Bible John: A New Suspect by Jill Bavin-Mizzi

[Herlock Sholmes]

"My first thought was that you guys were being pretty harsh in your criticism of Joe Beattie. He was after all trying to catch the killer in what was then ''the here and now'' and not pave the way for our discussions more than fifty years later." (OneRound)

The more I look at this case the more I cant help but think that Joe Beattie completely screwed the investigation up.
He took the word of a "clairvoyant", Gerard Croiset that the killer lived in the Govan area.
Hence the interviewing of the ferrymen on the Govan Ferry.
This is sheer stupidity and incompetence, and no excuse can be made for him that in those far off days people were less sceptical than today.
Was this a deliberate move to muddy the waters of the investigation? Who knows!

Cobalt makes the good point that the bouncers should have been questioned thoroughly to ascertain what they saw.
During the incident with the cigarette machine, there would have been more than one bouncer watching the interaction between the manager and Bible John.
It was standard practice that more than one bouncer would be present at any incident that had the possibility of escalating into violence.
So, there would be the manager and at least two bouncers closely watching the incident at the cigarette machine.
Their senses would be heightened, adrenaline does that to a a body.

Are there detailed statements from the manager and the bouncers sitting in the official files?
I don't remember them being mentioned in Karen Gillan's podcast, but I could be mistaken.

I have a strong feeling that the interest generated by Jill Bavin-Mizzi's book and Karen Gillan's podcast may well lead to someone producing the definitive book that this fascinating case deserves.

My apologies for being Mr Nitpick Barn.

The podcast presenter was Audrey Gillan.

Have you been watching some old episodes of Dr. Who lately?

[barnflatwyngarde]

Ha ha!
Absolutely right Herlock.
I know a few women with the surname Gillan, and I'm always mixing them up.

DOH!

[Herlock Sholmes]

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

[OneRound]

OneRound's thoughts on BJ are very much in line with my own and I will elaborate on some of the points he raised.

...


Highly suspicious. If he [John Irvine McInnes] was innocent and cleared by police why hide the records?

BTW OneRound I checked up on the Calvinistic financier Sir John Templeton whose attitude to making loads of money was described as being, 'It's fine so long as you don't enjoy it.' Maybe a bit like BJ's attitude to sex. Sir John lived pretty frugally apparently and adopted a financial system later developed and named after one James Tobin. No relation I am sure.

Hi cobalt - thanks for those comments above and your other elaborations.

Beattie and other high ranking officers dealing with John Irvine McInnes in the way that they did is highly, highly odd.

A total guess on my part is that they might have gone to see him not so much in expectation of making an arrest him but rather to rule him out. Possibly he had been linked in some way (? the Moylans business card) but his police officer cousin had assured Beattie et al that McInnes couldn't be their man. Consequently, they (too) readily accepted any alibi proffered with insufficient checking and dubious record keeping.

Similar to Herlock, I can't say with any great confidence that John Irvine McInnes was Bible John but for me he remains the most likely candidate. Certainly, the pathologist on the Audrey Gillan podcast made clear that whilst there wasn't DNA evidence to prove his guilt, there equally was nothing to establish innocence.

Best regards,
OneRound

[Ms Diddles]

That's me back from Jill Bavin Mizzi's author talk in Airdrie library.

It was fascinating but very brief at just an hour long including questions.

Firstly Jill came across extremely well. It was very apparent that she is an academic and historian with impeccable credentials.

Much of the talk was dedicated to why she had chosen this particular case to research (it's relatively recent history and numerous clues made her think she was in with a shout at solving it using the DNA as a starting point) and her research and findings which are all in her book, so there's no point in rehashing them here

I found it interesting to hear her flesh out the information about her conversation with Templeton's ex-wife June.

There was nothing new, but I found it intriguing how June apparently betrayed no great surprise at her ex husband being named by Jill as Glasgow's most famous serial killer.

She seems to have been quite forthcoming and open throughout their conversation, but neither defended nor condemned him.

Jill had purposefully avoided asking whether June had any inkling that her husband was BJ as she felt (I'd say understandably) that it wasn't June's responsibility either way.

The mic drop moment came at the end when she revealed that since the book was published she has managed to locate a living relative of Templeton's father.

She has approached him re obtaining a DNA sample but he has failed to respond.

She and a fellow researcher are planning on approaching the police to make their case and try to persuade them to get a sample.

Personally, I'm sceptical that the police will go for this, but you never know.

It was apparent that Jill is personally 100% certain of her suspect's guilt.

- you got a mention when Jill referenced people who had come forward who had worked with Templeton in the Mitchell library. It sounded like she had spoken to some of your former colleagues too, as she referenced more than one source?

Apparently someone had described Templeton as a misogynist and stated that female colleagues didn't like him.

I only recall you saying that he was always well dressed and unusually polite and well-spoken. I didn't recall the misogynist description coming from you (or perhaps I've forgotten it)?

I think that's all the most salient points.

Oh, I got a Jaffa Cake there too!

[Herlock Sholmes]

That's me back from Jill Bavin Mizzi's author talk in Airdrie library.

It was fascinating but very brief at just an hour long including questions.

Firstly Jill came across extremely well. It was very apparent that she is an academic and historian with impeccable credentials.

Much of the talk was dedicated to why she had chosen this particular case to research (it's relatively recent history and numerous clues made her think she was in with a shout at solving it using the DNA as a starting point) and her research and findings which are all in her book, so there's no point in rehashing them here

I found it interesting to hear her flesh out the information about her conversation with Templeton's ex-wife June.

There was nothing new, but I found it intriguing how June apparently betrayed no great surprise at her ex husband being named by Jill as Glasgow's most famous serial killer.

She seems to have been quite forthcoming and open throughout their conversation, but neither defended nor condemned him.

Jill had purposefully avoided asking whether June had any inkling that her husband was BJ as she felt (I'd say understandably) that it wasn't June's responsibility either way.

The mic drop moment came at the end when she revealed that since the book was published she has managed to locate a living relative of Templeton's father.

She has approached him re obtaining a DNA sample but he has failed to respond.

She and a fellow researcher are planning on approaching the police to make their case and try to persuade them to get a sample.

Personally, I'm sceptical that the police will go for this, but you never know.

It was apparent that Jill is personally 100% certain of her suspect's guilt.

- you got a mention when Jill referenced people who had come forward who had worked with Templeton in the Mitchell library. It sounded like she had spoken to some of your former colleagues too, as she referenced more than one source?

Apparently someone had described Templeton as a misogynist and stated that female colleagues didn't like him.

I only recall you saying that he was always well dressed and unusually polite and well-spoken. I didn't recall the misogynist description coming from you (or perhaps I've forgotten it)?

I think that's all the most salient points.

Oh, I got a Jaffa Cake there too!

Hi Ms D,

It was only yesterday that I wondered when the talk was but I forgot to check and find out.

It sounds like it was well worth going. As you say, it’s interesting that Templeton’s wife hasn’t leapt to the defence of her husbands honour and although we can’t read too much into that when we view it alongside the opinion that he was particularly disliked by female colleagues (and was described as a misogynist by one) it’s impossible not to wonder if she had a suspicion. Or at least that her experience of him left her unsurprised by the possibility.

The living relative provides a tantalising possibility. I wonder what reaction the police might get if they refuse to follow up on this. No need for an exhumation this time. Thanks for the report and a cigar for Barn for getting you in.


Only one Jaffa Cake? Yeah right.