I think I just lost my (long) post! Aren’t you glad?! I got so excited over posts by 2 of my favourites! In short, this is the key crime scene; where the answer lies. Which officer is telling the truth? They can’t both be.

For what it’s worth, I don’t think he can tell the same story once. I may be completely wrong, but I’m sure they want to catch the Zodiac as much as we do, and so they’d want us to cover every angle. I think they are both lying, but for different reasons. Of course I don’t know what the reasons may be. But we have mutually exclusive statements here.

I think Officer Pelissetti is lying about everything except one thing, and Officer Fouke is telling the truth about everything except one thing. And it’s the same thing. I can’t figure it out, and I’d need to see an interview with Officer Zelms’s widow to be more certain. But I think Officer Fouke did, very briefly, stop the Zodiac. One cannot look Welsh.

I had all the many reasons written out but lost the post, so I’ll just leave it at that. But I think people’s families were threatened.

Isn’t it odd that Pelissetti lets a man go because he thinks he lives there, and Fouke lets a man go because he thinks he doesn’t live there? And I think there was no dog. The Satanists ate them all.

One cannot look Welsh.

But then again, you can’t sound like you’re “possibly of Welsh ancestry” either (which is what you’re hinting at, I take it).

Fouke did explain what he meant by that phrase in one of the later interviews – it was something about the man’s body type which made him opt for that description. No mystery, really – just a rather unusual way of expressing it.

The word ‘ancestry’ may have been added to soften the absurdity of having said Welsh while claiming not to have heard his voice. Not even Southern ancestry, not Texan. Welsh. Doesn’t that strike you even as slightly odd?

I’m not buying that you can tell someone’s ancestors were from a specific small country just by looking, any more than one can tell the writer of a letter had red curly hair… It’s a nonsense. Was he wearing a black top hat? Did he have some sheep with him? (No offence to the Welsh!)

By the way, I’d have done exactly the same as Officer Fouke, if a group (as I think it was) threatened my family. He seems a good man who’s done his best to help, in later years. I think he will tell us one day.

One cannot look Welsh.

But then again, you can’t sound like you’re “possibly of Welsh ancestry” either (which is what you’re hinting at, I take it).
Fouke did explain what he meant by that phrase in one of the later interviews – it was something about the man’s body type which made him opt for that description. No mystery, really – just a rather unusual way of expressing it.

So you are saying my use of the term ‘Welsh’ as opposed to the term ‘of Welsh ancestry’ changes the issue? If anything, it weakens your case. There is a big difference between ‘Welsh’ and of ‘Welsh ancestry’, I agree. But I think it’s an irrelevant, philosophical point. Okay, I’ll go with it. See, I do agree with you that when a witness says something like this, it usually does connect to something useful. We store information in convenient files. When we think about why we got the impression, we usually get at something else.

I’m not being clear. Say a poem reminds you of your Auntie Annie. Now, I am a complete anti-intentionalist in that I believe meaning lies between the text and the reader (or listener). (This often goes for contracts as much as for poetry! That’s why we need all the defences for breach.) But if you said in an essay that the poem reminded you of your Auntie Annie, you wouldn’t do too well. The next step would be to connect to what it was about her that the poem reminded you of.

The statement doesn’t add up, in my view. The words imply he heard Specky-Boy’s voice. Personally, I can’t see any way round that. Other things about Fouke’s later interview confirm it for me, but that’s for another thread!

I find it extremely interesting that Officer Fouke said that. Or maybe the Zodiac was whistling ‘Land of My Fathers’ with a daffodil in his lapel? It’s a mythstery. Norse, what was it about his body shape which could be identified as of Welsh ancestry? I’d love to know. Maybe it was a euphemism for taking a leek?

Z had a build/body type which reminded Fouke of Welsh coal miners. That’s what he meant by it. He, Fouke, is of Welsh ancestry himself.

If he had been of Scottish ancestry, perhaps Z had reminded him of Scottish miners. It’s a somewhat unusual, and pretty confusing (without the context) way of saying that Z was a big guy, a stocky guy, barrel chested, etc. But that’s what it means, and there is – again – nothing mysterious about this.

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I fail to see the significance of either officers ‘story’ nor how their interpretation of a suspect really impacts the overall case. I don’t believe either Fouke or Pelissetti ever disagreed with the sketch that was produced after the Stine murder.

It took Fouke a month or more to even make a statement about his ( and Zelm’s) encounter.

Fouke is one of very few eyewitnesses who saw Z, and he’s a police officer at that. It’s hardly surprising that people attach some significance to his description.

No, he didn’t disagree with the composite – just added that the guy looked a bit older, IIRC.

Don’t think I’ve ever seen AP commenting on the composite either way, but he did not believe Fouke encountered Z (or that’s what he says, anyway).

Z had a build/body type which reminded Fouke of Welsh coal miners. That’s what he meant by it. He, Fouke, is of Welsh ancestry himself.

If he had been of Scottish ancestry, perhaps Z had reminded him of Scottish miners. It’s a somewhat unusual, and pretty confusing (without the context) way of saying that Z was a big guy, a stocky guy, barrel chested, etc. But that’s what it means, and there is – again – nothing mysterious about this.

Context adds nothing. I’ts not confusing, it’s a crock! (In my opinion, of course.) (Incidentally, in my experience, Scottish and Welsh guys are more likely to be slightly shorter.)

You been watching ‘How Green Was My Valley’?

Z had a build/body type which reminded Fouke of Welsh coal miners. That’s what he meant by it. He, Fouke, is of Welsh ancestry himself.

If he had been of Scottish ancestry, perhaps Z had reminded him of Scottish miners. It’s a somewhat unusual, and pretty confusing (without the context) way of saying that Z was a big guy, a stocky guy, barrel chested, etc. But that’s what it means, and there is – again – nothing mysterious about this.

Did he have a honing gene? Is that what you’re saying? Did his blood sing in the presence of a fellow boyo, like the sea? Was he… psychic, look you? Or… was the Zodiac blacked up, as if fresh from ‘pit? Hey, maybe that dispatcher was right the first time…

‘Nope! Too silly!’

Well, that’s what he said.

I probably shouldn’t ask, but what’s your point? He was lying about something and came up with this brilliant – and clearly not conspicuous at all – way to describe Z in order to fool generations of sleuths?

He could have – oh, I don’t know – said nothing at all. Or said that the guy looked husky. Might have worked too.

He was describing Z’s body shape. As I’ve said now twice. The question isn’t whether we think his choice of words is appropriate or not – but rather whether there’s any reason to think that these words were NOT meant to describe Z’s body shape. See the thing here?

Fouke wasn’t implying that the man looked “Welsh” (whatever that would be) in any other sense than him having a certain body type which reminded him, Don Fouke, of Welsh coal miners (presumably because he knew some Welsh coal miners, or had seen pictures of them, or…who knows and who cares? Fouke was of Welsh ancestry himself, as mentioned above).

This is a classic piece of Z case confusion. People didn’t know what the hell Fouke meant by “Welsh ancestry” (understandably so) and began theorizing in all manners imaginable.

Then Fouke finally is interviewed about it – and the explanation is perfectly simple. People don’t like that, though – simple is no good. Has to be something more to it. There’s something sinister about this Welsh ancestry business – has to be.

Let me ask you this: If “Welsh ancestry” does not, simply, imply that the man had a certain body type (which is what Fouke himself claims) – then what does it mean? And why did Fouke opt for this outlandish term (which is, indeed, pretty inexplicable without elaborating)?

Way back when I was not familiar with "Welsh", I just thought it would be the same as saying something like "Irish"…assuming it was someone with red hair and freckles or something.

Hi-
Fair enough. I would not be surprised if it ever came out that Fouke only came forward after he was busted by Z with the 11/9 letter and that he didn’t want to get in trouble for not reporting what he saw on the night it happened, so he kept quiet to cover his ass. Who knows if he spoke to the guy? He has never faltered and admitted it to me. However, did you notice that on the night of the murder, when Pelissetti told him they were looking for a white guy, he did not speed back to 3712 Jackson and run up the steps to that house?

He told me and Jim in 2005 that he felt at the time that the person who had robbed the cabbie would not have lived in that neighborhood, which is what every other officer undoubtedly thought at the time, so he thought the guy had "faked him out" by APPEARING to walk up the steps. This is a logical conclusion. His actions are a matter of record that night, as he and Zelms went into the park assuming that the perp was going to walk up Maple and get away in that direction.

Fouke was very conditioned not to bother the residents of PH, since they were wealthy. He seems to have been very class conscious. He felt the guy he saw fit in the neighborhood, and since he was presumably wealthy, when he saw him walking up the steps towards a mansion, he did not want to bother him. Or maybe that is a cover story. But his ACTIONS that night, which cannot be disputed since they are a matter that is on the record for that night, say that he did not feel the man lived in PH.

And Fouke is not giving Mr. X a personal alibi that is based on meeting him at Jackson and Maple. Pelissetti is, and he is pretty in-your-face about it. Now he tells a different story that alters his timeline and places him in a different place than he ever said he was that night. When have you ever heard of a suspect getting an alibi from the police department that should have investigated him? Kind of unique, right?

Mike

Pellisetti didn’t give Qvale an alibi. In actual point of fact, Lindsey Robbins really didn’t identify Qvale as the guy he saw on Washington and Cherry. He said he would never say that. What you should have done is tracked down Rebecca and shown her a full photo lineup with 7-10 suspects and see if she picks out Qvale. Lindsey was clearly too close to the Qvale family to make a positive ID. So, Pellissetti didn’t provide an alibi for Qvale because he was never actually placed at the scene of the crime, but only on Jackson. If a murder occurs two blocks from my house and I am seen on my street shortly after the murder, is it logical to think I am the killer? Probably not because I would be expected to be at my house or on my own street. Lindsey Robbins failed to place Qvale at Washington and Cherry. Don’t blame Pellisetti for making the logical deduction that Qvale was probably not the assailant based upon the available evidence. Go get Rebecca to ID Qvale and then we can talk.

BTW, he told Samuel that the dog walker from the front yard was NOT the guy who was placed in the back of the police car and looked at by Rebecca that night. To repeat: NOT the guy in the squad car!

So who was that man? Was it Xenophon Anthony?