Bible John (General Discussion)

[Herlock Sholmes]

The transcript does not read very well- I hope it comes across better in the podcast. Too breathless in style for my palate.

Occam's Razor suggests the McDonald sighting in South Street is a red herring at best. We know from taxi driver Hannah that he dropped Helen and the male passenger off in Earl Street. He retraced his route the following morning when the memory was fresh and police presence would have concentrated his thoughts. The Earl Place thoroughfare to Dumbarton Road- opposite Number 95- would have served as a decent landmark. We also know that police found the body of Helen in the backyard area of Number 95. The obvious conclusion to be drawn is that Helen was murdered soon after leaving the taxi by the male passenger who Hannah remembered being in a minor altercation with her.

The podcast does admit a few problems with the South Street sighting, such as why Helen did not turn right towards her flat 150 yards away, but instead climbed up an embankment, clambered over a fence, and headed for a friend's cottage 300 yards away to her left instead? And even if we accept she knocked on a door in Harland Cottages why was it necessary for Helen to be walking (or running by other accounts) along South Street, an industrial area where she was allegedly spotted by a passing taxi driver? This would have taken her even further from her own flat. Not addressed in the transcript is why BJ, having killed Helen somewhere along the embankment, took the trouble to drag the body back and lay it out for display in almost the very same location that the taxi had previously dropped them off!

So what was McDonald up to with his tale? I think he did see a woman in a white coat walking somewhere in the vicinity and convinced himself it was Helen Puttock in her ocelot outfit. I would be interested to see his statement and check whether it was made after a description of Helen's clothing had been made public. As for the timing, a taxi driver on a busy Saturday night has little concept of time as he dashes from place to place. He had no reason to recall what he saw at the time it happened so can hardly be expected to recall when he saw the woman. When it came to taxi testimony Hannah's was quite correctly the version favoured by the police.

You get the unfortunate impression that the person transcribing the podcast had never met a Scottish person before as neither Audrey Gillan, Marcello Mega or those voicing the police parts have ‘difficult’ accents. It’s a bit like the instructions that sometimes comes with stuff you buy from abroad.

As you’ve said, we have Hannah telling us where he dropped his two passengers (Earl Street a very few yards from number 95) so that if Helen did end up on South Street it would have had to have been after that. An obvious problem is that MacDonald only saw a woman. There was no man in pursuit. If there had been a struggle at the rear of number 95 and Helen had managed to get away it’s difficult to imagine how she could have put so much distance between herself and her killer that he wasn’t seen. There was grass between her shoe and heel so she still had her shoes on when she was found. So she was scrambling over a rough grassy area in shoes that probably had heels and she managed to put a significant distance between herself and a 30ish year old guy in flat shoes who, according to his own words, didn’t smoke or drink? It doesn’t seem likely? We’ve mentioned this before I know but ‘perhaps’ he saw her fairly briefly and the guy was walking a few yards behind; not wanting to draw attention to himself? But then we have to ask how he managed to get her back? Helen was no shrinking violet according to those that knew her.

As it stands I’m not totally decided either way but I think there’s more in favour of MacDonald either making this up or of him seeing a women in the distance in a coat that only resembled Helen’s or even that he saw another woman in an ocelot coat (coincidence, yes, but far less likely ones have happened)

[Herlock Sholmes]

I took this one from further to the left do that you can see all of the house. I don’t know if you can enlarge it Geddy?

It doesn’t matter if you can’t.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Herlock Sholmes is this the same place?

Cheers Geddy, I won’t ask ‘how’ you did it because it looks like most people are able to do this. Just not me.

I believe that Helen’s body was found underneath the window at the bottom right visible between the gap in the trees.

[Geddy2112]

Herlock Sholmes is this the same place?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Second attempt.

I give up. It’s impossible to post photographs. Why is it so complicated!!!!

I found that on Google Earth you can actually ‘walk’ along the top of the railway embankment so I screenshotted two pictures looking down at the rear of 95 Earl Street which is the best that we can achieve these days. You can tap the picture then expand it to some extent but I wish that I could just post a photo.

People have given me advice on the past but if it begins with ‘you just need to download’ then sorry but I’m not interested. Too complicated. Too time consuming. Too irritating.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’m guessing that these uploaded pictures won’t work. I’ll try one first.

I was right. It doesn’t work. I’ll try one more thing.

[cobalt]

The transcript does not read very well- I hope it comes across better in the podcast. Too breathless in style for my palate.

Occam's Razor suggests the McDonald sighting in South Street is a red herring at best. We know from taxi driver Hannah that he dropped Helen and the male passenger off in Earl Street. He retraced his route the following morning when the memory was fresh and police presence would have concentrated his thoughts. The Earl Place thoroughfare to Dumbarton Road- opposite Number 95- would have served as a decent landmark. We also know that police found the body of Helen in the backyard area of Number 95. The obvious conclusion to be drawn is that Helen was murdered soon after leaving the taxi by the male passenger who Hannah remembered being in a minor altercation with her.

The podcast does admit a few problems with the South Street sighting, such as why Helen did not turn right towards her flat 150 yards away, but instead climbed up an embankment, clambered over a fence, and headed for a friend's cottage 300 yards away to her left instead? And even if we accept she knocked on a door in Harland Cottages why was it necessary for Helen to be walking (or running by other accounts) along South Street, an industrial area where she was allegedly spotted by a passing taxi driver? This would have taken her even further from her own flat. Not addressed in the transcript is why BJ, having killed Helen somewhere along the embankment, took the trouble to drag the body back and lay it out for display in almost the very same location that the taxi had previously dropped them off!

So what was McDonald up to with his tale? I think he did see a woman in a white coat walking somewhere in the vicinity and convinced himself it was Helen Puttock in her ocelot outfit. I would be interested to see his statement and check whether it was made after a description of Helen's clothing had been made public. As for the timing, a taxi driver on a busy Saturday night has little concept of time as he dashes from place to place. He had no reason to recall what he saw at the time it happened so can hardly be expected to recall when he saw the woman. When it came to taxi testimony Hannah's was quite correctly the version favoured by the police.

[Herlock Sholmes]

This is the transcript covering the Taxi Driver Sighting…


So why use a reef knot?

You’re anxious. I’ll just tie a knot.

No, but normal people don’t know how to do reef knots.

You need to have a certain amount of knowledge.

She’s in the Army. (On the actual recording it’s not ‘she’s’)

This is a significant detail, one that changes the narrative of Helen’s murder.

Now, I felt she’d come out and knit out her clothes, and they were in the back clothes(in the recording it’s actually being said that the cold case detectives felt that that they had come out and were in the back close) and they were having a wee bit of a struggle. And she said no, and she’d run across the back.

To the railway embankment.

To the railway embankment. Now, there’s a small mound of earth there. She’d try to get up that mound of earth and succeeded and was trying to get up the embankment when he caught her and pulled her back down.

There were signs of this on the railway embankment.

On the railway embankment. There was also some old, docking stuff, you know, withered on the doings, between the ligature and the neck, where it had on the ground.

Beattie says in that interview that there was dock leaves. Can’t see any dock leaves. I can see them.

No, how’s that? That’s not a dock leaf.

Dandelion leaves.

I went back to Earl Street again. I was trying to work out how long it would take to get from the back close at number 95 to South Street. I had in my mind something else Jim and Brian told me.

Something I didn’t know about before. Something that seemed hugely important. A possible sighting of Helen from the night of her murder after she got out of the taxi with Bible John.

If my memory is correct, in the initial statements, there was a guy called William MacDonald who was a taxi driver, sees a woman in an ocelot coat running down South Street at 1am. And that’s about nothing else from him. Never been interviewed. I don’t know what enquiry was made into that at the time.

It was a short time.

At that time, that sighting of that woman in the ocelot coat, that sighting was seen roughly at the same time. Roughly at the same time. The incident was occurring. The incident occurred or was to occur, if I remember right. It sort of tied in.

Yes.

And that sighting there was only.

Couple of hundred yards.

You’re lucky if it was 200 yards.

Couple of hundred yards from where the locus was.

As far as your examination of the hundreds and hundreds of pieces of paper is, it’s never mentioned again.

Inquiry.

That inquiry.

It would be a hell of a coincidence for another woman wearing a fake fur coat in black and white ocelot print to be walking along an empty industrial street at 1am at a Friday morning. If it was Helen, it then it changes our understanding of her last few minutes alive. This seems to me a crucial piece of evidence that should have been properly followed up.

But after the taxi driver came forward and gave a statement, no one asked him any more about it. His words were just filed away. I couldn’t get him out of my head though.

If Helen had managed to somehow run up the railway embankment, why didn’t she head for home just eight doors down? She ran off in the opposite direction.

So, if it is the second theory, and that she does come up here and runs along. I mean, looking down the sides here, it does look like, oh my god, you could find a body down there anytime.

What it tells me when I’m up here is that if it is the that she ran along here and she was dragged or carried or force-marched back, it’s with quite a lot of intention on the person that’s making her do that, because you could just chuck her down the banking.

So here we are at another bridge.

And for me, the exit down there is not that easy or clear cut, but that’s because there’s a fence being put up, but anybody who was desperate and really needed to get down could get down. I’m just not wanting to hurt myself. So, as far as I know, we’re coming up to Harland Cottages, the series of houses that would have been built for workers at Harland and Wolfe.

So, if I’d come down here, I mean, you come straight down that path, and you come straight out, down 11 Harland Cottages, and I go to this door, I’m banging on my friends door, and she’s not in.

I’d remembered that Helen had a friend, Jean O’Donnell, who lived at 11 Harland Cottages. She’d also been at the Barrowland that night. Is this where Helen went?

Was she knocking on her pals door in the hope she’d let her in? But Jean wasn’t in. She’d got a lumber and was in a guys car just a few streets away.

And when I come out on the main road, I’m almost where the taxi driver saw the woman in the ocelot coat.

If that was Helen on South Street, what did she do then? The taxi driver didn’t report seeing anyone with her and he didn’t describe the woman as being in a distressed state. If this was Helen and she was terrified, wouldn’t she have flagged the taxi driver down?

Perhaps she ran up the banking to get away from someone, but didn’t think her life was in danger.

We don’t think she was murdered at the rear of the house. She was murdered further along at the railway embankment and dragged back. And what they said was, an initial markings in the grassy slope, was that she tried to escape and been dragged back down.

When the post- mortem was conducted, there were several pieces of vegetation found between the ligature and the skin on the back of Helen’s neck. But the location where her body was found was a tarmac path.

Her thesis was that she had been murdered somewhere else dragged back and the body dumped there because she wouldn’t go down and fight quietly.

The second taxi driver sighting was one of the first things that Brian and Willie Lindsay brought to Joe Beattie when they questioned him.

He had no knowledge of the sighting. Now, that was in their statements. The original statements was there.

[Herlock Sholmes]

just listening to the podcast again where Helens body is described at the murder scene. Listening again I am struck by the level of anger/violence displayed by the murderer. It is a vindictive nasty attack. (I realise that may be seen as a bit obvious to some) but the actions I think are saying something. Apparently Helens bra was ripped in two and the top half of her tights are ripped away. Along with the sanitary towel placed under her arm it feels to me like a punishing, belittling attack. It is not for example an attack which ends in death through a simple excess of force (I am not down playing the nastiness of other murders) This man has a serious grudge and hatred of women in my view or an extreme power fanatic.

NW

I agree NW. It appears that all three women were punched in the face presumably just before they were strangled.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Look forward to that.

McInnes staying over in Berkeley Street near Glasgow city centre with an uncle and aunt seems reasonable on paper. But consider the reality. McInnes has not just missed his last bus to Stonehouse which I assume would have left nearer 11 o'clock than midnight. He is knocking up relatives who are presumably in their 50s leading a fairly quiet life, after 2am in the morning. And not for a 'one off' if he was responsible for the murder of Jemima McDonald who was last seen around 12.40am. Abusing their hospitality whilst in a dishevelled state seems unlikely to me.

Agreed. The only other possibility is that his aunt and uncle might have given him a key knowing that if he ever missed his bus it would have been in the early hours while they were in bed.

[New Waterloo]

just listening to the podcast again where Helens body is described at the murder scene. Listening again I am struck by the level of anger/violence displayed by the murderer. It is a vindictive nasty attack. (I realise that may be seen as a bit obvious to some) but the actions I think are saying something. Apparently Helens bra was ripped in two and the top half of her tights are ripped away. Along with the sanitary towel placed under her arm it feels to me like a punishing, belittling attack. It is not for example an attack which ends in death through a simple excess of force (I am not down playing the nastiness of other murders) This man has a serious grudge and hatred of women in my view or an extreme power fanatic.

NW

[cobalt]

Look forward to that.

A couple of minor points in response to recent posts.

A fit, young male can certainly walk a brisk 15 minute mile and we assume that BJ, whoever he was, came into that category. But walking under street lighting is a slower process since you have to watch out for uneven pavements, dog mess or in the early hours of Glasgow a troublesome drunk. It can be even slower if you don't know the area so well. Hilly terrain also slows you down although I think Dumbarton Road is a pretty level route. So I would put the travelling time from Earl Street to the possible Gardner Street sighting nearer to 20 minutes per mile, which makes 50 minutes over the distance. Add on the duration of the attack, the partial unclothing of the victim, the rooting through the handbag itself, the dumping of the handbag and some attempt at cleaning oneself up and I would estimate another 15 minutes. Which, assuming the murder of Helen Puttock began around 0.45am, puts us very close to the 2am sighting in Gardner Street of the BJ look-alike who alighted the late night bus.

McInnes staying over in Berkeley Street near Glasgow city centre with an uncle and aunt seems reasonable on paper. But consider the reality. McInnes has not just missed his last bus to Stonehouse which I assume would have left nearer 11 o'clock than midnight. He is knocking up relatives who are presumably in their 50s leading a fairly quiet life, after 2am in the morning. And not for a 'one off' if he was responsible for the murder of Jemima McDonald who was last seen around 12.40am. Abusing their hospitality whilst in a dishevelled state seems unlikely to me.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’m going to have another look tomorrow at what Audrey Gillan said about William MacDonald’s sighting of the woman in the ocelot coat because she, having visited the scene, clearly thinks that it was likely to have been Helen Puttock. With the quick look I’ve just had at the transcript I just can’t picture what she’s talking about. I’ll write up the short passage tomorrow and see if you, Barn or Ms D can make sense of it.

[cobalt]

I understand that four top ranking Glasgow Police detectives visited Stonehouse (McInnes' home village) within a few days of the Helen Puttock murder. Since this place is around 25 miles outside Glasgow, where the murder took place, these detectives were well away from their 'manor.' So they must have had a compelling reason to go there and, reportedly, speak to John McInnes at Hamilton Police Station. Yet there is no record of this alleged interview and the official position remains that, despite such an unusual burst of activity, nothing of substance to the murder was obtained by their efforts: neither evidence for, nor evidence against, John McInnes.

I cannot see how four Glasgow detectives converging on Hamilton Police Station would help to lower the profile of the inquiries in relation to Jimmy McInnes. If Jimmy had not originated from the area- I suspect he did- then his relationship to the other McInnes family members would surely have been known in such a small place. The whole police/local grapevine would have been full of rumours when the big shots from Glasgow arrived in their police cars.

A lower key approach would have been to have Sandy McInnes drive person of interest, John McInnes, in his own car to the relevant police station in Glasgow to clear matters up. Some Glasgow police would have noticed the name of McInnes being the same as one of their serving officers, but it's not an uncommon name in Scotland and Glasgow is a big city. That would have created less of a furore than descending on Stonehouse.

To paraphrase Jim Garrison on Oswald's arrest in a cinema for the JFK murder: 'The most suspicious mass turnout since the Reichstag fire.'

[Herlock Sholmes]

You can certainly see why some might think that there was an attempt at some form of cover-up when it came to McInnes. The word the you use, ‘inexplicable’ sums up a lot about the case. Marcello Mega recalls multiple sources mentioning the card found at the scene and Mickey Moylan recalls some of his staff being questioned. Added to that, Sandy McInnes recalls that the police turned up at his house because of the card. The fact that they officers went to Stonehouse 2 days after the murder suggests that McInnes’s name wasn’t on it so the police must have gone through so checking/elimination process. Then again, as Mickey Moylan didn’t recall any great fuss perhaps they got to McInnes quickly. Maybe through two Moylan’s salesmen who ended up at the Barrowland that night? To me this seems the likeliest explanation. Perhaps they were questioned first and it was them that mentioned seeing McInnes that night? I think that you’ve already suggested this. It seems very possible to me.

Why wasn’t he investigated further? I can only wonder, as is suggested on the podcast, that Jimmy McInnes might have had something to do with this (perhaps he’d genuinely believed that his cousin was innocent but wanted to keep his name out of it?) Jimmy told the cold case guys that he hadn’t really worked on the case apart from manning the phones once but this wasn’t true. He checked Hannah’s taxi for prints and strangely found none. He went to see a woman who said that she could name the killer, but he left no record and there was an attempt to scrub out her name then alter the numbering to hide the visit. He certainly wasn’t happy about the cold case investigation. Enough to raise eyebrows.