I have always said that in my opinion, given the top 4 or 5 suspects we had to choose from (Allen, Marshall, Kane, Gaikowski etc) that Kane the most likely, in my opinion at least, to be Z. But this was before really knew anything of James Owen as a suspect. I have been seen as another amateur sleuth with a pet suspect and will hear nothing to the contrary and that’s never been accurate. I have tried to remain objective and in light of discovering all that James Owen said and did in relation to Lake Herman Rd, I would even say he is more likely responsible that any other suspect and that is including, Larry Kane!

When a homicide is committed, Detectives main priority is to establish two things. Who was the last person to see the victims alive? And who has both motive and opportunity?

Well, The offender responsible for The Lake Herman Road Double Homicide can be flushed out using Arthur Conan Doyle famous logic that: "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth"

We know that witnesses (Peggy & Homer) report seeing Bettye and David alive and well as late as 11.15. At 11.20, James Owen ‘passes’ the scene. At approx. 11.25 – Stella Borges approaches the scene and discovers the bodies of Betty Lou and David sprawled on the gravel of the pumping station entrance. Stella Borges states that from starting out on Lake Herman, rite up to the locations where she discovered the two victims, no other vehicle passed her heading the other way. So, putting Owen’s claims of a innocent passing vehicle going passed him aside, The Offender, Zodiac, could not have left the scene in a vehicle and headed toward Vallejo. The offender must have shot the two at the gated entrance then proceeded toward Benicia, which, as it happens, is the direction Owen was travelling. Responding officers coming from both directions recall passing no other vehicles while speeding to the scene. So, given the timeline and window of opportunity that Zodiac has in this instance and by a process of elimination, only Owen can be placed at the scene at or extremely near the time the two were killed, so he has the opportunity. Motive? Owen has no motive to slaughter these two teens specifically because its not personal. The Motive for the crime itself, knowing now who’s responsible, is publicity, to create fear by manipulating the media.

It seems that Owen was aware that there was such a small window of opportunity for the offender to strike unseen and knows that base on other witnesses testimony, they were alive at 11.15, Dead at 11.25, and only Owen passes the scene in between at approx. 11.20. Is this cause to make up the whole story of seeing a second vehicle there? Absolutely. But that ‘alibi’, even though essential to invent it to divert suspicion and offer a whole second scenario of a killer there as Owen Passes, is not backed up by any of the other witnesses on Lake Herman who report seeing no passing vehicles around the time of the murders or in the immediate aftermath.

By the time of the second interview, Owen probably knows the timeline the police have put together and knows he’s the only one that has the opportunity to have been there offender. So, as if out of necessity rather than choice (as he sees it) he decides to throw in the "Ohhh yes, by the way, about 45 secons, maybe a minute after I passed there, I heard what I though was a gun shot." And this had slipped his mind in the first interview where he knew that a double homicide had occurred with both being shot to death? In Z’s own words I would reply to that with; "Bulls*it. If guilty of this crime and knowing the police had worked out a timeline that allows approx. 6 minutes for the offender to strike and escape and he’s the only one that passes there in that six minute time frame, you’d expect a guilty man to come with something like this to try and avoid becoming ‘suspect’ and remain the helpful ‘Witness’ by saying "It wasn’t me that did this, but I did hear the shots being fired by the man who did."

Several of Owen’s comments also seem suspicious, or at the very least raise an eyebrow at. The Second interview Owen is said to state "There definitely were two cars there." The way that is stated, to me anyway, is as if he’s replying to someone who questions his two cars in entrance claim, maybe the officers confronted him with the fact that no other witnesses saw a second vehicle there or remember passing one on Lake Herman itself. That would warrant Owen making such a remark as "There definitely were two vehicles there."

And finally, the vehicles Owen claims to have seen that night, one parked in the pumping station entrance, the other passing by it just before he does going in the opposite direction.

Like His only remembering hearing the Gun in this second interview Owen also suddenly remember this second vehicle passing him just as he approached the scene that he hadn’t mentioned in his first interview. This may be huge, another crucial witness to the second car at the scene possibly who can corroborate Owens account! So, what does this vehicle passing you look like Mr owen, general description? "He (Owen) could give no description of this vehicle." Argghh, danm shame that! What about its occupants? Did they come forward as witnesses? No trace ever foud of vehicle occupants. Another most unfortunate outcome! What about the 2nd suspect vehicle at the scene you saw Mr Owen? Could you give us a description of this vehicle? "Stated he could not give a description of the make or colour of the other car." A third most unfortunate of circumstances. But, wait! He gives full description of the type, make and colour of the victims vehicle that is no use to anyone because we already know this vehicle exists because it was left at the scene. Tis the most unfortunate of outcomes that. Can describe in detail the victims vehicle that nobody disputes was at the scene giving the colour, model, year and type, and yet cannot give any details at all of the 2nd vehicle that nobody else saw and would be the killers car. And to think the suspect car was parked only 3 ft away from the Rambler that he has no trouble in describing in detail! Amazing set of unfortunate circumstances that!

Owen seems to be adding things to the second statement in reaction to learning of the police timeline based on witnesses on LHR that night. Once all others on LHR are eliminated, then whoever remains, no matter how improbable it seems, must be the offender surely!

My opinion? He can’t describe either of these 2nd vehicle’s, both the passing motorists and the suspect vehicle at the scene, because neither of them existed, just like all the other witnesses seem to agree on in their own individual statements.

So wc and morf both think Owen is lying. They only disagree on why he is lying. While I definitely find his statements odd and inconsistent, I haven’t convinced myself (yet) that he was lying. One thing for sure, not recalling the gunshot in the first interview seems real strange. But then, there’s a lot of strange things going on that night.

For instance, the hunters claim to have arrived at 9:00, a white impala is there. Bingo claims to have left at 10:00, the white impala was there. William Crow stated that he was there at 9:30-10:00, with no Impala there. They couldn’t have all been correct, could they? So, was one of them incorrect? Two of them incorrect? All of them incorrect? If one or more was incorrect, does that mean they were lying or just incorrect.

Peggy Your claims the Rambler was facing east when she passed by. The younger hunter stated (twice) that it was is was parked on the bank (reference the police sketch). Owen says the Rambler was back facing East with another car parked beside it. That’s a lot of moving around in a matter of minutes. Doesn’t make sense. Maybe the hunter was incorrect. Certainly seems out of place.

James Owen said he passed one going the opposite direction. How come Stella didn’t see it? That doesn’t make sense. Okay, this one actually does. Its in the report that he passed the car in the area of the Borges ranch. So, she shouldn’t have seen it. But why didn’t the driver of the car come forward? Why didn’t the hunters come forward?

And what about this drug bust? Can someone, anyone, for the love of God, please pm me or post a newspaper article on the big pot bust that took place that night on LHR? Thanks.

" One thing for sure, not recalling the gunshot in the first interview seems real strange." It is, but he also forgets to mention seeing another vehicle passing him until the second statement either.

"the hunters claim to have arrived at 9:00, a white impala is there. Bingo claims to have left at 10:00, the white impala was there. William Crow stated that he was there at 9:30-10:00, with no Impala there. They couldn’t have all been correct, could they? So, was one of them incorrect? Two of them incorrect? All of them incorrect? If one or more was incorrect, does that mean they were lying or just incorrect." I see where your coming from but the crime didn’t happen at 9:30, nor did they (the hunters) claim to come upon the scene with a second vehicle there at the time we know the two were murdered. This is not general details of an eye witnesses testimony, this is a man claiming to see the scene itself while the offenders car is parked there. General discrepancies are expected in eye witness testimony, I accept that, but not gaping and specific contradictions, inconsistencies in what was observed and where, and forgetting hearing a gunshot report in your initial statement when you know your giving a statement as a witness to a double homicide where two teens have been shot to death.

And Morf I see what you mean in regards to speculation of how this crime unfolded, and I didn’t claim that scenario, or any other, was likely correct. The reason I personally choose to be open to several different scenarios and speculate on this particular crime and the way it was specifically executed by Z is because we have no witness to the actual crime itself. You won’t see me on Hartnell & Sheppard thread speculating as to how the Zodiac managed to get both bound and other things because we know from a witness at the scene, Bryan Hartnell so the sequence of events is not questionable as we know Zodiac’s MO at Lake Berryessa from descending the slope, stepping behind a tree, emerging with a hood and so on and so fourth. With Lake Herman, we have none of that, only a timeline given by witnesses as to what they saw, when they saw it and where. The crime itself, nobody knows. Using Owen as a witness to base something on as a fact is to ignore how inconsistent his own statement is. And even if we go by Owen’s claim, David & Betty were out of their vehicle by the time he passed, and remember, he hears one single shot fired about 30 seconds to a minute after he has passed the scene and yet when David is discovered he’s found right next to the door of his rambler as if shot as he exited.

So wc and morf both think Owen is lying. They only disagree on why he is lying. While I definitely find his statements odd and inconsistent, I haven’t convinced myself (yet) that he was lying. One thing for sure, not recalling the gunshot in the first interview seems real strange. But then, there’s a lot of strange things going on that night.

For instance, the hunters claim to have arrived at 9:00, a white impala is there. Bingo claims to have left at 10:00, the white impala was there. William Crow stated that he was there at 9:30-10:00, with no Impala there. They couldn’t have all been correct, could they? So, was one of them incorrect? Two of them incorrect? All of them incorrect? If one or more was incorrect, does that mean they were lying or just incorrect.

Peggy Your claims the Rambler was facing east when she passed by. The younger hunter stated (twice) that it was is was parked on the bank (reference the police sketch). Owen says the Rambler was back facing East with another car parked beside it. That’s a lot of moving around in a matter of minutes. Doesn’t make sense. Maybe the hunter was incorrect. Certainly seems out of place.

James Owen said he passed one going the opposite direction. How come Stella didn’t see it? That doesn’t make sense. Okay, this one actually does. Its in the report that he passed the car in the area of the Borges ranch. So, she shouldn’t have seen it. But why didn’t the driver of the car come forward? Why didn’t the hunters come forward?

And what about this drug bust? Can someone, anyone, for the love of God, please pm me or post a newspaper article on the big pot bust that took place that night on LHR? Thanks.

First off, I agree about the oddity of Owen not remembering the shot the very next morning while it was fresh in his mind and as he was standing at the scene of the murders, that is originally what got me interested in him as a suspect,along with the inconsistencies in his statements and the fact he was there only a couple minutes before Borges found the bodies.

Welsh and I certainly both agree that Owen could be lying, but you’re right, it’s for different reasons.

You also mention the ‘weird goings-on’ there that night. For a lonely dimly lit road, that not alot ofpeople travelled, there were alot of people there that night. One odd thing that happened, was Pierre Bidou mentioned that he and his Partner drove by the scene when the victims should have been there, but he did not see their car.

One odd thing that happened, was Pierre Bidou mentioned that he and his Partner drove by the scene when the victims should have been there, but he did not see their car.

I’d love to see a newspaper article that mentions this (paraphrasing) big drug bust. Anyone?

If I am not mistaken, James Owen led a decent life, correct? Nothing in his past to indicate he would become a serial killer?
And he did not have to come forward to the Police. But eyewitnesses do make mistakes. The killer may have been stalking
the area, stopping, parking, leaving, coming back, waiting for victims, or someone he knows to show up. When I was a young
child, my mother parked our car in front of the Supermarket and left me and my sister and a neighbor girl in the car. A man
pulled in beside us and parked for a moment. The he pulled away. After awhile he came back and parked next to us again. Then
he left, and then came back. My sister looked over into his car. He had a cast on his leg, a shirt on, and no pants, naked from the waist
down. Then he left.
My mother called the police. They said they had heard about him.
My point being, with different witnesses seeing the same type of white Impala car there that night, Zodiac could have been stalking or
hunting as he would put it, coming and going, waiting for the right moment to strike. What a thrill…he would be compelled to repeat it.

Most serial killers lead a normal life,and most people are surprised when they found out they were Friends or neighbors with a Serial Killer. Some are upstanding citizens like Gacy,or charming good looking young Attorneys like Bundy, most dont appear outwardly to be monsters. So, I don’t automatically rule somebody out because things look good from the outside. By all accounts,Owen was a gainfully employed, retired military, Family man. The fact he voluntariy came forward to police does not really mean anything. Serial killers have been known to offer help or assist in cases. Perhaps, he wanted to guide the investigation in a certain direction,or got some thrill out of being there at the scene if he was Zodiac, I don’t know.

By the flip side of the coin, he was the age described in the SF Zodiac sketch, he was fresh out of the Air Force(wingwalkers), and he was a hunter and owned multiple guns. He moved to Vallejo shortly before the murders started. Most important of all,he can be placed at the scene of a Z murder during a small window of time when the murders hapened,and he has no witness or alibi to back up his statements,which by the way, are chalk full of inconsistencies. For these reasons, I’ll press on with him near the top of my suspect list.

James Owen may not have been Zodiac, and I would gladly love to rule him out, but until something comes forward to help me do that, I simply can’t dismiss the only person confirmed to be at the scene of the murder between the victim’s being alive,and being found dead.

Morf, here’s something you may find interesting to look into further. Below is a list of residents of Jackson St. Notice that, within visual distance of 3712 Jackson (where Z was last seen) is 3555 Jackson Street Apartments. Apartment 2 seems to be occupied by a J Owen…

No idea whether its ‘The’ J Owen or even one of his relations. Thought maybe someone could find out?

The James Owen who is in the police reports was James A Owen and he lived at 1735 Mini Dr. in the 1968-69 Vallejo Polk’s Directory. His occupation is listed as Refinery Tech at Humble Oil.

The James Owen who is in the police reports was James A Owen and he lived at 1735 Mini Dr. in the 1968-69 Vallejo Polk’s Directory. His occupation is listed as Refinery Tech at Humble Oil.

Thanks for looking, plus that looks like a WM J OWEN at that address in SF

The James Owen who is in the police reports was James A Owen and he lived at 1735 Mini Dr. in the 1968-69 Vallejo Polk’s Directory. His occupation is listed as Refinery Tech at Humble Oil.

Thanks for looking, plus that looks like a WM J OWEN at that address in SF

Can we rule out that it’s one of James’ relatives? I doubt the person is related to James Owen that we are interested in as Owen not an uncommon name, but you never know.

Anyway, going back to one of the original points on page one of this thread, I still think that Betty has way too much blood flow from the head area for it to be simply coming from her mouth due to being shot in the torso. Below is a side by side of David’s blood loss from a shot to the head with Betty’s next to it. They are quite similar:

Another thing, Zodiac repeatedly said in his first three letters to three Bay Area newspapers is that "The girl was on her right side, feet to the west." She looks on her front face down to me.

Betty Lou was shot more times than David. There were more wounds on Betty Lou for the blood to have flowed from and I think that is why there is a larger amount of blood.

Another thing, Zodiac repeatedly said in his first three letters to three Bay Area newspapers is that "The girl was on her right side, feet to the west." She looks on her front face down to me.

We have discussed this elsewhere on the forum, either this one or the old one. It was suggested that Betty Lou may have involuntarily changed positions in the throes of death. She may have been on her side when Zodiac last saw her but perhaps precariously and she rolled onto her face after he left. Also, maybe the first responders when checking to see if she had a pulse moved her a bit.