Bible John (General Discussion)

[Herlock Sholmes]

Like NW I also have difficulty with Darryl’s suggestion as to why the killer took the clothes though I have to say that it’s a clever suggestion and one that I certainly hadn’t considered before.

For me it would appear that the killer either had a bag with him or that he came in a vehicle. If he’d picked her up at Barrowland then I’d have though it unlikely that he’d have been carrying a bag with him. He might have offered her a lift home in a car though. This would have made it easier to get her undressed (she might have done this herself or at least she might have agreed to partially undress inside the car) leaving the killer to carry her body and dump it in the alleyway. Also there would have been less chance of being seen from someone’s bedroom window if he was u dressing her in the open. A car would also have made it much simpler to carry away the clothes. A man with no car or bag is unlikely to have wanted to bump into a patrolling Police Constable with an armful of women’s clothes. Two cars were seen and Elphinstone Dalgleish asked the public for information. I still think it at least possible that the killers car type might have been mentioned which discouraged him from using it again.

It’s a tricky one and I’d certainly like to hear more suggestions on this because I’m certainly not claiming that mine is a done deal. Maybe he just hid the clothes under an overcoat? I don’t know. A car appears is the obvious answer. Is it the right one though?

We haven’t got a complete list of her clothing but we do know that as well as a ‘yellow crocheted mini dress’ she was wearing a ‘grey duffle coat with a blue collar.’ A duffle coat on its own is quite a bulky item.

[Ms Diddles]

Been listening to Jean (well the actor) on the Pod cast again. There is a bit of a contradiction. She states that when she heard of Helens murder she immediately thought it could have been Helens husband. Saying something like she didn't ' think BJ would be capable or that sort (cant remember exact words). This seems a bit odd as she had left Helen in the Taxi with BJ.

The contradiction is that although she says BJ was very quiet and a 'mammie's boy' he had a very vocal and heated argument with the manager of the club over the cigarette machine and that the manager was a very tough individual but BJ strongly confronted him and somewhat belittled him. (only a short time before the taxi ride)

My understanding was that BJ adopted a rather pompous and superior tone with the Barrowlands manager, rather than showing any overt signs of aggression.

I seem to recall Jeannie stating that he neither raised his voice nor swore (quite unusual for a regular Barras punter I suspect).

I believe there was a history (or at least some incidents) of domestic violence between George and Helen Puttock.

I seem to recall it was reported that Helen was wanting out of the relationship, so I can understand why Jeannie's immediate response would have been to suspect George.

In the Taxi Jean says BJ was quiet and had to be encouraged to say anything. Perhaps while he was in the taxi he was planning the murder. Thinking it through.

Entirely possible.

I wonder if he thought killing the victims close to their homes distances the crime from the Barrowlands in some sort of naïve thinking that the police would not make the Barrowlands connection. Sounds stupid but feasible. It is a lottery though, as his style (if it is one ) would mean he could have ended up miles and miles from his own home address.

It's possible.

In the case of Pat Docker the police were so busy erroneously chasing up leads at the Majestic that they almost missed the Barrowlands link.

Sorry all if my posts are a bit disjointed but I find it hard to be methodical and the whole thing seems odd

Me too!

Thinking about the reef knot (was that Helens murder) Some seem to suggest its a difficult knot. Many use this knot without realizing it. My father was in the Navy and explained to me 'left over right, right over left. There is a problem using this, as once the knot is complete you cannot tighten it any further as far as I recall. Tricky if its not tight enough to say strangle someone. I would imagine the killer did the left over right bit. pulled it tight until the deed was done then locked the knot with the right over left.

Just thoughts again

NW

Interesting thoughts, NW!

[Ms Diddles]

Patricia was found naked apart from her shoe/shoes. Why would the killer take her clothes away ? Well, just a long shot here but suppose her murderer gave Patricia a Moylan's card, or perhaps even his name and address on a scrap of paper . He could have searched for it afterwards, not finding it in the dark in his blind panic so stripped Patricia instead and took her handbag, clothes and legged it . If he did give Patricia a Moylan's card as the same possibly with Helen. He may have been disturbed before he could look for said evidence. The connection was made and the murders stopped. As we know now, once serial killers are interviewed/suspected they can and do stop killing for at least a while.

An interesting theory, Darryl!

Sutcliffe realised the significance of the new five pound note he left with a victim and went back to search for it.

I also believe Bible John did not plan any of his murders but when the poor victims refused his sexual advances his anger overtook every rational thought he may have had.

That would probably be my guess too.

Perhaps the killer regularly [ whoever he was ], beat his wife/partner if they refused sex with him and they were so scared of said individual that they indeed gave him an alibi when interviewed .
Also the killer may lie in the police archives somewhere. Someone who was accused of rape but the charges dropped. Would, if there are any rape victims out there who were also married press charges ?
Maybe an appeal so long after the events if there are any rape victims out there and still alive might bring a name forward.

It's an interesting idea.

I think it's highly unlikely that any married rape victim would have come forward.

To be honest with such low conviction rates and the dreadful stigma attached, I suspect that any unmarried ones would have likely thought twice about it too.

One last point didn't John Mcinnes wife say she was left traumatized by her marriage to him ?

Regards Darryl

Yes, and you would expect whoever did this to be a nightmare to be married to, to say the least.

[Ms Diddles]

Like NW I also have difficulty with Darryl’s suggestion as to why the killer took the clothes though I have to say that it’s a clever suggestion and one that I certainly hadn’t considered before.

For me it would appear that the killer either had a bag with him or that he came in a vehicle. If he’d picked her up at Barrowland then I’d have though it unlikely that he’d have been carrying a bag with him. He might have offered her a lift home in a car though. This would have made it easier to get her undressed (she might have done this herself or at least she might have agreed to partially undress inside the car) leaving the killer to carry her body and dump it in the alleyway. Also there would have been less chance of being seen from someone’s bedroom window if he was u dressing her in the open. A car would also have made it much simpler to carry away the clothes. A man with no car or bag is unlikely to have wanted to bump into a patrolling Police Constable with an armful of women’s clothes. Two cars were seen and Elphinstone Dalgleish asked the public for information. I still think it at least possible that the killers car type might have been mentioned which discouraged him from using it again.

It’s a tricky one and I’d certainly like to hear more suggestions on this because I’m certainly not claiming that mine is a done deal. Maybe he just hid the clothes under an overcoat? I don’t know. A car appears is the obvious answer. Is it the right one though?

We haven’t got a complete list of her clothing but we do know that as well as a ‘yellow crocheted mini dress’ she was wearing a ‘grey duffle coat with a blue collar.’ A duffle coat on its own is quite a bulky item.

Hi Herlock,

I agree that a car is a possibility for the first murder.

I seem to recall that there were two cars spotted in the area at what was thought to be the crucial time.

The couple who were in one car came forward and were cleared of any involvement.

The second car was never traced.

On Saturday I went off on one of my fact-finding missions and wandered around this (actually very lovely) part of town.

It's a very quiet, residential, genteel area and I doubt it will have changed that much since 1968.

It would I imagine, have been relatively easy to walk down the hill from Carmichael Lane to the River Cart carrying a bundle of clothes and not meet a soul at the time of night in question as long as you kept off the main roads and stuck to the residential streets.

I suppose what I'm saying is that either option is feasible!

It's strange that there are no reported sightings of Pat after she left the Barrowlands.

I'd have expected there to be some witnesses if she caught a taxi or bus (or took a long walk home for that matter).

I guess (as someone suggested earlier on this thread) perhaps that critical week that elapsed while the police were sniffing around the Majestic blew it for them.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,

I agree that a car is a possibility for the first murder.

I seem to recall that there were two cars spotted in the area at what was thought to be the crucial time.

The couple who were in one car came forward and were cleared of any involvement.

The second car was never traced.

On Saturday I went off on one of my fact-finding missions and wandered around this (actually very lovely) part of town.

It's a very quiet, residential, genteel area and I doubt it will have changed that much since 1968.

It would I imagine, have been relatively easy to walk down the hill from Carmichael Lane to the River Cart carrying a bundle of clothes and not meet a soul at the time of night in question as long as you kept off the main roads and stuck to the residential streets.

I suppose what I'm saying is that either option is feasible!

It's strange that there are no reported sightings of Pat after she left the Barrowlands.

I'd have expected there to be some witnesses if she caught a taxi or bus (or took a long walk home for that matter).

I guess (as someone suggested earlier on this thread) perhaps that critical week that elapsed while the police were sniffing around the Majestic blew it for them.

Hi Ms D,

What reason do you think the killer might have had for wanting to dump her clothes in the river? It certainly sounds physically possible.

[Ms Diddles]

Hi Ms D,

What reason do you think the killer might have had for wanting to dump her clothes in the river? It certainly sounds physically possible.

Ha! I was so pleased with my revelation about how quiet and residential the streets were between Carmichael Place and the river that I failed to really consider why BJ would have done such a thing!

He was going to take them, then realised how cumbersome and / or incriminating they were and decided to dump them?

He was destroying evidence? I know DNA was in it's infancy, but he may have been worried about fingerprints or hair.

Yeah, I'm stretching here!!

To be fair, there are many aspects of this case which appear highly illogical, so I'm not sure we're looking at someone who was completely rational during the commission of their crimes.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Ha! I was so pleased with my revelation about how quiet and residential the streets were between Carmichael Place and the river that I failed to really consider why BJ would have done such a thing!

He was going to take them, then realised how cumbersome and / or incriminating they were and decided to dump them?

He was destroying evidence? I know DNA was in it's infancy, but he may have been worried about fingerprints or hair.

Yeah, I'm stretching here!!

To be fair, there are many aspects of this case which appear highly illogical, so I'm not sure we're looking at someone who was completely rational during the commission of their crimes.

Absolutely right. It’s easy to fall into the trap of thinking “well he/she wouldn’t have done (or thought) that because it’s not what I’d have done. ” Your suggestion about him wanting to take the clothes but then realising how cumbersome they were is a possible. Or maybe he got a bit paranoid if someone walked past him and gave him a look, so he decided to dump them as he was nearing the river?

[New Waterloo]

Ms D is correct in that its strange nobody saw Pat on her way home. If she caught a bus i would imagine in 1969 there were still bus conductors and not just driver only buses. Conductors knew their job and were on the ball so to speak about who got on and off especially early hours of morning (good potential witness) (to be believed in Helens case)

still have a problem with walking with the clothes. If Barnflat is correct about the bridge where they were found its a bit of a walk seay and a much busier road I think which again points to a car.

perhaps the stripping of the clothes is a power thing. Helen isnt stripped but is degraded (awful word but cant think of another) with the horrible act of putting the sanitary towel under her arm.

maybe it illustrates what sort of offender this was. Terrible person for sure.

NW

[cobalt]

It would help clear up the matter a little if we knew whether our two main suspects a) possessed a driving licence at the time and b) owned a motor vehicle. I speak more in hope than expectation: the issue of whether Lee Harvey Oswald ever had a driving licence in 1963 is still hotly disputed.

The logic of Patricia Docker's killer having a car has to be seen through. It's true nobody remembered Patricia being bussed or taxied home, but then no one saw her leaving the Barrowland and accompanying a man to a vehicle either. We don't know for sure whether she even went to the Majestic dance hall first before going on to the Barrowland; one of the witnesses who thought she had seen Patricia there later had second thoughts about which day it was. Witness testimony is absent unfortunately so we have nothing either way regarding how she arrived near to her home.

Taking the clothing away in a car sounds reasonable- less chance of being spotted walking through the streets. But having to stop on the Clarkston Bridge (?) in the early hours of the morning to chuck items down into the river is a good way to attract attention from any passing motorist or member of the public.

I don't think the killer had a car. Trying to make a sexual advance in a car was not an easy move back in the late 1960s since car heating systems were less effective. Car coats, sheepskin coats and driving gloves were fashionable accessories for a car driver in the colder, winter months.

The lock ups I knew from that period were two facing rows of single wooden garages (where we lads often played 5-a-side kick abouts.) Between each garage was a narrow space where you could slip off for a pee if necessary away from public view. I have no idea if that was the case in Carmichael Lane but if it was, then the attack on Patricia could have been carried out without anyone seeing and her clothes removed- for whatever psychological purpose- there as well. Her body could then have been dragged a few yards into the Lane to be perceived.

If the clothes were thrown into the river by the killer on foot then that suggests some working knowledge of the area I would guess. How did he carry them there and why? I have no idea to the second question- maybe some form of cleansing? But he may have used the duffle coat as an impromptu bag and stuffed the other items inside.

[New Waterloo]

Yes Cobalt we really need to find out if the two main suspects had a driving license and a car. I am not sure how we could do that but I think it is a task that we can achieve and this would be a real step forward.

The clothes remain a mystery. Somebody said that duffle coats are quite heavy and they are correct. I would think that the offender would have to use both hands to carry the clothes and would have stood out like a sore thumb walking along.

I am less keen on the idea of the clothes being thrown in the river. The police managed to find the handbag I think some of the clothing would have turned up as well perhaps caught on the bank of the river, an overhanging tree branch or something.

Perhaps the clothes were dumped very close to the murder scene but that doesn't really work because I would imagine the police would have searched around the immediate area very quickly after attending the scene.

Why keep the hand bag? Whilst writing this I have just had a thought. Have we made an important connection between Pat and Helens murder. Yes its already known has been since 1969 but it is the same MO. on both occasions the offender keeps the handbag. This is a purse in Helens case. The offender removes them from the scene. Why maybe simply that he wants to get to a safer are with more light to see if there is anything of value inside. When he has done this he dumps the bag/purse

I think this could be a strong indicator that we are dealing with the same person..Well maybe

NW

[barnflatwyngarde]

I will contact Jillian Bavin-Mizzi and ask her if she knew if John Templeton had a driving licence.

Re John McInnes, perhaps Audrey gillan has this info, she interviewed some Stonehouse residents who knew John McInnes.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Ms D is correct in that its strange nobody saw Pat on her way home. If she caught a bus i would imagine in 1969 there were still bus conductors and not just driver only buses. Conductors knew their job and were on the ball so to speak about who got on and off especially early hours of morning (good potential witness) (to be believed in Helens case)

still have a problem with walking with the clothes. If Barnflat is correct about the bridge where they were found its a bit of a walk seay and a much busier road I think which again points to a car.

perhaps the stripping of the clothes is a power thing. Helen isnt stripped but is degraded (awful word but cant think of another) with the horrible act of putting the sanitary towel under her arm.

maybe it illustrates what sort of offender this was. Terrible person for sure.

NW

Although I can’t state it as a fact (because I can’t recall if it’s been stated anywhere in the literature on the subject) it has to be likely that this wasn’t Pat’s first visit to the Barrowland so it’s perhaps surprising that no one came forward to say that they had seen her. If she had been there before there would have been people that knew her so was it the case that her acquaintances, likely to have been women, might not have wanted to come forward and admit that they were there? As this was the first murder there would have been no suggestion of a madman targeting any women so they might have felt less inclined to come forward?

[Darryl Kenyon]

Concerning whether John Mcinnes drove a car or not , in this article it says he drove a green Ford Cortina . The article seems to be taken mainly from a book, entitled Bible John Hunt for a killer, [ which I have not read ].

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-scottish-mail-on-sunday/20221211/282441353130498

Hope this helps Darryl

[barnflatwyngarde]

Concerning whether John Mcinnes drove a car or not , in this article it says he drove a green Ford Cortina . The article seems to be taken mainly from a book, entitled Bible John Hunt for a killer, [ which I have not read ].

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-scottish-mail-on-sunday/20221211/282441353130498

Hope this helps Darryl

Interesting stuff Darryl, thanks for posting.

The article has a coy, knowing air about it, the reference to an attempted suicide in the village shop is mentioned with no telling detail whatsoever.
Anything new that we can find out about the case, John McInnes and John Templeton is to be welcomed.

[Ms Diddles]

Concerning whether John Mcinnes drove a car or not , in this article it says he drove a green Ford Cortina . The article seems to be taken mainly from a book, entitled Bible John Hunt for a killer, [ which I have not read ].

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-scottish-mail-on-sunday/20221211/282441353130498

Hope this helps Darryl

Nice find Darryl,

I feel like I have read that article at some point but missed the info about the car.

It would make sense for a young man from Stonehouse to have a car.

In my experience people from rural areas are much more likely to hold a driving licence than people from cities with abundant public transport options.