The thing is Tom, he was already heading away from the crime scene before he got the update from Pelissetti. In 1989, he stated "As we arrived at Arguello Street the description of the suspect was changed to a white male adult, (and) believing this suspect was possibly the one involved in the shooting, we entered the Presidio of San Francisco and conducted a search on West Pacific Avenue, the opposite side of the wall and the last direction we observed the suspect going. We did not find the suspect".

How does that quote show Fouke hadn’t already heard that Pelissetti was at the scene?

So your suggesting that within the 90 seconds tops it took Donald Fouke to reach the Jackson and Cherry intersection from the initial APB, Donald Fouke was issued with a second radio call informing him of Pelissetti’s presence at the crime scene, thereby allowing him to proceed to Arguello. If you have evidence of that second call, I’m all ears.

There’s not even documentation that the initial broadcast was about a black suspect.

Ed Neil wasted a lot of time on Presidio Heights by using old quotes, time estimates, etc. The eternal problem is, even if all of the players had watches that were in synch down to the minute (which they weren’t), there could still be a margin of error of nearly 60 seconds.

I think we can all agree there is some ambiguity in the version(s) of events that night at Presidio Heights.

What I find interesting is the question posed to Fouke during his interview in the doco "This Is the Zodiac Speaking".

Q: "Can you guess how fast you were driving down the street when you saw [the white male]?"
A: “Well, until I saw him probably about thirty-five or forty miles per hour on a twenty-five mile per hour street, slowed down as [we] passed him, I don’t know, we we’re still rolling. Saw that it’s a white male, step on the gas. Five, ten, fifteen seconds tops from first spotting him ’till passing him.”

Fouke describes the white male in the doco: "A white male adult, dressed in a derby or three quarter waist length jacket with elastic at the waist and on the cuffs and regular flap down collars. He had a crew cut he was wearing rust color pleated trousers which were unusual for the time. He had on engineering type boots, low cut shoe, three quarters of the way in length, tan I color."

His intra-departmental memorandum states:

"The suspect that was observed by officer Fouke was a WMA 35-45 Yrs about five-foot, ten inches, 180-200 pounds. Medium heavy build- Barrel chested- Medium complexion- Light-colored hair possibly greying in rear (May have been lighting that caused this effect.) Crew cut- wearing glasses- Dressed in dark blue waist length zipper type jacket (Navy or royal blue) Elastic cuffs and waist band zipped part way up. Brown wool pants pleated type baggy in rear (Rust brown) May have been wearing low cut shoes. Subject at no time appeared to be in a hurry walking with a shuffling lope, Slightly bent forward. The subject’s general appearance- Welsh ancestry.”

This seems an extraordinarily detailed description under the circumstances, even for the most dedicated and well trained officer. "Elastic cuffs & waist band"? "Zipper part way up"? "Pants pleated"? "Hair possibly greying at the rear"?

As Fouke also stated, "Seeing as it was a white male in an affluent neighborhood walking along the street we didn’t think it was a suspect".

And per Gian J Quasar. "In fact, the view was so fleeting that Fouke admitted in his “scratch” that he didn’t even know if Zelms had seen the suspect. He concluded by giving Zelms’ name and badge number in order to facilitate a follow-up if his superiors desired."

I make this point not to nit-pick, but because it potentially adds weight to the scenario that Fouke does in fact interact with the Zodiac. The incredibly detailed description seems at odds with Fouke’s own words suggesting a more perfunctory drive-by.

I think we can all agree there is some ambiguity in the version(s) of events that night at Presidio Heights.

If you ignore Fouke’s changing info — and if you also remove attempts at pinpointing events down to the second — I believe the PH case is pretty simple.

There’s not even documentation that the initial broadcast was about a black suspect.

Good chance the dispatch correctly said White Male, and the white guy on Jackson finessed Fouke.

The killer was escaping on foot and only had a brief head start. What Fouke did made perfect sense.

Agreed. Foulke had the choice to report to where the crime had already been committed or possibly intercept and capture the assailant within minutes.

Regarding the theory posited above:

You can choose to believe that Zodiac sat next to Stine, reached across his body and shot Stine with the barrel pointed forward and downward, grabbed both the steering wheel AND Stine’s body, reached his leg over and deftly pressed the gas, then drove the taxi a city block. All while holding a dead body and gun. Also, somehow not being completely drenched in blood. Because…??????

Or you can choose to believe that Stine pulled to the corner of Washington and Cherry with Zodiac sitting behind the passenger seat, Zodiac pulled a gun while Stine waited for the fare, placed it to Stine’s head and fired across and downward with Zodiac then getting out, wiping the car and struggling to keep Stine upright before fleeing the scene.

I think you can tell which one is more logical.

Yes, the latter theory makes little to no sense – which is probably why no one in these posts has mentioned it, let alone would choose to believe it. Yes, Gian Quasar’s theory quoted in an earlier post does imply this version, but the most likely alternative theory is virtually the same as your second version, with just a few additional points highlighted:

"Stine pulled to the corner of Washington and Maple with Zodiac sitting behind the passenger seat, Zodiac pulled a gun while Stine waited for the fare, placed it to Stine’s head and fired across and downward with Zodiac then getting out" and entering the front of the taxi through the passenger side, sliding across next to Stine, then maneuvering the cab the short distance to the corner of Washington & Cherry before "wiping the car and struggling to keep Stine upright before fleeing the scene".

This would be a logical version and one that no doubt Michael Butterfield et el (and myself) would be positing.

I guess you and I have very different definitions of the word “logical”.

Apologies, Chaucer, my original post should have said "Yes, the former theory (not latter as I mistakingly wrote) makes little to no sense. Both scenarios – the shooting at Maple or the shooting at Cherry – have merits in terms of logic, it’s the theories themselves that we can agree to disagree on.

Ah, OK. I wasn’t even going to try to argue lol

Ah, OK. I wasn’t even going to try to argue lol

All credit to you for your restraint lol.

I’m too old for online flame wars

I had to pause the player at 44:20 to admire Richard’s question: "If you don’t believe that reports of height can be taken as accurate, what would you say if the report was drastically different and happened to match your particular POI who is known to not fit the reported height?" THAT is a GREAT question!

These are two people working toward the same goal, who have invested a lot of time and effort into researching this case, hoping to shed some light on why these horrible crimes were committed and potentially bring some sense of peace or closure to the victims and their families and friends – and yet they still keep each other in check, making sure that they don’t fall victim to the pitfalls of speculative investigation that so plague this case in particular.

That’s the kind of on-the-spot question nobody is prepared for, and Mike’s answer was too quick and steady to be anything but truthful.

This is a case where any random nobody can write a book and claim that their uncle’s chiropractor’s barber was the Zodiac and make a fortune. If I’m going to study this case, I want to know that I can trust the people I’m getting my facts from. Mike already has a very strong pedigree which I trusted even before listening to the podcasts, but to hear him be put on the spot by his own partner and still maintain his position without wavering at all? That is a mark of integrity that is almost unheard of when it comes to the Zodiac case. Kudos to both of you.

Kudos to both of you.

And much encouragement to you two! My favorite discussions of this case fer shur!
Decryption of the 340 also makes me think that – geez Wally – this thing could get solved if people keep digging.

Just listened again. Another aspect of Fouke’s story seems not to track (please correct my facts if wrong):

• Fouke was driving, Zelm passenger, and they are lit up, heading West on Jackson Street towards the murder scene.
• Suspected Zodiac is seen on sidewalk, North side of Jackson.
• Zelm allegedly does not see suspect.
• Fouke sees suspect and is able to give a fairly detailed description.

Fouke being the driver puts him in the worst position to make an observation of the suspect. Zelm as passenger is closer to the subject and would have a direct view from his window. Fouke was driving a responding vehicle toward a hot murder scene, watching the road, rolling through stop signs….

How then could Fouke see the suspect, make a detailed observation, and Zelm not see the suspect at all? Fouke would have to be staring Zelm in the face to see the suspect, because Fouke (driving West) would need to turn to his own right (passenger side) to observe the suspect on the North side of Jackson. It does not track. If Fouke saw him so clearly, Zelm could not possibly have missed him.

Yet the story is that Fouke saw him quite well while driving, and observer Zelm did not even catch a glimpse?

Makes me think that the encounter must have been more than a drive-by. Makes me think there is more truth to the Zodiac’s contention that he did indeed interact with the officers, who let him go.

@russ-thompson Donald Fouke wasn’t responding to a murder at the point he encountered the WMA, just an assault & robbery. However, to get such a detailed description that entailed elasticated cuffs and waistband, pleated pants and hair graying at the rear, he must have slowed the vehicle to a crawl. Slowing the vehicle considerably (or failing to accelerate after passing the intersection) must have registered in the mind of Eric Zelms that Fouke was crawling the vehicle for a reason. Both, knowing that an assault and robbery had occurred, would surely have been scanning the sidewalk for potential suspects. The claim in the November 12th memorandum that he didn’t know if Zelms saw anything is absurd. But the fact that Donald Fouke in 1989 stated he continued on Jackson towards Arguello Boulevard is proof enough he was directed there by a third party. You simply don’t head away from a crime scene you are supposed to be responding to. This implies, that Donald Fouke could describe the man so well, because he stopped and spoke to him.