Bible John (General Discussion)

[New Waterloo]

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

[Herlock Sholmes]

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.

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.

[cobalt]

''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.

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.

[Ms Diddles]

I wonder if I’m the only person who has drawn his own avatar.

I think you probably are, Herlock!

It's a very good Jeremy Brett.

I seem to remember Milchman UK (or Robin Asquith as I always thought of him) had a kind of portrait, but whether he did it himself or not, I dunno!

[Ms Diddles]

Ms D, my guess would probably be that it's the Gorbals.
The deprivation is very noticeable, and the council paid very little attention to the Gorbals, until they decided to raze it to the ground.
Also there are some fine old churches in that area of Glasgow. If not the Gorbals, possibly Bridgeton?

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.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Do you know, I have seen your avatar for all these years and never made the connection before!

Some mystery solver I am!!

I wonder if I’m the only person who has drawn his own avatar.

[Ms Diddles]

I agree about Oscar Marzarolli's photographs.
My avatar is a Marzarolli photo " Golden Haired Lass".

Do you know, I have seen your avatar for all these years and never made the connection before!

Some mystery solver I am!!

[Herlock Sholmes]

I agree about Oscar Marzarolli's photographs.
My avatar is a Marzarolli photo " Golden Haired Lass".

I thought it was you Barn. I know that they used to dress young lads as girls in the Victorian era.

[barnflatwyngarde]

It's great isn't it?

It looks like Bert Hardy.

I quite like Oscar Marzaroli's photos too.

They're extremely evocative and really bring the old tenements to life.

I agree about Oscar Marzarolli's photographs.
My avatar is a Marzarolli photo " Golden Haired Lass".

[barnflatwyngarde]

Great picture, Barn!

I am now trying to identify the church and work out where that is!

Ms D, my guess would probably be that it's the Gorbals.
The deprivation is very noticeable, and the council paid very little attention to the Gorbals, until they decided to raze it to the ground.
Also there are some fine old churches in that area of Glasgow. If not the Gorbals, possibly Bridgeton?

[Ms Diddles]

I wonder how many of those kids are still alive? A more sinister thought though - that lad on the right could have turned out to have been Bible John.

Ha! Now you say it, he does look rather tall, slim and sandy haired....

Is that a milk and roses complexion??

The wee girl in the picture has just stolen his last tin of beans and called him a ginger twat.

His anger is going to ferment into a lifetime of violence and misogyny, and it all started in that back court!

Nice spot, Herlock!

[Ms Diddles]

A very powerful photo where every face tells a story and church spires are visible behind the rather grim stonework of the tenements. I'd guess it was taken around the mid 1950s- maybe part of the Bert Hardy collection for Picture Post?

It's great isn't it?

It looks like Bert Hardy.

I quite like Oscar Marzaroli's photos too.

They're extremely evocative and really bring the old tenements to life.

[Ms Diddles]

Sorry guys, while I'm wallowing in nostalgia, I thought that I'd share this excellent photo.

It shows kids playing in the back court and shows the washing and the bins that were in the back court, another reason why there would no secure doors at the front or back of the close is that the binmen would need access to the bins in the back court.

Great picture, Barn!

I am now trying to identify the church and work out where that is!

[Ms Diddles]

Hi Ms D,
I spent the first 11 years of my life living in a glasgow tenement.

There were 3 houses on every landing with a shared toilet for every landing.
There was no door at the front or the back of the tenement, you could walk off the front street straight through to the back court.
The back court was a large area where the outside bins were and where the washing was hung up to dry.

The houses on Earl Street look as if they are quite modern for 1960's Glasgow, they are much nicer than the kind of tenement I grew up in (see photo attached).
However I can say with certainty that there would be no security doors obstructing entry to the close or the back court.

I have no idea why they went to the back court, I can only ussume 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.

Thanks for your thoughts Barn!

I've lived in a few Glasgow tenements in my time too (although by the time I got here they all had indoor toilets and locks on the close doors, so I've had it easy!).

I hadn't realised that they were all open access back in the day, so that answers my question.

I agree that any noise inside the close would have been heard by all tenants, so the attack could not have commenced there.

I do think the winching in the back court (to use an apt Glasweigan expression) sounds a bit incongruous coming so soon after the scuffle witnessed by Hannah, but maybe the falling out just added to the passion!

[Herlock Sholmes]

I wonder how many of those kids are still alive? A more sinister thought though - that lad on the right could have turned out to have been Bible John.