Zodiac doesn’t mention this incident straight away. He was very nearly caught, but managed to pull a trick on the cops – no small feat from his perspective. But he doesn’t mention this right away: the incident is only mentioned in his third post-Stine missive. In his first missive, he talks about hiding out in the park (evading the cops – a taunting remark on his part), but there’s no mention of the much more embarrassing (for the SFPD) Fouke encounter.
So why wouldn’t Zodiac mention that in his first letter? It’s strange that a cocky guy like Zodiac who loves to make cops look stupid wouldn’t mention that right away.
Zodiac doesn’t mention this incident straight away. He was very nearly caught, but managed to pull a trick on the cops – no small feat from his perspective. But he doesn’t mention this right away: the incident is only mentioned in his third post-Stine missive. In his first missive, he talks about hiding out in the park (evading the cops – a taunting remark on his part), but there’s no mention of the much more embarrassing (for the SFPD) Fouke encounter.
So why wouldn’t Zodiac mention that in his first letter? It’s strange that a cocky guy like Zodiac who loves to make cops look stupid wouldn’t mention that right away.
Possibly by confirming the encounter it would verify the accuracy of the composite ?
The Zodiac has seen everything else. Maybe, somehow, the Zodiac knew Fouke was going to write a report. The Zodiac mentions the incident 3 days before Foukes report comes out.
Clearly Zodiac’s letter prompted Fouke to come forward.
TomVoigt said;
"Clearly Zodiac’s letter prompted Fouke to come forward."
Yes, a reasonable conclusion.
If it is considered that Zodiac being witnessed by two SFPD
patrolman near the scene of a murder, caused Zodiac some
heartache (and Tarboxes story, if believed, supports that), then
(cheekiness aside) what prompted Zodiac to mention the talk
at all?
I consider that Zodiac was very concerned, fearful perhaps, at
the circumstance that two SFPD patrolmen were now witnesses
to his being seen near the scene of a murder – but as the weeks
went by with no mention of that fact in the newspapers, I believe
Zodiac began to wonder if the patrolmen had in fact concealed
that fact from their superiors to prevent censure of themselves
and the SFPD.
I believe Zodiac saw an opportunity to try to force the SFPD into
making a statement in relation to whether any patrolmen had
stopped and talked to him – so he wrote that letter asserting he
had been stopped and talked to, and he made it clear in that
letter that that assertion must be printed in the newspaper.
Consider Zodiac’s possible thought process, his gambit – if the
SFPD, in reply to the assertion, had made a strident denial that
any patrolman had stopped and talked to anyone as the letter
cheekily claimed, then it would place in doubt any future
subsequent evidentiary claim by those patrolmen in any court
trial that they stopped and talked to the accused (Zodiac) near
the scene of Stine’s murder.
As it occurred however, one of those patrolmen displayed some
cunning – Foulke’s belated written report asserted he had observed
a suspect, description stated, but denied that there was any stopping
(and thereby no talking with) the suspect.
(It is not clear to me exactly if or how precisely the SFPD ever
responded to the assertion in the Zodiac’s letter – SF Chronicle
articles are obviously findable, but perhaps not all SF Examiner
viewtopic.php?f=30&t=1150#p11167
or television reports are viewable nowadays.)
Cheers
Napa Valley Register: "Zodiac also chides police with the fact that he was hiding in the park near the scene of (the murder). He says police even stopped him as he was on his way to the park asking him if he had seen any suspicious character in the area. San Francisco investigators vehemently deny these claims." No direct quote.
No comment in the Examiner.
Both letters seem to be reacting to the coverage. The first addresses the park search, possibly the teen witnesses (school bus threat). The second is largely a wrathful rebuttal to LE. The second letter was also much longer, and the first was sent only a few days after the murder…maybe he just needed time to process.
