Bible John (General Discussion)

[Herlock Sholmes]

Friends of mine refuse to allow me to navigate anywhere as I have no sense of direction and am dangerous with a map in my hand so be patient and beware because I’ve been using Google Earth. But….a couple of points/questions.

If MacDonald did actually see Helen running along South Street at around 1.00 (which AG describes as around 200 yards from where she was found) then it looks like she would have turned into Harland Street, gone under the railway bridge and then turned left into Earl Street. It would then have been around 100 yard walk to number 95. So..around 200 yards.

Therefore if AG’s ‘around 200 yards’ was correct and if my notes are accurate when I wrote “AG came out onto South Street at around the spot where MacDonald saw the woman in the ocelot coat,” (and there’s a definite chance that they might not be) then somehow Audrey Gillan knew the spot where MacDonald had possibly/probably seen Helen running? Next..

Now, if you go down the alley at the side of number 95 Earl Street it looks like, in those days, that a person could have walked, walk in front of the embankment, from Harland Street along to Balmoral Street (both ends are now closed off)

In my old notes from episode 9 I wrote “AG asks, if HP got to the railway embankment why didn’t she head home 8 doors away? Instead she went in the opposite direction. Further along in that direction was Harland Cottages. Her friend Jean O’Donnell lived at number 11 and had been at the Barrowland with her that night.”

Harland Cottages are the other side of the embankment accessible only from South Street so how could she have got to them without going right to Harland Street, turning right, then right again in to South Street. Again this relies on the accuracy of my notes but if AG is suggesting that Helen reached the embankment and then moved in the direction of Harland Cottages and away from her home at what point is she suggesting that Helen reached the embankment? Another way of putting it, if I’m not being clear, is that she appears to be suggesting that Helen got to the embankment yards away from number 95 in the direction of her home but she headed in the direction of number 95 or where she ended up.

The emboldened part should read - going left to Harland Street, turning right, then left into South Street which is where Harland Cottages are still located.

[New Waterloo]

Hi Herlock. Very good. Surely that really is more than a coincidence. Of course there can be many ties with red stripes but maybe another part of the jigsaw.

Of course if its a Scot's Guards tie and its being worn by somebody who was in the Scots Guards (McInnes) then it would seem to suggest that he was not planning a murder that evening, the tie would be too identifying.

Of course (same old really) personality/alcohol/opportunity play into this but it certainly seems to be adding weight to McInnes being BJ. He certainly had significant issues according to the blogg.

I suppose many think that several murders by the same offender makes them a serial killer, well yes in the exact meaning of the term I suppose but maybe an unstable person killing at opportunist moments without planning.

NW

[Herlock Sholmes]

A description of what Bible John was wearing….short suede boots, a brown suit with three buttons on the front, a blue shirt, and a dark tie with three red stripes across it.

https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=1e7101d6c772e40c&sca_upv=1&rlz=1C9BKJA_enGB704GB704&hl=en-GB&sxsrf=ADLYWIJVBwkAjv0FHWSjT2EDmWUSPmyQZw:1722716863732&q=man+wearing+scots+guards+tie&udm=2&fbs=AEQNm0Aa4sjWe7Rqy32pFwRj0UkWd8nbOJfsBGGB5IQQO6L3J7pRxUp2pI1mXV9fBsfh39KRvAkf_RbLmqO8b2Na6CPIL2LfB40iMkaTVa1lR-W5Yx-XPEBtftdFKXlYZhuEWVBrENSwf7uuoeGmcDzq1ncIEiiTrkHuFXdsa7MAm_pxBE2wVaz-WRzq4UMFchO3ZbH3hDQ_rZom8bUBIvdPi5_EXPtvvg&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwidjti11NmHAxXEYEEAHeNwH-QQtKgLegQIHhAB&biw=1024&bih=1247&dpr=2#vhid=k08OgFIPscN_AM&vssid=mosaic

It’s not too difficult to see how someone remembering back to the previous evening, and after not paying particularly close attention to a tie at the time, might have just noticed the three main red stripes on the tie above. It’s a Scot’s Guards tie. John Irvine McInnes was in the Scot’s Guards.

When he was discharged from the army in 1959 a fellow soldier called MacDonald bumped into him around a year later and McInnes was wearing his regimental tie.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Friends of mine refuse to allow me to navigate anywhere as I have no sense of direction and am dangerous with a map in my hand so be patient and beware because I’ve been using Google Earth. But….a couple of points/questions.

If MacDonald did actually see Helen running along South Street at around 1.00 (which AG describes as around 200 yards from where she was found) then it looks like she would have turned into Harland Street, gone under the railway bridge and then turned left into Earl Street. It would then have been around 100 yard walk to number 95. So..around 200 yards.

Therefore if AG’s ‘around 200 yards’ was correct and if my notes are accurate when I wrote “AG came out onto South Street at around the spot where MacDonald saw the woman in the ocelot coat,” (and there’s a definite chance that they might not be) then somehow Audrey Gillan knew the spot where MacDonald had possibly/probably seen Helen running? Next..

Now, if you go down the alley at the side of number 95 Earl Street it looks like, in those days, that a person could have walked, walk in front of the embankment, from Harland Street along to Balmoral Street (both ends are now closed off)

In my old notes from episode 9 I wrote “AG asks, if HP got to the railway embankment why didn’t she head home 8 doors away? Instead she went in the opposite direction. Further along in that direction was Harland Cottages. Her friend Jean O’Donnell lived at number 11 and had been at the Barrowland with her that night.”

Harland Cottages are the other side of the embankment accessible only from South Street so how could she have got to them without going right to Harland Street, turning right, then right again in to South Street. Again this relies on the accuracy of my notes but if AG is suggesting that Helen reached the embankment and then moved in the direction of Harland Cottages and away from her home at what point is she suggesting that Helen reached the embankment? Another way of putting it, if I’m not being clear, is that she appears to be suggesting that Helen got to the embankment yards away from number 95 in the direction of her home but she headed in the direction of number 95 or where she ended up.

[cobalt]

The references to Helen Puttock being amenable to romantic approaches came from police sources. These would presumably have emerged from interviews of regular patrons at the Barrowland Ballroom. I read somewhere (apologies for being vague) that two persons claimed they had been intimate with Helen prior to her death.

However I am in full agreement with ms diddles on Helen and Jeannie's likely assessment of BJ, one which precluded lustful entanglement. A paid taxi home would have been the real prize. Helen Puttock seems to have been confident in her ability to handle such situations and no doubt was, like many Glasgow women, well skilled in the art of the 'brush off.' Glasgow etiquette of that era included the phrase: 'Drap deid, ya scunner!'

The HS theory that has Helen disembarking from the taxi in South Street and then being pursued to Earl Street makes more sense than her running away from nearer her apartment. But William Hannah was taken by police to recreate his route and drop off point the following morning so the location where Helen left the cab must be well established. That location is always given as Earl Street, although no one seems to have pin pointed exactly where.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Here is photograph of police examing the exact location of Helen Puttuck's body.

What is noticeable is just how close to the wall it was.
In fact it looks like the body was right below a window.

Another element of risky behaviour among many examples of risky behaviour.

I also attach the link to the video that the photograph is in.
The date of the video is January 1996.

Interesting bit at the end of the video where Superintendent Louis Munn says that they are following a "definite line of enquiry" re the murder of Helen Puttock, and that a report will submitted to the Procurator Fiscal.

This presumably refers to the seeking of permission to exhume John McInnes.

One thing to notice, is the emphasis that Superintendant Munn places on the word "definite."

https://stvfootagesales.tv/content/bible-john-suspect/

Cheers Barn

[barnflatwyngarde]

Here is photograph of police examing the exact location of Helen Puttuck's body.

What is noticeable is just how close to the wall it was.
In fact it looks like the body was right below a window.

Another element of risky behaviour among many examples of risky behaviour.

I also attach the link to the video that the photograph is in.
The date of the video is January 1996.

Interesting bit at the end of the video where Superintendent Louis Munn says that they are following a "definite line of enquiry" re the murder of Helen Puttock, and that a report will submitted to the Procurator Fiscal.

This presumably refers to the seeking of permission to exhume John McInnes.

One thing to notice, is the emphasis that Superintendant Munn places on the word "definite."

https://stvfootagesales.tv/content/bible-john-suspect/

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Ms D.
Is this the church in the photo?

The four spires look as if the crosses at the top have been removed, but to me it looks like a pretty good match.
The slats at the side look the same, and the circles above the main entrance look the same.

The church in the photograph is in Old Rutherglen Road in Hutchesontown, which is in effect, the Gorbals.

I attach the photo of the kids playing for comparison.

Well done Barn. It looks like the one to me.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It's a perfectly reasonable scenario.

Yes, the taxi driver not seeing the man is the least acceptable part. Unless the man was behind a parked vehicle as the taxi passed.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hello Herlock,

Very plausible. Your suggestion is very good, not fanciful and easy to visualize. Can we say exactly (well as near as we can where Helen was dropped and if this works geographically so to speak. I guess you have had a look at this. I am also re listening to the Pod cast as I think Jean recalls the taxi drivers route and there is some info about what the taxi driver said about the dropping off.

Although I think Jean says that she didn't want BJ to know where she lived exactly when she was dropped as she was a bit wary of him. That does seem a bit odd as she then leaves him in the taxi with her sister.

Or have I imagined that. I am sure I either read that or it was in the Pod Cast.

NW

Hi NW,

I can’t recall anything being written or said about the location that Helen was dropped off unless I’ve forgotten it (which is always a possibility) Same goes for your suggestion about Jean although I might have heard something in the dim and distant. I’ll keep my ears open as I work my way through the podcasts.

[Ms Diddles]

I think you might have nailed it!

Thanks Barn!

I had been googlimg images of old Glasgow churches but couldn't find anything that closely resembled the photograph.

Nice work!

[barnflatwyngarde]

Yes, it's usually the Gorbals in the old pictures isn't it?!

It's funny how it was one of the most notorious parts of Glasgow (No Mean City and all that) and now it's one of the most desirable parts of the city in terms of social housing.

Hi Ms D.
Is this the church in the photo?

The four spires look as if the crosses at the top have been removed, but to me it looks like a pretty good match.
The slats at the side look the same, and the circles above the main entrance look the same.

The church in the photograph is in Old Rutherglen Road in Hutchesontown, which is in effect, the Gorbals.

I attach the photo of the kids playing for comparison.

[Ms Diddles]

Scenario - Helen gets dropped off a distance from 95 Earl Street with BJ. (Maybe she didn’t expect him to get out of the taxi too if she thought that he was just seeing her home?) Apparently, according to George Puttock, the taxi driver saw BJ get out of the car after paying and he had the impression of some kind of disagreement between the two passengers. Maybe Helen ran off with BJ following? It’s hard to imagine her running very quickly in heels so he would have had little problem keeping her in sight. Taxi driver William MacDonald sees her running (around 200 yards from where he was found according to him) Maybe BJ was just a few yards behind her but he didn’t notice him dressed in darker clothing compared to Helen’s black and white coat? Helen doesn’t try to flag down the taxi because she’s only 300 yards from home and believes that she’ll get there. Maybe she just saw this guy as an annoying, boring, straight-laced kind of person who she just wanted to lose? To her he didn’t look like the ‘killer’ type so she wasn’t in terror.

I think this makes good sense.

I'm inclined to think that the feisty Helen probably thought BJ was nothing she couldn't handle, and was more irritated and perhaps wary than truly scared (hence the lack of screaming).

For me it's a stretch to think that the taxi driver would fail to see a man pursuing the lady in the ocelot coat if he was wearing dark clothes.

Also as a general thing, you'd likely be surprised at how fast and confidently women who are used to wearing high heels can move in them.

It’s dark, she can hear him a distance behind her, so she decides to duck down the side of number 95 because she doesn’t want him following her all the way home to make a scene? Maybe by turning down that alleyway she thinks that BJ might think that it’s where she lives and that he wouldn’t want to deal with an irate husband but he followed her down there. She’s hiding, keeping quiet. He catches her by surprise. Perhaps at first he’s not violent, perhaps it was a case of “what’s wrong, I’m only being friendly?” but by now Helen is more scared and she bolts for the embankment. It’s not a very high embankment and BJ catches her easily and they struggle. He walks her back to the close with his hand over her mouth where he strangles her. As he’s doing it she grabs at his face and he bites her wrist.

That’s only 5 ‘maybe’s’ and a couple of ‘perhaps’s.

It's a perfectly reasonable scenario.

[Ms Diddles]

Hello Herlock,

Very plausible. Your suggestion is very good, not fanciful and easy to visualize. Can we say exactly (well as near as we can where Helen was dropped and if this works geographically so to speak. I guess you have had a look at this. I am also re listening to the Pod cast as I think Jean recalls the taxi drivers route and there is some info about what the taxi driver said about the dropping off.

Although I think Jean says that she didn't want BJ to know where she lived exactly when she was dropped as she was a bit wary of him. That does seem a bit odd as she then leaves him in the taxi with her sister.

Or have I imagined that. I am sure I either read that or it was in the Pod Cast.

NW

Hi NW!

That rings a bell with me too.

[Ms Diddles]

''I have no idea why they went to the back court, I can only assume it was for a kiss and cuddle.
If Helen had been attacked in the close itself, the echo would have reverberated throughout the building.
The close was in effect a huge echo chamber, so I assume that she went through the close to the back court willingly.''

That's a reasonable way to look at the situation. Maybe we have to take on board the police information which indicated that Helen Puttock could be free with her favours; but if that was the case, it surely applied to times when she and her husband were living apart. It is hard to imagine her being so consumed with passion for BJ and his biblical jazz routine when she has a husband and two children awaiting her return 100 yards along the road.

Yes, that's how I see it.

I can't recall details about the insinuation that Helen was a bit free and easy.

That may of course have been the case, but there's an equal chance that this was just the generalised misogyny of the era, and certain assumptions being made about a married mother kicking up her heels in a place like the Barrowlands.

From Jeannie's report of the conversation in the taxi, there's nothing there to indicate that passion was on the cards.

TBH all that "you know what happens to the adulterous woman?" chat combined with the argument at the cigarette machine and BJ's pissiness about offering Jeannie a cigarette sounds more like a cold shower to me!

It was apparent that Helen and Jeannie were impressed by BJ's impeccable manners at the dancing, but it sounds like they regarded him more as a bit of an eccentric oddball who was good for a free taxi home.

I just don't see Helen being so consumed with passion for this petulant weirdo that she would consider making out within spitting distance of her husband, kids, parents and all the neighbours who could recognise her.


It's possible she had a hand placed over her mouth and was bundled through to the backyard, from where she made a temporary escape up the embankment, before being subdued.

That's why I think the taxi driver's statement is important. Did he consider them as a couple, or did he expect BJ to travel on somewhere else to be dropped off? Linked to this, what did Helen Puttock think BJ's travel plans were after she left the cab? She could hardly have invited him back home (whether some sexual congress took place or not) so she must have had some inclination of what he intended to do next.

Absolutely!

She would presumably have asked him where he stayed at some point during the evening (standard Glasgow chat!) so would presumably have formed an impression of how he would be getting home.

It's a shame she didn't share this information with Jeannie!