Bible John: A New Suspect by Jill Bavin-Mizzi

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock - thanks for your concern although tbh it was viewed at the time as a bit of a jolly with your workmates and a skive from work. There again, we might have treated the occasion with greater seriousness if it had been for the A6 Murder or a Bible John killing rather than a local burglary.

As it happened, one of my fellow stooges was wrongly picked out. There was no chance of him spending the night in the cells however, as once the suspect had been taken away, the police sergeant cheerily said something like, '' We won't be having you again as you look too much like him. Don't worry though, we've still got him for something else!''

Best regards,
OneRound

Hi OneRound,

My apologies for not responding. It’s certainly not something that I’d fancy doing. Just like jury service which I’ve avoided so far.

[OneRound]

Hi OneRound,

Given that we know how people can mistakenly identify people it must have been a slightly worrying experience? Pessimist that I am I’d be worrying about ending up in the cells.

Hi Herlock - thanks for your concern although tbh it was viewed at the time as a bit of a jolly with your workmates and a skive from work. There again, we might have treated the occasion with greater seriousness if it had been for the A6 Murder or a Bible John killing rather than a local burglary.

As it happened, one of my fellow stooges was wrongly picked out. There was no chance of him spending the night in the cells however, as once the suspect had been taken away, the police sergeant cheerily said something like, '' We won't be having you again as you look too much like him. Don't worry though, we've still got him for something else!''

Best regards,
OneRound

[New Waterloo]

It seems worrying (and I am sure you know this and being light hearted) but for those who are not sure, official formal ID parades are where you have a suspect, normally in custody who you want to put before a witness. The stooges are not suspects they are people gathered together who look like the police suspect being investigated. In Norwich where I live the police would often go to the YMCA to get some stooges and the YMCA lads would be quite happy to make a quick fiver from the police. It would raise some eyebrows if a stooge was picked out by witnesses but that would not be the purpose and presumably any local active criminal wouldn't be risking volunteering!
casual IDs were not encouraged and not controlled and very weak evidentially but worth a try when you havn't even got a suspect. Just wandering around public places/clubs hoping you spot the offender.
NW

[cobalt]

Given that we know how people can mistakenly identify people it must have been a slightly worrying experience? Pessimist that I am I’d be worrying about ending up in the cells.

It might have happened to me! When I was a 'stooge' in an ID parade the sergeant read out, in front of the witnesses, the address of the burglary- which by chance was in the same small street I lived in at the time. I did not recognise either of the OAP witnesses but I remember being nervous in case they had seen me about and thought I looked familiar. Fortunately they did not identify anyone but it was a very uncomfortable situation I found myself in. I think the payment was around 6/- back in 1971.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Back in the very late '70s / early '80s, I worked for a large company in a small town. It was quite common then for the the Personnel Department (HR wasn't invented until later) to supply 'volunteers' or 'stooges' for police ID parades. This was all part of being seen as 'a good community employer'. I was asked once and was happy to go along with it - more than an hour off work including being mini-bussed to the cop shop and a crisp £1 note from the police sergeant at the end. My employer supplied people for two separate parades on the day I went, one for a 20 something suspect with blonde hair and the other for a 20 something suspect with brown hair. As I had light brown hair in those days, the policeman sorting things out was initially unsure which line up I should have been in.

Anyway, with regard to the final and more significant point above, I'm sure Joe Beattie would have wanted to be there to see a prime suspect in an ID parade. In the A6 murder case, Det Supt 'Basil' Acott, the police officer who led the investigation, was a prominent figure in the various ID parades and the goings on at them was one of the grounds for James Hanratty's posthumous appeal in 2002 although it cut no ice with the Court of Appeal.

Best regards,
OneRound

Hi OneRound,

Given that we know how people can mistakenly identify people it must have been a slightly worrying experience? Pessimist that I am I’d be worrying about ending up in the cells.

[Herlock Sholmes]

But conversely it also shows that the police did check out McInnes at the time more than we tend to accept and a few things which rule him out (in the eyes of the police)

I think you have said in previous posts that in 1996? Beatty said that the teeth of McInnes were not a match for the bite mark.

So perhaps the police were thinking, wrong teeth, no evidence implicating him from wife or she provided alibi and no positive ID by Jeannie (If that took place). Any extra alibi we are unaware of would seal the deal in some eyes. It wasn't him.

I still think he is a strong possibility. Wife may have lied (given him alibi) or genuinely didn't know anything, poor analysis at the time of McInnes being spoken to. A look in mouth by untrained police officer where should have been expert, and Jeannie's ID was just about there really just questioned hair colour so had to be negative.

Yes perhaps he just slipped the net because of these factors.

NW

Hi NW,

The problem is that three years after the murder of Helen Puttock McInnes had dentures fitted. We don’t know to what extent but I think that we can safely assume that it was at least the top set (or part of it) which would have included the overlap which Jeannie mentioned.

[OneRound]

Hi Cobalt,
I agree with your comments on ID parades.
There was a pub in my area that was only about 50 yards from the police station.

It was common for police to come into the pub and ask for some volunteers to stand in an ID parade.
There was no attempt to look specifically for people of a certain size, hair colour, build etc.

I too appeared in an ID parade, and was done in front of a sergeant and a constable or two.
No high ranking officers were present.
But yes you are right in thinking that surely Joe Beattie would want to there to see a prime suspect in an ID parade.

Back in the very late '70s / early '80s, I worked for a large company in a small town. It was quite common then for the the Personnel Department (HR wasn't invented until later) to supply 'volunteers' or 'stooges' for police ID parades. This was all part of being seen as 'a good community employer'. I was asked once and was happy to go along with it - more than an hour off work including being mini-bussed to the cop shop and a crisp £1 note from the police sergeant at the end. My employer supplied people for two separate parades on the day I went, one for a 20 something suspect with blonde hair and the other for a 20 something suspect with brown hair. As I had light brown hair in those days, the policeman sorting things out was initially unsure which line up I should have been in.

Anyway, with regard to the final and more significant point above, I'm sure Joe Beattie would have wanted to be there to see a prime suspect in an ID parade. In the A6 murder case, Det Supt 'Basil' Acott, the police officer who led the investigation, was a prominent figure in the various ID parades and the goings on at them was one of the grounds for James Hanratty's posthumous appeal in 2002 although it cut no ice with the Court of Appeal.

Best regards,
OneRound

[New Waterloo]

On page 117 of Crow and Samson's book " Bible John: Hunt for a Killer", the authors discuss John Irvine McInnes's wife Helen (Ella).

Helen remarried and took the surname of her new husband Rolfe Thornqvist.

According to Crow and Samson, Rolfe Thornqvist was replying to reporters about his wife's marriage to McInnes when he said:

"It is all history and no-one would involve her anyway. This is all in the past.
They interviewed her at the time.
If there had been any thought she knew anything, they would have inquired into it.
Obviously the police knew she had nothing to do with it".
(my emphasis)

If what Crow and Samson have written is correct it adds another strand to the belief that police, for whatever reason(s) had John Irvine McInnes firmly in their sights to such a degree that they felt the need to interview his wife.

But conversely it also shows that the police did check out McInnes at the time more than we tend to accept and a few things which rule him out (in the eyes of the police)

I think you have said in previous posts that in 1996? Beatty said that the teeth of McInnes were not a match for the bite mark.

So perhaps the police were thinking, wrong teeth, no evidence implicating him from wife or she provided alibi and no positive ID by Jeannie (If that took place). Any extra alibi we are unaware of would seal the deal in some eyes. It wasn't him.

I still think he is a strong possibility. Wife may have lied (given him alibi) or genuinely didn't know anything, poor analysis at the time of McInnes being spoken to. A look in mouth by untrained police officer where should have been expert, and Jeannie's ID was just about there really just questioned hair colour so had to be negative.

Yes perhaps he just slipped the net because of these factors.

NW

[barnflatwyngarde]

On page 117 of Crow and Samson's book " Bible John: Hunt for a Killer", the authors discuss John Irvine McInnes's wife Helen (Ella).

Helen remarried and took the surname of her new husband Rolfe Thornqvist.

According to Crow and Samson, Rolfe Thornqvist was replying to reporters about his wife's marriage to McInnes when he said:

"It is all history and no-one would involve her anyway. This is all in the past.
They interviewed her at the time.
If there had been any thought she knew anything, they would have inquired into it.
Obviously the police knew she had nothing to do with it".
(my emphasis)

If this report is accurate, it adds another strand to the belief that police, for whatever reason(s) had John Irvine McInnes firmly in their sights to such a degree that they felt the need to interview his wife.

[cobalt]

Samson and Crow's book confirms that it was 10 shillings.

Absolutely. To break a fiver back then was a big deal. I never saw an actual £10 note until several years later. When the UK miners won a pay rise in 1974 they saw their first £10 notes and called them 'Arthur Scargills.'

The cigarette machine incident at the Barrowland is linked to the taxi fare home for Jeannie and Helen. A 20 packet back then cost around 10/- and since they would have known the taxi fare to be around £1 presumably they did not have enough money for fags as well. In stepped Bible John with his offer to pay for the taxi home and off went Jeannie to the machine. So BJ earned their gratitude on two fronts as a result, which no doubt pleased the women at the time. Given later comments made by Jeannie I think the two women viewed BJ as a bit of a soft touch and maybe BJ was cunning enough to play along with this.

[barnflatwyngarde]

HS said:

The distance from Stonehouse to either Hamilton or Wishaw is about the same, around 8 miles. But his point about the three Moylans employees all living within 10 miles of each other is very likely correct. (Ten players from the Celtic football team which won the European Cup in 1967 were born within 11 miles of Glasgow.)



That's standard procedure these days and probably was back in 1969 as well. In my experience as a 'stooge' in an ID parade around the time of the BJ murders the parade was managed by an experienced station sergeant. No detectives involved in the burglary were seen by any of us. We had to give our names and addresses which were written down in the record, and sign that we had received payment.

Maybe Herlock has identified a problem of holding two ID parades around the same time. You obviously cannot show the witness the same 'stooges' as you did for the first parade since it would be obvious who the suspect actually was second time round. That might explain why Smith was not formally paraded- they didn't have enough suitable stooges.

Despite all the procedural requirements, I find it hard to believe that an experienced detective like Beattie would not have taken the opportunity to grill a suspect inside Partick Marine once he had been identified. His absence seems very odd.

Hi Cobalt,
I agree with your comments on ID parades.
There was a pub in my area that was only about 50 yards from the police station.

It was common for police to come into the pub and ask for some volunteers to stand in an ID parade.
There was no attempt to look specifically for people of a certain size, hair colour, build etc.

I too appeared in an ID parade, and was done in front of a sergeant and a constable or two.
No high ranking officers were present.
But yes you are right in thinking that surely Joe Beattie would want to there to see a prime suspect in an ID parade.

[New Waterloo]

That makes sense. Thanks Barnflat

[barnflatwyngarde]

Just been looking at the Bank of England calculator (what money was worth then and now comparison)

Inflation calculator | Bank of England

I have been thinking. For 1969 £10 seems quite a lot for George Puttock to hand over to Jeannie for the taxi. According to them it would work out as £146 which doesn't seem right to me. None the less considering a pint of beer was about 30p I suppose £10 was a lot

Not really sure what that means. There would certainly be enough to buy some alcohol somewhere (more than that stated by Jeannie)

Can anybody give us an idea of costs of say pack of cigs, beer, rent money etc to get an idea please

NW

Hi NW, I had it in my head that the money that George gave to Jeannie that night wasn't £10, but 10 shillings.

Samson and Crow's book confirms that it was 10 shillings.

[New Waterloo]

Just been looking at the Bank of England calculator (what money was worth then and now comparison)

Inflation calculator | Bank of England

I have been thinking. For 1969 £10 seems quite a lot for George Puttock to hand over to Jeannie for the taxi. According to them it would work out as £146 which doesn't seem right to me. None the less considering a pint of beer was about 30p I suppose £10 was a lot

Not really sure what that means. There would certainly be enough to buy some alcohol somewhere (more than that stated by Jeannie)

Can anybody give us an idea of costs of say pack of cigs, beer, rent money etc to get an idea please

NW

[New Waterloo]

Hi Cobalt yes agreed. I see what you are saying and even not being picked out doesn't override other evidence you may have. Professional curiosity would kick in and Beatty would be very interested in this man. He would probably speak to Jeannie afterwards and her negative result (but almost there) wouldn't close the case against him.

It would probably be that new ID parades with fresh stooges could be held with other witnesses, and there were several. Barrowland staff, clippie on bus, taxi driver. I suppose it could weaken any future court case but this was a murder. Its still a mystery why there seemed a lack of well common sense.

NW