Bible John: A New Suspect by Jill Bavin-Mizzi

[cobalt]

I'm not dismissing Templeton as a suspect and when I said there will never be any DNA proof I was thinking in terms of legal proof. Unless a sample can be taken from his person then I do not think that any other DNA is admissible evidence in court. If there was DNA from a uniform jacket he left in the Mitchell Library locker, one that could be definitely be connected solely to Templeton, that might be a grey area legally I imagine. But I doubt the locker was 'retired' in honour of his service so there must be various mixtures of DNA that have accumulated inside it since over the years. So it's really a dead end even if the Helen Puttock sample is still usable.

I think the JBM theory has been strengthened by contributions on this site. Ms Diddles' geographic knowledge of Glasgow has been really helpful and how many murder mystery sites have a contributor like Barn who actually knew and spoke to a leading suspect! His recollection of Templeton's manner and dress certainly fits with much of the testimony from Jeannie Langford, the main witness.

Interestingly, the photofit pictures behind Joe Beattie (one of which actually resembles him!) are as a group distinct from the iconic portrait that is placed high to the right. They show harder looking faces often with a widow's peak hairline (bar one which has a Beatles fringe) that I would imagine was more representative of the average looking guy who attended the Barrowland for an over 25s night. They veer more towards McInnes than Templeton, although you might argue the reverse applies with the Lennox Paterson sketch. Barn and I have have listed a number of witnesses whose testimony would be helpful: I wonder what their view of the portrait was? I know Jeannie was very satisfied but I can't be alone in seeing the portrait as rather rosy cheeked and idealised; the more photographic impressions and e-fits retain a more authentic look.

I think one common feature of the witness statements was the colour of BJ's hair as remembered on the nights of both the Jemima McDonald and Helen Puttock murders. Described as 'reddish' or 'sandy' or 'light brown,' it does not point to Templeton I don't think.

[Herlock Sholmes]

saw deep purple with yes in concert last summer lol. Ian Gillan still has pipes!!

Yeah he’s still got a great voice Abby. He can’t shatter a glass at 100 yards like he used to but hey..he’s 80 in August.

I love Yes too but I much prefer them with Jon Anderson.

[barnflatwyngarde]

saw deep purple with yes in concert last summer lol. Ian Gillan still has pipes!!

Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.

[Abby Normal]

The only other Gillan that I know is the lead singer of Deep Purple.

saw deep purple with yes in concert last summer lol. Ian Gillan still has pipes!!

[barnflatwyngarde]

Frustrating isn't it?

You wanna go check it out?

You can shin up the drainpipe and climb in the bathroom window.

I'll keep a lookout and drive the getaway car!

I'm sorely tempted Ms D.

Am I right in thinking that somewhere in police files relating to the case, there will be an "index" of all the evidence, statements, forensics etc?

If there is, then it would be easy to ascertain if any evidence is missing by matching each entry in the index to the actual statement/evidence.

[Ms Diddles]

Cobalt is right in saying that there must be a mountain of evidence stored in Police Scotland somewhere, probaly Glasgow HQ, or possibly still in Partick station.

Frustrating isn't it?

You wanna go check it out?

You can shin up the drainpipe and climb in the bathroom window.

I'll keep a lookout and drive the getaway car!

[Herlock Sholmes]

Cobalt is right in saying that there must be a mountain of evidence stored in Police Scotland somewhere, probaly Glasgow HQ, or possibly still in Partick station.

His summation of statements that must be in the police files is pretty comprehensive, however there are two other important witnesses who are rarely mentioned.

On page 40 of "Bible John: Search for a Sadist", Charles Stoddart refers to "a boy" who saw Jemima MacDonald and a man "sitting in a pub", and "a girl" who saw them sitting on a settee in the Barrowland.

No names are given for these two witnesses, but presumably their statements and names are in the police files.

Jeannie Langford is clearly the person wo saw most of Bible John, as did "Castlemilk John".
So her description of the killer carries some evidential weight, but what about all the other people who saw Bible John?

As cobalt points out the list is extensive; the Barrowland manager, The Barrowland bouncers, Taxi driver Alex Hannah, the boy who saw the killer with Jemima, the girl who saw the killer with Jemima, unnamed witness(es) who saw Jemima in the company of a man in Bain Street and in London Road, there may be others that we don't know about.

We know that Lennox Paterson relied heavily on Jeannie Langford, what we don't know is whether any of the other witnesses had an input.

We can safely assume, I think, that these other witnesses did in fact provide statements which led to photfits being produced.
The photograph which shows Joe Beattie in the incident room shows seven different photofits/artist impressions.

The witness statements which went along with these photofits would surely be fascinating reading.

Absolutely Barn. Then there was the cold case investigation too (mentioned in the podcast) They would have had access to all of that evidence.

[barnflatwyngarde]

Agreed!

To flip it, if it was Templeton then the Moylan's card is a hell of a coincidence too.

But one or the other IS a red herring (unless they were both BJ obviously!!)

Cease and desist Ms D!

This case is tricky enough without trying to get our heads round a pair of killers.

By the way, I agree with you re the geography of the city areas relating to Templeton and the man seen getting off the bus.

[barnflatwyngarde]

Cobalt is right in saying that there must be a mountain of evidence stored in Police Scotland somewhere, probaly Glasgow HQ, or possibly still in Partick station.

His summation of statements that must be in the police files is pretty comprehensive, however there are two other important witnesses who are rarely mentioned.

On page 40 of "Bible John: Search for a Sadist", Charles Stoddart refers to "a boy" who saw Jemima MacDonald and a man "sitting in a pub", and "a girl" who saw them sitting on a settee in the Barrowland.

No names are given for these two witnesses, but presumably their statements and names are in the police files.

Jeannie Langford is clearly the person wo saw most of Bible John, as did "Castlemilk John".
So her description of the killer carries some evidential weight, but what about all the other people who saw Bible John?

As cobalt points out the list is extensive; the Barrowland manager, The Barrowland bouncers, Taxi driver Alex Hannah, the boy who saw the killer with Jemima, the girl who saw the killer with Jemima, unnamed witness(es) who saw Jemima in the company of a man in Bain Street and in London Road, there may be others that we don't know about.

We know that Lennox Paterson relied heavily on Jeannie Langford, what we don't know is whether any of the other witnesses had an input.

We can safely assume, I think, that these other witnesses did in fact provide statements which led to photfits being produced.
The photograph which shows Joe Beattie in the incident room shows seven different photofits/artist impressions.

The witness statements which went along with these photofits would surely be fascinating reading.

[Ms Diddles]

It’s well and truly open as far as I’m concerned Ms D. All of Cobalt’s points are valid. It’s a head-scratcher. I know that it’s not the ‘be all and end all’ of the Templeton discussion but I just can’t help thinking “after all of that research what are the chances of finally zeroing in on a guy and discovering that he looks more like the Patterson portrait than McInnes’s does?”

Agreed!

To flip it, if it was Templeton then the Moylan's card is a hell of a coincidence too.

But one or the other IS a red herring (unless they were both BJ obviously!!)

[Herlock Sholmes]

Yep!

That's where I'm at with this.

I suppose I'm instinctively quite taken with this theory as

1) I'm in Glasgow and the geography and cultural references of Templeton as BJ make perfect sense. It feels right to me.

2) I was impressed by the unforced way that the pieces of the puzzle (ie the possible coincidences you list above) fell into place for Jill without any of the usual shoe-horning and cherry-picking.

That said, Cobalt's points above are all valid. I would not be confident enough to dismiss McInnes either.

It really comes down to what the truth is about the DNA.

Either way it's been fascinating to see a new suspect theory that is being given serious consideration on here, and hasn't immediately been torn to shreds.

It’s well and truly open as far as I’m concerned Ms D. All of Cobalt’s points are valid. It’s a head-scratcher. I know that it’s not the ‘be all and end all’ of the Templeton discussion but I just can’t help thinking “after all of that research what are the chances of finally zeroing in on a guy and discovering that he looks more like the Patterson portrait than McInnes’s does?”

[Ms Diddles]

I agree and accept the points made by Cobalt. There are some things that we can’t know but I’d certainly love to know a statistical answer on this (probably impossible to work out even for someone expert in those kind of statistics.) What I mean is…what are the actual statistical chances of finding a Templeton going back those few generations down the McInnes line. Then what are the chances of the guy growing up in right area..being fostered..having just a sister (albeit a foster sister)….living just a short walk from the stop where Night Bus Man got off……and he looks about as close in looks to the portrait that Jeannie said was spot on as possible.

I’m not saying that Templeton was the man and I’m not averse to accepting coincidences but…..this one does seem a little….remarkable? Maybe I’m exaggerating but I’m unsure. I certainly don’t dismiss McInnes yet though.

Yep!

That's where I'm at with this.

I suppose I'm instinctively quite taken with this theory as

1) I'm in Glasgow and the geography and cultural references of Templeton as BJ make perfect sense. It feels right to me.

2) I was impressed by the unforced way that the pieces of the puzzle (ie the possible coincidences you list above) fell into place for Jill without any of the usual shoe-horning and cherry-picking.

That said, Cobalt's points above are all valid. I would not be confident enough to dismiss McInnes either.

It really comes down to what the truth is about the DNA.

Either way it's been fascinating to see a new suspect theory that is being given serious consideration on here, and hasn't immediately been torn to shreds.

[Ms Diddles]

So, to sum up. JBM has put all her faith in a DNA theory that, flying in the face of her scientific approach, can never be scientifically proven.

Hi Cobalt,

Are you 100% certain that this is the case?

I myself am not.

I've made no bones about the fact that I'm struggling to get my head around the DNA in this case.

Was the sample from Helen Puttock's stockings definitely so degraded / contaminated as to be of no use?

Why did the police state that it had ruled out McInnes if this wasn't the case?

I can't help but think that if the police bothered to swab Templeton's old locker in the Mitchell Library that they felt it worthwhile to do so.

To be clear, I'm not saying definitively that a hit with Templeton's living relative would solve the case, I'm just saying that I'm not sure due to all the conflicting info about the DNA flying around.

[cobalt]

After almost 60 years I think there are things we should know.

First up of course is the statement made by John McInnes in which he presumably supplies an alibi, two days after the final murder. (presumed missing.)

Second are the statements collected from patrons at the Barrowland who saw Jemima McDonald dance with and later leave the dance hall with a man.

Third are the statements of witnesses between the Barrowland and McKeith Street who saw Jemima McDonald walking in the company of a man.

Fourth are the statements from patrons inside the Barrowland who saw Helen Puttock dancing with a man. These may be significant in narrowing down how long Helen was actually in his company. The women arrived at around 10pm and left around midnight but some reports say that Helen was only with her partner for the last 30 minutes. So who was BJ dancing with before then? I doubt if the tight fisted BJ would have paid to come in for the last 30 minutes but even if he did then he would likely have been remembered by staff.

Fifth are the statements made by the manager and bouncer(s) regarding the cigarette machine rumpus at the Barrowland. There is a reported discrepancy in the description offered which surely should have been resolved at the time. We have discussed the possibility that the two 'Johns' were mixed up by staff- Castlemilk John is always portrayed as a quiet, uninvolved type- but he might have chipped in a few words of advice here and there in an attempt to keep the peace. (A re-enactment of the scene at the time might have helped tremendously.)

All of the witnesses' names could be anonymised along with those of friends in their company. There is little chance that BJ is still alive- Glaswegians are not known for their longevity- although I appreciate that a 92 year old was convicted of murder last week. However I cannot see why the above materials cannot be put in the public domain.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I agree and accept the points made by Cobalt. There are some things that we can’t know but I’d certainly love to know a statistical answer on this (probably impossible to work out even for someone expert in those kind of statistics.) What I mean is…what are the actual statistical chances of finding a Templeton going back those few generations down the McInnes line. Then what are the chances of the guy growing up in right area..being fostered..having just a sister (albeit a foster sister)….living just a short walk from the stop where Night Bus Man got off……and he looks about as close in looks to the portrait that Jeannie said was spot on as possible.

I’m not saying that Templeton was the man and I’m not averse to accepting coincidences but…..this one does seem a little….remarkable? Maybe I’m exaggerating but I’m unsure. I certainly don’t dismiss McInnes yet though.