The One Similarity of the Bible John Murders

[Herlock Sholmes]

Can I say the discussion has been very adult and respectful. Well done all I think. A sensitive part of our research.
yes in a lot of ways more odd than JTR 5 I think. It makes you realise actually how similar murders the canonical 5 were.

The menstruation link in these ‘bible john’ murders and differing MO with the clothing is odd the say the least. Strange as Herlock puts it.

I am just wondering if the different ways the clothing is dealt with indicates an experimental process. You know sort of try slightly different things. Not sure if we can get our heads round this.

perhaps we are thinking too deep. Perhaps serial killers don't think as much about these things as much as we assume. Perhaps they just don't care and any similarities are overplayed.

lately i think we are being led down the path of possibly different killers in the Bible john case. Maybe we just need to keep returning to what we know. I think you fantastic researchers have a big chance with this one.

It’s possible NW. Who really knows how a mind like that might work? Perhaps it was his original intention to take the clothing until he realised the impracticalities when he actually did it with Docker.

The idea of more that one killer is definitely being suggested from some quarters but I just can’t see it. I think that it was the same man and I think that we have to consider the possibility that these three weren’t his only crimes?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Sherlock, only Patricia Docker was using a tampon, the other two victims appear to have been wearing towels.

I think that it is more than a coincidence that all three victims were menstruating at the time of their murder.

Is it possible that only finding out Patricia Docker was menstruating at the time of her murder acted as some kind of "trigger" for him?

You are correct in your assumption that towels were much bulkier in those days, and the killer could have become aware of this while dancing close with the Jemima MacDonald and Helen Puttock.

His taking away of the clothes, some of them bulky, is a very strange facet of the case.

I think that if we were looking at the murder of Pat Docker in isolation one alarm would perhaps be going off? One that said VEHICLE! We should always be wary of trying to think like a serial killer imo but it’s just so difficult to imagine someone carrying her clothing away with him. If he wanted a souvenir or two then you’d think that her handbag and watch would have been ideal - watch in pocket, handbag under the jacket or maybe one of those overcoats with big inside pockets? But he discards them - handbag found in the river and watch found in a puddle.

The taking of the clothing suggests perhaps that he might have had a bag with him?

Barn, haven’t you had the new book yet? Mine arrived on Thursday but as I’m on holiday they wouldn’t deliver it (it might have required a signature) so I have to go through the rigmarole when I get back. I thought that either you or MsD might have had your copies. That’s the problem with living in Scotland Barn. Those bloody Highwaymen.

[New Waterloo]

Can I say the discussion has been very adult and respectful. Well done all I think. A sensitive part of our research.
yes in a lot of ways more odd than JTR 5 I think. It makes you realise actually how similar murders the canonical 5 were.

The menstruation link in these ‘bible john’ murders and differing MO with the clothing is odd the say the least. Strange as Herlock puts it.

I am just wondering if the different ways the clothing is dealt with indicates an experimental process. You know sort of try slightly different things. Not sure if we can get our heads round this.

perhaps we are thinking too deep. Perhaps serial killers don't think as much about these things as much as we assume. Perhaps they just don't care and any similarities are overplayed.

lately i think we are being led down the path of possibly different killers in the Bible john case. Maybe we just need to keep returning to what we know. I think you fantastic researchers have a big chance with this one.

[barnflatwyngarde]

Sherlock, only Patricia Docker was using a tampon, the other two victims appear to have been wearing towels.

I think that it is more than a coincidence that all three victims were menstruating at the time of their murder.

Is it possible that only finding out Patricia Docker was menstruating at the time of her murder acted as some kind of "trigger" for him?

You are correct in your assumption that towels were much bulkier in those days, and the killer could have become aware of this while dancing close with the Jemima MacDonald and Helen Puttock.

His taking away of the clothes, some of them bulky, is a very strange facet of the case.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Herlock,, yes it's absolutely possible.

However none of the sanitary products that the three victims were using that were found in situ.

They had all been removed and were placed or thrown close by..

Also although only one of the victims was raped, it doesn't look like he saw the fact that the victims were menstruating as an impediment to sex.

Every damn question in this case leads to so many hypothetical scenarios.

Enjoy your holiday..

Thanks Barn. I’m down in Druitt country but the closest I’ll get to Druitt territory is yesterday when I was in Winchester. No sense of foreboding and evil as I strolled around though.

So to be clear, what you are pointing out is that the victims were using tampons as opposed to sanitary towels and as NW has pointed out, it might have been possible for a man to tell if a woman was using a sanitary towel during close dancing? And as they were using tampons BJ couldn’t have known beforehand that they were menstruating. So this eliminates any suggestion that he might have been the type that perhaps danced with a few women until he found his target type - a menstruating woman. So this gives us the possibility that the fact that they were menstruating was the trigger. The curious thing, as you point out, is that even the trigger didn’t discourage him from having sex.

A huge question for me is in regard to Pat Docker. The only one of the three not raped; the only one of the three naked and with clothes missing. Very strange imo.

[barnflatwyngarde]

Herlock,, yes it's absolutely possible.

However none of the sanitary products that the three victims were using that were found in situ.

They had all been removed and were placed or thrown close by..

Also although only one of the victims was raped, it doesn't look like he saw the fact that the victims were menstruating as an impediment to sex.

Every damn question in this case leads to so many hypothetical scenarios.

Enjoy your holiday..

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Ms D, yes you are right to highlight this possibility.

However, it was a bitterly cold February night and the attraction of having al fresco sex in a lane in a very busy suburb, where the lanes are extensively used as shortcuts doesn't seem likely to me.

Although, like so much in this case, we should keep all possible scenarios open.

Hi Barn,

Isnt possible that she might have said that she couldn’t have sex that night because….. Hence the rage?

[barnflatwyngarde]

Nice work, Barn!

Or alternatively he could have discovered she was menstruating if Patricia removed the tampon to facilitate intercourse.

Hi Ms D, yes you are right to highlight this possibility.

However, it was a bitterly cold February night and the attraction of having al fresco sex in a lane in a very busy suburb, where the lanes are extensively used as shortcuts doesn't seem likely to me.

Although, like so much in this case, we should keep all possible scenarios open.

[barnflatwyngarde]

Hi Barn

Sorry for sounding ignorant but was the tampon definitely Patricia's or could it just have been discarded there by someone else before the murder ?

Regards Darryl

Hi Darryl, official police records/notes as quoted in episode 2 of Audrey Gillan's podcast says that "A soiled Tampax sanitary towel was found near the body."

Bearing in mind that the killers next two victims were also menstruating, I think that it is highly likely that it was Patricia Docker's.

It is one of the main planks of any writings on the murders that all three victims were menstruating, and I assume that the post mortem would have confirmed this and tests carried out to see if the tampon could in fact be tied to Patricia.

But, as I have often lamented to Herlock, there is just very little official documentation available relating to the case.

The new book by Jillian Bavin-Mizzi promises lots of references and an extensive bibliography.
Her earlier book " The Wanda Beach Killer" does have extensive references and a full bibliography, so hopefully the new book will list resources and official documents.

[Ms Diddles]

I thought that the content of this post needed it's own thread, because I think that what I am about to say is important, and clarifies a
major error in most of the books and articles dealing with the murder of Patricia Docker, the killer's first victim.

On the "Other Mysteries" section I created a thread entitled "Another Piece of Evidence Linking John McInnes to the Bible John Murders".
In post #91, I noted that there was conflicting evidence as to whether Patricia Docker was wearing a sanitary towel or a Tampax when she was killed.

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/social-chat/other-mysteries/800518-another-piece-of-evidence-linking-john-mcinnes-to-the-bible-john-murders/page7#post837710

(All the killer's victims were menstruating at the time of their death)

In her excellent podcast "Bible John: Creation of a Serial Killer", Audrey Gillan states that the item was a Tampax tampon, not a Tampax sanitary towel, while every other reference to the case that I have seen refer to a sanitary towel that was found close to the body.

I thought that it was important to clarify this point, and to that end I contacted the parent company Procter and Gamble to ask if they produced sanitary towels for sale in the UK in the 1960's.

They replied back stating that they did not produce sanitary towels in the 1960's.

Therefore Audrey Gillan was correct in her assertion that it was a tampon that was found close to Patricia Docker's body.

This is important, because it means that in all likelihood, the killer did not know Patricia was menstruating until he stripped her body.

Nice work, Barn!

Or alternatively he could have discovered she was menstruating if Patricia removed the tampon to facilitate intercourse.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Hi Barn

Sorry for sounding ignorant but was the tampon definitely Patricia's or could it just have been discarded there by someone else before the murder ?

Regards Darryl

[barnflatwyngarde]

I thought that the content of this post needed it's own thread, because I think that what I am about to say is important, and clarifies a
major error in most of the books and articles dealing with the murder of Patricia Docker, the killer's first victim.

On the "Other Mysteries" section I created a thread entitled "Another Piece of Evidence Linking John McInnes to the Bible John Murders".
In post #91, I noted that there was conflicting evidence as to whether Patricia Docker was wearing a sanitary towel or a Tampax when she was killed.

https://forum.casebook.org/forum/social-chat/other-mysteries/800518-another-piece-of-evidence-linking-john-mcinnes-to-the-bible-john-murders/page7#post837710

(All the killer's victims were menstruating at the time of their death)

In her excellent podcast "Bible John: Creation of a Serial Killer", Audrey Gillan states that the item was a Tampax tampon, not a Tampax sanitary towel, while every other reference to the case that I have seen refer to a sanitary towel that was found close to the body.

I thought that it was important to clarify this point, and to that end I contacted the parent company Procter and Gamble to ask if they produced sanitary towels for sale in the UK in the 1960's.

They replied back stating that they did not produce sanitary towels in the 1960's.

Therefore Audrey Gillan was correct in her assertion that it was a tampon that was found close to Patricia Docker's body.

This is important, because it means that in all likelihood, the killer did not know Patricia was menstruating until he stripped her body.