All good and got ya and makes sense for now! Ps. I wasn’t trying to be a D to you and like your post.

If he left his right palm print on the cab door frame while he reached back in he may have been left-handed.

If he left his right palm print on the cab door frame while he reached back in he may have been left-handed.

Glad I brought up left handed but not for that but makes sense. You are going to brace yourself with your less dominant hand while reaching in with your dominant hand. So he may have brace himself on the cab with his right hand.

without knowing the position of stine’s head as he was shot it’s not possible to say with certainty where the killer was sitting. if we had more details on blood spatter then we might make a guess, but we don’t. so stine could have been looking forward, looking to his right, leaning forward, etc. as for the "no evidence zodiac was in the back", not to be pedantic but there’s no evidence zodiac rode in the car. the kids saw him sitting in the front but technically he could have walked up to the cab after stine let out his last passenger, however we assume that he took the cab ride as it’s the least assumptive of the likely options. as a default i assume zodiac sat in the back of the cab because that’s how people usually ride in a cab. you might take someone’s sister saying someone from le told her something as gospel but i don’t. there’s enough third party conjecture used as evidence in this case as it is.

Some hearsay testimony is better than other. It’s not binary. In this instance the claim is very straightforward and unembellished. The story has changed hands a few times, but it’s not really a complex story, it’s one "fact", and the type of "fact" that should be simple enough to remember passing from the top cop, to the sister, to Tom. It’s hard to believe any of the three could have gone that far wrong over such a simple detail.

Some hearsay testimony is better than other. It’s not binary. In this instance the claim is very straightforward and unembellished. The story has changed hands a few times, but it’s not really a complex story, it’s one "fact", and the type of "fact" that should be simple enough to remember passing from the top cop, to the sister, to Tom. It’s hard to believe any of the three could have gone that far wrong over such a simple detail.

we’ll agree to disagree on the reliability of that particular chain of custody.

Yes, I think it’s fair to say that there are many variables that could affect the trajectory of the shot including where Zodiac was sitting, Stine’s head movement, etc. There’s no way to know for sure Zodiac’s location within the vehicle without other evidence.

Still, I believe that Zodiac sitting in the rear of the cab behind the passenger seat makes the most sense. It provides the most logical explanation for the angle of the shot. Assuming Stine was relatively stationary and facing forward, if Zodiac was sitting directly behind or just adjacent and behind Stine, he would have to bend his arm at an awkward angle to put the gun to Stine’s head. If he was sitting directly next to Stine, he would have to reach across his body and lean over awkwardly to place the gun to his head.

If he is sitting in the rear of the cab behind the passenger seat, all he has to do is lean slightly forward, reach across the seat, put the gun Stine’s head and fire. This would account for the forward/downward trajectory of the bullet.

Also, if you were a mass murderer planning on shooting a cab driver, would you want to sit next to him so that he could easily see your movements and actions and potentially your knife and gun? Or would you rather sit in the rear, out of view? Also, would you rather sit next to the man you are shooting at close range where you could potentially be covered in blood and brains? Or would you rather sit in the rear furthest from the driver where the blood and brains would be separated from you by a seat?

Both in terms of trajectory and logically, a position behind the passenger seat of the cab makes the most sense. Just an educated guess.

I was going through the crime scene photos and the right rear window is definitely rolled down and the right front wing is open…hard for me to tell if the right front window is down in the photos because of the light. However, there is a photo taken from the opposite side of the vehicle that shows the interior window roller handles in close to the same position on both doors. Was it possible that Zodiac shot Stine from the outside?

I was going through the crime scene photos and the right rear window is definitely rolled down and the right front wing is open…hard for me to tell if the right front window is down in the photos because of the light. However, there is a photo taken from the opposite side of the vehicle that shows the interior window roller handles in close to the same position on both doors. Was it possible that Zodiac shot Stine from the outside?

recalling from memory, but i think the gunshot residue on his head indicated the gun was very near or contacting his head when fired.

There are a couple of things worthy of note in this. Firstly from the Crime Scene report, the spent shell casing was found in the Front passenger side footwell.

Secondly from the witnesses. They state that he wipes down the Cab, but it seems to imply thathe only wipes thr front. He does not touch the rear doors which could possibly be telling in itself.

This would make sense, Cragle, because shells from a 9mm Browning Hi Power eject to the right. A gun aimed from the rear at a slightly down and forward angle toward the driver would eject in the opposite direction ie. toward the front/passenger side.

However, a gun fired from the passenger side could also end up with a shell in the passenger side. Shell ejections are pretty chaotic.

ETA: The teen witnesses saw what was happening from across the street and above . Their view would have been of the driver side with the passenger side partially obscured. From that angle in the darkness, its reasonable to assume they thought they saw Zodiac sitting in the passenger seat when in fact, he could have been crouched next to it or leaning in to it to cut the shirt.

The idea that Z knew Stine just doesn’t ring true to me. It just defies logic.

If Z knew Stine well enough to sit in the front, (which I don’t believe he did) then;

1. Why would he choose this "opportunity" to commit the crime? As opposed to another one – if he knew him then why do this in the cab? Seems VERY awkward.

2. In ALL of the previous attacks Z puts physical space between himself and the victims OR he disables them (ties up Brian and Cecilia) Z NEVER engages in a physical altercation directly.
Sitting in the back is clearly more advantageous to him in this regard. Pulling a gun on someone you know in a car while sitting inches away from them… Can you imagine the risk of Stine fighting back, grabbing the gun? Too high – absolutely does not fit the previous crimes.

2. If he knew him, he would obviously be aware that the police would come looking to interview Stine’s friend’s, family, acquaintances etc. and would therefore be in the crosshairs to some degree.

3. Knowing that, why turn it into a "big Z" Zodiac crime with all the letters etc? In a case like that I would expect either, A= Z actually makes it look like a robbery and slips away – gets rid of a witness while making it look random, or B= Make a point of it and taunt the police – "Stine knew too much" or something cryptic… Clearly Z wouldn’t miss a chance to taunt them.

4. What we actually get is a "presentation" of the killing from Zodiac through his letters that lines up just the same as the first 2 murder scenes. Which to me fits into more of a "terrorist/vigilante" kind of perspective.

Anyway, I’m not buying it.

Tom believes that Zodiac knew Stine because Tom believes that Richard Gaikowski is the Zodiac Killer.

Gaikowski lived and worked near Stine’s home (among other things that Tom can further elaborate on) so Tom believes the two knew each other and were friendly.

While I don’t agree with Tom’s conclusions about Gaikowski, there is certainly some evidence to back up his claims.

ETA: Unless I am mistaken, Tom believes that Zodiac/Gaikowski knew all of his victims and intentionally targeted them.

Tom believes that Zodiac knew Stine because Tom believes that Richard Gaikowski is the Zodiac Killer.

I believe Zodiac knew Stine because his sister Carol stated that Zodiac rode in front, per Inspector Armstrong, and Paul only allowed people he knew to ride in front.