Personally I hold more weight to the LE’s description, but that just my opinion.

Based upon a couple second observation? That’s quite a lot of faith in Fouke’s observation skills…and his memory. Not mention, if Fouke really spoke to the Zodiac (and I think he did), he has the most motive to muddy the water by casting doubt on the Robbins’ description. He does not want to be the guy that had the Zodiac dead to rights and let him go.

You’re the second person in this thread to suggest Foulke was sabotaging the investigation to catch the Zodiac. Letting Zodiac get away was not his fault.

Nobody says that Fouke is at fault for letting the Zodiac get away. It was an accident. Something that just happen. But I do believe, to use Vegas words, he muddied the waters. Who is anyone going to believe, kids, or an adult cop.

Post by Vegas Lawyer » Fri May 07, 2021 10:56 am

If you believe he got that detailed of a description by driving by a pedestrian at night at 35-45 mph, let’s do business.

With respect, I didn’t state that at all – it is not my belief. The complete opposite in fact, and the whole point of the post.

So, he’s either making ish up or he spoke to the guy.

Yes, as I said: "One could argue there are two conclusions here: 1. Fouke does in fact interact with the Zodiac. 2. Fouke embellished his description…"

Why would Zodiac put on this costume, including with the symbol that I guess people could have recognized, and then tell Hartnell and Sheppard that he was an escaped convict?

Both the killer and Zelms’ widow claimed that Fouke stopped and spoke with him. I believe they did and that Fouke was too embarrassed to admit to as much.
But Fouke also said that the sketch, which he had no influence with, was very similar to the man that he saw on Jackson St.
So while sketches are sometimes not all that accurate, they can have similar features or be close enough so that people may recognize them as a person they know or have seen or suspect is involved in a crime.
I believe Fouke stopped and spoke to the Zodiac. Even if he didn’t, I believe that he got a good enough look at him to confirm that the sketch did look like the man that they saw. Although he said the original sketch was thinner looking than the man that he saw, and that the hairline was a little different. The second sketch has the hair fixed and has added weight, which is weird that Fouke had nothing to do with the updated version. But his ability to say the weight and hair were a bit different than the original sketch adds a more credible clue that he did stop and speak to him.

Why would Zodiac put on this costume, including with the symbol that I guess people could have recognized, and then tell Hartnell and Sheppard that he was an escaped convict?

I think his top reason for wearing the costume was to have his bases covered in case one of them survived, like Mike Mageau from earlier. I think he made up that story about being an escaped convict to make them think that he was just there to rob them. If they knew that he planned to kill them from the start then they would have fought back.

Although he said the original sketch was thinner looking than the man that he saw, and that the hairline was a little different. The second sketch has the hair fixed and has added weight, which is weird that Fouke had nothing to do with the updated version. But his ability to say the weight and hair were a bit different than the original sketch adds a more credible clue that he did stop and speak to him.

Did any of the Robbins kids say that they were responsible for the revised sketch? If not then maybe Don Fouke was the one responsible for it.

Although he said the original sketch was thinner looking than the man that he saw, and that the hairline was a little different. The second sketch has the hair fixed and has added weight, which is weird that Fouke had nothing to do with the updated version. But his ability to say the weight and hair were a bit different than the original sketch adds a more credible clue that he did stop and speak to him.

Did any of the Robbins kids say that they were responsible for the revised sketch? If not then maybe Don Fouke was the one responsible for it.

There’s no need to keep questioning what was already cleared up long ago, in this case the story behind the second composite. Fouke had nothing to do with it.

There’s no need to keep questioning what was already cleared up long ago, in this case the story behind the second composite. Fouke had nothing to do with it.

Wasn’t the second sketch done after the Robbins kids were re-interviewed? I thought both sketches came from the 3 kids

There’s no need to keep questioning what was already cleared up long ago, in this case the story behind the second composite. Fouke had nothing to do with it.

Wasn’t the second sketch done after the Robbins kids were re-interviewed? I thought both sketches came from the 3 kids

“After the initial wanted poster was released, it was opined that it could be improved if [artist, Juan] Morales did not incorporate the input from all three teenagers into the drawing. After listening to the kids’ observations again, it was determined that Rebecca was the most artistically inclined. The final sketch was made using only her input. When it was finished, the kids agreed that it was very close to what they had seen. On October 18, it was circulated."

Korsgaard, Søren Roest,. America’s Jack The Ripper (pp. 112-113)

Wanted poster: October 18th
Fouke report: November 12th

Graysmith presents Fouke’s report as an "amended description," yet Fouke was clearly reporting an encounter with the suspect, not just quibbling over how old or big he was. And why would Fouke wait till November 12th — after, coincidentally, the "two cops pulled a goof" letter — to file a report, unless he was embarrassed by Zodiac?

Graysmith also implies it was only a gap of "days" before Fouke came forward, but again, why wait till November 12th to put it in writing.

Plus, Graysmith never spoke to Fouke, or Pelissetti or the Robbins, for that matter. While Toschi, I think, is just an unreliable narrator, if Graysmith’s books are any indication.