Two things puzzle me about this. First is that the man in the picture with Darlene looks like Jim Crabtree. Why wouldn’t it be him? It surprises me that people think it’s someone else.
Second, why does it matter? Do we think the guy in the picture murdered her? Has he got a pistol in his pocket, for instance? I don’t get it.
If there are any other pictures of her with other unknown men – or a cat – then lets post them and see if it helps us solve her murder. I suspect it won’t.
Eh?

Smithy, I agree. Besides, the fellow in the photo also has a wedding band on. You just don’t get cozy with any female besides your wife and have photographic evidence unless you’re the husband, son, brother, father or maybe uncle or cousin. I think the fellow is the wrong age to be anything but a husband, brother or cousin. We know it’s not her brother. That leaves husband or cousin.

Two things puzzle me about this. First is that the man in the picture with Darlene looks like Jim Crabtree. Why wouldn’t it be him? It surprises me that people think it’s someone else.
Second, why does it matter? Do we think the guy in the picture murdered her? Has he got a pistol in his pocket, for instance? I don’t get it.
If there are any other pictures of her with other unknown men – or a cat – then lets post them and see if it helps us solve her murder. I suspect it won’t.
Eh?

Lots of people look like each other…doesn’t make them the same person. Darlene’s sister said it was not Jim. Jim said it was not him…he’s not a guy fond of having his photo on Zodiac message boards, but doesn’t seem to have a problem with this one. Then you have a height issue. A big discrepancy there.

While it makes no matter if it was Jim…they were married of course, it has become a topic of conversation and if it’s Jim and he is lying, some find that intriguinging.

This would be Jim too…fresh out of the military.

Two things puzzle me about this. First is that the man in the picture with Darlene looks like Jim Crabtree. Why wouldn’t it be him? It surprises me that people think it’s someone else.
Second, why does it matter? Do we think the guy in the picture murdered her? Has he got a pistol in his pocket, for instance? I don’t get it.
If there are any other pictures of her with other unknown men – or a cat – then lets post them and see if it helps us solve her murder. I suspect it won’t.
Eh?

LOl smithy ,I like your humor. There shouldn’t be any doubt that this guy is Jim Crabtree, he has been ID’d by friends that knew both of them. Darlene’s sister Pam ID’d him, but when be became angry with me , she denied saying it was him.
I have seen Jim in person, that is him. The reason it has been so controversial is that a few thought the man in the picture could be Darlene’s killer. ( We are not alleging Jim is her killer ) She looks unhappy with him because she probably was unhappy. The clothes she had on indicate cooler weather, my guess is that it was taken Oct, Nov, Dec, 66 or as late as Jan 67.
By then she had to have known she was going to leave him. A few months later, mid to late April 67 she was pregnant with Deena. I got pregnant on April 27th and had mine on Jan 28th.
I say she was done with him when that picture was taken and it shows. Jim’s height is another issue, in one police report it shows him as 5ft 6 another police report he is 5 ft 9 did he ware 3 inch heals ? They did have them for men back then. By April 67 Jim’s hair had grown longer than what that picture is showing, he grew a beard by March or April 67 according to her testimony in court papers.(She said he grew a beard and looked like a Hippie) I suppose a guy can grow a beard 6 or7 months and his hair would also be longer by then. Although I don’t remember her stating that his hair was long ? When I saw him in 1995 he had very long curly hair and looked like he just stepped out of a 1969 time machine.

The clothes she had on indicate cooler weather, my guess is that it was taken Oct, Nov, Dec, 66 or as late as Jan 67.

I believe it was determined the photo was taken sometime in 1965 if I’m not mistaken. Had something to do with the baby photo. I don’t think it was determined 100% though.

Pam also spoke to Tom and said it was not Jim. I don’t know why if it was so obvious it was Jim, she wouldn’t just say "yep..that’s Jim!". ??

The clothes she had on indicate cooler weather, my guess is that it was taken Oct, Nov, Dec, 66 or as late as Jan 67.

I believe it was determined the photo was taken sometime in 1965 if I’m not mistaken. Had something to do with the baby photo. I don’t think it was determined 100% though.

Pam also spoke to Tom and said it was not Jim. I don’t know why if it was so obvious it was Jim, she wouldn’t just say "yep..that’s Jim!". ??

I noticed that baby photo , but could see that there was an older picture in the corner of that picture. I know that some people will show a baby picture and then when that child grows up , they attach the new one to the younger picture.
So that baby picture is meaningless I think.

Pam told me before she told Tom ,that the guy was for sure Jim Phillips. (She did not have the slightest doubt) It was shortly after that , that she became angry with me and told Tom a different story, making it look as if I lied about her telling me he was Jim P.(That was to make me look bad.) Remember that she also told Tom that Gyke was her sisters killer, then back stepped when Lyndon’s book came out and said that she had always said it was Grant who killed her sister. I called her on that and asked how could she make that statement, when I saw her brake down crying when I showed her the picture of the man who was harassing the two of us at the same time back in the late 80’s and through the 90’s. She said he was Larry Kane , the man who killed Darlene. Her answer to me was : Sandy we will never be able to prove that he is the Zodiac, so what is the difference ?
Pam and I will remain friends, regardless of what she says or does. She and I have been through a lot together over the yrs., I am probably the only one who believes Zodiac has stayed in touch with her and has called her many times. I have seen some of the things he has left her. No one not even she could make that stuff up.

Two things puzzle me about this. First is that the man in the picture with Darlene looks like Jim Crabtree. Why wouldn’t it be him? It surprises me that people think it’s someone else.
Second, why does it matter? Do we think the guy in the picture murdered her? Has he got a pistol in his pocket, for instance? I don’t get it.If there are any other pictures of her with other unknown men – or a cat – then lets post them and see if it helps us solve her murder. I suspect it won’t.
Eh?

This is why it might be important:

http://zodiackiller.fr.yuku.com/reply/1 … YeWbKL-GSo

Posted by caresut on Zodiackiller.com Nov 26, 2010:

This unknown man was identified by the original person having this photo as being weird and was also suspected by the owner of the photo of being involved with Darlene’s murder. He was not a relative. He may have been Jim Crabtree (show me some proof Sandy!). We have relatives who we have contacted who say it is not Jim, we have Jim who says it is not Jim.
This photo was described by the owner as being a boyfriend (not a husband)
of Darlenes. I suggest we don’t write it off so quickly

Not sure who "caresut" is, meaning I don´t know if he/she is a relative of Darlene Ferrin?
Maybe somone else here know?

Caresut was a long time member on Tom’s forum,and for a while on this forum. I don;t think he’s related in any way to any Z victims,and he does not live in CA

In my opinion, this photo has only generated so many rumours, a lot of speculation, and some seeming quite sure that the man pictured with Darlene is none other that Zodiac himself for pne reason alone…. The man is wearing Horn Rimmed Glasses!

Seriously, I asked myself when I first came across this photograph…

‘Could this man be the ‘Stocky male’ as described b y Mageau? Is it the man Officer Fouke said was ‘Barrel Chested?’ Does this man look between 35 – 45 as described by Officer Fouke, considering Fouke is the only witness that we know of that came inti contact with Zodiac while Zodiac was not wearing a hood over his head, nor was Fouke being pumped full of bullets at the time they were trying to see the mans face. Fouke got a clear, unobstructed look at the Zodiac while not being in total fear and panic for his life.

If it was the Zodiac in the photo then we have discovered something about him that would be utterly amazing. That being, Zodiac apparantly waltzes round the area murdering people that only a short time ago, he is posing with for photographs with the victim. I mean this is the same Zodiac remember that told the San Francisco Detectives ‘Police shall never catch me because I have been too clever for them’ and also proclaiming himslef ‘Crackproof’.

Two things puzzle me about this. First is that the man in the picture with Darlene looks like Jim Crabtree. Why wouldn’t it be him? It surprises me that people think it’s someone else.
Second, why does it matter? Do we think the guy in the picture murdered her? Has he got a pistol in his pocket, for instance? I don’t get it.If there are any other pictures of her with other unknown men – or a cat – then lets post them and see if it helps us solve her murder. I suspect it won’t.
Eh?

This is why it might be important:

http://zodiackiller.fr.yuku.com/reply/1 … YeWbKL-GSo

Posted by caresut on Zodiackiller.com Nov 26, 2010:

This unknown man was identified by the original person having this photo as being weird and was also suspected by the owner of the photo of being involved with Darlene’s murder. He was not a relative. He may have been Jim Crabtree (show me some proof Sandy!). We have relatives who we have contacted who say it is not Jim, we have Jim who says it is not Jim.
This photo was described by the owner as being a boyfriend (not a husband)
of Darlenes. I suggest we don’t write it off so quickly

Not sure who "caresut" is, meaning I don´t know if he/she is a relative of Darlene Ferrin?
Maybe somone else here know?

The proof should be the pictures I have posted showing the same person as in that picture, he even has on long baggy pants, standing very much the same way. Also Howard found friends (meaning more than one person)of Darlene’s and Jim’s ,who say that is him. You of all people should know that Jim is not a truthful person, he is your number 2 suspect I thought ? The people who told Howard that he is Jim Phillips, have nothing to gain by lying. Why Jim is lying about it is anyone guess ? It is my understanding that the person who took that picture was the owner of the house who died, the person who ended up with that picture didn’t know who the man was and wanted to find out because he/ she remembered hearing something about him being strange and possibly Darlene’s killer . Darlene’s own mother felt that way about Jim , she died believing that Jim was her daughters killer, so why wouldn’t the uncle think the same way about him ? How many more people do we need to prove that is Jim in that picture? A few of you didn’t believe the first picture ,which was Jim’s graduation picture was him. I was given that picture by a LE officer who knew the Phillips family, that wasn’t good enough either ! You are very good at finding things that others can’t seem to find , why don’t you prove it is not him, by getting one of his arrest pictures ?

Two things puzzle me about this. First is that the man in the picture with Darlene looks like Jim Crabtree. Why wouldn’t it be him? It surprises me that people think it’s someone else.
Second, why does it matter? Do we think the guy in the picture murdered her? Has he got a pistol in his pocket, for instance? I don’t get it.If there are any other pictures of her with other unknown men – or a cat – then lets post them and see if it helps us solve her murder. I suspect it won’t.
Eh?

This is why it might be important:

http://zodiackiller.fr.yuku.com/reply/1 … YeWbKL-GSo

Posted by caresut on Zodiackiller.com Nov 26, 2010:

This unknown man was identified by the original person having this photo as being weird and was also suspected by the owner of the photo of being involved with Darlene’s murder. He was not a relative. He may have been Jim Crabtree (show me some proof Sandy!). We have relatives who we have contacted who say it is not Jim, we have Jim who says it is not Jim.
This photo was described by the owner as being a boyfriend (not a husband)
of Darlenes. I suggest we don’t write it off so quickly

Not sure who "caresut" is, meaning I don´t know if he/she is a relative of Darlene Ferrin?
Maybe somone else here know?

The proof should be the pictures I have posted showing the same person as in that picture, he even has on long baggy pants, standing very much the same way. Also Howard found friends (meaning more than one person)of Darlene’s and Jim’s ,who say that is him. You of all people should know that Jim is not a truthful person, he is your number 2 suspect I thought ? The people who told Howard that he is Jim Phillips, have nothing to gain by lying. Why Jim is lying about it is anyone guess ? It is my understanding that the person who took that picture was the owner of the house who died, the person who ended up with that picture didn’t know who the man was and wanted to find out because he/ she remembered hearing something about him being strange and possibly Darlene’s killer . Darlene’s own mother felt that way about Jim , she died believing that Jim was her daughters killer, so why wouldn’t the uncle think the same way about him ? How many more people do we need to prove that is Jim in that picture? A few of you didn’t believe the first picture ,which was Jim’s graduation picture was him. I was given that picture by a LE officer who knew the Phillips family, that wasn’t good enough either ! You are very good at finding things that others can’t seem to find , why don’t you prove it is not him, by getting one of his arrest pictures ?

Sandy I TOO belive it is Crabtree in that picture, and I sure think you proved it with all the images you have found and posted.
I just posted that qoute/post of caresut’s because it show why some people belive that the picture might be significant, but that doesn´t mean I agree that it is not Crabtree because, I DO belive it’s him.

Thank you TF, I was sure you felt the same as I did. I could try and find one of his still living x’s and show her the picture to get another opinion, but I don’t think that would convince the people who no matter what doubt it ?

Even if I had a mountain of evidence, I doubt it would be enough to convince the people who already have their minds made up that it is not Jim.

I miss caresut, but I’m not sure he went on to a career in law enforcement.

The evidence then, ladies and gentlemen of the Jury, is that the "original person" (un-named) and "the owner" (also un-named) of this photograph say that this man (who looks suspiciously like Jim Crabtree standing with his wife) was "weird" and "suspected of being involved [with] her murder" by other person or persons – surprisingly un-named – and for no tangible reason.

The prosecution rests.

I realize I am the odd man out…so to speak, but I see strong differences in those two people and considering Darlene’s autopsy which states her height AND the police booking report while in custody…it’s not jibing.

It has nothing to do with not believing you Sandy. Some people take things personally when you voice a difference of opinion. While I doubt this skinny looking guy in the photos was Zodiac (or Jim)…now I just want to know.

Heck, this photo was on America’s Most Wanted….I think they could have found out if it was Jim.