I just saw it last night.

They could have simply e-mailed me with the question, but chose to post it in public.

I’m tired of people calling me out and then disappearing once they have been proven wrong. Which appears to have happened here.

I too think people should ask you questions directly rather than post a call-out on other forums. I think this question though was posed to get to the truth about a confusing case detail rather than to criticize a lack of clarity on your site. The whole Zodiac case is baffling, obviously. I view zodiackiller.com as a collection of information compiled in good faith and I am sure Richard does as well even if the two of you do trade barbs occasionally. Of course there are errors and issues which require updating within its thousands of pages as there are on Richard’s site but that is to be expected with this kind of subject. It wasn’t my comment though so I guess I should stay out of it.

I think this question though was posed to get to the truth about a confusing case detail rather than to criticize a lack of clarity on your site.

I guess it’s confusing if you use wonky sources for your info. Not implying you do that. Reddit, self-published books, bad TV docs, inaccurate YouTube videos…99% garbage info.

Since 1998 I’ve had a page at Zodiackiller.com devoted to Paul Stine, including the details about the age estimate:

"The three witnesses watched the suspect from approximately 60 feet away as he wiped down the cab with a cloth after killing Stine. They called the police and described a white male, 25 to 30 years old, 5’8" to 5’9", stocky build, reddish-brown hair worn in a crew cut, heavy-rimmed glasses and dark clothing."

https://zodiackiller.com/Stine.html

The link above includes the wanted poster. All it would have taken for someone to know why I listed the age as 25-30 would have been to simply look at my Stine page. Seems to me to be the logical first step.

Fair enough. Thanks for taking the time to clarify that.