All I can think of is Zodiac restrains Stine, turns him towards the driver’s seat window and fires the shot pointblank.

Or Paul turned rightwards before the shot was fired. Zodiac could have tricked him to look out of his window.

there is no evidence that he sat in the front seat during the drive. i think this rumor started because of the eyewitness account of the three kids who saw him in the front seat while likely removing a piece of stine’s shirt.

Paul Stine’s sister, Carol, is on record having stated that Inspector Armstrong of SFPD told her Zodiac rode in front.

Aside from that, there is no evidence Zodiac ever rode in the back, it’s an assumption perpetuated by books and movies. Zodiac was never seen in the back of the cab, nothing about the crime was necessary for the Zodiac to be in the back, and according to Carol, who would have no reason to lie, the investigation proved Zodiac rode in front.

The wildcard might be though that the witnesses had the killer wiping down the left passenger-compartment door. That could imply that he entered the cab in back and at some point moved up front.

Tom Voigt is on record saying that it is conclusive that he sat in the passenger seat. I believe Dave Toschi said this as well. However, the autopsy and logic seem to suggest otherwise. What is the evidence that compels two pretty reliable sources to say he sat in the passenger seat?

The wildcard might be though that the witnesses had the killer wiping down the left passenger-compartment door. That could imply that he entered the cab in back and at some point moved up front.

Over the years, I have never resolved the entire Stine scenario in my head. Fisherman’s Friend and Richard Grinell helped me to think it through a while back on the Washington and Maple thread. Xcaliber, I agree with what you said about wiping the passenger door. I have always thought it was because he / Zodiac initially touched the door handle on that side and kept it in mind after he shot Stine. However, if he picked up the cab on Geary and Mason, the cab pick up area is on the passenger side. Zodiac could have easily crossed the street and talked to Stine from the drivers side to explain that scenario. This is a good thread. Let’s keep it going.

Geary was one-way going west, so passengers entered cabs on Geary equally from the left and right sides.

It does seem significant that he took the time at the scene to wipe the left rear door.

Therefore my guess is:

a) He hailed the cab, opened the left rear door, asked Stine if could sit in the front seat, and did so.

b) He rode in the back and at some point along the way (or at Washington and Cherry before the witnesses looked out the window) exited the rear compartment and entered the driver’s compartment.

c) He rode in the rear, and at the scene, without exiting the cab, climbed over into the front compartment.

Anything else, or am I way off?

Paul Stine’s sister, Carol, is on record having stated that Inspector Armstrong of SFPD told her Zodiac rode in front.

Aside from that, there is no evidence Zodiac ever rode in the back, it’s an assumption perpetuated by books and movies. Zodiac was never seen in the back of the cab, nothing about the crime was necessary for the Zodiac to be in the back, and according to Carol, who would have no reason to lie, the investigation proved Zodiac rode in front.

It’s hard to imagine that the police wouldn’t have made a determination on which seat he was sitting in.

It’s also reasonable to think they might have discussed that sort of detail with Carol.

Further I believe Carol has stated that she had fixed this piece of information in her mind as she was adamant that Paul only allowed friends to ride up front.

Having said that I think a lot of people have a strong reluctance to believe information that has passed by memory from Armstrong to Carol to Tom.

And it’s not because anyone thinks they would lie.
The reason people are doubtful has more to do with observations most of us have made about the reliability of peoples memories.

If you’ve ever sat around the table at a family gathering and discussed old memories you may have observed the phenomenon of faulty memory.

At my own family gatherings my aunts and uncles argue incessantly over details from the past. Simple details that should stick in ones mind. The most basic detail cannot be established with any certainty, they can’t seem to decide if the Holiday they took in in 2004 was to the local beach, or Bangkok, even if they’ve never set foot in Bangkok. And then each in term will cite reasons that this detail is etched in their memory. It usually goes something like this,

"it was definitely Bangkok, I know because I spent four weeks in the lead up learning Thai"
"NO. I know for a fact that it was the local beach, because I took surfing lessons!"
"Well then explain how it is I can speak Thai?!"
"Explain how it is I can surf!!"

… And so it goes back and forth.

Having said that not everyone is so unreliable and I still tend to believe that if Carol was indeed told by Armstrong that Zodiac sat in the front seat, it is likely that she would remember the detail correctly. So in short, I believe it, with the usual grain of salt that aught to accompany hearsay.

No reason to be too quick to believe, but no reason to be unreasonably skeptical.

Zodiac claimed he wiped the cab down to leave fake clews. I believe he meant that he wiped the cab to give the impression he might have left fingerprints somewhere. AKA a ruse.

Also, according to Carol Stine, nobody rode in the front of Paul’s cab unless Paul knew and trusted them.

Some points:

First, the children who witnessed the aftermath of the shooting claimed that Zodiac was sitting in the passenger seat with Stine’s head in his lap. If this is true, Zodiac would have been covered in blood. If Foulke did see Zodiac immediately after, there is no way he wouldn’t have seen Zodiac’s blood soaked clothes. It would also be foolish for Zodiac to allow himself to be covered in blood and make an inconspicuous getaway in the busy city of SF.

So, either the children were mistaken, and Stine’s head was not in Zodiac’ lap, or Foulke did not see Zodiac.

Second, the Yellow Book said that there were a series of taxi robberies in which the culprit sat in the passenger seat. Stine’s murder was originally thought to be an ordinary robbery gone wrong, so it’s reasonable to assume that Inspector Armstrong relayed this information to Carol.

Third, Stine’s autopsy states the following:

"There is a large, ragged, irregular shaped apparent gunshot entry wound over the right side of the head. This wound is located at the superior and anterior attachment of the right ear.
The vertical dimension measure 4 cm. and transverse dimensions 2 cm. There is a blackening of the skin over the ventral aspect of this wound, extending from a distance over 2 cm.
When probed, the wounds penetrates left laterally towards the midportion of the left zygomatic arch."

In layman’s terms, this means the bullet entered just barely in front and above the ear. if you place your finger on the little protrusion of cartilage on the front of your ear and move it slightly up – that’s where the bullet entered. The entry wound is described as "large, ragged, and irregularly shaped" which indicates the barrel of the gun was very near of in contact with the skin. It also shows that the bullet traveled through Stine’s head and ended up in the left temporalis muscle which is located above the temple. The bullet likely ricocheted off the zygomatic arch (cheekbone) and fragmented into the area above his left temple. This indicates that the gun was almost, but not quite, perpendicular to the side of Stine’s head and angled slightly anteriorly (towards the front). If you place your right finger on where the bullet entered, and your left finger on the middle of your cheekbone, you will see this.

In order for Zodiac to shoot Stine while sitting in the passenger seat, he would have had to reach across his body and angle the gun downward and forward at close range. Witnesses later claimed that Zodiac tried to prop up Stine but he kept falling sideways into the passenger seat, so this is likely what happened after the shot. Again, if Zodiac shot Stine in the passenger seat, he would have been drenched in copious amounts of blood.

I think it is far more logical to assume that Zodiac rode in the backseat. When Stine reached the destination, he likely turned to tell Zodiac how much he owed him. When he did, Zodiac stuck the gun against his head and fired.

Just a hypothesis based on evidence. I’m happy to hear other thoughts.

Pointless.
He had all the reasons to ride in the back seat.
1) It’s far more common
2) Could shot Stine from the back.
He rode in the back, then entered the passenger side to cut the shirt.
I guess the police can’t prove he didn’t rode in the back seat.

For all we know, Stine turned his head to the left just before Zodiac pulled the trigger, perhaps as he reached for his cash box, or instinctually when he saw the gun. Everything that happened could have occurred with Zodiac in the front seat.

Regarding blood, I don’t care how much the Zodiac had on his dark clothes, it wouldn’t stand out, especially at night, and especially with the officers whizzing past.

Pointless.
He had all the reasons to ride in the back seat.
1) It’s far more common
2) Could shot Stine from the back.
He rode in the back, then entered the passenger side to cut the shirt.
I guess the police can’t prove he didn’t rode in the back seat.

*It wouldn’t be at all common if you knew the cab driver. In fact, it would be weird.

*Zodiac never shot anyone from the back that we know of.

*There’s no evidence placing the Zodiac in the rear of the cab.

*The shirt was torn, not cut or ripped.

*According to Paul’s sister, the police did in fact find evidence the Zodiac rode in front.

If Stine knew his killer, wouldn’t LE have worked it that way?