Criminologist David Wilson - Y'all's Thoughts?

[barnflatwyngarde]

That was my thinking too on the question of how drunk she was. I’ve read a suggestion somewhere that some people sometimes sneaked alcohol into the venue, which wouldn’t surprise me, but it’s still an unknown and, as you say, if she didn’t have anything to drink there then 2 hours of sweaty dancing followed by hitting that cold, late October Glasgow air wouldn’t have left her too drunk.

There was some suggestion that Beattie might have got a little too ‘close’ to Jeannie but there’s no evidence for it as far as I’m aware. He did give her a different name though….she was Williams to the Press but maybe it was it her own request if she didn’t want anyone to know that she’d been to the Barrowlands on what was known as a grab-a-granny night?

To be honest I can’t remember all the details about the taxi driver but I’m sure that he never saw McInnes in aline up. As soon as I have time I’ll do some re-reading and I’d like to listen to the podcast again because it was interesting to hear what the detectives said. They appeared to be of the opinion the McInnes was in the taxi but he wasn’t Bible John. That said, the DNA question doesn’t appear conclusive.

I’ve just read the relevant section of a book called Beyond The Tape by Dr Mary Cassidy who was Forensic Pathologist for The Crown at McInnes exhumation. She said that initially McInnes siblings provided swabs to check against the semen stains on Helen Puttock’s clothing. The results showed enough similarities to proceed with the investigation into McInnes which in turn led to the exhumation. She said: “The remains were removed to the mortuary and bone samples were taken, the best source of material for DNA analyses given the time frame. Unfortunately, despite our best efforts, the laboratory could not get a full profile and the results were described as inconclusive.”

So it wasn’t that there was no DNA match. It was just inconclusive. So John Irvine McInnes hasn’t been exonerated.

Great post Herlock , especially in relation to the DNA.
Re customers taking drink into the Barrowlands, it was a common occurrence. As long as the women's handbags didn't make a clunking noise as they entered the dance hall, it was fine. Men would often have a half bottle in their inside jacket pocket.

[cobalt]

I read that part of the DNA problem was due to McInnes being buried in family grave, and that his mother had been interred on top of him after his suicide.

I can't grasp the theory that the last man seen in Helen Puttock's company was not her killer. All the victims had come from the same dance hall and the last two left in the company of man similarly described as the man in the taxi. Witnesses on a late night bus (around 2am) remember a man answering a similar description who boarded the bus close to where Helen Puttock was discovered. The conductor and driver (presumably sober) recalled him being dishevelled, with mud on his coat and scratches on his face.

Am I right in remembering that a card linked to McInnes' work as a furniture salesman was found at the scene of the first murder, and that is partly why he came to police attention? He also admitted being in the dance hall on the night Helen Puttock was murdered? If the taxi driver was never given the chance to ID McInnes, the whole case seems suspect to me.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

If the taxi driver was never given the chance to ID McInnes, the whole case seems suspect to me.

I agree - and that is just one of a number of reasons to think so.

The Bible John case, like the Julia Wallace case and the London Nudes case, was a case of a murderer being protected by persons in high places.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I just did a Kindle search on these books…


We All Go Into The Dark - Francisco Garcia (2023)

The Lost British Serial Killer - Wilson/Harrison.

The Face Of Bible John - Steve MacGregor (2018)

Bible John On Trial - Nate Campbell (2021)

Bible John’s Secret Daughter - David Leslie (2007)

Glasgow Crimefighter - Les Brown (2007)


None of them mention the card. All that gets mentioned is the card that the guy supposedly showed to Helen Puttock in the club and it isn’t known what that card actually was. The card supposedly found at the crime scene does get dealt with in the podcast though. I believe that it was from a furniture store called Moylan’s (?) where McInnes worked (as a salesman/rep. I believe) I’m hazy on the details though. This does seem the likely cause of McInnes coming to the police’s attention in the first place. I don’t recall reading or hearing of McInnes admitting being in Barrowlands though.


Did he drop it at the crime scene?

Did he just give it to her at the club, maybe a bit of showing off, but he didn’t kill her?

Did he give her the card, to show how respectable he was and that he had a good job, intending to take it back after killing her? It’s believed that Helen Puttock fled up a railway embankment before her killer caught her so perhaps this episode caused the killer to forget to retrieve it?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I agree - and that is just one of a number of reasons to think so.

The Bible John case, like the Julia Wallace case and the London Nudes case, was a case of a murderer being protected by persons in high places.

William Wallace was being protected?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

William Wallace was being protected?

Certainly not.

He was, as he said after being sentenced, innocent.

[cobalt]

HS,

I appreciate your attention to detail, but I thought the furniture salesman card was from the first killing of Patricia Docker.

Of course I may be mistaken, but why were the police so quickly on to the suspect John McInnes? I understand he was interviewed, if not put in an ID parade, before the last murder. Why was this happening, if I am correct?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Certainly not.

He was, as he said after being sentenced, innocent.

We’ll we have to disagree on that one PI. I’m on the Wallace was guilty side. There are some very long Wallace case threads on here but I haven’t had any thoughts about the case for a considerable time and the threads are no longer active. A former poster on here runs a Wallace case website though if you’re interested. He posted on here as WallaceWackedHer but came to favour Wallace’s innocence. He’s certainly the expert on the case these days. I still disagree with his solution though.

https://www.williamherbertwallace.com/

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I’m fairly certain that the officers doing a cold case investigation showed the taxi driver a photograph of John Irvine McInnes and he said that it was the guy in the taxi with Helen Puttock.

The taxi driver, who gave the two sisters and the man a ride, was also never asked to identify McInnes, the 1995 team said, but when they showed him a picture he was sure that it was the correct man.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-63703111

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

The taxi driver, who gave the two sisters and the man a ride, was also never asked to identify McInnes, the 1995 team said.


The 1995 team investigated the case and found more inconsistencies and lost evidence, such as a card bearing the name of Moylans furniture store, where John Irvine McInnes worked.

They believe the card had been found at the scene of the crime, then later lost or removed.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/bible-john-murder-taxi-driver-police-b2231999.html

John McInnes and two of his work colleagues from Moylan’s furniture store were picked up by police as a ‘ticket’ or business card for the store had been found at the scene, but by 1996 that had vanished from the police archive.

The other two Moylan’s workers were taken to Partick police station and ‘paraded’ in front of Helen’s sister, Jean Langford, who had shared a cab with Helen and her dancing partner on the night she died.

But John McInnes, who the 1996 investigation team believed was certainly the man in the taxi, was hidden away at a small police station in Hamilton and was never shown to Jean.

https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/investigation-bible-john-murders-launched-27884179

[Herlock Sholmes]

The taxi driver, who gave the two sisters and the man a ride, was also never asked to identify McInnes, the 1995 team said.


The 1995 team investigated the case and found more inconsistencies and lost evidence, such as a card bearing the name of Moylans furniture store, where John Irvine McInnes worked.

They believe the card had been found at the scene of the crime, then later lost or removed.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/bible-john-murder-taxi-driver-police-b2231999.html

John McInnes and two of his work colleagues from Moylan’s furniture store were picked up by police as a ‘ticket’ or business card for the store had been found at the scene, but by 1996 that had vanished from the police archive.

The other two Moylan’s workers were taken to Partick police station and ‘paraded’ in front of Helen’s sister, Jean Langford, who had shared a cab with Helen and her dancing partner on the night she died.

But John McInnes, who the 1996 investigation team believed was certainly the man in the taxi, was hidden away at a small police station in Hamilton and was never shown to Jean.



https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/i...nched-27884179

Cheers PI. That refreshes my memory. I’m certainly usually reluctant to go for the ‘cover up’ option but there’s much in this case that nudges you in that direction. Jimmy McInnes being on the Force is one thing. The ‘i only helped out on the phones’ part does raise an eyebrow. I’m still going to listen to the podcast again though, starting with the McInnes episode.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

We’ll we have to disagree on that one PI. I’m on the Wallace was guilty side. There are some very long Wallace case threads on here but I haven’t had any thoughts about the case for a considerable time and the threads are no longer active. A former poster on here runs a Wallace case website though if you’re interested. He posted on here as WallaceWackedHer but came to favour Wallace’s innocence. He’s certainly the expert on the case these days. I still disagree with his solution though.

https://www.williamherbertwallace.com/

Thanks for your thoughts, Herlock, but I have not the slightest doubt that Wallace was innocent.

He could not possibly have committed the murder in the time available to him - and that is why he was ultimately acquitted.

There is a documentary online claiming that he was guilty but, as is usual when the case against Wallace is presented, it does not mention the fact that two young men were seen running in the street very near to Wallace's address, at about the time when the murder must have been committed, nor the evidence that one of them admitted throwing the murder weapon down a certain grid outside a certain doctor's surgery, as they made their escape, nor that a witness in the case identified the same grid as the place where the weapon was disposed of.

[cobalt]

Just a thought on Helen Puttock. She was described as quite a feisty Glaswegian woman and allegedly told her mother that she could fend off any man trying it on with her long, sharp nails.

Unfortunately that was not the case, but surely there should have been scrapings taken from under her fingernails? As I posted earlier, there was a report of a man looking dishevelled and with scratches on his face soon after the murder. The whole case seems to stink a bit: where are these scrapings? And what about fibre transfer which was quite well developed at the time? Glaister was doing this forensic comparison back in the late 1940s yet there are so many who want us to believe that until DNA the police could do little.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Thanks for your thoughts, Herlock, but I have not the slightest doubt that Wallace was innocent.

He could not possibly have committed the murder in the time available to him - and that is why he was ultimately acquitted.

There is a documentary online claiming that he was guilty but, as is usual when the case against Wallace is presented, it does not mention the fact that two young men were seen running in the street very near to Wallace's address, at about the time when the murder must have been committed, nor the evidence that one of them admitted throwing the murder weapon down a certain grid outside a certain doctor's surgery, as they made their escape, nor that a witness in the case identified the same grid as the place where the weapon was disposed of.

No problem. I don’t think it could have been anyone but Wallace. The Qualtrough phone call was clearly a ploy invented by Wallace. Wallace would have had more than ample time.

I’ll leave Wallace alone though. I’m no longer as interested in the case as I once was. Maybe one day my interest will be re-ignited. Maybe they’ll dig up a diary written by Wallace confessing.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

No problem. I don’t think it could have been anyone but Wallace. The Qualtrough phone call was clearly a ploy invented by Wallace. Wallace would have had more than ample time.

I’ll leave Wallace alone though. I’m no longer as interested in the case as I once was. Maybe one day my interest will be re-ignited. Maybe they’ll dig up a diary written by Wallace confessing.

As you wish.

If you change your mind, we could always continue the discussion at

** The Murder of Julia Wallace **