Bible John (General Discussion)

[Ms Diddles]

Well, it's not a theory I think is worthy of much discussion but it seems to originate from some detectives who worked on the case at the time. From what I have gleaned from this site, I think the theory that McInnes/BJ were two different people is limited to the Helen Puttock murder.

Like you, I think witness evidence clearly links Jemima McDonald and Helen Puttock to having been escorted home by the same person. For this person to have been 'hijacked' by a serial sex murderer not once, but twice, stretches credulity beyond breaking point.

Ahhh! Gotcha!

Thanks for the clarification and FWIW I completely agree.

[Ms Diddles]

And I can only come up with the fact that she was menstruating. A thing that’s perhaps surprising then is the absence of any other woman coming forward to claim that they had danced at the Barrowland with the same man. Then again, if they were married perhaps they didn’t trust the discretion of the Police? Or perhaps the police have a list of women who gave statements that they may have danced with him?

Yes!

When it comes to the Ripper I'm pretty much convinced that there will have been other women approached, perhaps some aborted attempts to solicit an unfortunate, perhaps some non fatal attacks.

In this case I'm not so sure.

BJ seems to have stood out like a sore thumb in the Barrowlands.

For all The Barras had a bit of a dubious reputation I find it hard to believe that EVERYONE who was there was married and there for nefarious purposes.

There must also have been plenty of people there just for the band and the dancing, who would have been perfectly free to speak up without it jeopardising their relationship or ruining their reputation.

Or as you say, perhaps they did and this information just isn't in the public domain.

Also, if it was the menstruation / thwarted passion that triggered BJ, you would think there would have been other women who had copped off with him, weren't on the rag and likely considered themselves to have had a very narrow escape.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Yes!

When it comes to the Ripper I'm pretty much convinced that there will have been other women approached, perhaps some aborted attempts to solicit an unfortunate, perhaps some non fatal attacks.

In this case I'm not so sure.

BJ seems to have stood out like a sore thumb in the Barrowlands.

For all The Barras had a bit of a dubious reputation I find it hard to believe that EVERYONE who was there was married and there for nefarious purposes.

There must also have been plenty of people there just for the band and the dancing, who would have been perfectly free to speak up without it jeopardising their relationship or ruining their reputation.

Or as you say, perhaps they did and this information just isn't in the public domain.

Also, if it was the menstruation / thwarted passion that triggered BJ, you would think there would have been other women who had copped off with him, weren't on the rag and likely considered themselves to have had a very narrow escape.

It’s interesting that you mentioned in a previous post about a bit of a mythology that may have grow up around Beattie as a kind of Supercop. It reminds me of bit of John Du Rose in the Jack the Stripper case who was known as Four Day Johnny for the speed that he usually cleared up cases. He didn’t catch the Stripper though. George Oldfield was highly regarded but failed to catch the Yorkshire Ripper. No doubt they were all very competent detectives but they were all in some ways out of their depth as regards specialised knowledge and the systems and resources that were in place at the time that they were working. And like any business I suppose that ‘cliques’ existed. Those who were in Beattie’s favour were probably less likely to be critical of him years later and were more likely to perhaps put him on some kind of pedestal. Caution is the watchword I’d say when it comes to judging these people. We can all be wrong. (Apart from me of course)

I seem to remember, on the podcast, it being mentioned that an officer at the time suggested investigating the area where the victim was seen getting on the bus but was ‘slapped down’ by Beattie. Was that an Officer years later trying to say ‘if only they had listened to me,’ with Beattie basically saying ‘I’ll do the thinking around here?’ Or was it simply an embittered officer doing a bit of point scoring? I don’t know.

Another ‘mythology’ might be Jeannie’s suggestion that BJ stood out like a sore thumb. He may have been a bit smarter/straight-laced than many of the men that went there but he can hardly have been the kind of bloke that caused everyone to stop and stare as if he was dressed like Sid Vicious. He couldn’t really have stood out that much. Maybe Jeannie was being a bit like Beattie when he claimed that he’d have known him if he’d seen him. Maybe she was perhaps exaggerating her observational skills a little? Again though, maybe not.

[Ms Diddles]

It’s interesting that you mentioned in a previous post about a bit of a mythology that may have grow up around Beattie as a kind of Supercop. It reminds me of bit of John Du Rose in the Jack the Stripper case who was known as Four Day Johnny for the speed that he usually cleared up cases. He didn’t catch the Stripper though.

Interesting!

I have heard of that case but it's not one that I'm at all familiar with.

George Oldfield was highly regarded but failed to catch the Yorkshire Ripper. No doubt they were all very competent detectives but they were all in some ways out of their depth as regards specialised knowledge and the systems and resources that were in place at the time that they were working. And like any business I suppose that ‘cliques’ existed. Those who were in Beattie’s favour were probably less likely to be critical of him years later and were more likely to perhaps put him on some kind of pedestal. Caution is the watchword I’d say when it comes to judging these people. We can all be wrong. (Apart from me of course)

I seem to remember, on the podcast, it being mentioned that an officer at the time suggested investigating the area where the victim was seen getting on the bus but was ‘slapped down’ by Beattie. Was that an Officer years later trying to say ‘if only they had listened to me,’ with Beattie basically saying ‘I’ll do the thinking around here?’ Or was it simply an embittered officer doing a bit of point scoring? I don’t know.

I guess it could be either.

That must have been from one of the earlier podcasts in the series (that I didn't listen to on Sunday) as it rings a bell but only very vaguely.

Was that the possible sighting of Pat Docker after her night at the Barrowlands (IIRC somewhere on the Southside quite near her home)?

Another ‘mythology’ might be Jeannie’s suggestion that BJ stood out like a sore thumb. He may have been a bit smarter/straight-laced than many of the men that went there but he can hardly have been the kind of bloke that caused everyone to stop and stare as if he was dressed like Sid Vicious. He couldn’t really have stood out that much. Maybe Jeannie was being a bit like Beattie when he claimed that he’d have known him if he’d seen him. Maybe she was perhaps exaggerating her observational skills a little? Again though, maybe not.

I'm inclined to think that he would have stood out among the Barrowland regulars.

In terms of his appearance, when I first moved to Glasgow from Yorkshire I remember being quite surprised at how much shorter the men were up here.

6ft or thereabouts wouldn't be circus-freak tall, but it would have made him conspicuous enough.

On top of that, the sandy hair, clean cut image along with the good quality but slightly unfashionable clothes would have been quite unusual.

In a place like the Barrowlands women would have been checking out the talent, and men would have been checking out the competition.

IIRC the two witnesses who saw him walking home with Mima independently stated that he was quite good looking, so that would not have gone unnoticed by the ladies at the dance hall.

More than his appearance though, I can't help but think that his well spoken voice and slightly superior behaviour (standing up whenever the ladies got up and pulling their chairs out for them, and the soft spoken, non-sweary, rather pompous authority that he exerted during the whole cigarette machine incident) would have been extremely unusual in that place at that time.

Perhaps (like Beattie) I am relying a bit too heavily on Jeannie's statements but I personally read her as being quite perceptive.

Not infallible, but she seems to have picked up on some quite interesting and subtle details which I don't think would be the case with a lot of witnesses.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I'm inclined to think that he would have stood out among the Barrowland regulars.

In terms of his appearance, when I first moved to Glasgow from Yorkshire I remember being quite surprised at how much shorter the men were up here.

6ft or thereabouts wouldn't be circus-freak tall, but it would have made him conspicuous enough.

On top of that, the sandy hair, clean cut image along with the good quality but slightly unfashionable clothes would have been quite unusual.

In a place like the Barrowlands women would have been checking out the talent, and men would have been checking out the competition.

IIRC the two witnesses who saw him walking home with Mima independently stated that he was quite good looking, so that would not have gone unnoticed by the ladies at the dance hall.

More than his appearance though, I can't help but think that his well spoken voice and slightly superior behaviour (standing up whenever the ladies got up and pulling their chairs out for them, and the soft spoken, non-sweary, rather pompous authority that he exerted during the whole cigarette machine incident) would have been extremely unusual in that place at that time.

Perhaps (like Beattie) I am relying a bit too heavily on Jeannie's statements but I personally read her as being quite perceptive.

Not infallible, but she seems to have picked up on some quite interesting and subtle details which I don't think would be the case with a lot of witnesses.

It does raise the question though of why he was so at seemingly ease that after killing Pat Docker he went back twice to kill again apparently unconcerned that he might stand out. I think that’s exactly what he did do but it makes me wonder about how he was thinking at the time but I’m wary of falling into the trap of judging his actions and thought processes in the light of how I would have thought and reacted in those circumstances. After Jemima MacDonald was killed they had the Patterson picture everywhere. Why didn’t he lie low or pick another hunting ground? Might this suggest a man who simply not care if he got caught or not?

He goes back to the same place for victims.
He was probably seen with MacDonald by a neighbour at the crime scene and yet he still kills her.
He was seen with Helen and could be easily identified and yet he still killed her.

Option one: he didn’t set out to kill them but was triggered by something.
Option two: he was on some kind of downward spiral and couldn’t care less if he was caught or not.

[cobalt]

I think Ms Diddles is correct in focusing on witnesses from the Barrowland. There must have been potential riches in the statements obtained. 'Checking out the talent' is a very pithy way of describing it and Beattie, despite some reservations some of us have about him, must have had a keen eye for witness testimony. He knew Glasgow, the Glasgow that was a 'dancing city' in much the same way that Liverpool was a 'singing city.'

I commented earlier on how we tend to see the female victims as desperate lonely hearts, and how there is nothing to substantiate this. Women generally do not go to dance halls on their own. But the same applies to blokes: having a pal in tow gives a man a certain social acceptance, offers a choice of partners to the women and, if all fails, at least you have someone to commiserate with when given the brush off. We are always led to think of BJ being on his own but he had been to the Barrowland at least twice- probably more I suspect- and from what we can gather there were two work colleagues there that night as well. This image of the cold, slightly aloof loner is part of the problem in how we see the crime in my opinion. And as some of us have noted, it would be interesting to know about other partners that Helen and BJ danced with that evening.

Why did the Bible John inquiry fail? I don't know but the Yorkshire Ripper case offers some clues. We are now encouraged to see the chronic failure of that inquiry as a technocratic failure but to me that exculpates the police. Due to his accumulation of victims the Ripper squad collected a good amount of information that should have allowed them to put Sutcliffe closer to the frame than he was when arrested. ( I think he was not even in the top 100 suspects?)They had good photofits from surviving victims; they knew his approximate age and his shoe size; the worn tread on his right boot suggested a lorry driver; they were confident he worked locally due to a recovered new bank note he gave to one of the victims; they knew he had a gap between his front teeth; they knew his blood group; they had a fair idea of the cars he drove during his murder spree which could be confirmed by the PNC; Sutcliffe's car was one (perhaps one of many, to be fair) regularly spotted in traditional 'red light' areas. It should not have taken a computerised system to tie that information together and hone in on a smallish range of suspects.

The Glasgow police knew a fair bit about about BJ. They knew he was local (something the Ripper enquiry completely ballsed up.) They knew he had frequented the Barrowland where he must have been spotted at sometime. They had a more than decent photofit to work from. They knew he was quite tall, smartly dressed, had reddish hair and smoked Embassy cigarettes. They knew his blood group and they knew he had a working knowledge of the Bible. They could also assume he did not live in the west of the city if the late bus sighting was to be trusted. Given the late hour of the murder of Helen Puttock, BJ must have had somewhere in Glasgow to stay overnight. That's not as much as the Ripper squad had but it is a decent start. And to finish where I started, the Ripper squad had no witnesses that saw Sutcliffe and his victims together: the BJ inquiry did. They should have done better at tracking him down.

[cobalt]

I should correct that previous post. We believe that John McInnes attended the Barrowland where two of his work colleagues were also having a night dancing, but we do not know if John McInnes was Bible John.

[New Waterloo]

Hello Ms Diddles. Been thinking about your question could all 3 victims been killed by different people. Well yes they could have been. But my personal opinion is that there are two many similarities/connections linking the murders together.

The fact that all of the victims were at Barrowlands firmly establishes a link between them all.

I am trying to imagine a scenario where these murders have taken place and the victims had not been to Barrowlands. Would the police have linked the murders in that case.

I have to say yes. Although there are some differences between how the victims were killed (one left naked etc) there remain many similarities.

We are all struggling a bit as to how McInnes (if he is BJ) could be so brazen in the way he keeps going to Barrowlands, seen by so many witnesses and then goes on to murder.

There may be an answer to this. If he was relatively well known at the club (well at least by some, his work colleagues frequented there) then perhaps his best defense is to carry on his normal behavior. If he was to suddenly change behavior, not go out, become withdrawn etc would this not create suspicion amongst some.

friends, family acquaintances would say 'Johns being quiet, what's up with him, not going to Barrowlands' sort of thing. In simple language if he fronted it out it hides himself in plain sight. Does that make sense?

I suppose we all like the idea of the creeping in the shadows serial killer but maybe Bible John was not that sort of murderer.

I suppose where I struggle with McInnes is that although I think he is such a good suspect and the man in the taxi why havn't witnesses come forward with more information. Bit of a wall of silence which needs further thought.

NW

[Ms Diddles]

It does raise the question though of why he was so at seemingly ease that after killing Pat Docker he went back twice to kill again apparently unconcerned that he might stand out. I think that’s exactly what he did do but it makes me wonder about how he was thinking at the time but I’m wary of falling into the trap of judging his actions and thought processes in the light of how I would have thought and reacted in those circumstances. After Jemima MacDonald was killed they had the Patterson picture everywhere. Why didn’t he lie low or pick another hunting ground? Might this suggest a man who simply not care if he got caught or not?

He goes back to the same place for victims.
He was probably seen with MacDonald by a neighbour at the crime scene and yet he still kills her.
He was seen with Helen and could be easily identified and yet he still killed her.

Option one: he didn’t set out to kill them but was triggered by something.
Option two: he was on some kind of downward spiral and couldn’t care less if he was caught or not.

Yes, for me if we just had the murder of Helen Puttock in isolation I would entertain the possibility that the guy she danced with in full view of everyone, the guy who created an unnecessary scene at the cigarette machine involving Helen, Jeannie, Castlemilk John, the Barrowlands manager and assistant manager, the guy who shared a taxi with her and her sister right across the city was not in fact Helen's killer.

It tallies too well though with the witnesses who saw him walking Mima home and the neighbour who waved at them shortly before he killed Mima.

It's the same completely reckless behaviour, which I imagine must be fairly unusual in such crimes.

It's one of your two options above or perhaps a combination of them, with a little compulsion thrown in for good measure.

[Ms Diddles]

I think Ms Diddles is correct in focusing on witnesses from the Barrowland. There must have been potential riches in the statements obtained. 'Checking out the talent' is a very pithy way of describing it and Beattie, despite some reservations some of us have about him, must have had a keen eye for witness testimony. He knew Glasgow, the Glasgow that was a 'dancing city' in much the same way that Liverpool was a 'singing city.'

I commented earlier on how we tend to see the female victims as desperate lonely hearts, and how there is nothing to substantiate this. Women generally do not go to dance halls on their own. But the same applies to blokes: having a pal in tow gives a man a certain social acceptance, offers a choice of partners to the women and, if all fails, at least you have someone to commiserate with when given the brush off. We are always led to think of BJ being on his own but he had been to the Barrowland at least twice- probably more I suspect- and from what we can gather there were two work colleagues there that night as well. This image of the cold, slightly aloof loner is part of the problem in how we see the crime in my opinion. And as some of us have noted, it would be interesting to know about other partners that Helen and BJ danced with that evening.

I have pondered that one myself too.

Could he have been there with some friends or acquaintances (which I guess would be common practice when going out dancing)?

It's possible of course.

If so, you would have to think it likely that those same friends or acquaintances would have harboured suspicion once they became aware of the murders and may well have spoken to the police.

Why did the Bible John inquiry fail? I don't know but the Yorkshire Ripper case offers some clues. We are now encouraged to see the chronic failure of that inquiry as a technocratic failure but to me that exculpates the police. Due to his accumulation of victims the Ripper squad collected a good amount of information that should have allowed them to put Sutcliffe closer to the frame than he was when arrested. ( I think he was not even in the top 100 suspects?)They had good photofits from surviving victims; they knew his approximate age and his shoe size; the worn tread on his right boot suggested a lorry driver; they were confident he worked locally due to a recovered new bank note he gave to one of the victims; they knew he had a gap between his front teeth; they knew his blood group; they had a fair idea of the cars he drove during his murder spree which could be confirmed by the PNC; Sutcliffe's car was one (perhaps one of many, to be fair) regularly spotted in traditional 'red light' areas. It should not have taken a computerised system to tie that information together and hone in on a smallish range of suspects.

The Glasgow police knew a fair bit about about BJ. They knew he was local (something the Ripper enquiry completely ballsed up.) They knew he had frequented the Barrowland where he must have been spotted at sometime. They had a more than decent photofit to work from. They knew he was quite tall, smartly dressed, had reddish hair and smoked Embassy cigarettes. They knew his blood group and they knew he had a working knowledge of the Bible. They could also assume he did not live in the west of the city if the late bus sighting was to be trusted. Given the late hour of the murder of Helen Puttock, BJ must have had somewhere in Glasgow to stay overnight. That's not as much as the Ripper squad had but it is a decent start. And to finish where I started, the Ripper squad had no witnesses that saw Sutcliffe and his victims together: the BJ inquiry did. They should have done better at tracking him down.

I can see why there have always been suspicions of some kind of cover up.

On paper they should certainly have caught him (perhaps even after the second murder).

Beattie acknowledged that they absolutely should have nailed him too and seemed extremely frustrated that they had failed.

I'd almost suggest that he must have been some short, stocky, black haired, bearded Glasgow rough or someone so far removed from the photo fit and all the witness descriptions, but alas it's the tall, slim sandy haired guy who is in fact seen all over the place in this case.

Even if we assume for one minute that Jeannie had dreadful eyesight and even worse recall, it's the sandy guy who is seen with Mima before her murder and the Sandy guy who is seen looking dishevelled catching a bus shortly after Helen's murder.

I seem to recall that the witness descriptions from the Barrowlands staff were a bit different.

Do we have those or are they lost to the mists of time?

[New Waterloo]

I think this could be important. It probably has been said before. If it has apologies.

I believe Pat Dockers handbag was found in the River Dart. Looking at Google maps this appears miles from the murder scene at Carmichael Place. Doesn't look like its easily reached by public transport. Strong suggestion the murderer had a car which I know many including Herlock have suggested could have been possible.

NW

[Ms Diddles]

Hello Ms Diddles. Been thinking about your question could all 3 victims been killed by different people. Well yes they could have been. But my personal opinion is that there are two many similarities/connections linking the murders together.

The fact that all of the victims were at Barrowlands firmly establishes a link between them all.

I am trying to imagine a scenario where these murders have taken place and the victims had not been to Barrowlands. Would the police have linked the murders in that case.

I have to say yes. Although there are some differences between how the victims were killed (one left naked etc) there remain many similarities.

I think so too NW!

Glasgow was a violent city, but mainly in terms of gang related violence, drunken brawls and domestic assaults, but I doubt there were many murders of this nature.

It's interesting that when I listened to the podcast again I got the distinct impression that Audrey Gillan was quite sold on this idea that there were different perpetrators and BJ was a myth.

I thought she handled the victims relatives with great sensitivity and she seemed to have developed a real rapport with Alex Docker and Mima's granddaughter, Sammy.

She saw fit to inform them that two of the investigating officers had revealed to her their conviction that there was no Bible John and they had stated that they felt an apology was owed to these relatives from the police for the smokescreen.

The relatives found this information quite hard to process and extremely distressing.

I just thought it was interesting that Audrey Gillan placed enough weight on this multiple killer theory and yet all of us posting on this thread have rejected it.


We are all struggling a bit as to how McInnes (if he is BJ). could be so brazen in the way he keeps going to Barrowlands, seen by so many witnesses and then goes on to murder.

There may be an answer to this. If he was relatively well known at the club (well at least by some, his work colleagues frequented there) then perhaps his best defense is to carry on his normal behavior. If he was to suddenly change behavior, not go out, become withdrawn etc would this not create suspicion amongst some.

friends, family acquaintances would say 'Johns being quiet, what's up with him, not going to Barrowlands' sort of thing. In simple language if he fronted it out it hides himself in plain sight. Does that make sense?

Yes, it makes perfect sense.

I hadn't really looked at it from this angle before but it's certainly a possibility

I suppose we all like the idea of the creeping in the shadows serial killer but maybe Bible John was not that sort of murderer.

Yes, plus once we've generally accepted a particular narrative, it becomes quite hard to rethink it clearly and start from scratch so to speak.

I suppose where I struggle with McInnes is that although I think he is such a good suspect and the man in the taxi why havn't witnesses come forward with more information. Bit of a wall of silence which needs further thought.

NW

Or they have and those statements have disappeared over the years.

Thanks for adding your thoughts!

[New Waterloo]

Correction River Cart. Sorry

NW

[Ms Diddles]

I think this could be important. It probably has been said before. If it has apologies.

I believe Pat Dockers handbag was found in the River Dart. Looking at Google maps this appears miles from the murder scene at Carmichael Place. Doesn't look like its easily reached by public transport. Strong suggestion the murderer had a car which I know many including Herlock have suggested could have been possible.

NW

Hmmmmmm! I can feel a stroll or a drive around the southside coming on this weekend!

[barnflatwyngarde]

Hmmmmmm! I can feel a stroll or a drive around the southside coming on this weekend!

Hi Ms D, if you venture forth this weekend, it is a 350 yard walk from 27 Carmichael Place to 105 Carmichael Place which is the shortest route to White Cart Water.

Not very far at all , if that is where the killer dumped some of Helen's possessions.