Bible John: A New Suspect by Jill Bavin-Mizzi

[Herlock Sholmes]

From the Helen Puttock episode Barn.


At 5.12 it sounds like AG says “pretty Scottish people” but that surely cant be right?

At 6.40 it sounds like AG says “I found Margaret work” ?

At 7.30 Margaret says something that sounds like “well I went there in 1830.”

At 21.05 what is the word Jeannie uses before ‘mesmerised’?

[barnflatwyngarde]

From the Helen Puttock episode Barn.


At 5.12 it sounds like AG says “pretty Scottish people” but that surely cant be right?

At 6.40 it sounds like AG says “I found Margaret work” ?

At 7.30 Margaret says something that sounds like “well I went there in 1830.”

At 21.05 what is the word Jeannie uses before ‘mesmerised’?

5.12 "scones, pancakes for tea..."

6.40 It sounds like "I found Margaret work".

7.30 "I went to her 18th birthday".

21.05 " I was staunin' (standing) mesmerised.

[Herlock Sholmes]

5.12 "scones, pancakes for tea..."

6.40 It sounds like "I found Margaret work".

7.30 "I went to her 18th birthday".

21.05 " I was staunin' (standing) mesmerised.

Cheers Barn.

[cobalt]

The photo Barn uploaded of Jemima MacDonald is very poignant. The standard photo of Jemima which we all know is hardly flattering but this one shows the obviously genuine love of a mother for her child. A precious thing and heightened by the rather sparse, spartan backdrop which lies in the background behind her and her daughter. Maybe if Beattie and his team had access to this photo they would have approached the investigation in a better way.

Still on the matter of perception, I do wonder about the validity of the Lennox Patterson portrait which history has judged as too mannered and specific to elicit a valuable response. I'm not doubting Patterson's technical ability and we have to remember that Jeannie was very impressed with the final result. But the BJ as sketched by Patterson looks a far more benign presence than the other more hardline mugshots produced at the time. He looks more like a Music Teacher at Hyndland Academy than a killer, whereas the earlier photofits show a more realistic 'street' face.

Having said that I don't doubt that the investigation encountered Bible John at some point, but unfortunately they failed to nail him. He could hardly have escaped the myriad of names being supplied to the police at the time. Yet rather like Sutcliffe, no one ever quite joined the dots. In the Yorkshire Ripper Case they knew Peter Sutcliffe's blood group, his appearance (which he never changed), his shoe size, his make of shoe, his gap tooth, and had a fair idea he was a lorry driver and they even had a fix on where he probably worked due to a new bank note discovered on a victim. His car was seen cruising countless times in Red Light areas yet when arrested he was not even in the top 100 suspects! Despite being interviewed 9 times at least.

I think BJ comes into a similar category. He was traced, interviewed, and mistakenly eliminated. I'm not saying BJ was either McInnes or Templeton but the police must have let him slip through their fingers. The public did their job: the police didn't.

[barnflatwyngarde]

Had another go at upscaling the image of Joe Beattie with lots of BJ photofits behind him.

[barnflatwyngarde]

Nope!

Still can't seem to get the pivture large enough, although it looks great on my laptop.

Doh!

[Geddy2112]

[barnflatwyngarde]

Well done Geddy.
I don't know what I was doing wrong, but I was doing it consistently.

[Geddy2112]

Well done Geddy.
I don't know what I was doing wrong, but I was doing it consistently.

Hehe, no worries, I actually uploaded the wrong one, here is the correct version for those eagle-eye readers

[barnflatwyngarde]

Hehe, no worries, I actually uploaded the wrong one, here is the correct version for those eagle-eye readers

Nice one!

No wonder Joe Beattie screwed it up.

[Herlock Sholmes]

From the podcast Bonus Episode: Jeannie:

“After it happened they took me to the police officer in Glasgow and I walked in and I looked and you have no idea the sensation I got inside me when I looked at this other poster. Not the one they had in Barrowland. It was this other one. I went like, that is definitely him. There’s a resemblance there. It was the very first photo they must have got off some of the witnesses from the other cases. It wasn’t him but the resemblance was there. It was good enough to make me feel sick. You don’t get that in your gut. But they says, no, you can’t connect it. He either disappeared or he had a good alibi and somebody covered up for him.”


The Patterson portrait was based on a description from Jeannie as she had definitely seen the man known as Bible John and at close quarters and yet here she is saying that the poster that was the one that she felt stood out out to her as resembling the real Bible John was one that the police “must have got off some of the witnesses from the other cases.” So not the Patterson portrait?

I find this curious to say the least. Why would she think that a picture of Bible John was more accurate than the one that was done with her input? And why did the police say that the man in the picture couldn’t have been the guilty man?

[barnflatwyngarde]

From the podcast Bonus Episode: Jeannie:

“After it happened they took me to the police officer in Glasgow and I walked in and I looked and you have no idea the sensation I got inside me when I looked at this other poster. Not the one they had in Barrowland. It was this other one. I went like, that is definitely him. There’s a resemblance there. It was the very first photo they must have got off some of the witnesses from the other cases. It wasn’t him but the resemblance was there. It was good enough to make me feel sick. You don’t get that in your gut. But they says, no, you can’t connect it. He either disappeared or he had a good alibi and somebody covered up for him.”


The Patterson portrait was based on a description from Jeannie as she had definitely seen the man known as Bible John and at close quarters and yet here she is saying that the poster that was the one that she felt stood out out to her as resembling the real Bible John was one that the police “must have got off some of the witnesses from the other cases.” So not the Patterson portrait?

I find this curious to say the least. Why would she think that a picture of Bible John was more accurate than the one that was done with her input? And why did the police say that the man in the picture couldn’t have been the guilty man?

Hi Herlock,
Lennox Patterson gave an interview to the Daily Record of 5th December 1969.
It is not a huge article, but the salient points are interesting.


Artist Lennox Patterson has just completed his most unusual work, commissioned by the police.

Millions of people have seen the thousands of copies which have heen made of the portrait, for it could be playing an important part in a murder hunt.

The subject of the portrait is a man the police want to interview in connection with the murder of Mrs Helen Puttock, found dead near her home in Scotstoun, Glasgow.

Mr Patterson, deputy director and registrar at Glasgow Art College, also worked on the first artist's impression ever issued by police in Scotland.

It was a drawing of a man wanted for questioning in connection with the murder of Jemima McDonald, whо was found strangled near ner home in Bridgeton earlier this year.

Mr Patterson told us: "The police contacted me and asked if I could attempt a drawing from descriptions after the first murder".

"Two witnesses gave me as much detail as they could, but people don't really remember facial features accurately unless they are very familiar with a person.
I just had to work on a general feeling of what the man was like and the witnesses seemed to think the result was accurate.
I think this was really luck".

For the second murder Mr Patterson had more detail for the painting of "Bible John" -the man the police want to question.

He said: "I'm sure I must be unpopular with a lot of innocent people who look like the man in the portrait but this is inevitable".

Mr Patterson who was a student at Glasgow Art College and has taught ther for 23 years. doesn't normally paint portraits.

He said: "I paint landscapes mainly-when I have enough free time".

"I only do portraits of people I know really well-but this latest portrait, I must emphasise, is an exception".

Patterson is saying that after the Patricia Docker murder, two witnesses helped him in compiling the first photofit.

After Jemima MacDonald's murder, Patterson had "more detail" to work with, presumably from witnesses who saw Jemima with a man, either in the Barrowland or on the short walk to MacKeith street.

What Patterson seems to be saying is that he was involved in the creation of three portraits of Bible John.
One after the murder of Patricia Docker, one after the murder of Jemima MacDonald, and another portrait created with the help of Jeannie Langford.

Jeannie seems to be saying that she was more impressed with one of the first two Patterson portraits of Bible John.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,
Lennox Patterson gave an interview to the Daily Record of 5th December 1969.
It is not a huge article, but the salient points are interesting.


Artist Lennox Patterson has just completed his most unusual work, commissioned by the police.

Millions of people have seen the thousands of copies which have heen made of the portrait, for it could be playing an important part in a murder hunt.

The subject of the portrait is a man the police want to interview in connection with the murder of Mrs Helen Puttock, found dead near her home in Scotstoun, Glasgow.

Mr Patterson, deputy director and registrar at Glasgow Art College, also worked on the first artist's impression ever issued by police in Scotland.

It was a drawing of a man wanted for questioning in connection with the murder of Jemima McDonald, whо was found strangled near ner home in Bridgeton earlier this year.

Mr Patterson told us: "The police contacted me and asked if I could attempt a drawing from descriptions after the first murder".

"Two witnesses gave me as much detail as they could, but people don't really remember facial features accurately unless they are very familiar with a person.
I just had to work on a general feeling of what the man was like and the witnesses seemed to think the result was accurate.
I think this was really luck".

For the second murder Mr Patterson had more detail for the painting of "Bible John" -the man the police want to question.

He said: "I'm sure I must be unpopular with a lot of innocent people who look like the man in the portrait but this is inevitable".

Mr Patterson who was a student at Glasgow Art College and has taught ther for 23 years. doesn't normally paint portraits.

He said: "I paint landscapes mainly-when I have enough free time".

"I only do portraits of people I know really well-but this latest portrait, I must emphasise, is an exception".

Patterson is saying that after the Patricia Docker murder, two witnesses helped him in compiling the first photofit.

After Jemima MacDonald's murder, Patterson had "more detail" to work with, presumably from witnesses who saw Jemima with a man, either in the Barrowland or on the short walk to MacKeith street.

What Patterson seems to be saying is that he was involved in the creation of three portraits of Bible John.
One after the murder of Patricia Docker, one after the murder of Jemima MacDonald, and another portrait created with the help of Jeannie Langford.

Jeannie seems to be saying that she was more impressed with one of the first two Patterson portraits of Bible John.

Thanks for posting that Barn. It does seem a little strange to say the least. When she says that it wasn’t the one that they had in the Barrowland I’d assumed that she meant the photo fit but surely they would have put any drawing that Patterson had done up too so why hadn’t Jeannie seen it as she was a regular visitor? Then we have the question of Jeannie saying that the police told her that it couldn’t have been the man. How could this be the case if it was just a generic face produced by Patterson? If they had rejected a certain picture doesn’t that mean that it was of a specific man?

[cobalt]

There is a lot of ambiguity in both Jeannie's oral account and the article about Lennox Patterson.

I don't think Patterson was asked to do a sketch after the Pat Docker murder; when he talks about the 'first' murder I think he is referring to the killing of Jemima MacDonald, which was the first time he was approached. Thus the 'second' murder is probably a reference to the murder of Helen Puttock.

Jeannie contradicts herself regarding the poster she saw inside the police station. First of she says it is definitely him, then she says it is not him but you can see the resemblance. A bit of a muddle but what seems clear is that the Patterson sketch done in respect of the Jemima MacDonald murder was, from Jeannie's point of view, pretty accurate. What we can't know is how much Jeannie's memory of the poster influenced the description she gave to Patterson when the portrait was done.

Maybe that is what the police were trying to avoid when they told her not to pay any attention to the poster on the wall. Because as HS points out, they cannot have discounted a suspect on the basis of a generic sketch.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Surely if a poster is up on a police wall then the person in said poster must still be connected to the case in some way? Otherwise they would take the photofit/portrait down? Or am I missing something Regards Darryl