wasn’t the happy one that everyone thought.)

He has a client that’s behind in his payments. He gets talking to him. He’s also in arrears with his rent. He’s unemployed (maybe a criminal conviction causes difficulties?) He even tells Wallace that his wife might leave him. Wallace gradually tests the water and finds that ( for a payment) the man is a willing co-conspirator. Wallace is confident that the man won’t go to the police afterwards due to his (even peripheral) involvement. Wallace might even tell him that if he tries going to the police he’ll point the finger at him (telling them of his debts, his conviction, perhaps he might even say “I remember him asking me what nights I played chess!)

He gets ‘Mr Q’ to make the phonecall.

Then on the evening of the murder (while Wallace kills Julia, cleans up and attempts to set up a bungled robbery scene) ‘Mr Q’ waits in the alley for Wallace to leave. As he does Wallace hands him a parcel or a bag containing an iron bar which he takes away and disposes of.

Off Wallace goes in search of the mythical MGE.

I’d call this my ‘ Possibly Correct Solution.’ All I’ve done is invent a co-conspirator
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

Last edited by Herlock Sholmes : 03-13-2018 at 05:47 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2048  
Old 03-13-2018, 06:08 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,504
Default

And of course the ‘Alternative Possibly Correct Solution’ would be that Wallace simply paid ‘Mr Q’ to kill his wife for cash.
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2049  
Old 03-13-2018, 06:10 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,504
Default

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

Rod says that criminals often slip up under the pressure of the situation. This is undoubtedly true. They might leave something at the crime scene or let a word or two slip out that might cause suspicion or simply behave suspiciously in the aftermath due to nerves. That said, I find it bordering impossible that Parkes would have been stupid enough to have taken his car to be cleaned at a garage where he was known, mistrusted and disliked. And then to cap it all, with no prompting, he spills the beans to someone who doesn’t like him. Even to the point of telling him where he’s dumped the murder weapon. I also can’t fail to notice that Party didnt mention a mysterious co-conspirator.
The car wouldn’t have been ‘drenched’ in blood. There was no DNA at that time. He could easily have cleaned it himself. Indeed if Parry had planned this crime surely he’d have factored in cleaning the car. If so he would have surely realised the suicidal stupidity of taking it to Parkes.
Bloody predictive text! Obviously that should read Parry and not Party.
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2050  
Old 03-13-2018, 08:27 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,504
Default

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

Rod says that criminals often slip up under the pressure of the situation. This is undoubtedly true. They might leave something at the crime scene or let a word or two slip out that might cause suspicion or simply behave suspiciously in the aftermath due to nerves. That said, I find it bordering impossible that Parkes would have been stupid enough to have taken his car to be cleaned at a garage where he was known, mistrusted and disliked. And then to cap it all, with no prompting, he spills the beans to someone who doesn’t like him. Even to the point of telling him where he’s dumped the murder weapon. I also can’t fail to notice that Party didnt mention a mysterious co-conspirator.
The car wouldn’t have been ‘drenched’ in blood. There was no DNA at that time. He could easily have cleaned it himself. Indeed if Parry had planned this crime surely he’d have factored in cleaning the car. If so he would have surely realised the suicidal stupidity of taking it to Parkes.
Should be Parry of course
__________________
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 05:04 AM.


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