Bible John (General Discussion)

[Ms Diddles]

That’s intriguing Barn. And of course according to Detecive McEwan and his team an effort had been made to change the numbers on the index to wipe out any reference to any missing report of the interview with Mrs Palka. Perhaps the police found the Moylan’s card but they couldn’t narrow it to a specific suspect. Then Mrs Palka names McInnes perhaps and they connect him to Moylan’s and the card. If that was the case then perhaps it explains why the big guns all wanted to be ‘in at the kill’ if they were thinking that it was game over for Bible John at last?

Oh, I had forgotten all about the numbers on the index.

It's easy to see why a cover up is suspected, isn't it?

I know police procedures were perhaps a bit more lax in 1969, but if Mrs Palka was pointing a finger at John McInnes, you would think that the last person on the force who would be conducting that interview would be...........Jimmy McInnes though, wouldn't you, or was "conflict of interests" just not a thing then?

[Ms Diddles]

There is a fascinating comment made in Charles Stoddart's book "Bible John: Search for a Sadist".

"These early enquiries produced a suspect immediately: he fitted the description given by Jeannie, he had been at the Barrowland on the Thursday, he was married but was known to frequent the dancing. Someone told the police of his identity and that he was believed to live in Stonehouse.
On the Sunday preparations were made for an identitification parade to be held at 11.00am but wasn't held until 5.00pm: the subject had moved from Stonehouse and the police chased around Lanarkshire all day until he was finally traced at Newarthill near Airdrie. But when he was paraded, Jeannie failed to identify anyone on the parade."
(Page 73) (my emphasis)

In episode 8 of Audrey Gillan's podcast the reinvestgation team mention that in "the first few days of the Helen Puttock investigation." A Mrs Palka gave the police a name of a suspect who she knew who was a regular at the Barrowland. Jimmy McInnes interviewed her, but there is no record of the interview in the case files.

Are these two incidents describing the same man?

Interesting find, Barn!

It's hard to say if these two incidents refer to the same man.

My initial thought was yes, but on consideration I think it likely that the names of quite a few Barrowland regulars would have been brought to police attention in the early stages of the investigation, and the police would likely have worked their way through a list.

I'd say it's possible but not a slam dunk!

[Ms Diddles]

That Castlemilk John was a slater by profession can be found in reports from the Daily Record, BBC Scotland and STV just to name the most obvious. The source of that information must be from police speaking to the media, whether on or off the record, in light of Jeannie Langford's testimony.

CJ had no reason to lie abut this in the Barrowland back in 1969 - even if he was just a 'roofer' - and it is hardly an attempt to give a man some elevated status. A slater would simply be considered as a worthy working class man, no more, no less. I assume he was telling the truth about being a slater, and also that he was living in Castlemilk, south of Glasgow. He had no inclination that a woman would be murdered later in the evening so apart from concealing any marital status he might have had, it would have been simpler just to stick to the truth. Most liars do.

Why did CJ not come forward later? It's hard to say. His connection to BJ seems to have simply been a casual meeting on the night of Helen Puttock's death. But perhaps the police have evidence of BJ and CJ being more closely linked hence the interest in the ferry crossing. But as George Puttock, Helen's husband later said, why was no photofit of Castlemilk John ever placed before the public? He could have been flushed out surely.

You would think so, wouldn't you Cobalt.

I guess for C.J. there was probably a sense of simply not wanting to get involved.

He was likely married and didn't want it to get out that he'd been down the Barrowlands (particularly on the night where it was notorious for being a hook up joint).

Putting myself in his shoes for a moment, I would have expected that knock on my door to come at anytime, so I think I'd have taken my chances and gone to the nearest police station to spill the beans.

At least that way I could try to control the narrative to some extent and it would be better than the police turning up to question me with the wife and kids at home.

Plus if another woman was killed, I'd have been wracked with guilt that I had been so cowardly and hadn't tried to help.

Keeping out of it was quite a gamble (for all the reasons mentioned).

It seems from what we know that the gamble paid off, but it could so easily have gone the other way.

[cobalt]

Senior detectives would not have descended on Hamilton police station on a mere hunch so yes, they seem to have been anticipating a celebratory photo opportunity. It still strikes me as odd however: all of the case notes and exhibits would have been logged at Maryhill police station in Glasgow so were the band of detectives heading to Hamilton not so much to interview McInnes but to oversee an ID parade? They were that confident?

If Jeannie failed to pick out McInnes that would certainly have burst their balloon yet they did have other eye witnesses as well. So far as we are aware none of them seemed to be called upon. In addition, there would have been some forensic evidence in terms of fibre transfer as well as teeth and blood group comparisons. McInnes' shoes and clothing should surely have been seized as well. I cannot understand why they seemed to drop all interest in him so quickly that no trace now remains of him being a suspect.

[Herlock Sholmes]

There is a fascinating comment made in Charles Stoddart's book "Bible John: Search for a Sadist".

"These early enquiries produced a suspect immediately: he fitted the description given by Jeannie, he had been at the Barrowland on the Thursday, he was married but was known to frequent the dancing. Someone told the police of his identity and that he was believed to live in Stonehouse.
On the Sunday preparations were made for an identitification parade to be held at 11.00am but wasn't held until 5.00pm: the subject had moved from Stonehouse and the police chased around Lanarkshire all day until he was finally traced at Newarthill near Airdrie. But when he was paraded, Jeannie failed to identify anyone on the parade."
(Page 73) (my emphasis)

In episode 8 of Audrey Gillan's podcast the reinvestgation team mention that in "the first few days of the Helen Puttock investigation." A Mrs Palka gave the police a name of a suspect who she knew who was a regular at the Barrowland. Jimmy McInnes interviewed her, but there is no record of the interview in the case files.
Are these two incidents describing the same man?

That’s intriguing Barn. And of course according to Detecive McEwan and his team an effort had been made to change the numbers on the index to wipe out any reference to any missing report of the interview with Mrs Palka. Perhaps the police found the Moylan’s card but they couldn’t narrow it to a specific suspect. Then Mrs Palka names McInnes perhaps and they connect him to Moylan’s and the card. If that was the case then perhaps it explains why the big guns all wanted to be ‘in at the kill’ if they were thinking that it was game over for Bible John at last?

[barnflatwyngarde]

There is a fascinating comment made in Charles Stoddart's book "Bible John: Search for a Sadist".

"These early enquiries produced a suspect immediately: he fitted the description given by Jeannie, he had been at the Barrowland on the Thursday, he was married but was known to frequent the dancing. Someone told the police of his identity and that he was believed to live in Stonehouse.
On the Sunday preparations were made for an identitification parade to be held at 11.00am but wasn't held until 5.00pm: the subject had moved from Stonehouse and the police chased around Lanarkshire all day until he was finally traced at Newarthill near Airdrie. But when he was paraded, Jeannie failed to identify anyone on the parade."
(Page 73) (my emphasis)

In episode 8 of Audrey Gillan's podcast the reinvestgation team mention that in "the first few days of the Helen Puttock investigation." A Mrs Palka gave the police a name of a suspect who she knew who was a regular at the Barrowland. Jimmy McInnes interviewed her, but there is no record of the interview in the case files.

Are these two incidents describing the same man?

[Herlock Sholmes]

That Castlemilk John was a slater by profession can be found in reports from the Daily Record, BBC Scotland and STV just to name the most obvious. The source of that information must be from police speaking to the media, whether on or off the record, in light of Jeannie Langford's testimony.

Cheers Cobalt. Strange isn’t it…all the stuff I’ve read on the case but that had never registered with me.

[cobalt]

That Castlemilk John was a slater by profession can be found in reports from the Daily Record, BBC Scotland and STV just to name the most obvious. The source of that information must be from police speaking to the media, whether on or off the record, in light of Jeannie Langford's testimony.

CJ had no reason to lie abut this in the Barrowland back in 1969 - even if he was just a 'roofer' - and it is hardly an attempt to give a man some elevated status. A slater would simply be considered as a worthy working class man, no more, no less. I assume he was telling the truth about being a slater, and also that he was living in Castlemilk, south of Glasgow. He had no inclination that a woman would be murdered later in the evening so apart from concealing any marital status he might have had, it would have been simpler just to stick to the truth. Most liars do.

Why did CJ not come forward later? It's hard to say. His connection to BJ seems to have simply been a casual meeting on the night of Helen Puttock's death. But perhaps the police have evidence of BJ and CJ being more closely linked hence the interest in the ferry crossing. But as George Puttock, Helen's husband later said, why was no photofit of Castlemilk John ever placed before the public? He could have been flushed out surely.

[Herlock Sholmes]

My knowledge of bridges is about as extensive as my knowledge of the ‘music’ of Girls Aloud Barn but i’m about as certain as I can be that those are two different bridges. Not just the square block that you pointed out but the gap between the bricks that form the arch and the horizontal ones above looks too great to me. Plus, the bricks that form the arch appear to have an outer row of narrower bricks. Unless the bridge has had some extensive reworking over the ensuing years?

[barnflatwyngarde]

Dont know if this has worked NW

Millbrae Bridge Langside Avenue

Hi NW,
If you look at the police divers photograph, you'll notice that there is a square block of stone on the lower arch of the bridge.

There doesn't seem to be a similar block on the Millbrae Bridge.

I have attached a better image of Millbrae bridge which shows this more clearly.

I would just like to say that I'm greatly impressed with the efforts, finds and conjectures that folk are contributing to this fascinating case.

[New Waterloo]

Dont know if this has worked NW

Millbrae Bridge Langside Avenue

[New Waterloo]

I found a picture of Millbrae bridge, the one at Langside Avenue on Google. It also looks very similar. I am really rubbish at posting photos. Any chance of you trying for me please Barnflat. I will keep trying

Thank you

NW

[barnflatwyngarde]

Now I have the correct river section it would be nice to know where on that stretch of river the handbag was found although there is the issue of the bag moving with tidal/water flows. Perhaps if it was near the bridge in the excellent photo then maybe thrown from that bridge if it can be identified and from there a route across the river taken by BJ.

There seems to be a footbridge heading South across White Cart Water very close to the murder scene. The other bridge at Langside Drive would be via a long footpath (if the offenders on foot) easier in a car.

NW

Great points NW.

You are correct that there is a small footbridge at the end of Carmichael Place that the killer could conceivably have used to dispose of Patricia's clothing.

I was intrigued as to why the photograph showed the police searching that specific area of water, there could of course have been several police underwater units searching other areas of the river, although I don't think that the police underwater unit would have been very large.

I think that the bridge in the photo is the one on Clarkston Road. (photo attached)

If they were searching near that particular bridge, I think that it may have been because they thought that the killer had a car.

[New Waterloo]

Now I have the correct river section it would be nice to know where on that stretch of river the handbag was found although there is the issue of the bag moving with tidal/water flows. Perhaps if it was near the bridge in the excellent photo then maybe thrown from that bridge if it can be identified and from there a route across the river taken by BJ.

There seems to be a footbridge heading South across White Cart Water very close to the murder scene. The other bridge at Langside Drive would be via a long footpath (if the offenders on foot) easier in a car.

NW

[New Waterloo]

Hello All. Thanks Barnflat for putting me right. I have lead you all up the garden path. Sorry. I was looking at the River cart where it joins the Clyde. still hopefully opened a bit more discussion.

Cheers all

NW