Ged, I think first of all there was obviously an ingenious plot at play here...complete with the Qualtrough call etc. I think it is plainly clear by now that Parry made that call...the question is did Wallace put him up to it?
div>
The only two options seem to be either Wallace is guilty or Parry is guilty...(well he's guilty in either scenario but I mean of murder.) To accept Wallace's innocence..one must them assume Parry set this whole thing up....as a botched robbery? As Mark has pointed out I think before...it was not a very profitable loot and I can't remember the specifics but something about Wallace's sickness and not having a lot of money on that particular night...something Parry probably knew about...even if he didn't...to go to all that trouble to rob Wallace? After Wallace had fingered him for dishonesty already?
No, if we think Parry is guilty then we are saying he is guilty of premeditated murder, the perfect crime...with nothing but a fiendish, bizarre revenge at a terrible personal risk to him. Parry strikes me as a con-man type and a low level ladies man hustler. I cannot believe he set this whole thing up and killed poor Julia Wallace...and hoped to frame William. Surely he must have known he would face considerable suspicion and that Wallace would finger him...no Parry did not conceive of this plot or do this murder.
Like I said....I'm not at the point where I'm ready to convict...the jury is still out....but I do not have a good feeling about Wallace. And I believed for many years he was innocent.
just wanted to add that I watched Man from the Pru for the first time last night...pretty good performances by Wallace and Parry actors. Of course your heart breaks for Wallace in the movie as it strongly suggests at Parry's guilt. The score is quite good.
Bookmarks