Many people are highly skeptical of Fouke’s claim that the man he saw on Oct 11 really did turn and walk up steps toward the door of 3712 Jackson. The skepticism is very uderstandable because he did not mention this in his 1969 report,but simply states suspect was heading east on Jackson, before turning North on Maple. It isn’t untill 38 years later that Fouke mentions the suspect appearing to turn into a driveway and head toward a house. I’ve been highly critical of Fouke myself at times but after looking at all the evidence and reports of that night, I think Fouke is telling the truth here and there does seem to be several things to support that notion.

Don Fouke said in his original report of the suspects descriptoion – "White Male. Age: 35-45. Height: 5′ 10. Weight: 180-200lbs." But the most interesting observation he makes is "Light colored hair, possibly greying in rear". How could Fouke have seen the rear of this mans head to make such a remark? Fouke was going uphill on Jackson, suspect coming downhill on Jackson, so they were square on coming toward each other. The comment ‘possibly greying in rear’ does make sense in his original report now we know that the suspect, as soon as he spotted Fouke approaching, turned into the driveway, because this now would put the suspect’s back to the officers in their patrol car as they passed. It’s also logical to say that, assuming that was the Zodiac, he looked up, saw Fouke & Zelms approaching and slowing down, and to avoid having the officers see him or speak to him, he turned into the house driveway. I mean when you think of it, it seems strange why nobody had ever questioned Foukes original report that states suspect was last seen going ‘North on Maple’. Well turning off Jackson North onto Maple would lead into the little trun area that has a gap in the trees to get through onto West Pacific and the Presidio, as seen in the pic below.

Surely if Fouke saw the man heading off in that direction he’d have been highly suspicious? This little ‘alcove’ area is, as it happens, right next to 3712 Jackson, the property in which Fouke claims to have witnesses the man trun into

When you are wondering in general if Z was in the area or if he had fled consider these two things: 1) Take a close look at what he describes in the 10/13 and 11/9 letters. Sounds. Things he heard. How could he have fled to Vallejo and heard the sounds of the search? 2) There really was no detailed description of the search of the park in the newspapers prior to the time Z sent the 10/13 letter.

Therefore, he had to be close by the area. Either that or he was a mad genius who fled to Vallejo and was then able to consciously decide to transform whatever mental vision he may have had of the search into a description of sounds that he had not heard.

The search was pretty extensive. If you were Z, would you have felt comfortable hanging out in someone’s yard that night hoping you would not be caught after dodging a huge bullet (evading Fouke and Zelms) to make your escape–and then risking being caught all for the sake of some details for your letter, which were redundant since you already had Stine’s shirt as proof you had done the crime? Seems he had a "safe haven" where he was hanging out that night listening to the search.

Mike

Mike I totally agree with you, I think it is almost certain that Zodiac was somewhere close enough not only to hear the motorbike and fire trucks, but to also see the police cars and describe the distance between the ‘two groups of parking’.

He wasn’t in J. Kahn park, though in my opinion because Chief of SFPD Inspectors Martin Lee stated publically that they had the area detained and search the park using 7 blood-hound police K-9 units, flood lights, and a small army of police searching, to quote him direct "Tree by tree and bush by bush, Zodiac wasn’t anywhere near that park". He also said "A mouse couldn’t have escaped our attrention".

I think Zodiac simply had a nice view from afar. This area makes sense considering Zodiac’s description of LE locations–Zodiac mentioned motorcycle cops "going from south to north west":

Here would be his view from PRESIDIO Blvd/Ave. (had he been there) looking towards Maple (at the far top) and Julias Kahn playground to the right:

And the view from the backside of Maple towards Presidio Blvd/Ave which was was on top of the far hill:

Well Zodiac seems to know too much about the coordinates of the search for it to simply be lucky guess after lucky guess so there are only two possibilities,

1. Zodiac was close enough to see it for himself.
2. Someone else he knew that lived in immediate area saw it and told him.

The second option isn’t to imply that an this other person was an acomplice, although it’s a possibility. Zodiac may have engaged his friend in conversation the day after about what had happened and asked about the search details. Remember there were people in the immediate vicinity that night, Armon Pelissetti saw a man with a dog right at the intersection of Maple & Jackson.

I wouldn’t think option two is the more likely, but it’s the only other way Zodiac could have know the details of the search effort without being present himself.

Hi-

It is kind of confusing but I think the word is "barking," referring to dogs, not "parking" referring to cars. Three groups of barking dogs.
Once again, an auditory clue.
Mike

It also makes sense that Zodiac would turn and start walking towards a house with his back to the Officers because he was absolutely soaked in Pauls blood. Zodiac probably saw the car approaching the intersection and realized that if the headlights hit him the reflection and colour of the huge amount of blood would become visable to the police.

Well Zodiac seems to know too much about the coordinates of the search for it to simply be lucky guess after lucky guess so there are only two possibilities,

1. Zodiac was close enough to see it for himself.
2. Someone else he knew that lived in immediate area saw it and told him.

3. He got the details from the police force, somehow.
?

Yes true, that also would be another possibility.

The thing I can’t get my head round about this whole incident is Fouke (and Zelms, but he’s sadly deceased as if Jan 1970, so hasn’t given interviews and statements like Fouke has). I really don’t like being critical of the police in this case but in regards to what happened that night and the subsequent telling of events, it’s impossible to ignore the inconsistancies.

I mean, Fouke see’s a white male and decides he can’t be the suspect as he’s been told the suspect is Black. But Pelissetti says he updated the suspects description over the radio to that of a White Male long before Fouke encountered Zodiac, yet Fouke was unaware of the change.
When Fouke first spots this lone White Male, Fouke himself said "He was putting his head down when he spotted the police car, then turned into the entrance way of a house". This wouldn’t seem suspicious? A shooting occurs 200 yards or so away, your approaching the scene and as you do a man is walking away from the direction of the crime, and as soon as he spots you he puts his head down not wanting to make eye contact, then turns into a driveway.

Armond Pelissetti says he thinks Fouke didn’t come foreward to admit seeing (and he claims speaking) with the man as he realized who the man was 3 days later. But a report/scratch should have been made that night, October 11, detailing his encounter of with a White Male on Jackson st. At this point, the name ‘Zodiac’ wasn’t even remotely attached to this shooting. Yet he still doesn’t report that he has seen a possible suspect, which could offer useful evidence to the Homicide Detectives with Fouke as a witness. This encounter between Fouke & Z may never have made it into the public domain had it not been for Chief Inspector Martin Lee calling Zodiac everything from a clumsy criminal to a latent homosexual because it was while responding to these comments that Zodiac made the ‘2 cops pulled a goof’ comment and let the cat out of the bag. So he comes foreward and offers a description and details by sending Homicide Division a memo. But even this memo is questionable. As Pellisetti point’s out "Well, I believe Fouke would have been honest but, what he told me and what is in that scratch don’t match" (Pellisetti claims that Fouke had told him that he’d stopped and spoken to the white male on Jackson st). And finally….

Fouke said that he didn’t mention the suspect turning and going up steps,onto a drive and then heading toward a house because, quote "I didn’t think he (the suspect) lived there". Now I can see why Fouke may have assumed that on the night, and making this assumption on the night I can see his reasons for doing. But, after you have cordened off the area and searched the park ‘Tree by tree, bush by bush’ and found nothing, wouldn’t the house, and the possibility he really was in or around the house, become more of a concern. Then, a month later after Zodiac himself gives you detailed info on the search, thus suggesting he was close by but not in the park, i’d think the Jackson st house would be priority No. 1

I’m not suggesting that Zodiac did live there, or had friends or an accomplice living there. Although there was one thing that I learned about the owners that made me at least consider a connection. The man who lived there in 1969 was listed as having owed a textile and sewing business. Zodiac’s elaborate costume and symbol at Berryessa sprang to mind and the words of Bryan Hartnell: "And it (the hood) had a crossed hairs symbol on the front,white, about 4 inches in diameter and looked like it had beenmade with some kind of machine, or with some degree of care, it wasn’t just scrawled on".

For some reason the whole "did they didn’t they speak to Zodiac" argument has been one of the most devisive over the years. While having no particular agenda one way or the other, I’ve always inched toward "they did" side for no other reason than there was much to Foulkes claims and what he did and didn’t do that didn’t make a lot of sense to me. Then that video surfaced with Pellissetti’s comments and I can’t for the life of me, figure why he would lie. It’s not just what he had to say but the way he said it. He also tried his best ( I thought) to minimise to effect, by saying it probably wasn’t Zodiac in the first place, as if to try to cover for Fouke. Why would he sell a fellow officer up the river like that?

In any case, back on topic….another reason why Z may actually have been in the area that night (after the murder)….no phone call! He didn’t leave evidence as to his involvement at the scene (like LH) and appeared to be in a hurry (as evidenced by the timing of the letter) to take credit ASAP. His last two calls were traced in quick time and perhaps he couldn’t get out on the night in question and /or was unwilling to risk a call from where he was.

For some reason the whole "did they didn’t they speak to Zodiac" argument has been one of the most devisive over the years. While having no particular agenda one way or the other, I’ve always inched toward "they did" side for no other reason than there was much to Foulkes claims and what he did and didn’t do that didn’t make a lot of sense to me. Then that video surfaced with Pellissetti’s comments and I can’t for the life of me, figure why he would lie. It’s not just what he had to say but the way he said it. He also tried his best ( I thought) to minimise to effect, by saying it probably wasn’t Zodiac in the first place, as if to try to cover for Fouke. Why would he sell a fellow officer up the river like that?

In any case, back on topic….another reason why Z may actually have been in the area that night (after the murder)….no phone call! He didn’t leave evidence as to his involvement at the scene (like LH) and appeared to be in a hurry (as evidenced by the timing of the letter) to take credit ASAP. His last two calls were traced in quick time and perhaps he couldn’t get out on the night in question and /or was unwilling to risk a call from where he was.

Its funny you should bring the ‘did they/didn’t they stop Zodiac argument because it’s something I had been thinking about recently. I, like yourself, have always thought that Fouke did stop and speak with Zodiac. I have also asked myself the same question as you asked, that being, why on Earth would A.P lie regarding something Fouke had said to him? What possible motive would there be, or what could he gain from it? And as you point out, why would he make up lies about something Fouke had said, then appear to try and play down the whole incident with "I believe Fouke would have been honest, but that scratch (memo/incident report) and what he told me do not coincide." He later continues "Fouke was also very clear about what the person was wearing and it just so happens that that area is extremely well lit and I cannot imagine his not seeing the shine of blood on the clothing if it had been Zodiac. I feel bad for him if he feels that was the Zodiac, I don’t think it was"
As A.P states, Fouke was ‘Very clear about what the person was wearing’. That’s an understatement IMO, there was so much detail in his description that it is one of the reason’s i’ve pointed to in support of him having stopped and spoke to Zodiac. In regards to Fouke’s sighting, I do believe his statement that the suspect turned into the entrance way of a house and onto the drive toward the front door. The reason I believe Fouke in this account is because two specific comments he makes in his original memo seem to support it. They are…

"Light coloured hair, possibly greying in rear" & "Brown Wool pants pleated type baggy in rear"

As I said before, Fouke was driving up Jackson st while the Zodiac was coming down Jackson St which means they would have to have been heading straight toward each other and any encounter would be face on. Knowing this, how can it be that Fouke see’s the back of this mans head and pants well enough to enable him to make the two comments above? Now there will be some who may say ‘he probalby passed him and looked into his side door wing mirror’. That couldn’t be how he saw the back of Zodiac because Fouke is the driver, sitting in the left side of the vehicle on the left side of the street. Zodiac is ‘stumbling along with a lumbering gait’ down the right side of the street, the opposite side to Fouke. It makes perfect sence to me that Zodiac would see the approaching police car and, after putting his head down, turn into a house pathway towards a house before Fouke and Zelms got too close to him because the front of Zodiac’s clothes (his pleated pants specifically) would have been absolutely soaked in blood after having Stine’s head resing in his lap. So Zodiac would have had every reason to turn his back toward the police car. I have also pointed out on the old site that the description of Zodiac’s clothes given by Bryan Hartnell and Don Fouke are almost identical. I say almost because there is one slight difference which to me, is significant. Here are the two men’s descriptions.

Hartnell: Dark/Navy Blue cotton coat with Collar and zipper down the front. Older style Pleated Pants, either black or dark blue. Wearing Boots.

Fouke: Dark waist length zipper type jacket with collar, navy or royal blue. Brown Rust coloured pants, pleated style. Engineering type boot, low cut shoe.

It’s fairly obvious that Zodiac wore the same ‘outfit’ for both murders. The one minor, yet significant difference in their description, is the colour of the pleated pants. Bryan said they were black or dark blue. Fouke described the colour in his memo as ‘Brown wool pants pleated type baggy in read (rust brown)’. I think the reason they looked a rust coloured brown was because they were saturated in blood turing them from Hartnell’s Black or dark blue, into rust redish brown colour, and this was why Zodiac would have had to turn away from the passing police car to hide the obvious blood soaked front of the pants.

And your final point about Zodiac not phoning is also one i’ve though quite a lot about. The most obvious reason for his silence that night would be him being on foot. (Funny enough, i’ve often thought Zodiac may have been on foot at LHR for reason that are not suitableto post here, but are on the LHR thread) Zodiac didn’t phone after LHR either. Zodiac was never really consistant in his communications when you look at them. For example, he murders Betty & David at LHR on Dec 20, 1968 and neither phones nor writes to take credit in the aftermath. Seven months later, he attack’s Mike and Dee at BRS. The same night he calls LE to inform them "You’ll find the kids in a brown car, I also shot those kids last year. Goodbye". He then writes to inform the media and police that not only is he responsible for the double shooting earlier that month, but also for the double homicide in Dec of the previous year. Then he attacks Bryan and Cecelia at Berryessa, stabbing both many times before leaving them stranded and driving to another payphone to tell Napa Police Dpt he ‘Wants to report a murder… No, a double murder". He writes the dates on Hartnells car along with the cross hairs symbol but never writes one letter to confess that he was the LB attacker. Then finally we get to Paul Stine and he doesn’t phone this time, yet instantly fires off a letter telling the Cronicle "This is the Zodiac Speaking. I am the murderer of the cab driver over by Washington & Cherry streets last night. To prove this, here is a blood stained piece of his shirt". So he seemed to change his communication habbit, or at least one specific part of his communication method, for each attack, the same way he changed weapons every attack, along with jurisdiction’s (Lake Herman Road – Benecia. Blue Rock Springs Park – Vallejo. Lake Berryessa – Napa. Presidio Heights – San Francisco.)

I’ve always had my doubts about the validity of making definitive statements vis-a-vie what Fouke/Zelms and Zodiac for that matter, would or would not have noticed during their encounter. Sure, I accept that it’s highly likely Z had a lot of blood on him, however by the same token it’s all dependent on a number of factors as to whether it would be noticed. Dark clothing, lighting, what the officers were concentrating on…it may be the case that Z (position in Taxi) had most of that on the left leg and therefore would be on the inside here. Similarily I have no doubt Z seen the squad car coming at a certain distance, I’m not 100% sure (as it was probably a head down thereafter) that he would have been able to determine that it contained two men. I’m surprised no one over the years has attempted a reconstruction….even a simple drive by with a video camera, I’m sure it would be telling one way or another.

I think we also too, have to allow for Z to evolve, we are told that these types get more brazen at time goes by, the longer they go the more confident they get and will take more risks, that certainly seems to be the case with Z. I’m not at all surprised that there was no call or letter after LHR, it may well be he wanted to make sure he had a second set of murders under his belt, before he announced himself to the world. A second "easy one" before LE knew what they were dealing with. It would have been embarassing to him had he went "all out" from the get go and then got caught. I am surprised that all we have after LB was writing on the car door and a phone call, although I have a feeling that there’s more to the door than meets the eye (can’t prove it). It seems odd he appears content that his handwriting is sufficent as proof,(maybe there is something in the 340) when he goes to such extraordinary lenghts next time out to prove he was responsible but I again suspect there was method to his madness and he was trying to make some particular statement with the bloody shirt.

I’m surprised no one over the years has attempted a reconstruction….even a simple drive by with a video camera, I’m sure it would be telling one way or another.

Too right and my thought’s exactly. The angle of that incline, where the spread of the headlights hits the area he was seen, trees? parked cars?. All of these would be interesting to see if they could affect what Foukes said he saw or not. I got some crime scene reconstruction software where you can recreate and to drive through and view from inside a vehicle etc. Might be quicker for someone to video it by the time I figure out a way of manually inputting the correct terrain profile.

I’m surprised no one over the years has attempted a reconstruction….even a simple drive by with a video camera, I’m sure it would be telling one way or another.

Too right and my thought’s exactly. The angle of that incline, where the spread of the headlights hits the area he was seen, trees? parked cars?. All of these would be interesting to see if they could affect what Foukes said he saw or not. I got some crime scene reconstruction software where you can recreate and to drive through and view from inside a vehicle etc. Might be quicker for someone to video it by the time I figure out a way of manually inputting the correct terrain profile.

It’s been done a bunch by amateurs. Bet you could find something on youtube.