I’ve never seen him say he found Faraday slouched. Faraday was outside of the car on the ground.

I’ve never heard that either. I do know the colonial parkway murders in VA in the 80’s and the murder of a young couple at an Oklahoma lover’s lane in 1970 are theorized to have been committed by cops (especially the 1970 case). The Oklahoma case was controversial bc the cop who killed the kids was also involved in the investigation and had obvious ties through the department. His friend/fellow officer said that he had a stash of .22 cal weapons and haunted lovers’ lanes (Hm inspired by Z?). The cop ended up trying to frame that same friend/officer for the murders and had him killed so he couldn’t snitch.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_Parkway_Killer

http://m.newsok.com/71-death-adds-twist … le/2373832

If the cop angle in relation to lover’s lane murders is something that grabs your interest independent of Zodiac I’d suggest checking out the aforementioned cases.

News to me too. Can you link the site where you read/saw that info?

Yes he definetly said that he found DF slouched in one of his many interviews,he does change quite a few things which is odd.

They are youtube the many interviews,where he was who was in his car it really does change alot his story,i found this strange.

Please post the links, otherwise this thread will probably be removed. It is important to post accurate information and without proof, it doesn’t help things.

bet he is talking about Ed Rust and DF Darline Ferren – slouched in her seat are there many interviews of the Benica cop?

There are definitely interviews of Ed Rust of the V.P.D., but he has never changed his story. I believe the only one of Bidou from Benicia was via Fincher’s documentary and as far as I recall, he says no such thing.

I was quoteing the man directly, i will post the links next time,having trouble with my LT and i assumed wrongly sorry guys.

People say all the time that police officers and witnesses "changed their stories". Often when I investigate these claims in detail it turns out that someone has made a misinterpretation or assumption based on some vague detail, or they have discussed this with other people, who have exaggerated or distorted the claims a bit more. Eventually it can appear as if testimony was contrary to what was originally said. This is bad.

Only go by the original police reports people. All else, even things rehashed by the press at later times, can be wrong or subject to distortion. People’s memories also fade with time, even for the most astute of police officers.

As an extreme example of this I once had a fellow argue with me that the witness testimony was wrong and the Zodiac’s hood was actually made from bright blue silk. He added that the Zodiac symbol was very neatly embroidered. When I asked him how he knew this he replied :"Trust me on this, I know, because I have seen it." Well, needless to say I did not trust his word on this or any other of the ridiculous claims that he was making. Some people will seek to distort minor details, others will seek to distort on a larger scale, to the point of exaggeration and fallacy.

I agree for the most part, but a lot of what is in police reports comes from these same types of people.

If you get a room full of people and start a rumour at one end, allow it to circulate right around the room. By the time it gets to the other end, the story has changed. Not only that but it can change considerably.

This is what I am getting at. The more times information changes hands the more it gets distorted. So the safest option is to only rely on the witness reports. Yes there will be differences between these, but not as many differences as you will begin to find in later statements that have changed hands a number of times. Following a passage of time information also tends to erode and becomes distorted, so whenever people recall events from 20-30 years ago the information cannot be relied on to the same extent as their original testimonies.

I’m sure he’s already been cleared, and I don’t want to bring his name into disrepute, but who was the cop that was on a plainclothes assignment, and was the first on the scene. And Graysmith said he knew Darlene, but he denied it. Because of all these things I always considered him a possibility. Like I said, he has undoubtedly been cleared, though.

I’m sure he’s already been cleared, and I don’t want to bring his name into disrepute, but who was the cop that was on a plainclothes assignment, and was the first on the scene. And Graysmith said he knew Darlene, but he denied it. Because of all these things I always considered him a possibility. Like I said, he has undoubtedly been cleared, though.

Yes indeed. Just look at John Leonard Orr. A professional arson investigator who successfully covered up his own arson spree for over a decade, and he was even writing a fictitious book at the same time which closely mirrored his own activities.

There is the very real possibility that the Zodiac could have been a cop (this is one thing I do agree with Gaikowski about). I am not pointing suspicion at any one in particular. I am just saying that it is something that must be considered, as the Zodiac seemed to have a knack of keeping himself below the radar.

But rather than assume he was too smart to get caught, I would reason that he was perhaps just very lucky. He almost got caught committing the murder of Paul Stine, and it is amazing that someone did not notice his plate numbers around earlier crime scenes. He must have been driving around some areas in a very suspicious manner. However if he had been scouting out potential locations in a police car, few people would have taken any notice.