1.The teenagers would have been viewing the scene at approximately 9.52 pm to 9.54 pm.
2. About 9.53 pm to 9.54 pm.
3. Armond Pelissetti and Frank Peda responded "red light and siren" arriving at 9.55 pm.
4. Donald Fouke and Eric Zelms also got the call at approximately 9.55 pm traveling northbound on Presidio Avenue, having just passed Washington Street. They arrived in Cherry Street at approximately 9.57 pm to 9.58 pm, where they bumped into Armond Pelissetti on foot searching for Zodiac.
5. At approximately 9.57 pm.

When Fouke and Zelms passed the white male near 3712 Jackson Street they were supposedly under the assumption it was a black male and claimed they did not stop him, although this is questionable.
Fouke looked at the sketch and thought the guy may have been older and heavier.
If they didn’t stop him the point about ‘the man waving the gun’ wouldn’t have been relevant.

Fouke said they never talked to him and with what you describe Marie, it sounds more plausible.

Pelissetti said in ‘This is the Zodiac Speaking’, "I spoke to officer Fouke later that evening and was unaware that he had stopped anybody, black, white or any other color, however in subsequent conversations with him, he told me that he did stop somebody". Donald Fouke denies that he stopped anybody. It is clear that the Zodiac Killer was not privy to this conversation and the supposed stopping and questioning of a suspect was not featured in the newspaper articles prior to the November 9th 1969 Bus Bomb Letter. The Zodiac claimed that the encounter occurred about 3 minutes after he left the taxicab, so let us examine the timeline of Donald Fouke and the Zodiac Killer that night.

Armond Pelissetti stated in the documentary that he and Frank Peda responded ‘red light and siren’ after the dispatchers call at 9.55 pm. So let us surmise for now the Zodiac left the scene at 9.54 pm. After three minutes walking the Zodiac would have arrived close to the intersection of Jackson and Maple, by 3712 Jackson Street at 9.57 pm, supposedly where this encounter happened. Donald Fouke agrees that he saw a white male entering the stairwell to 3712 Jackson Street. Donald Fouke also received the dispatchers call at 9.55 pm, while he and his rookie partner Eric Zelms were travelling northbound on Presidio Avenue, having just passed Washington Street. This is approximately 2 minutes from 3712 Jackson Street, meaning Donald Fouke would have arrived at 9.57 pm, at the exact time the Zodiac would have been passing this location. So Zodiac’s claim of this encounter holds up to the timeline and bearing in mind Armond Pelissetti’s claim that Fouke stated to him that he stopped somebody, it appears to corroborate Zodiac’s claim that "two cops pulled a goof".
Again he was not privy to the police officers claims or statements prior to November 9th 1969, so it was either a lucky guess on his part or he was telling the truth.

I have no doubt Zodiac saw Fouke and Zelms since he mentioned seeing 2 cops, but I do question what took place.

I think there might just be a little fibbing or exaggeration on both their (Zodiac & Fouke’s) parts.

Yes Tahoe a lot of what Pelissetti and Fouke say does not stack up and possibly Zodiac.

Like I was trying to express, its just not logical (Love pop ultra- Judge Judy "If is doesn’t make sense, its usually not true.)

I know they were on the chase for a black man. If I’m a cop and someone says- yes, I saw him run up that street waving a gun, you NEEED to fully interview that witness.

At the very least, get his name (even if its fake) and ask him to come in for a statement.
He was a witness. And who would not increase their pace after seeing a man with a gun. Like I said, I am trying to make sense of it all, reconcile opinions, learn- but he should have been tagged and interrogated as a witness.

I also want to say "I have no idea what it means., or why.

Like I was trying to express, its just not logical (Love pop ultra- Judge Judy "If is doesn’t make sense, its usually not true.)

I know they were on the chase for a black man. If I’m a cop and someone says- yes, I saw him run up that street waving a gun, you NEEED to fully interview that witness.

At the very least, get his name (even if its fake) and ask him to come in for a statement.
He was a witness. And who would not increase their pace after seeing a man with a gun. Like I said, I am trying to make sense of it all, reconcile opinions, learn- but he should have been tagged and interrogated as a witness.

I also want to say "I have no idea what it means., or why.

I agree, the pedestrian should’ve been stopped/questioned/warned, but maybe the police were in too much of a hurry to find that black man they probably assumed was running away, with a several minute head start.

I don’t think it necessarily follows that a guy casually walking down Jackson street, would be aware that 3 minutes before, a single gunshot had been fired inside a cab on Washington Street. He’d hear and see police in the area, but he’d have no way to know why, if he hadn’t been on Washington. For all he’d know, the police could be responding to a car accident, robbery, or anything else.

Fouke has claimed both

a) that he encountered Pelissetti on Cherry, talked to him and received the updated description, said "****, I just passed the guy", and went in pursuit of the suspect;

and

b) that he received the updated description as he was headed towards Arguello Blvd (presumably not thinking about heading to the crime scene at all, and without encountering Pelissetti) in pursuit of the suspect (seemingly under the assumption that the latter was going for the park).

Pelissetti on his part has claimed both that Fouke told him that he stopped someone – and that he doesn’t think this person was Z.

Hard to make sense of what the pair of them have claimed, between them, over the years.

Anyway, I think it’s very important to keep one thing in mind here: They did not have any reason to think the crime was anything out of the ordinary. That’s no excuse – as such. But we need to remember this before we start reading too much into what was done – and not done – that night.

The teenagers rang in and described the suspect as a "white male, 5’8" in height, rimmed glasses, dark clothing, heavy build, reddish-blond hair and a crew cut." Well the next logical step is for the dispatcher to pass this description in its entirety onto the police. It would make no sense to ignore the whole description and just pass on the part about a black male. So if we take the claims at face value, the dispatcher incorrectly changed white male to black male. The description the dispatcher sent out should therefore have read "black male, 5’8" in height, rimmed glasses, dark clothing, heavy build, reddish-blond hair and a crew cut." and supposedly this made sense and was never questioned immediately. The late 1960’s sported many hair cuts, but a black male with a reddish-blond crew cut sounds out of the ordinary, unless we are to believe only the color part of the description was relayed.

i agree with norse. they are cops working a nightly beat and they get lots of calls. this particular night they get a call of a shot fired in the possible robbery of a cab driver. i’m sure they deal with four or five similar type calls a week. hindsight’s 20/20 on our part – we KNOW the call is zodiac related but to them it was just a run-of-the-mill robbery/shooting. the reason they don’t stop everyone on the street and put them in cop cars or whatever scenario keeps getting suggested is precisely because they weren’t taking it that seriously. i think that’s the main reason the stories have changed over the past forty years – they didn’t do a particularly good job of securing a crime scene, zodiac rubbed their faces in it, something did happen as far as an exchange with a person on the street, and i firmly think it became an effort to cover the fact that they probably could have nabbed a serial killer if they had followed protocol. just my 2 cents.

The teenagers rang in and described the suspect as a "white male, 5’8" in height, rimmed glasses, dark clothing, heavy build, reddish-blond hair and a crew cut." Well the next logical step is for the dispatcher to pass this description in its entirety onto the police. It would make no sense to ignore the whole description and just pass on the part about a black male. So if we take the claims at face value, the dispatcher incorrectly changed white male to black male. The description the dispatcher sent out should therefore have read "black male, 5’8" in height, rimmed glasses, dark clothing, heavy build, reddish-blond hair and a crew cut." and supposedly this made sense and was never questioned immediately. The late 1960’s sported many hair cuts, but a black male with a reddish-blond crew cut sounds out of the ordinary, unless we are to believe only the color part of the description was relayed.

We don’t know how detailed their description to the dispatcher/duty officer/whoever took the call was. The details you mention are from the report, I doubt that whoever called (presumably the oldest teen) had the presence of mind to list all those details when he called it in.

It could even be…that the kid didn’t say anything about the ethnicity of the killer. Perhaps the dispatcher simply assumed it was a black guy. Cab mugging, black perpetrator, 1969 style. Pelissetti then arrives on the scene and gets the true description.

Just speculation on my part. I don’t recall if JDean mentioned any particulars regarding what the (then) teens remembered about the call.

Another possibility, which has been offered up before, is that the caller said something like "the guy is still there, what does he look like? I don’t know, he’s wearing black…" and presto.

Any dispatcher worth their salt would ask for the details and if the teen couldn’t recall what he had just seen 30 seconds ago, I put absolutely no stock in the description they gave to generate the composite hours later. As for the BMA, there was likely no such radio call, it was concocted to cover Donald Fouke’s incompetency for letting a white suspect on his way and the police have been covering their backsides ever since. Pelissetti and Fouke claim the initial dispatch was a black male adult, is that it, couldn’t the kids even give the hair color between all three of them. No, because a black, reddish-blond crew cut makes no sense. It never happened.

Like I was trying to express, its just not logical (Love pop ultra- Judge Judy "If is doesn’t make sense, its usually not true.)

I know they were on the chase for a black man. If I’m a cop and someone says- yes, I saw him run up that street waving a gun, you NEEED to fully interview that witness.

At the very least, get his name (even if its fake) and ask him to come in for a statement.
He was a witness. And who would not increase their pace after seeing a man with a gun. Like I said, I am trying to make sense of it all, reconcile opinions, learn- but he should have been tagged and interrogated as a witness.

I also want to say "I have no idea what it means., or why.

Which is why Zodiac could have been full of crap and simply saw the two men in the cop car, and that was that.

Which is why Zodiac could have been full of crap and simply saw the two men in the cop car, and that was that.

Exactly. Z had been in very close contact with a very bloody body just minutes before. The last thing he is going to do is stop to talk with a cop – he is going to do exactly what Foulke said – casually duck out of sight.

If he can’t do that, if Foulke insists on talking with him, then the last thing he’s going to say is anything that would be the least bit interesting to the police. Since he was walking on a different street (Jackson) than the murder (Washington) he’d have the perfect excuse to say he saw nothing. And there wouldn’t be any reason for the cops to not believe that (if they didn’t see the blood on his clothes.)