Bible John (General Discussion)

[barnflatwyngarde]

Barn,

We're pretty much on the same page but in my opinion Bavin-Mizzi isn't. Dress codes were strict regarding entry to all dance halls in the late 1960s and a tie was de rigeur. The hair style worn by Templeton in his photo, presumably 1967, was fine but anything longer might have risked refusal. This was still Sergeant Pepper era and before John Lennon went full Jesus Christ. But by 1969 restrictions had eased and in my home town the local rock group called Nazareth actually had the temerity to go on age without ties! That was considered a big moment at the time, believe me. I suspect a dance hall guy like Templeton would have followed the trends and looked much more 'hippie' by 1969 than in his photo in Bavin-Mizzis's book. Bible John was a 'square' and identified as such by Jeannie. There is no comparison between them Both worthy of the name by anyone who lived through that era.

The reasons for Templeton being quizzed are superficial at best. Beattie and Mizzi believe BJ set out in order to kill but, perhaps being a decent bloke, he gave the police a fighting chance by making his identity clear beforehand? And a printer becomes transformed into a man who works in a laboratory? Before marrying and leading a quiet life thereafter in the Mitchell Library, Glasgow? The whole notion is preposterous.

Templeton basked in the notoriety of being 'Bible John' amongst his work colleagues although that was also true of Sutcliffe in relation to being suspected of being the 'Yorkshire Ripper.' So we can't draw any conclusions from that. Templeton's upbringing in Yoker might be significant to him knowing bars in that area and the Puttock murder was committed in that area. So I won't dismiss him as a suspect- he does certainly tick a few boxes- but the 100% certainty of Mizzi is as tedious as David Wilson staking his professional reputation.

Cobalt, yeah I think that you're probably correct re the hair style(s).

The idea that a killer who had already killed twice, would obligingly give his real name to the victim and her sister is a bit of a stretch.
But who knows how the mind of a psychopath works?

Templeton certainly can't be ruled out, there are just too many "possible" links relating to the case.

It was reported recently that Bavin-Mizzi has determined that John Templeton has no living relatives, so the possible DNA trail dies there.

Personally, I think that there was a police cover-up of sorts, and that there was a man called John McInnes who probably had a DNA connection to the case.
What I am not sure about is whether Jeannie Langford ever saw John McInnes in a police identification parade.

[cobalt]

Barn,

We're pretty much on the same page but in my opinion Bavin-Mizzi isn't. Dress codes were strict regarding entry to all dance halls in the late 1960s and a tie was de rigeur. The hair style worn by Templeton in his photo, presumably 1967, was fine but anything longer might have risked refusal. This was still Sergeant Pepper era and before John Lennon went full Jesus Christ. But by 1969 restrictions had eased and in my home town the local rock group called Nazareth actually had the temerity to go on age without ties! That was considered a big moment at the time, believe me. I suspect a dance hall guy like Templeton would have followed the trends and looked much more 'hippie' by 1969 than in his photo in Bavin-Mizzis's book. Bible John was a 'square' and identified as such by Jeannie. There is no comparison between them Both worthy of the name by anyone who lived through that era.

The reasons for Templeton being quizzed are superficial at best. Beattie and Mizzi believe BJ set out in order to kill but, perhaps being a decent bloke, he gave the police a fighting chance by making his identity clear beforehand? And a printer becomes transformed into a man who works in a laboratory? Before marrying and leading a quiet life thereafter in the Mitchell Library, Glasgow? The whole notion is preposterous.

Templeton basked in the notoriety of being 'Bible John' amongst his work colleagues although that was also true of Sutcliffe in relation to being suspected of being the 'Yorkshire Ripper.' So we can't draw any conclusions from that. Templeton's upbringing in Yoker might be significant to him knowing bars in that area and the Puttock murder was committed in that area. So I won't dismiss him as a suspect- he does certainly tick a few boxes- but the 100% certainty of Mizzi is as tedious as David Wilson staking his professional reputation.

[barnflatwyngarde]

The police activity at the library locker has all the hallmarks of covering their backs. They could hardly have expected to find any usable DNA inside a locker (presumably metal?) after at least 14 years. But to impress the public, boost newspaper sales and increase sales of a real crime book it might be possible to exhume Templeton's body before discovering no firm conclusions can be reached. That will cost the public a pretty penny or two and leave a cloud over surviving family members but maybe inspire another suspect, so the process can be repeated again.

Bavin-Mizzi claims that BJ went out with the intent to kill so how does she square this belief with him giving his real name to Jeannie? And if she thinks the 1967 photo of Templeton (snazzy looking Glesca guy with slight sideburns, on the pull) resembles the iconic 1969 Bible John portrait (staid, shortish hair, rather aloof looking individual) then she was not around in the late 1960s. Her cultural compass is not up to the task.

What would be interesting to discover is why Templeton was questioned by police at the time.

Hi cobalt,
John Templeton's wife June, understood that the 2 police officers turned up to interview him at home for two specific reasons.
The first was that he matched the name given by the killer to Helen Puttock and her sister Jeannie.
The second was that he had lived in the Scotstoun area but had had moved before Helen Puttock's murder.

Re the comment on the comparison between the photo of Templeton, I can't agree with you on this particular point.

Lennox Paterson's portrait/photofit of the killer, to my eyes, does look very similar.

Scruffs weren't allowed into the Barrowland, and while i'm not sure if there was a formal dress code, there are plenty of photos and videos of the period showing smart young men in suits, shirts and ties.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hey Ms D!

Apparently the locker was reassigned to another attendant who was transferred to the community libraries, and it doesn't appear that the locker was reassigned after that.
So it appears that from the Police's point of view it was was worth a shot, but the intriguing thing to my mind is what was the catalyst for this move.

I suppose that it could have been nothing more than reacting to the points made in Jill Bavin-Mizzi's book. However if police reacted to every point made in the many true crime books published each year, they would have little time to do anything else.

We know that John Templeton was interviewed by police regarding the murders.

Is it possible that they had another look at the notes of that interview and found, or reinterpreted something from the interview that they thought was worth investigating further?

Re Herlock's query as to when Templeton left the Libraries Department, I don't know.

Templeton died aged 69 or 70 in 2015, so if he retired at the "normal" age of 65, it means that he would have left the department round about 2010.

The Templeton aspect of the case is interesting, and he does tick some of the boxes that we "think" we know about Bible John, however everything in Audrey Gillan's excellent podcast does point to a Lanarkshire connection.

I’ve already got the book listed for a re-read Barn. The thing that comes back to me, possibly more than anything, is this issue of the Moylan’s card which appears to have been the catalyst for McInnes’ entry into the case. I considered whether he was just a chat up merchant who happened to have given Helen Puttock his card at some point? The card wouldn’t have had his name on it but it would have triggered a visit to the shop. So what if it was Templeton after all and he was with Helen in the taxi but some time prior to that evening McInnes had tried chatting her up and gave her a card which the police found at the scene? Maybe the card that ‘John’ flashed at her in the club was something unconnected?

Certainly wouldn’t have been his library card though Barn.

[cobalt]

The police activity at the library locker has all the hallmarks of covering their backs. They could hardly have expected to find any usable DNA inside a locker (presumably metal?) after at least 14 years. But to impress the public, boost newspaper sales and increase sales of a real crime book it might be possible to exhume Templeton's body before discovering no firm conclusions can be reached. That will cost the public a pretty penny or two and leave a cloud over surviving family members but maybe inspire another suspect, so the process can be repeated again.

Bavin-Mizzi claims that BJ went out with the intent to kill so how does she square this belief with him giving his real name to Jeannie? And if she thinks the 1967 photo of Templeton (snazzy looking Glesca guy with slight sideburns, on the pull) resembles the iconic 1969 Bible John portrait (staid, shortish hair, rather aloof looking individual) then she was not around in the late 1960s. Her cultural compass is not up to the task.

What would be interesting to discover is why Templeton was questioned by police at the time.

[barnflatwyngarde]

Fascinating, Barn!

Thanks for that intriguing tidbit!

Presumably that same locker would have been used by hundreds of people in the intervening years though?

Don't get me wrong, it's worth a throw of the dice but I'm not sure how credible any findings would be after so long.

Hey Ms D!

Apparently the locker was reassigned to another attendant who was transferred to the community libraries, and it doesn't appear that the locker was reassigned after that.
So it appears that from the Police's point of view it was was worth a shot, but the intriguing thing to my mind is what was the catalyst for this move.

I suppose that it could have been nothing more than reacting to the points made in Jill Bavin-Mizzi's book. However if police reacted to every point made in the many true crime books published each year, they would have little time to do anything else.

We know that John Templeton was interviewed by police regarding the murders.

Is it possible that they had another look at the notes of that interview and found, or reinterpreted something from the interview that they thought was worth investigating further?

Re Herlock's query as to when Templeton left the Libraries Department, I don't know.

Templeton died aged 69 or 70 in 2015, so if he retired at the "normal" age of 65, it means that he would have left the department round about 2010.

The Templeton aspect of the case is interesting, and he does tick some of the boxes that we "think" we know about Bible John, however everything in Audrey Gillan's excellent podcast does point to a Lanarkshire connection.

[Ms Diddles]

I had a coffee yesterday (well tea actually) with some old work colleagues, and we were talking about our memories of working with John Templeton in the Mitchell Library.

My old boss told me that on the back of the Jill Bavin-Mizzi book on the case, the police turned up at the Mitchell Library and swabbed for DNA the locker that was used by John Templeton.

Damned interesting!

Fascinating, Barn!

Thanks for that intriguing tidbit!

Presumably that same locker would have been used by hundreds of people in the intervening years though?

Don't get me wrong, it's worth a throw of the dice but I'm not sure how credible any findings would be after so long.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I had a coffee yesterday (well tea actually) with some old work colleagues, and we were talking about our memories of working with John Templeton in the Mitchell Library.

My old boss told me that on the back of the Jill Bavin-Mizzi book on the case, the police turned up at the Mitchell Library and swabbed for DNA the locker that was used by John Templeton.

Damned interesting!

That is interesting Barn. How long since he’d used it?

[barnflatwyngarde]

I had a coffee yesterday (well tea actually) with some old work colleagues, and we were talking about our memories of working with John Templeton in the Mitchell Library.

My old boss told me that on the back of the Jill Bavin-Mizzi book on the case, the police turned up at the Mitchell Library and swabbed for DNA the locker that was used by John Templeton.

Damned interesting!

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’ve got a small grey hardback notepad that I’ve used in the past to make notes on the podcast along with any other thoughts or points that I’ve come across in books (after which I tend to gather the relevant stuff on my tablet) Looking back to one of the pages concerning the cold case detectives and the idea that Jeannie hadn’t actually seen McInnes on an ID parade I see that I’ve written in underlined capitols HOW DO THEY KNOW THIS?

[cobalt]

The exact wording from the cold case reported in The Times is:

''The original inquiry team said that she {Jeannie} had failed to pick anyone out, but it has now been established that McInnes was never included in an identity parade for her or for any other potentially important witnesses.''

I'm not sure how much faith to place in the wording in bold type. It seems there is no record of such an ID parade taking place but that is not quite the same thing as one never having taken place. The detectives working on the cold case acknowledged that paperwork was missing from the files, so I don't know how they could have 'established' what is claimed.

So far as I can gather two of the pieces of information that indicate McInnes was questioned in Hamilton on the Sunday (the police arriving at a relative's house, the Moyle's advertising card link) actually originate from his cousin Jimmy McInnes, the very man suspected of 'weeding' the files. Although I think there is paperwork to support the high ranking detectives heading off to Stonehouse.

Detectives like Muncie, Goodall, Dalglish and Beattie basked in their media image as crime busters so it's inconceivable they would have covered for a serial killer on the grounds of some personal friendship. Yet the failure to subject McInnes to an ID parade in front of a number of witnesses meant that he was never properly eliminated at the time, hence the later attempts at a DNA match.

[Herlock Sholmes]

To clarify: We now have two completely contradictory accounts of the McInnes ID parade.

According to Stoddart (1980) a man from Stonehouse was traced to Harthill (McInnes we have to assume) and an ID parade took place around 5pm on the Sunday. {Where?} Jeannie Langford failed to pick anyone out.

Yet cold case detectives announced in an article in The Times newspaper (2022) that McInnes avoided an ID parade, was hidden away from sight in Hamilton while his two co-workers were put on parade in Partick and naturally enough were not identified by Jeannie Langford. On being shown a photo of McInnes, admittedly many years later, she said she had never seen him before.{I appreciate that last part is ambiguous.}

So it remains unclear whether McInnes was ever put on an ID parade before Jeannie, never mind the other half a dozen witnesses that might have clarified matters.

There was no reason for high ranking detectives to swoop on Stonehouse unless they were intending to seize clothing from the suspect - something they could have delegated to local police anyhow.{Was this ever done?} McInnes should have been driven to Partick and processed there.

Frustrating isn’t the word.

It’s impossible to envision such high ranking officers swarming over to Stonehouse on the ‘off chance’ or for some piece of bog standard police work that uniform could easily have accomplished. The problem is that it’s difficult to avoid the impression that, at some point or other, something dodgy went on.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Cobalt,

Yes, you’d have thought that this incident, which we know definitely occurred, would have provided the police with a good focal point for jogging memories. Asking if anyone saw the incident would have been an obvious step and perhaps it happened but there is just no record of it? Again the issue of men and women not wanting partners to know where they were probably came into play to some extent but might we have expected someone at least to come forward? Not everyone there was married. I wonder if the location of the machine might have limited the amount of people that might have witnessed the scene? If it was located up a corner or somewhere that you would only see on the way to the loo or the cloakroom?

If Jeannie was the worse for wear that night and although we can’t prove it I personally wouldn’t dismiss it, might this have affected her ability to ID Bible John? A few drinks before and a bottle sneaked in would have done the trick to get someone from merry to drunk and I’m betting that some blokes sneaked something in to perhaps loosen the inhibitions of their dance partners, so perhaps Castlemilk was carrying something? We know that people aren’t always good at identifying faces. I don’t know but I certainly don’t want to dismiss Jeannie just because the spectre of drink has been raised.

[cobalt]

To clarify: We now have two completely contradictory accounts of the McInnes ID parade.

According to Stoddart (1980) a man from Stonehouse was traced to Harthill (McInnes we have to assume) and an ID parade took place around 5pm on the Sunday. {Where?} Jeannie Langford failed to pick anyone out.

Yet cold case detectives announced in an article in The Times newspaper (2022) that McInnes avoided an ID parade, was hidden away from sight in Hamilton while his two co-workers were put on parade in Partick and naturally enough were not identified by Jeannie Langford. On being shown a photo of McInnes, admittedly many years later, she said she had never seen him before.{I appreciate that last part is ambiguous.}

So it remains unclear whether McInnes was ever put on an ID parade before Jeannie, never mind the other half a dozen witnesses that might have clarified matters.

There was no reason for high ranking detectives to swoop on Stonehouse unless they were intending to seize clothing from the suspect - something they could have delegated to local police anyhow.{Was this ever done?} McInnes should have been driven to Partick and processed there.

[cobalt]

Hi HS,

I'd overlooked the cigarette machine dispute which really undermines Beattie's theory about BJ being a cold, premeditated killer. And yes, there must have been a few bystanders enjoying the drama of a man 'cruising for a bruising' from the bouncers. Maybe the fact there were a couple of women in the company spared BJ from being given the bum's rush out the front door. But bouncers never forget a face who has given trouble: they are as good witnesses as you will find. And yet we don't seem to have any record of bystanders giving an ID of the man involved in the incident. The cigarette machine incident might have been worth re-enacting in order to clarify witness statements.

We can also assume BJ was not a Catholic. When the women said they were Catholic he did not acknowledge any connection, something which even a lapsed Catholic or a Catholic who had abandoned the faith would surely have done. Maybe not much help given that still leaves around 70% of Glasgwegians who would have identified as Protestant but his conversation pointed to his having been brought up as part of a strict religious sect like the 'Wee Frees' or the Plymouth Brethren. Their numbers are very small. Were any enquiries made inside these organisations?

Glasgow is regarded as a football city with deep tribal loyalties but once again BJ places himself outside the common herd. In matters Rangers or Celtic he wryly described himself as an 'agnostic.' His taxi chat would have been designed to impress the two women but I can't see any reason to doubt the truth of what Jeannie recalled. He wasn't boastful. He quoted his father about the 'dens of iniquity' rather than proclaiming this as his own philosophy. He didn't claim the hole-in-one for himself but accredited it to a cousin. He said he'd once worked in a laboratory but stopped well short of claiming to be some kind of Einstein.

In summary, we didn't need some FBI profiler to narrow down BJ in terms of his religious background, social class, education or culture. Beattie and his team had all that provided to them within 48 hours.