Re: Blood

Yes, I agree. The idea that he would have been sitting with Stine’s bleeding head in his lap just doesn’t make any sense. Unless he was completely out of it (mentally, I mean) at the time, he simply wouldn’t do that.

The teens could have easily misinterpreted what he was doing inside the cab.

Is it possible that no suspect information was given out on the radio, just that there were shots fired at the location?

That’s possible, IMO.

The teens call, saying – basically – that a guy is killing a cab driver outside. The dispatcher then puts two and two together and gets less than four: The message going out reads: Attack in progress at such and such an address *, cab driver the victim, no mention of the fact that the suspect is fleeing on foot, no mention of ethnicity.

* Could have easily added the "shots fired" detail too, in spite of the caller not claiming to have heard shots – in fact it seems very likely that "shots fired" WAS included in the dispatch, since Fouke mentions this specifically (IIRC).

Having said that, though, to me it isn’t less likely that the dispatcher simply misunderstood something the caller said, and constructed the phantom NMA from this. Or even that the dispatcher added the NMA detail for no good reason, out of prejudice or whatever one wants to call it (not intentionally, of course, but as a matter of flawed interpretation on his or her part: Cab mugging, most likely a black perpetrator, etc.).

The teens could have reported that Stine looked as if he had been shot, it would be a reasonable conclusion to jump to considering the amount of blood he had on him. Thus, the dispatcher said there had been shots fired.

Also, the description of the suspect being black could have gotten mixed up with the description of the clothing. Perhaps the kids said the suspect was wearing a black or dark jacket. I know that there is a protocol for giving a description that basically goes from top to bottom, starting with hair color. The kids not being all that worldly about such things could have answered the dispatchers questions out of order or were in some way confused when talking to the dispatcher.

There are a few different ways that these things could have happened without there having been blatant or malicious mistake made.

There are a few different ways that these things could have happened without there having been blatant or malicious mistake made.

Indeed.

Besides, if the SFPD wanted to cover up the embarrassing Fouke encounter, there were more obvious ways of doing it than inventing this NMA/WMA mix-up.

They could have just flat out denied that the encounter ever happened. The only outside witness to it – was Z himself. Hardly a credible source.

They could have just flat out denied that the encounter ever happened. The only outside witness to it – was Z himself. Hardly a credible source.

Very true, the closer I look at things, I think a coverup was made until they realized a few days later when the Z letter (mailed Oct. 13) arrived. I think, sadly, the coverup continued too long until Z again wrote (pen card, 340 cipher mailed 11/8). And then the bus bomb letter (mailed 11/9) that specifically called out the two officers passing him and the police booboos. Foulke’s guilt perhaps got the best of him, or was pressured by superiors, but he admitted it formally on 11/12 in an intra-deparmental memorandum that he had seen the suspect.

Its also a potential tragedy that the police released Stine’s body to a funeral home and was cremated on Oct.14, probably the day Z’s first letter arrived taking responsibility. Maybe a harder look could have found some other evidence, rather than working under the assumption it was just another cabbie murder. I had been hoping to find info about a funeral- in particular to see what may have happened to his glasses, but it wouldn’t matter for cremation. Boy, this investigation leads to me making so many morbid statements.

Yes, lots of woulda, coulda shouldas.

Why would officer Zelm’s tell his wife that they did stop a man on Jackson Street if it weren’t true ? It is True, officer Zelms did in fact tell his wife that!
I do believe Zelm’s wife, after all she had nothing to hide and certainly nothing to gain.

Why would officer Zelm’s tell his wife that they did stop a man on Jackson Street if it weren’t true ? It is True, officer Zelms did in fact tell his wife that!
I do believe Zelm’s wife, after all she had nothing to hide and certainly nothing to gain.

Did she tell you that? I don’t remember who originally reported that conversation, but at this point we are now at a 4th hand account of the incident. I believe that everyone involved was telling what they believed to be true, but I think it’s likely that some misinterpretation of the real event has come about in the telling.

I think the real question is, if it’s true, why didn’t Zelms tell anyone else about it besides his wife? And knowing that, why would she tell other people?

Nobody involved knew it was Z until some days later. That in itself is a possible source of confusion and mix-ups. Ed Neil had a theory about Zelms’ claim (or rather his widow’s claim) which makes sense on the face of it:

Zelms got the Jackson St encounter mixed up with another, different encounter (in which Zelms and Fouke DID talk to an individual) – and there you have it.

A couple of days after the Stine murder (a routine incident) it becomes clear that Z is involved – and Zelms, an inexperienced officer, jumps to the wrong conclusion: He thinks the guy they talked to (not the guy they simply rolled past) was Z. And nobody bothers to set him straight. He isn’t in the loop. Toschi and Armstrong never bothered to talk to Don Fouke – they probably never talked to Zelms either.

Toschi himself told me in one of our phone conversations back in the early 70’s, that two officers did stop a man briefly on Jackson st. that night , but they had no idea he was Zodiac.
So I doubt that Toschi made that up and of course he had to have spoken to all of the officers who were near the scene.

In 1990 I phoned SFPD, the person who answered the phone told me that he was the artist who drew the composite. He mentioned the two officers who stopped and spoke to Zodiac that night. He also told me it was those two officers who had him make the changes to the first composite, making him older, with a more full faced.

If they did not stop Zodiac for even one second, how would they remember so much detail about his face ?

Zelm’s wife told Bruce3 that they stopped the man on Jackson street. I doubt he was confused between two different incidents.( How many incidents like that could happen in that neighborhood ? ) When Zodiac sent his letter about the goof , Zelm’s must have realized at that point about the man he saw on Jackson street must have been Zodiac.

Nobody involved knew it was Z until some days later. That in itself is a possible source of confusion and mix-ups. Ed Neil had a theory about Zelms’ claim (or rather his widow’s claim) which makes sense on the face of it:

Zelms got the Jackson St encounter mixed up with another, different encounter (in which Zelms and Fouke DID talk to an individual) – and there you have it.

A couple of days after the Stine murder (a routine incident) it becomes clear that Z is involved – and Zelms, an inexperienced officer, jumps to the wrong conclusion: He thinks the guy they talked to (not the guy they simply rolled past) was Z. And nobody bothers to set him straight. He isn’t in the loop. Toschi and Armstrong never bothered to talk to Don Fouke – they probably never talked to Zelms either.

Didn’t Fouke say he had only worked with Zelms on that one occasion?

And we also have Officer Jerry Senkir who said he was one of two officers there that night who wondered if he let Zodiac "slip through his fingers".

http://zodiackiller.fr.yuku.com/topic/5 … dCzbvlVhBc — (see page 3 for original article)

While I do believe it was Fouke & Zelms who saw Zodiac, that night, one can’t help but be curious by Senkir’s statement. He seemed to have a long, well-respected career with the S.F.P.D.

Well, the teen witnesses have claimed that it was they who asked for a second session with the sketch artist. The second composite was the result of this – second – session. That is what they claim. And I can’t see any good reason to doubt that, frankly.

It’s certainly possible that Fouke and Zelms also contributed to the composite(s). They should have. But according to Fouke they did not – he’s very clear on that.

Theorizing/speculating about what could have happened

Chronologically:

Stine murder takes place. Fouke and Zelms encounter Z on Jackson St – but they don’t know it’s Z.

Fouke and Zelms continue with their shift, looking for the suspect, accosting various people, talking to them, etc. Some of these people may easily have been shady enough, given the time of day and the nature of the situation.

It becomes clear that Stine is a Z victim. Fouke realizes that the Jackson St guy must have been Z. But he does not talk to Zelms about this. After the night of the murder there is no interaction between Fouke and Zelms – they’re not on the same page at all.

Z sends his second Stine letter, claiming that he talked to two officers that night. Zelms sees this – and jumps to the wrong conclusion: He believes Z is telling the truth, in short, and concludes that Z must have been one of the (perhaps shady, suspicious, something of the sort) people he and Fouke accosted/talked to that night.

Again, there is no interaction between Fouke and Zelms – nor any interaction between Zelms and the detectives in charge of the case. Zelms doesn’t read Fouke’s famous memo, he isn’t involved in the Z investigation at all, he’s just a rookie cop whom nobody informs about anything pertaining to that case.

So – he’s mistaken. And he relates his mistaken view to his wife – in what precise terms we do not know. I don’t know precisely what sort of questions Davis put to her either, but it doesn’t really matter: She says her husband and Fouke talked to Z on Jackson St, because that’s what she believes: Her husband told her they talked to Z – and the Z encounter took place on Jackson St. The inference is inevitable, one could say. But it could nevertheless be completely wrong.

According to Fouke and Zelms, what you wrote would have to pretty much sum it up. Odd though, aye?

Odd though, aye?

The whole thing is odd. But I suspect that 99% of what we perceive as potentially dubious discrepancies is down to three factors:

1. We’re looking at it from a vantage point. Half a century down the line. And we’re looking at it as though it were a story which unfolded from A to Z just the way we’ve become accustomed to "read" it. Reality is usually at odds with the neatness of a narrative.

2. People make mistakes. People have faulty memories. People express themselves clumsily. People express themselves in a way which they believe will make them look good. People may or may not be good detectives.

3. We don’t have all the reports. We don’t know what they actually did – or who they actually talked to.

No deception, no conspiracy – just grim reality. That’s my take on it.

( Previous quote) 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.

Someone is lying, three guesses as to who and the first two don’t count.

My theory as to how or why the dispatcher put out a bolo on a BMA and not a WMA, is that when she asked the teen to describe the perpetrator, the teen said :Its "very dark" and hard to see. The dispatcher heard " very dark "and thought the perp was dark skinned?

In answer to the question , why didn’t the officers question anyone they saw walking in the area of the crime scene? When they are in persecute of a BMA they wouldn’t have the time to ask a lot of questions of a WMA.

Example, I called 911 at 3am saying a man was seen peeking in my bedroom window. The police arrived with in a couple of minutes, one of them asked me if the man was driving a blue and white car ? I said yes that is what he left in. The officer said: I past him speeding away down your street, but because I am a back up officer, I couldn’t turn around and go after him I had to respond to your address asap.

There is a certain protocol that they have to abide by, I don’t agree with it, but that is how they are trained.