Theforeigner, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:04 pm

I guess I missed that discussion about the Welsh.

I just finished reading some of Hartnell’s interview. He stated the suspect was a big guy about the size of the officer doing the interview. Sooooo …. what size would that be?

In the end I have to concede they had a pretty good point. I really did not know that many Welsh people have slightly darker skin tone and have dark hair, like my friend, avatar and Scotsman Sean Connery! And I am half Scottish/English myself!

But again I question Fouke’s ability to guess the ethnicity of a rather generic normal looking white man.

Read these comments from a prior post by me, then some good information from Tahoe, mostly in counterpoint to me, but read the last item, Hartnell’s guess on height, which ranges from 5’8" to 5’10" to 6’0" ! I just think mostly being on the ground, looking up at a man in costume with a hood over his head, it would be very hard to accurately guess height.

AK WILKS:

Mageau says 160 pounds in this article, and 25 to 30 years old. But lets face it, he saw the guy for seconds in the dark, was shot, had his life fall apart and he has since been all over the map in re descriptions.

Probable victim Kathleen Johns also gave Zodiac’s weight as 160 pounds and 30 years old, and she sat close to him in a car, for several minutes.

Fouke said in his DVD interview that Allen was "100 pounds" heavier than the man he saw that night. The heaviest weight for Allen I have seen was 250 pounds.

TAHOE: Again, I prefer police reports over newspaper articles. While Mike was certainly not a professional weight guess-timator, I think his general description says it all:

I mean, someone of 5’8"/5’9" and 160 is not going to be described as "real heavy set, beefy build" while wearing a short sleaved shirt!

But hey, whatever works for ya!

*

SFPD report 10/12/69

note: MM says "light brown, almost blond hair".

Bryan Hartnell:

**

I think it’s a no-brainer to say Zodiac could have made himself look larger with clothes or whatever, but considering MM’s statement I think it’s a safe bet Zodiac was as generally described.

In the newsreport in the above post Mageau alleged stated that the killer:

" walked slowly and with his head down"

Interestingly Foulke stated in his Zodiac /Stine murder report:
Fouke writes: "Subject at no time appeared to be in a hurry walked with a shuffling lope, Slightly bent foreward head down."

Seems like this slow walk/"head down" might be a characteristic of the way the Zodiac killer walked and held his body/head…

AK Wilks, do you know what date/year the Mageau newsreport was from?

I ask because if the mageau newsreport was dated AFTER the Foulkes report Mageau might have been influenced by Foulke’s report, however if it was published PRIOR to Foulkes report, then I DO belive that the "slow walk/head down" was indeed a characteristic of the Zodiac killer.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:47 pm

Well, maybe I worded the response poorly.

Skteches may help identify the killer, and any and all information (which I consider most of the things posted here) should be considered in an investigation.

The hard evidence, which is mostly lacking in this case, is one of the reasons
the killer walked free. Lack of LE cooperation, between jurisdictions is another.
David Toschi worked hard to solve the case, but he ran into road blocks, as well.

Keep in mind that there are many cold cases in which the responsible is never caught – even in today’s era with DNA and other sophisticated technilogy.

AK Wilks, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Oct 26, 2012 11:30 pm

TheForeigner :In the newsreport in the above post Mageau alleged stated that the killer:

" walked slowly and with his head down"

Interestingly Foulke stated in his Zodiac /Stine murder report:
Fouke writes: "Subject at no time appeared to be in a hurry walked with a shuffling lope, Slightly bent foreward head down."

Seems like this slow walk/"head down" might be a characteristic of the way the Zodiac killer walked and held his body/head…

AK Wilks, do you know what date/year the Mageau newsreport was from?

I ask because if the mageau newsreport was dated AFTER the Foulkes report Mageau might have been influenced by Foulke’s report, however if it was published PRIOR to Foulkes report, then I DO belive that the "slow walk/head down" was indeed a characteristic of the Zodiac killer.

AK Wilks – The Mageau article is I am pretty sure is from July 1969, so well before the Stine murder and the statement of Fouke.

That is interesting that both Mageau and Fouke report the killer walking slowly with his head down, also both Fouke and the girls at Lake Berryessa describe a man walking with an unusual walking gait, a lope or slight limp.

Theforeigner, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Oct 26, 2012 11:47 pm

TheForeigner :In the newsreport in the above post Mageau alleged stated that the killer:

" walked slowly and with his head down"

Interestingly Foulke stated in his Zodiac /Stine murder report:
Fouke writes: "Subject at no time appeared to be in a hurry walked with a shuffling lope, Slightly bent foreward head down."

Seems like this slow walk/"head down" might be a characteristic of the way the Zodiac killer walked and held his body/head…

AK Wilks, do you know what date/year the Mageau newsreport was from?

I ask because if the mageau newsreport was dated AFTER the Foulkes report Mageau might have been influenced by Foulke’s report, however if it was published PRIOR to Foulkes report, then I DO belive that the "slow walk/head down" was indeed a characteristic of the Zodiac killer.

AK Wilks – The Mageau article is I am pretty sure is from July 1969, so well before the Stine murder and the statement of Fouke.

That is interesting that both Mageau and Fouke report the killer walking slowly with his head down, also both Fouke and the girls at Lake Berryessa describe a man walking with an unusual walking gait, a lope or slight limp.

Ok thanks AW, but I assume you are not 100% sure that the newsarticle was from PRIOR to Folkes report right?

I ask because it is IMO pretty important, not to say really important.

And could you please post an exact copy/quote of what thise Lake Berryessa girls said about the walking gait on the man they saw, because I don´t recall anything about that, but I sure could be wrong.

AK Wilks, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:22 am

Howard Davis has that article as appearing on August 19, 1969, so that was well before the Stine murder in October 1969 and the comments of Officer Fouke.

See: http://www.thezodiacmansonconnection.co … lated.html

Comments of Officer Fouke from police report and girls at Lake Berryessa as quoted by Robert Graysmith in book Zodiac:

Officer Fouke said the man he saw at the Stine crime scene walked with a "lumbering gait…a semi-limp", a girl at Lake Berryessa observed that a man watching them who may have been the Zodiac "favored one leg over the other".

patinky, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Oct 27, 2012 9:48 am

Didn’t we decide in the Frederic Manalli discussion thread that he probably had a limping gait due to spine/skeletal problems. I’ll look it up if need be. He mentioned these problems in a letter to a friend iirc.

My second thought is the pair of shoes Ted Kaczynski designed that would leave altered footprints.

Either of the above would likely cause an altered gait. Surely the cops noted this and would have checked the suspect list.

AK Wilks, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Oct 27, 2012 10:11 am

His brother said Ted was piegon toed and ‘walked with a nticable limp’. I have also heard that Allen’s weight and knees affected his walk according to Graysmith.

smithy, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Oct 27, 2012 10:31 am

…..a girl at Lake Berryessa observed that a man watching them who may have been the Zodiac "favored one leg over the other".

Hers, or his own?
(Sorry – I couldn’t help myself).
Yes, I’ve heard the quote from Ted’s brother before. Doug? I think so, AK.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Oct 28, 2012 1:22 am

Graysmith in "Zodiac Unmasked" places Allen’s limp around the time the killer of Kim Wendy Allen (no relations) got injured throwing her remains into sort of a ditch.

Graysmith contents that is how ALA got his limp. Whether ALA is the responsible, I don’t know, but I highly doubt it.

From then on, his gait consisted of leaning forward, head down, one leg ahead of the other.

Those who are able, can observe this walk on the KTVU interview in 1991.

Jem, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Oct 28, 2012 2:51 am

If Z had an injured leg, causing him to favor the good leg, that might account for the depth of the LB shoe print that had police guessing he must have been a very heavy guy. Unless there were two consecutive shoe prints of both feet, with that same depth.

duckking2001, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Oct 28, 2012 5:23 am

Graysmith in "Zodiac Unmasked" places Allen’s limp around the time the killer of Kim Wendy Allen (no relations) got injured throwing her remains into sort of a ditch.

But that was after the Zodiac crimes…I guess the Graysmith logic is that Allen was prone to getting knee injuries while killing people, so that shows why Zodiac had a limp and why he must have been Allen.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Oct 28, 2012 11:38 am

No, Ducking, it was Graysmith’s logic why ALA was tied to the Santa Rosa murders.

Just because ALA had a white Impala, Wingwalker shoes, claimed that he tied penlight flashlights to pistols, does not tie him into any of the murders.

More hard evidence is needed.

Somewhere in the Graysmith sequel, I read that, in one of his letters, the Zodiac killer, when shooting DF/BLJ, claimed December 20th was his birthday.

December 20th was ALA’s birthday, also.

I still contend that information is not enough to convict ALA – too much reasonable doubt present.

onewhoknows, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Oct 28, 2012 1:43 pm

Could a clever criminal disguise his walk, his gait deliberatly? Move slow and
normally after a crime, so as not to appear guilty. Zodiac thinks first like a cop,
and then plans the crime backwards from there.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Oct 28, 2012 3:12 pm

Could a clever criminal disguise his walk, his gait deliberatly? Move slow and
normally after a crime, so as not to appear guilty. Zodiac thinks first like a cop,
and then plans the crime backwards from there.

————————————————————-

Sure he could, especially the ones with high I.Q. His gait would not be the only thing disguised.

He could disguise his handwriting as well. This guy was clever and thought things out very carefully before making his move.

duckking2001, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Oct 29, 2012 1:50 am

No, Ducking, it was Graysmith’s logic why ALA was tied to the Santa Rosa murders.

Sorry, that was sarcasm about what a dumb idea it is and how Graysmith likes to use circumstances after the fact to try to establish correlations. Like, six months after Allen got out of prison, all the sudden a new Zodiac letter is sent! A coincidence? um, yeah.

zodio, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Oct 29, 2012 2:02 am

And according to YB Z just had to say it was his B-day. He couldn’t be lieing if he said it at all.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Oct 29, 2012 3:10 am

Point was not Z claiming it was his birthday – it was Z and ALA’s birthday were on the same day, so Graysmith has more reason to tie ALA to the killler.

traveller1st, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Oct 29, 2012 5:49 pm

A shuffling gait, a semi limp. What the hell is a semi limp anyway? is it, as mentioned, a "slight" favouring of one leg over the other as part of the overall walking style. I would say that fits.

There are so many things that can cause that, and not least, putting it on as OWK mentioned. I have to wonder though if it was put on then why this limp aspect? I would suggest that if not an actual limp then it may be an echo of when this person did actually put on a limp to get out of something, whether that be work or army duties or whatever. Something that was done often enough to be a habit, of sorts.

Head down, appearing not to panic, trying to act normal, ok, but why limp? Was it a genuine impediment? Who knows but, if it was, how serious was it? I can’t think of any aspect of this case that indicates that in any way. There’s no mention of it in the footprint impressions. The Lake Berryessa attack site seems like an unlikely choice for a person with a walking impediment. So I would suggest that if there was an impediment that it was either minor and partly psychosomatic, leaking into flat surface walking in certain circumstances or it was an actual, real, impediment but intermittent and varied in severity.

Here’s an oldie but still relevant, I’ve known people with this in my lifetime. Gout. Just throwing it out there as a start point. It could just as easily be back problems which affect the legs or leg – I should know – suffer from it myself, not gout but back/leg probs.

I’m just wondering if we should pursue this aspect, medical records etc. Can we find anything in what we know that would suggest favouring due to physical restrictions. Turn left more than right? Did he hunker down at LB to do the tying or did he bend over? That sort of thing. Can we find evidence of a likely condition and use it to narrow the pool? Taking a look at the case as a whole from this angle and try to see if there’s a pattern, anywhere.

I think it’s an interesting and possibly unexplored aspect. It would be also a real soul-drainer given the amount of work I could forsee it taking.

T.O.L (thinking out loud)

EDIT: forgot to add. In all these reports of this walk/gait/limp, did anyone pay enough attention to actually mention what leg he seemed to favour? I would think that would be important.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Oct 29, 2012 10:33 pm

Medical Records – whose medical records do you want to get to study?
We don’t know who the killer is. ALA’s is protected.

If you want to see ALA’s walk, it is in the KTVU interview in 1991.
But, the limp came after the Zodiac killings, not before.

Let’s not discount the "limp" could also be a well-rehearsed act.

bayarea60s, Subject: Walking downhill Wed Oct 31, 2012 2:00 am

It could just be the result of Z walking downhill, and it appearing he had a limp. I always thought the report from Foulkes about Z’s demeanor always made Z seem more suspicious, then less. If a cop is coming up the road with his running lights on and slows down to look at you, you not making eye contact with the officers would make you look very suspicious. All of Z’s moves seemed to show avoidance, going up the stairs @ 3713 Jackson, would make you think he lived there, except that he stops at the top of the steps.

onewhoknows, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Wed Oct 31, 2012 11:42 am

But we cannot confirm that the man Foukes saw was indeed the Zodiac Killer.
What do we know based on the eyewitnesses to the killer.
White male adult. 5’8" to 5’10"? did we agree?
Weight? Kathleen Johns and the face of the composite drawing?
Heavy set all over? Padded up as a disguise?
Age? Read the police reports, eyewitness accounts of age.
If you believe the Zodiac himself called into the police to report the crimes,
what is age based on voice recogniton? Is it consistent from one report to the
other? What did Bryan Hartnell say about Zodiac’s age, based on his voice?
Age? Ladies and Gentleman?

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Wed Oct 31, 2012 12:15 pm

But we cannot confirm that the man Foukes saw was indeed the Zodiac Killer.
What do we know based on the eyewitnesses to the killer.
White male adult. 5’8" to 5’10"? did we agree?
Weight? Kathleen Johns and the face of the composite drawing?
…

It was more likely Fouke saw Zodiac, then Zodiac being responsible for KJ’s ordeal imo.

KJ has never been considered a confirmed victim. I think you need to nix her description. Even if it was Zodiac, if we are to dismiss Fouke, I think the same needs to be done with KJ.

onewhoknows, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Wed Oct 31, 2012 1:52 pm

Fair enough. The idea of this thread is to be exclusive of unconfirmed evidence so that we may create a profile.
So then again, any consensus on potential weight or age?
We are excluding Foukes and Kathleen Johns as confirmed eyewitness encounters.

Quagmire, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Wed Oct 31, 2012 7:21 pm

Although not 100% guaranteed, I think we have to say the odds are stacked in favour of Z being the guy that Foukes saw.

It’s a very quiet neighbourhood, late at night and a guy described as somewhere around 5’10", heavyset, with a crew cut, dark framed glasses and wearing dark clothes commits a murder and takes off down a street. Less than a minute later, a police car drives towards that street in the area he should be in and sees a guy somewhere around 5’10", heavyset, with a crew cut, heavy framed glasses and wearing dark clothes walking in the same direction towards them shuffling away from the crime scene.

I mean, seriously, what are the odds that it was a random lookalike walking in exactly the same area at exactly the same time. Oh, and if he was some innocent lookalike, he also decided not to call the police during the following days to rule himself out of the enquiries. This not being the murderer are about the same odds as Z being a black woman who wore a disguise – although not impossible, I think we can safely pretty much rule this out.

Johns is another case altogether though. Different type of victim, different MO, different area and the car fiddler doesn’t even attempt a murder – just driveas around in a trance for hours. However, Johns says he looked like Zodiac and he subsequently says, "yeah that was me." Intriguing but much more of a 50/50 call IMO.

The BRS and Stine murderer are described as being pretty much identical so that’s the description I place most value on. Of course it helps that this is just about consistent with Bryan and Cecelia’s limited description of the LB perp.

Nachtsider, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:44 pm

Oh, and if he was some innocent lookalike, he also decided not to call the police during the following days to rule himself out of the enquiries.

To be fair, not many people actually bother coming forward. You’re absolutely right about the odds, though.

onewhoknows, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:45 pm

Very good Quagmire…our verifiable eyewitnesses are consistent.

onewhoknows, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:50 pm

Re: Foukes San Francisco had 700,000 people living in 231 square miles in 1969.

And why did it take so long for Foukes to come forward?

Quagmire, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:51 pm

Re: Foukes San Francisco had 700,000 people living in 231 square miles in 1969.

And why did it take so long for Foukes to come forward?

Sadly because he’d probably just made one of the biggest cock ups and failed to apprehend possibly one of the most wanted killers in US history

The case is littered with appalling policework and it’s no wonder that Z got away.

Nachtsider, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 01, 2012 9:05 pm

I cut Fouke lots of slack. He was looking for a black dude. If anyone deserves blame, it’s the dispatcher.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 01, 2012 9:31 pm

I cut Fouke lots of slack. He was looking for a black dude. If anyone deserves blame, it’s the dispatcher.

Absolutely. No fault of Fouke’s. It would seem though, he would say something as soon as they realized the perp was a white guy. Was Fouke gone by then? Can’t remember….

patinky, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 01, 2012 9:54 pm

Has anyone ever determined how/why the mistake was made as to the suspect being black? That is a gross error for a dispatcher to make. I’ve always wondered if that was actually what was reported.

bayarea60s, Subject: One Who Knows… Sat Nov 03, 2012 4:17 am

The other reason we know it was Z that Foulkes saw was Z wrote about the encounter on the day following the murder of Stine. That wasn’t known to anyone at that time except for Foulkes, Zelm & Z.

bayarea60s, Subject: Tahoe 27 Sat Nov 03, 2012 4:26 am

Yeah there’s confusion there alright. Foulkes swears he said to Pellessetti that he just encountered the guy. Pellessetti says Foulkes never told him he saw anyone. I tend to agree with Foulkes here. If Foulkes never said anything then why the search in the Park east of Maple St. They would only be going off the kids report and they simply stated the last they saw Z was heading North on Cherry towards the park. But the search was totally focused off of Maple. I’ve never read anywhere that SFPD searched the wall area by Cherry. It seems everything was based off of Maple, which could only come from Foulkes.

glurk, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 03, 2012 4:46 am

I thought his name was Donald FOUKE?

bayarea60s, Subject: glurk Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:09 am

OK…..

glurk, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:51 am

bayarea60s-

If I am mistaken, I do apologize. I am mostly interested in the ciphers and don’t follow all of the details of the case as closely as many others do. That said, I’m pretty certain (or I thought I was) that the officers were Eric Zelms and Donald Fouke. I have never heard of anyone named Foulkes in this case.

-glurk

smithy, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:41 am

Fouke, glurk, yes.
There’s a joke there somewhere perhaps, but I’m not brave enough to make it.
I will opine about Fouke though, since I’ve always wanted to.

Fouke was a patrol car driver pulling just another shift when he was called to the robbery and murder of a cab driver by a "black male assailant".
That’s what he was looking for, so when he drove past a white guy and saw him walk toward the entrance of a house, he drove on.
What’s his description worth? Nuts. He was "a trained observer" – but he’d no reason to remember that guy at all. Especially not weeks later. Phooey.

When he was talking about this stuff on the Director’s cut of the Fincher movie he said the white guy he saw was walking up the steps toward a house on Jackson. (I think. I’m going to go play it again in a second, because it will bother me if I don’t.) They cut the sound when he gave the address, and he then said something to the effect that he hadn’t told the Detectives at the time, and no he hadn’t put it in his report, and yes, he’d only just remembered it.
How does that sound, to you?

Bullshit, wasn’t it. And I’m not sure Mr Fouke should have said it. If it were true, would he not have said so at the time? That he’d seen someone walking up the steps of that house as if to go inside? Yes he would. He wasn’t completely and grossly incompetent. He would have known that Detectives would have wanted to interview that guy to eliminate him, at least. Or to ask him if he had, in turn, seen anyone "suspicious". Or to arrest him. Would Fouke have "forgotten" to mention it at the scene? Phooey. Double nuts. Naughty Mr Fouke. Like everyone else I think he’s caught up in the glamour, even though Paul Stine was shot dead at 29 and his attacker was never found.

Mr Fouke still recites his description now, decades later, with real authority. (Well OK he gets the footwear wrong now). Good for him. He seems a nice man who was doing a rotten job, and I hope his notoriety brings him some pleasure and reward. If he had stopped the guy, yes, he may have been shot dead.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 03, 2012 1:47 pm

Patinky:

As to reasons why the mistake of race was made in the dispatcher’s description, I am sure an internal investigation took place within the SFPD.
The results will never be made public.

I don’t know if you are familiar with San Francisco; the city is divided into districts. The Stine murder took place in Pacific Heights, an upper class area.
Most violent crimes, at that time, took place in the Fillmore, Mission, Potrero Hill and Hunter’s Point Districts.

This is NOT a racial remark, nor intended as one, but it was common to involve a "BMA" suspect on such crimes….weekends were extremely busy for dispatchers. It is possible the person on duty had lots of calls involving BMA suspects and made a honest, but costly error.

I am just speculating on why such a mix-up occured. Whatever the reason, it was to the killer’s advantage.

It is a good possibility had the call been "WMA," Foulks life would have been in danger. 40+ years is a long time to remember small details. Foulk hesitated in reporting the incident – and SFPD still denies such an occurance took place.

Good speculation there, Smithy, but I don’t think anyone has the answers.
I doubt Foulke would remember his reasons in all the years gone by.

smithy, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 03, 2012 2:06 pm

Good post TM, no racism in stating the facts, well said. I presume you’re also saying there that SFPD deny Fouke spoke with the perp?
I tend to agree that it’s not at all likely. If you’re in your cruiser looking for a BMA and you’re in a hurry, stopping to ask "a civilian" would be VERY unusual.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 03, 2012 2:51 pm

Good post TM, no racism in stating the facts, well said. I presume you’re also saying there that SFPD deny Fouke spoke with the perp?
I tend to agree that it’s not at all likely. If you’re in your cruiser looking for a BMA and you’re in a hurry, stopping to ask "a civilian" would be VERY unusual.

I think asking someone in the area would be the responsible thing to do. "Have you seen anyone?" Makes sense to me. They could have easily just rolled-up and quickly asked. The perp obvioulsy wasn’t at the scene any longer, so…where did he go? Ask someone!

I think it happened and LE knew it.

Zodiac did not write about the goof with the cops in the Stine letter. It was the Bus-Bomb letter of November 9. Then, it’s mentioned in the paper and then on November 11, we get Fouke’s memo to Toschi and Armstrong. http://www.zodiackiller.com/FoukeReport.html

Coincidence?

But, since some still question it, the purpose of this thread is those who actually saw him. Those were the kids. Interesting thing is THEIR first description in the first composite fits better than the second…which some think Fouke had something to do with.

smithy, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 03, 2012 3:26 pm

No coincidence (you cynic!) but the Fouke report’s a direct reaction to media interest I’m sure. And that report’s odd. Fouke talking about himeslf in the third person? Very odd.
Since this one’s opinion, I think The Zodiac lied through his teeth! I’ll stick with my opinion that the R/O car just rolled on, looking for a black guy. So there.
And back on track, yes, the second version of "the poster" is supposed to reflect Fouke’s opinion of the guy as older, at least. It’s all conjecture though, ain’t it? Nothing in writing I’ve found. I did read that the 8 year-old girl was given the best shot with the artist, since she seemed to remember the most – but her youth might tend to undermine belief in her opinions……

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 03, 2012 3:53 pm

….And back on track, yes, the second version of "the poster" is supposed to reflect Fouke’s opinion of the guy as older, at least. It’s all conjecture though, ain’t it?…

Actually, no. Fouke denies contributing to that composite. So what was he truthful about?

smithy, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 03, 2012 3:59 pm

He does huh? Apologies – the conjecture was obviously mine!
I wonder whose opinion was changed from the first composite and by whom…..? Curiouser and curiouser.

Edit: Ah yes the scratch says he thinks the perp’s that age, right? Hence the notion he’d contributed to the second composite directly, I guess.
Which I believed… ho hum.

Nachtsider, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:13 pm

The kids supposedly requested the revision after deeming the first composite inaccurate.

Has anyone ever determined how/why the mistake was made as to the suspect being black? That is a gross error for a dispatcher to make. I’ve always wondered if that was actually what was reported.

For what it’s worth, Graysmith claims that the dispatcher made the error because the kids were freaking out on the phone and making lots of noise.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the dispatcher committed suicide somewhere down the track.

patinky, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:21 pm

Patinky:

As to reasons why the mistake of race was made in the dispatcher’s description, I am sure an internal investigation took place within the SFPD.
The results will never be made public.

I don’t know if you are familiar with San Francisco; the city is divided into districts. The Stine murder took place in Pacific Heights, an upper class area.
Most violent crimes, at that time, took place in the Fillmore, Mission, Potrero Hill and Hunter’s Point Districts.

This is NOT a racial remark, nor intended as one, but it was common to involve a "BMA" suspect on such crimes….weekends were extremely busy for dispatchers. It is possible the person on duty had lots of calls involving BMA suspects and made a honest, but costly error.

I am just speculating on why such a mix-up occured. Whatever the reason, it was to the killer’s advantage.

It is a good possibility had the call been "WMA," Foulks life would have been in danger. 40+ years is a long time to remember small details. Foulk hesitated in reporting the incident – and SFPD still denies such an occurance took place.

Good speculation there, Smithy, but I don’t think anyone has the answers.
I doubt Foulke would remember his reasons in all the years gone by.

Thanks Trainmaster. It’s odd the information was leaked that such an error was made.

I’ve never been west of the Mississippi so have no idea what the San Francisco layout would have been. The stereotypical BMA would have been used here at that time too in the larger towns such as Louisville, Nashville, Atlanta, Memphis.

patinky, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:29 pm

The kids supposedly requested the revision after deeming the first composite inaccurate.

Has anyone ever determined how/why the mistake was made as to the suspect being black? That is a gross error for a dispatcher to make. I’ve always wondered if that was actually what was reported.

For what it’s worth, Graysmith claims that the dispatcher made the error because the kids were freaking out on the phone and making lots of noise.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the dispatcher committed suicide somewhere down the track.

Thanks for the info Nachtsider.

zodio, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:48 pm

Are we sure the dispatcher got a description at all? A cabbie shot in a rich neighborhood she might have just assumed the perp was black. I have trouble with a few of Fouke’s statements but in particular the details he remembered of only one person he saw that night and this was long before they even knew it was Z, and also saying he didn’t know if Zelms had seen him. How couldn’t he have known? They were right next to each other looking out for a shooter!

onewhoknows, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 03, 2012 9:14 pm

And therefore, discounting Fouke, what is the Zodiac Killer’s age?

Nachtsider, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 03, 2012 10:43 pm

Between 20 and 35.

Fouke is the only witness who describes Zodiac as being over 35.

onewhoknows, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 04, 2012 12:23 pm

White Male Adult 5’8" to 5’10" 20 to 35 years of age? Weight 160lbs to 200lbs?
Based on the phone calls to Police, American sounding voice, no accent such as southern.
Most put the voice as younger sounding.
Hair color some shade of brown?
Access to the Bay Area, lives in the Bay Area of California?

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 04, 2012 1:27 pm

White Male Adult 5’8" to 5’10" 20 to 35 years of age? Weight 160lbs to 200lbs?
Based on the phone calls to Police, American sounding voice, no accent such as southern.
Most put the voice as younger sounding.
Hair color some shade of brown?
Access to the Bay Area, lives in the Bay Area of California?

Sounds reasonable, but thousands of men would fit that description.

Hair may be a wig, thus explaining the difference between Stine and LB drawings.

Nachtsider, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 04, 2012 4:22 pm

I don’t think any wigs were involved. I think he merely cut it short after LB.

Jem, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:35 am

With respect to accent, maybe we should keep in mind that many people can and do speak with more than one accent. For example, you might normally speak in your regional accent when you’re chatting casually, but use news anchor English when interviewing for a job.

Or suppose your parents are from (1) New York, you’re born in (2) Iowa and live there till you’re 10, then your family moves to (3) Georgia, then you go to college in (4) New England and work there for 10 years, then finally end up in California. That’s a lot of accents you’d probably be able to use! So if you wanted to disguise you’re voice, it wouldn’t be difficult.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Nov 05, 2012 12:18 pm

Between 20 and 35.

Fouke is the only witness who describes Zodiac as being over 35.

Supposedly, it was the kids who revised the age to older and Fouke had nothing to do with it. So, technically the kids too thought he was an older man.

I myself think he was probably around 30.

What I find interesting is Fouke wrote in his memo/scratch that the guy’s hair was possibly graying.

Seems his input affected that age change. I know he denies it.

entropy, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:20 am

I don’t think any wigs were involved. I think he merely cut it short after LB.

Agreed, Nacht. I think that is certainly the "Occam’s Razor" assumption rather than using any wig. I do, however, think that the apparent discrepancy regarding Z’s hair length is really important to consider. Both Hartnell and (apparently Shepard) observed hair (or what they thought was hair) hanging down in the eyeholes of his Lake Berryessa costume. That simply doesn’t jive with the description of anyone from the Stine scene and SEEMS to indicate that Zodiac had fairly long hair just two weeks before Stine’s murder. A simple haircut is the obvious explanation but I really think it begs the more important question of which was a better representation of Z’s everyday appearance. The short hair that he referred to as his "descise" at the Stine scene or the longer hair that he kept hidden at Lake Berryessa?

http://www.zodiackillerfacts.com/forum/ … =20&t=1395

entropy, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:59 am

He does huh? Apologies – the conjecture was obviously mine!
I wonder whose opinion was changed from the first composite and by whom…..? Curiouser and curiouser.

Edit: Ah yes the scratch says he thinks the perp’s that age, right? Hence the notion he’d contributed to the second composite directly, I guess.
Which I believed… ho hum.

That’s an enigma, smithy. Yes, Fouke has denied giving input for the revised sketch but let’s take a look:

http://zodiackiller.com/Composite1.html

http://zodiackiller.com/Composite2.html

The physical description is almost identical except for one aspect- Zodiac has suddenly aged 10-15 years in 5 days, going from "25-30" according to the original eyewitness accounts to "35-45" in the revised sketch! Does anyone really believe that Fouke’s eyewitness account didn’t factor into this revision??? Fouke didn’t create a written report until 11/12/69, a month after his encounter with Z. The age estimate on the 10/18/69 revised composite sketch, however, just happens to be identical to Fouke’s observation. Are we really to believe that the Presidio Heights teens suddenly recalled that Z was actually 10-15 years older than they first thought when they saw him five days early and that their revised estimate just happens to be identical to Fouke’s? That explanation makes no sense at all to me.

I’m not suggesting Fouke is being untruthful. Perhaps he was just unaware that his initial input to someone was factored into the revised sketch, although he has apparently endorsed the general accuracy of the sketch so it’s hard to imagine he wasn’t aware of the altered age estimate. I don’t, for what it’s worth, rule out Fouke’s description either. He may well have had the closest, least obstructed view of any eyewitness so I think it’s unwise to write off his observations. To me, that makes Z’s age even less certain, perhaps 25-45, and I wouldn’t even rule out someone slightly younger, which unfortunately makes the age descriptions nearly worthless as evidence.

Theforeigner, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Tue Nov 06, 2012 8:15 am

Concerning zodiac’s "brown hair" possibly seen by Hartnell:

IF the man seen by the 3 young woman was Zodiac, I belive he wore a (brown hair) wig, in order to disquise himself due to that he was possibly trolling for victims at locations where there were people around.

And IF that man was Zodiac, then that possible "brown hair" seen by Hartnell might have been that (brown hair) wig.

At the Stine murder, IMO, he didn’t wear a wig.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Tue Nov 06, 2012 9:33 am

By "Confirmed Evidence," I understand that phrase to mean any of these descriptions could be used against a suspect if he were apprehended???

None of it would hold water. Too much room for reasonable doubt for a defense.

The hard evidence such as fingerprints (if any), murder weapons, license plates and strands of hair do not exist. That is the kind of evidence which exists. Add to that lack of witnesses who saw the killer shoot one of teh victims(the kids saw someone wiping off a cab) makes it almost impossible to pinpoint anyone.

And, that is exactly what has happened since the first crime in 1968, or possible Zodiac crime in 1963.

2500 suspects, and a match could not be made ought to tell the reader something.

I doubt the killer will ever be caught.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Tue Nov 06, 2012 12:11 pm

Both Hartnell and (apparently Shepard) observed hair (or what they thought was hair) hanging down in the eyeholes of his Lake Berryessa costume. That simply doesn’t jive with the description of anyone from the Stine scene and SEEMS to indicate that Zodiac had fairly long hair just two weeks before Stine’s murder. A simple haircut is the obvious explanation but I really think it begs the more important question of which was a better representation of Z’s everyday appearance. The short hair that he referred to as his "descise" at the Stine scene or the longer hair that he kept hidden at Lake Berryessa?….

Ah, but we also have Mike Mageau’s description of "short curly, light brown, almost blond", and this reminds me of Fouke’s "possible graying" comment. Could have just been a blond tinge in SF…not gray.

So did the guy at LB have some curl to his hair and lots of hair products in it making it straight–and "dark". Both the girls and Bryan said it was "combed", and one said possibly styled if I’m not mistaken.

But we know, even with wet hair, "light-brown/almost blond" does not become dark-brown (to the point of looking black). No way.

And how fast does a man’s hair grow?

We know when he attacked Bryan and Cecelia he had to be seen at SOME point. We know he wasn’t driving around and stalking people with his hood on. We know he turned away when the girls and the doc and his son would look at him– (if same man I personally believe it was). Was he not concerned about hair, but maybe with the face?

So we have….real hair, wig, or not Zodiac. Take your pick!

patinky, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Tue Nov 06, 2012 2:06 pm

I don’t think any wigs were involved. I think he merely cut it short after LB.

Agreed, Nacht. I think that is certainly the "Occam’s Razor" assumption rather than using any wig. I do, however, think that the apparent discrepancy regarding Z’s hair length is really important to consider. Both Hartnell and (apparently Shepard) observed hair (or what they thought was hair) hanging down in the eyeholes of his Lake Berryessa costume. That simply doesn’t jive with the description of anyone from the Stine scene and SEEMS to indicate that Zodiac had fairly long hair just two weeks before Stine’s murder. A simple haircut is the obvious explanation but I really think it begs the more important question of which was a better representation of Z’s everyday appearance. The short hair that he referred to as his "descise" at the Stine scene or the longer hair that he kept hidden at Lake Berryessa?

http://www.zodiackillerfacts.com/forum/ … =20&t=1395

One thing for sure is, based on the Stine composite, the offender had a recent haircut.

Quagmire, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:15 pm

One thing for sure is, based on the Stine composite, the offender had a recent haircut.

Agree 100% and the colour matches BRS (just a bit longer/wavier).

I think Z’s natural hair colour was lightish brown. Whether he wore a wig for a daylight job at LB or it was a different guy is open to debate. Having said that, my hair is fair to medium brown and when wet it can look very dark brown although not black. Could this wet look, brown hair be what the witnesses at LB were describing?

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Tue Nov 06, 2012 8:14 pm

Quagmire:

Just a guess, but Hartnell only saw very little through that costume.
Did the killer have a wig, a hair cut, hair dyed to a different color?

We are just speculating like everyone else. No definitive answer.

I don’t think anyone can say for certain what the killer looked like.
That fact has always been to Zodiac’s advantage. Except for LB, most of the crimes were committed after dark.

I do not remember if Mageau mentioned anything about hair – perhaps someone could fill in the blanks there – but I would be very dubious of anything Mageau said, anyway.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Tue Nov 06, 2012 8:28 pm

I do not remember if Mageau mentioned anything about hair – perhaps someone could fill in the blanks there – but I would be very dubious of anything Mageau said, anyway.

Check my post a couple up.

I don’t think Mike would make up what he saw. If he didn’t see his hair, surely he would have said so and not created a description that did not exist. Going by his 1969 statement.

kirkham, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Tue Nov 06, 2012 9:35 pm

I dont know how MM got a look at much of anything other than a large hi powered flashlight in his face followed by bullets… :scratch:

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:39 pm

I dont know how MM got a look at much of anything other than a large hi powered flashlight in his face followed by bullets… :scratch:

Apparently he saw the guy when he turned and walked away.

bayarea60s, Subject: T27 Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:48 am

Tahoe….

Yeah I think MM caught a glimpse of Z, we have no more than what he has said to go by. It always amazed me that MM or BH survived their attacks.

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Wed Nov 07, 2012 11:13 am

I dont know how MM got a look at much of anything other than a large hi powered flashlight in his face followed by bullets… :scratch:

Apparently he saw the guy when he turned and walked away.

That is correct from what I have read, MM did catch a glimse of Zodiac as he turned to walk back towards his car. MM could also be talking about the person in the car at BRS, that he saw before the shooting, who most believe was the same person who shot them. I saw your earlier post on MM’s description of Z’s hair, and didn’t remember that exact description as being "short light brown" curly hair ? So I am a bit confused about the brown curly hair and in a pompadore style ? Can you please give a link to this MM report of short light brown curly hair or his quote ? The reason that this is important for me to know, is that the man I got away from had darker brown, very curly hair, in a medium short Afro style ( Perm like ) and later changed it to the pomadore of which he still has . I am very sure that this guy dyes his hair from time to time. Of course when I saw him in 1968 it was late at night and he was sitting in his car, so that could make his hair appear to be darker I suppose ?

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:10 pm

I dont know how MM got a look at much of anything other than a large hi powered flashlight in his face followed by bullets… :scratch:

Apparently he saw the guy when he turned and walked away.

That is correct from what I have read, MM did catch a glimse of Zodiac as he turned to walk back towards his car. MM could also be talking about the person in the car at BRS, that he saw before the shooting, who most believe was the same person who shot them. I saw your earlier post on MM’s description of Z’s hair, and didn’t remember that exact description as being "short light brown" curly hair ? So I am a bit confused about the brown curly hair and in a pompadore style ? Can you please give a link to this MM report of short light brown curly hair or his quote ? The reason that this is important for me to know, is that the man I got away from had darker brown, very curly hair, in a medium short Afro style ( Perm like ) and later changed it to the pomadore of which he still has . I am very sure that this guy dyes his hair from time to time. Of course when I saw him in 1968 it was late at night and he was sitting in his car, so that could make his hair appear to be darker I suppose ?

http://www.zodiackiller.com/DFR10.html

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:02 pm

Thanks Tahoe, I totally forgot about reading that one ! Seems to fit the man Christina said Darlene spoke to at Terry’s on July 4th and the Stine shooter, better than the darker haired man Hartnell saw. Light brown hair can look a few shades darker if wet, but certainly not black.
The man I saw in 68 was not close to blond at all, unless that was a wig ?
That fits into my more than one zodiac theory, one who prefers using a knife to a gun, and vice – verse. One being smaller than the one with the darker hair.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:24 pm

Thanks Tahoe, I totally forgot about reading that one ! Seems to fit the man Christina said Darlene spoke to at Terry’s on July 4th and the Stine shooter, better than the darker haired man Hartnell saw. Light brown hair can look a few shades darker if wet, but certainly not black.
The man I saw in 68 was not close to blond at all, unless that was a wig ?
That fits into my more than one zodiac theory, one who prefers using a knife to a gun, and vice – verse. One being smaller than the one with the darker hair.

Yes…I thought of him too Sandy..minus the curly hair. He and Gordon, the guy Darlene dated (not Buzz), was described with "curly hair", 5’10" and husky…and he thought she was pregnant.

Here is Gordon’s description. Also, the page prior tells more: http://www.zodiackiller.com/DFR42.html

I know many don’t take MM’s word for his description in 1969, but he is describing the man he saw (out of the car), and I do believe his take on it. Especially the body type–being in a t-shirt. So I do think it is important and should be considered in Zodiac’s description.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:16 pm

Thanks Tahoe, I totally forgot about reading that one ! Seems to fit the man Christina said Darlene spoke to at Terry’s on July 4th and the Stine shooter, better than the darker haired man Hartnell saw. Light brown hair can look a few shades darker if wet, but certainly not black.
The man I saw in 68 was not close to blond at all, unless that was a wig ?
That fits into my more than one zodiac theory, one who prefers using a knife to a gun, and vice – verse. One being smaller than the one with the darker hair.

Yes…I thought of him too Sandy..minus the curly hair. He and Gordon, the guy Darlene dated (not Buzz), was described with "curly hair", 5’10" and husky…and he thought she was pregnant.

Here is Gordon’s description. Also, the page prior tells more: http://www.zodiackiller.com/DFR42.html

I know many don’t take MM’s word for his description in 1969, but he is describing the man he saw (out of the car), and I do believe his take on it. Especially the body type–being in a t-shirt. So I do think it is important and should be considered in Zodiac’s description.

Name:

Gordon Arthur Spence
Birth:
15 May 1948

This is the right Gordon. He graduated from basic training in early 1968. There is an article about him in the 2/19/68 Argus about him graduating from Baasic training for the navy. If anybody can find a yearbook pic of him,I think he went to Fremont, CA – Irvington High School, aprox class of 66

EDIT- Found a photo of this guy from 1964,no glasses,but fat round looking face, he looks stocky. Will post later as I have time

Quagmire, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Wed Nov 07, 2012 6:06 pm

It wasn’t ideal viewing circumstances but I don’t see any reason to doubt Mageau’s description – partly because the attack lasted a fairly decent time (killer took it in turns to shoot both him and Darlene, then walked off illuminated by his own headlights and then came back again for more) but mainly because the description happens to pretty match the guy who was seen to shoot Stine. Only difference was Z had a buzz cut but otherwise the hair colour, weight, height, build and age are almost identical to what the kids at PH all described.

Maybe it was all just a coincidence but it would be a pretty shit-hot load of guesses to come up with a lot of matching features like he did.

bayarea60s, Subject: Hair Color & Weight Thu Nov 08, 2012 7:10 am

I recall after Stine on the news they discussed that folks should be aware of anyone they know who recently had lost noticeable weight and possibly altered their hair. Light brown hair when things like vaseline hair tonic are used on hair, your hair turns black, ala what BH saw. A crew cut/flat top hairdo when powder is applied ages you 20 years. Not saying Z did this, just saying, that’s the effect powder would have on the hair, if say a 25 – 30 year old did this.
And for anyone interested, if you’re in SF, and go to the scene, the address of the house where Foukes & Zelm’s sees Z is 3713 Jackson St. It’s the 2nd house in from the corner of Maple & Jackson, on the N. side of Jackson.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:16 am

That area has a lot of obstacles in the way – trees – the house mentioned has a hedge – don’t know if those were there at the time, but I suspect they were as that is an upper-class neighborhood.

Was the killer walking on the side of the street by that house? It would be easy to turn towards the house and just turn his head towards the police car, so the blood would not be seen on the jacket. Also, it was dark that night.

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:42 am

I have been to the house on Jackson near Maple, where the killer was last seen. Have checked out who owned the house at that time , he is a suspect by some. My thoughts are that the Z saw or heard the police car coming and pretended to go towards that house. No officer in their right mind would think twice about checking a home owner in that very affluent neighbor hood, as being a robber, is what Z must have thought? The person who owned that home ,actually owned two homes on that block !
There was nothing I could find on that man ,that made me think he could be a viable suspect, other than the Zodiac chose to walk in that direction.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 12:10 pm

The address of 3713 Jackson as given by Fouke, and the way z was walking, would the house numbers be getting higher or lower?

entropy, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 12:30 pm

I have been to the house on Jackson near Maple, where the killer was last seen. Have checked out who owned the house at that time , he is a suspect by some. My thoughts are that the Z saw or heard the police car coming and pretended to go towards that house. No officer in their right mind would think twice about checking a home owner in that very affluent neighbor hood, as being a robber, is what Z must have thought? The person who owned that home ,actually owned two homes on that block !
There was nothing I could find on that man ,that made me think he could be a viable suspect, other than the Zodiac chose to walk in that direction.

Totally agree, Sandy. Z just happened to take a turn as he saw Fouke and Zelms coming toward him. It certainly would make sense to interview the owner and any possible connections to the case but I think it is likely that Z was merely just trying to avoid being confronted there. I think his presumed escape route through Julius Kahn playground is one of those bits of "evidence" that needs to be examined very closely:

http://zodiackiller.21.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=1764

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 12:54 pm

I am sorting thru every Jackson address looking for a listing so far no luck. I DID find a Dr Thomas g Huss who had a podiatrist office at 4141 Geary close to Stines pickup spot, and he lived at 3870 Jackson which caught my eye

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:00 pm

Light brown hair when things like vaseline hair tonic are used on hair, your hair turns black, ala what BH saw.

Bryan Harntell never said black hair. One of the three girls said "black", another one said dark…like Bryan. Just want to make sure we are quoting correctly.

http://www.zodiackiller.com/HartnellInterview4.html

It would seem too he had a better view, than just a peek. He could tell it was combed! His hair must have been combed over his forehead somewhat. I would like to have seen how Bryan went on to describe it when he gave that statement: "like this…".

The address of 3713 Jackson as given by Fouke, and the way z was walking, would the house numbers be getting higher or lower?

Just another thing that bugs me! This information was NOT given in 1969. He said nothing of the sort. Later he said it was up to the detectives to figure out. How would they know if Fouke didn’t tell them? Uh..kind of important…there could have been clues there. WTH??

And how did Fouke get such a good description of this man, at night, if he turned and walked up some stairs? Why would he have given that close of a look to some white guy if they were in such a hurry looking for a black man?

Fouke was full of it at one point. So was in in 1969 or years later?

I’m still with the kids original description. I think I actually trust them more than Fouke.

entropy, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:21 pm

In Fouke’s official report, he actually indicates that he saw Z take a turn onto Maple St. at the end of the block.

http://www.zodiackiller.com/FoukeReport.html

Is this a presumption on Fouke’s part if Z was seen cutting across a lawn near the intersection of Jackson & Maple or what he actually saw? Dunno but I still find Z’s ADAMANT insistence to print this (presumed?) escape route in the newspaper intriguing.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:21 pm

Morf: As you walk towards Maple, the numbers get smaller.

Lets take a look here:

The killer gave Stine a destination of Washington and Maple. For some reason, Stine was told to go up one more block.

Foulk and Elms saw a man walking down Jackson (street that has a bus line) towards Maple.

It is possible he parked in the cul-de-sac on Maple. Graysmith states the killer walked uphill to Geary and took a bus – however, a bus line was available on Jackson Street as well.

Who was driving the patrol car – Foulk or Elm?

Most likely, the poliice was was headed west on Jackson towards Cherry and up to Washington.

That would put the driver on the left hand side, or further from the man on the street then the partner and make it a little more difficult to see the killer.

If, indeed, the man Foulk and Elm saw was the killer, it would make sense for that person to turn towards the stairway, as if going into the home. The hedge and trees also help hide him. He probably turned west towards the stairway, to hide the blood on the jacket and simply directed the officers towards Cherry and Washington, went up towards the house until the patrol car was gone, then got in his car and split.

Look at these photos:

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:31 pm

My other thought about where he was really headed, was the street he first told Stine he wanted to go, then realized that it was too close to where he was staying at the time and decided to throw off the investigation by going one more block.
I have checked out everyone on Maple st LOL, and found a connection to the address of where Paul Stine was killed. The brother of the person who was living at the house on Washington and Cherry, was a gardener of the older woman who owned the home who had died. It seems the gardener just brought in his family and stayed there, except one brother, who was living at an apt on Maple next to Washington. Shanterelli was the family’s name who lived there ( sorry the correct spelling of the name I just can’t remember off the top of my head )I came about that name because there was a lot of talk about Robt Hunter owning the house and he was alleged to be the Z suspect because he was living there at that time . Well that was proven to not be the case , Hunter and his wife lived a few blocks from there.

entropy, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:40 pm

Great photos, trainmaster! Hmm… does anyone know if those hedges were present in 1969? If so, the suggestions that Z was seen turning up the steps and turning left onto Maple St. would seem contradictory, no? When did Fouke say he saw Z walking toward the steps as opposed to the official report?

Edited to add a post from Mike Rodelli on his interview with Fouke from his former site via the archived board at Tom’s site:

From my site:

"F: …And he turned into the residence and proceeded up the stairs as if he lived there. We’re gone by then…by the time he’s up two steps. So I figure that a suspect wants to get away from the area. The fastest way is to turn around, walk up Maple and go through the Presidio wall into Julius Kahn park. He could hide in the bushes or the trees…"

The answer is that while Fouke saw the man on the steps, he did not think that the guy actually continued up them and into the residence. He felt that the guy was duping him (because obviously a cab robber is not going to live in a mansion in PH). There are not two stories here: Going up the steps and then into the park are part of the same continuum in Fouke’s mind. So he never covered up or held back info on the guy heading into a residence. He simply wrote what he thought the ultimate outcome of the man’s actions were–that he had escaped into the park. The proof is that that is where Fouke headed–into the park!

If true, it seems that Fouke’s statement of witnessing Z turning left onto Maple St. is pure conjecture and actually rather fishy considering other claims from Pelissetti and Zodiac himself that Z was actually stopped and questioned briefly. At least his later claim (as apparently told to Rodelli) is contradictory to his official report.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:55 pm

Not sure I trust Fouke’s info of a house number since he didnt give it in 1969,but worth checking anyhow. Just like I dont trust Mageau’s accounts from the documentary since they dont match his account from 1969. I think whereever Z was walking to was obviously important, perhaps he was going to a house near there,or to his car. ‘IF’ Fouke was being honest about Z walking up steps to an address,I think he was only trying to pretend he lived there,but thats a big IF. Still,if we could find the owner of the house in 69,it would be interesting

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 2:01 pm

Just an idea,and I am sure it has been discussed before, but what if Zodiac lived around Maple,or had a relative near there. When he gave Stine the location, maybe he realized he didnt want the cops to be looking around Maple,so he told Stine to go a block further. But if this is true,he likely would have took Stine’s address log..hmmm

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 2:07 pm

I am sorting thru every Jackson address looking for a listing so far no luck. I DID find a Dr Thomas g Huss who had a podiatrist office at 4141 Geary close to Stines pickup spot, and he lived at 3870 Jackson which caught my eye

Morf the person you are looking for on Jackson st. is Mr. X. He has been spoken to about the Zodiac.

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 2:11 pm

Just an idea,and I am sure it has been discussed before, but what if Zodiac lived around Maple,or had a relative near there. When he gave Stine the location, maybe he realized he didnt want the cops to be looking around Maple,so he told Stine to go a block further. But if this is true,he likely would have took Stine’s address log..hmmm

You might want to read 5or 6 posts up ?

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 2:12 pm

…’IF’ Fouke was being honest about Z walking up steps to an address,I think he was only trying to pretend he lived there,but thats a big IF. Still,if we could find the owner of the house in 69,it would be interesting

If Fouke is honest about that, I would bet my life Zodiac was pretending to live or visit there.

But, did Fouke tell other officers that night (after it was known he was actually a white guy):

"Hey, we just saw a white guy walk up to this house.."???

It would appear not. And his own admission in the Fincher documentary is that he didn’t. It was up to the detectives to figure out.

So did Fouke steer LE into the park on an assumption, when he had a positive ID at a house? Did he say anything AT ALL that night???

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 2:17 pm

Entropy:

I have been in the process of answering your question for the past 20 minutes…..

This picture of Presidio Heights, taken in 1969 appeared ONLY in the scarce, first-pressing of the first-edition 1969 of ABOVE SAN FRANCISCO. Later editions did not have it.

Here is exactly how the area looked in 1969:

Here is the same shot with Jackson and Maple area circled:

Here is a close-up of Washington and Maple as it appeared in 1969:

Here is the murder scene, again ALL these pictures were taken in 1969

Tom Voigt has a picture from 1969 on his site – but I am the one who sent it to him. So,
I can share it here.

The 1972 editions and the ones after that did not have this picture. Unfortunately, the original 1969 edition is almost impossible to find. Enjoy

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 2:21 pm

Hey Trainmaster,very nice pics,very detailed,thanks for sharing

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 2:37 pm

Just thought of something:

I think it is only fair that I post a current photo of Presidio Heights and the 1969
photo of the same area so you can compare:

Presidio Heights in 2012:

Presidio Heights in 1969:

Now, you have a complete idea of how the area looked then, versus now. You can google images of the area and compare them to 1969 photos as Zodiac saw the area.

NOTE: There were MORE trees and shrubs in 1969 then there is now. It would make it easier for the killer, especially at night.

entropy, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 2:55 pm

Yes, fabulous pics and great work, trainmaster!

It’s still a little hard to tell but the shrubbery doesn’t look quite as developed back then. My point is only that Z’s turning left onto Maple St. and eventually into the playground appears to be speculation on the part of Fouke and is generally accepted by others because Z confirms this route. It’s very possible that’s what actually occurred but then again… Z is a confirmed liar and, I believe, was just a bit nervous after Stine’s murder. He spends much of the Bus Bomb letter explaining why all of the evidence against him from this scene (fingerprints, eyewitness description etc.) is FALSE and then emphatically wants to tell everyone that Fouke’s apparent speculation about his escape route is TRUE. Print it in the newspaper for all to see!

Good discussion… Sorry to veer off of the main thread topic here. The subject of Z’s escape route should probably be a separate topic in the Stine thread.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 3:26 pm

Still looking for things of interest…

PETER WARREN NEWMAN lived at 2940 Jackson in 69-70. He died in 2007,was ex navy. Not sure how close that is to Stine scene,or if it was in right direction. I did find a military guy named PETER W. NEWMAN that was listed in the Santa Barbara directory in the late 50’s(Domingos/Edwards)

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:40 pm

Trainmaster , Thank you for showing all of the wonderful pictures. There must be something wrong with my viewing the pictures and the circled areas . In one of the 1969 pictures with a circled area of the tennis courts and play area, it looks like it is at the end of Maple st, (where I believe it is) but in the newer picture, it shows it is at the end of spruce ?

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:32 pm

Found an interesting name on that street….more on him later-

William Rollin Peschka. 3232 Jackson st. Can anybody mark on a map compared to where Stine was killed and where Fouke claims he saw Z?

Read the 2nd article here- http://zodiackillersite.forummotion.com … johns-case
These were about a series of Kathleen Johns attacks in the Great Bend, KS area in the mid 70’s. This man graduated from HS in Great Bend. He was involved in high school theater and plays, operetta,and the newspaper, and wait until you see his photo He used addresses in the Great Bend area AFTER he was living in San Fran at 3232 Jackson

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 6:34 pm

Found an interesting name on that street….more on him later-

William Rollin Peschka. 3232 Jackson st. Can anybody mark on a map compared to where Stine was killed and where Fouke claims he saw Z?

Read the 2nd article here- http://zodiackillersite.forummotion.com … johns-case
These were about a series of Kathleen Johns attacks in the Great Bend, KS area in the mid 70’s. This man graduated from HS in Great Bend. He was involved in high school theater and plays, operetta,and the newspaper, and wait until you see his photo He used addresses in the Great Bend area AFTER he was living in San Fran at 3232 Jackson

Now that is worth looking at . Show us the picture !

traveller1st, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 7:15 pm

I always wondered when Z wrote about being in "cover" if his vantage point was from the grounds of that address. He seemed to focus , in his letter, on what he could hear which makes me imagine him hunkered down, out of sight but also unable to see what’s going on, unless he peeked.

Even still if that was where he was, could he see anything even if he did peek, beyond flashing lights through trees?

and from above

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 7:16 pm

Morf, I tried to get you a picture of Gordon Arthur Spence in Fremont, but it didn’t have a yr book later than 1964 that I could find. I did find that he had passed away in 2008.

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 7:23 pm

I always wondered when Z wrote about being in "cover" if his vantage point was from the grounds of that address. He seemed to focus , in his letter, on what he could hear which makes me imagine him hunkered down, out of sight but also unable to see what’s going on, unless he peeked.

Even still if that was where he was, could he see anything even if he did peek, beyond flashing lights through trees?

There were plenty of houses and apt’s that could see it all going on at the park. I can attest to that, because I went there with the purpose of looking for places the Z could have been watching from. Remember that there were apts on Pacific Ave facing the park as well , he could have gone there ? If he was spotted going towards the park, it could very well be a place on Pacific Ave near Maple.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 7:24 pm

Morf, I tried to get you a picture of Gordon Arthur Spence in Fremont, but it didn’t have a yr book later than 1964 that I could find. I did find that he had passed away in 2008.

I found his pic and will post it later tonight I hope. Also will post a pic of the guy at 3232 Jackson

traveller1st, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 7:37 pm

I have no strong opinion on whether or not Z was in a residence whilst the search was going on but going from his own words, cover, suggests to me that he was in foliage of some description because I wouldn’t call an apt cover, I would more likely refer to that as a place of hiding or something to that effect.

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 8:22 pm

I have no strong opinion on whether or not Z was in a residence whilst the search was going on but going from his own words, cover, suggests to me that he was in foliage of some description because I wouldn’t call an apt cover, I would more likely refer to that as a place of hiding or something to that effect.

I don’t think he wanted the police to think he was inside of a home is why he would tell them that. The police, dogs, and search lights would have found him in the brush , if he was actually there. I think he was just putting them on, to rub their noses in it so to speak. I am pretty sure he would have had a plan ahead of time, hiding in the brush wouldn’t be a very good plan. He knew exactly where he was going to go and went there, is my belief.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 8:42 pm

I have no strong opinion on whether or not Z was in a residence whilst the search was going on but going from his own words, cover, suggests to me that he was in foliage of some description because I wouldn’t call an apt cover, I would more likely refer to that as a place of hiding or something to that effect.

I don’t think he wanted the police to think he was inside of a home is why he would tell them that. The police, dogs, and search lights would have found him in the brush , if he was actually there. I think he was just putting them on, to rub their noses in it so to speak. I am pretty sure he would have had a plan ahead of time, hiding in the brush wouldn’t be a very good plan. He knew exactly where he was going to go and went there, is my belief.

Makes sense,certainly possible that he was in a house,but didnt want police to know that and made up the story about being outside

bayarea60s, Subject: Tahoe 27 Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:06 pm

Tahoe Stated:

"If Fouke is honest about that, I would bet my life Zodiac was pretending to live or visit there.
But, did Fouke tell other officers that night (after it was known he was actually a white guy):
"Hey, we just saw a white guy walk up to this house.."???
It would appear not. And his own admission in the Fincher documentary is that he didn’t. It was up to the detectives to figure out.
So did Fouke steer LE into the park on an assumption, when he had a positive ID at a house? Did he say anything AT ALL that night???"

Yes Tahoe, Fouke steered the search into the park on a hunch. He has said it. Pellessetti says F didn’t tell him. Well for sure F told someone, he told dispatch. When F. leaves P. at Cherry and Jackson he heads west and loops around to Pacific and heads east back down Pacific towards where he figures Z would be travelling through park.
F. had to have notified dispatch that he was in pursuit of armed murder suspect WMA. He had to. No cop would be in pursuit of a killer and not be looking for backup. So F. is the one who set the entire search in motion. and that’s why the search was from Maple and to the east through the park.

It was impossible for F. to Know that Z was headed towards the park. F. left Z standing on the landing at 3713 Jackson St. and in 7 seconds F. & P. would be meeting at Cherry & Jackson.

Bay

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:32 pm

Sandy:

It would be great if the angles of the 1969 and present photos could be
lined up, but they weren’t. It does show you the changes of the area, over the years, which in that limited view, is not much, except for perhaps houses being painted or tress, bushes, hedges removed.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:33 pm

Thanks Bay–

I always presumed it was the info given by the kids that led LE to believe he was heading in that direction.

patinky, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 12:55 am

From the Social Security Index:

Name: Gordon Arthur Spence
Birth: 15 May 1948
Death: 8 Jan 2008 – Newark, Alameda, California, United States of America
Civil: California

bayarea60s, Subject: Tahoe 27 Fri Nov 09, 2012 1:44 am

T27…

I think that also added to it, but given once police were on scene and realized kids last saw Z on the corner of Cherry and Wash. heading N. on Cherry they might not have assumed the park had anything to do with it.
I think Z, from his letter the next day, tells us that he could hear some police action that was going on, but he couldn’t see it. That’s always led me to thinking Z had somewhere to go in PH, close to Maple and Jackson. A place that he knew was empty, a place that he knew where he could hide out. Course that’s solely my opinion.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 6:24 am

Found an interesting name on that street….more on him later-

William Rollin Peschka. 3232 Jackson st. Can anybody mark on a map compared to where Stine was killed and where Fouke claims he saw Z?

Read the 2nd article here- http://zodiackillersite.forummotion.com … johns-case
These were about a series of Kathleen Johns attacks in the Great Bend, KS area in the mid 70’s. This man graduated from HS in Great Bend. He was involved in high school theater and plays, operetta,and the newspaper, and wait until you see his photo He used addresses in the Great Bend area AFTER he was living in San Fran at 3232 Jackson

Now that is worth looking at . Show us the picture !

William Rollin Peschka class of 52, graduated from HS in Great Bend, KS-

From his high school interests,newspaper,theater,operetta, seems like Zodiac’s background.

He lived at 3232 Jackson at time of Stine murder. Thats like less than half a mile, on same road Zodiac was seen walking. Maybe he was walking back to his house when Fouke seen him? This guy went back to Great Bend KS after living in SF. Then, in the mid tolate 70’s, the multiple Kathleen Johns like attacks happened in Great Bend,KS area..

This guy worth a closer look?

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 6:48 am

From the Social Security Index:

Name: Gordon Arthur Spence
Birth: 15 May 1948
Death: 8 Jan 2008 – Newark, Alameda, California, United States of America
Civil: California

Found this guy’s pic in the 1964 yearbook of Irvington HS in Fremont CA, I think he was class of 66. In meantime, in same yearbook, i found this-

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 7:04 am

Thanks Tahoe, I totally forgot about reading that one ! Seems to fit the man Christina said Darlene spoke to at Terry’s on July 4th and the Stine shooter, better than the darker haired man Hartnell saw. Light brown hair can look a few shades darker if wet, but certainly not black.
The man I saw in 68 was not close to blond at all, unless that was a wig ?
That fits into my more than one zodiac theory, one who prefers using a knife to a gun, and vice – verse. One being smaller than the one with the darker hair.

Yes…I thought of him too Sandy..minus the curly hair. He and Gordon, the guy Darlene dated (not Buzz), was described with "curly hair", 5’10" and husky…and he thought she was pregnant.

Here is Gordon’s description. Also, the page prior tells more: http://www.zodiackiller.com/DFR42.html

***

I know many don’t take MM’s word for his description in 1969, but he is describing the man he saw (out of the car), and I do believe his take on it. Especially the body type–being in a t-shirt. So I do think it is important and should be considered in Zodiac’s description.

Name:

Gordon Arthur Spence
Birth:
15 May 1948

This is the right Gordon. He graduated from basic training in early 1968. There is an article about him in the 2/19/68 Argus about him graduating from Baasic training for the navy. If anybody can find a yearbook pic of him,I think he went to Fremont, CA – Irvington High School, aprox class of 66

EDIT- Found a photo of this guy from 1964,no glasses,but fat round looking face, he looks stocky. Will post later as I have time

Cant seem to find the pic now…I hate that.I know it was in the 1964 yearbook…possibly Irvington HS, or another hs in a 64 yearbook. HE GRADUATED FROM IRVINGTON HS CLASS OF 66 for certain,but the 64 photo I found of him was in a different HS yearbook,any other High schools in that aea? Cant remember which one it was

EDIT:

Got it, he was in 1964 Junipero HS in San Mateo,pg 107 of the yearbook,try to put it on later

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 3:14 pm

Found an interesting name on that street….more on him later-

William Rollin Peschka. 3232 Jackson st. Can anybody mark on a map compared to where Stine was killed and where Fouke claims he saw Z?

Read the 2nd article here- http://zodiackillersite.forummotion.com … johns-case
These were about a series of Kathleen Johns attacks in the Great Bend, KS area in the mid 70’s. This man graduated from HS in Great Bend. He was involved in high school theater and plays, operetta,and the newspaper, and wait until you see his photo He used addresses in the Great Bend area AFTER he was living in San Fran at 3232 Jackson

Now that is worth looking at . Show us the picture !

William Rollin Peschka class of 52, graduated from HS in Great Bend, KS-

From his high school interests,newspaper,theater,operetta, seems like Zodiac’s background.

He lived at 3232 Jackson at time of Stine murder. Thats like less than half a mile, on same road Zodiac was seen walking. Maybe he was walking back to his house when Fouke seen him? This guy went back to Great Bend KS after living in SF. Then, in the mid tolate 70’s, the multiple Kathleen Johns like attacks happened in Great Bend,KS area..

This guy worth a closer look?

This guy was a Merola Opera Board member….seems like a guy that might be a Gilbert & Sullivan fan

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 4:47 pm

Morf , Found Gordon Spence’s picture, class 66 page 107. It didn’t look like a graduation picture perhaps junior picture ? He has pretty dark hair and looks more like the Lake B drawing than SF. Perhaps you can post it ?

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 6:10 pm

From the Social Security Index:

Name: Gordon Arthur Spence
Birth: 15 May 1948
Death: 8 Jan 2008 – Newark, Alameda, California, United States of America
Civil: California

He certainly had that large big face it seems

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 7:35 pm

From the Social Security Index:

Name: Gordon Arthur Spence
Birth: 15 May 1948
Death: 8 Jan 2008 – Newark, Alameda, California, United States of America
Civil: California

He certainly had that large big face it seems

Definitely has the husky look (even then) as described. It’s hard to tell if his hair was curly with the buzz-cut. Must have been longer in ’69 of course.

(I will find another thread to put this in—thx!)

Edit: Here is the Gordon Spence thread: http://zodiackillersite.forummotion.com … xxxx#36435

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 7:42 pm

Now I know why Mike R likes MR.X so much, I just found his address and listing very close to the steps Fouke said Zodiac was walking up.

Ancestry is haywire right now, its only showing photo results to any inquries, no addresses, marriage records etc

onewhoknows, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 8:00 pm

FYI I thought we agreed in this thread that Foukes would not be considered confirmed evidence on which
to base our Profile. Now we are pulling up men who lived on Jackson street…

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 8:32 pm

Jackson St should be looked at in my opinion. Zodiac was last seen walking on Jackson st. He may have lived near there, or had Family there. He may have wanted to kill Stine and escape to a home nearby. He had some reason for walking up Jackson when he killed Stine. If he was going to a car to escape, why not park a little closer to the Stine murder scene? Plus Mike R’s suspect,Mr. X lived on Jackson. I personally think the cross streets right in that section should be looked at. Who knows, maybe we find an owner or resident that formerly lived in Riverside,etc.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 8:34 pm

Still a bit confused with my directions. I am zodiac, I kill Stine at Washington & Cherry after I told him to originally go to Washington & Maple. I get out and walk over to Jackson, make a right, and start walking up Jackson back towards Maple. Are the house number getting higher or lower as I walk?

EDIT -SCRATCH THAT THE NUMBERS ARE GETTING SMALLER…For anybody that wants a copy,I am going to make a list of every name and directory listing I find for 3300-4000 Jackson, then I will eventually do side streets. Maybe we get a name of interest.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 8:47 pm

If he was going to a car to escape, why not park a little closer to the Stine murder scene?

The original destination Stine wrote down was Washington and Maple.
That is one reason I believe Z parked his car on Maple. If the original plans were carried out, all he would have to do is walk down Maple to his car.
By leaving it a block or two away from the crime scene, no one can associate him with car make, license and/or color.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:04 pm

If he was going to a car to escape, why not park a little closer to the Stine murder scene?

The original destination Stine wrote down was Washington and Maple.
That is one reason I believe Z parked his car on Maple. If the original plans were carried out, all he would have to do is walk down Maple to his car.
By leaving it a block or two away from the crime scene, no one can associate him with car make, license and/or color.

Thats what I think too…but,on the other hand, maybe he was house sitting, or visiting Family or lived nearby? If he got in his car and left,he wouldnt be able to describe alot of the details. But if he was in a home nearby, he would have more info. We have to look at the WHY? WHY Maple/Cherry & Washington? He could have picked anyplace in SF or any other, more secluded area in a nearby city or area. So WHY Maple/Cherry & Washington? I just dont want to miss the chance that he had a connection in that area.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:14 pm

One thing’s for sure, lots of money on Jackson St, business owners, bankers, Doctors, Lawyers, and a supreme court justice. I dont think Zodiac himself likely had alot of money,but maybe his relatives did, or he did work for a person on this street, who knows.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 09, 2012 11:34 pm

Re-examining the Fouke memo:

So Fouke saw Z walking down Jackson, and that Z turned to his left and walked on Maple into the Presidio. If he was walking down Jackson, and turned left onto Maple, I dont think there are hoses there, am I wrong? And there we have Zodiac walking on Maple, where he originally wanted Stine to take him to.

I had forgotten that Fouke claims to have seen him actually walk towards the presidio, I thought he had just seen him walking down Jackson and they assumed he went into Presidio. This definitely, and completely contradicts Fouke’s statement on the DVD documentary. I dont think there are houses where Z turned onto Maple towards the Presidio.

This is the house that Fouke states Zodiac walked up steps, 3713 Jackson

Quicktrader, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 4:08 am

3713 Jackson Street…

From there he could’ve watched police driving around quite well.

Jackson Street

Maple Street entrance to 3713 Jackson Street

Maple Street itself is a dead’s end (maybe not so for pedestrians) towards Julian Kahn park. From 3713 Jackson, Z could even have seen police officers searching for him in the park.

Call Sotheby’s if you wanna buy Z’s former office home

QT

bayarea60s, Subject: The Stine Scene Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:09 am

I did this on Tom’s site a few years back, so I’ll do it here. I’m doing this from memory, I don’t think I need to pull out my notes for this. I with friends have re-enacted the crime scene 3 times, twice from the police reports, and years later from what is stated on the video. If you follow the police report written by Pellessetti and his partner, timewise we knew it never made sense to us. We knew there was something missing. The way the report reads is Pellessetti gets this dispatch, he’s close to scene (never states how close), we thought he was close enough that Z was probably halfway between Washington and Jackson on Cherry. Z saw their squad car, but they didn’t see him. Pel. stops his car on Washington facing east in front of Stines cab sees the kids in the street approaching Stine’s cab, Pel. gets out and stops kids before they get to cab, he takes the kids back to their house, then he procedes to go to cab, and it’s then he sees Stine and knows Stine is dead. From there he begins to head North on Cherry looking for perp, gun drawn, flashlight in other hand. He gets down to Jackson and up pulls Foukes and Zelm. Now we need to back up here.

Foukes states he was on Presidio heading north, approaching Washington, he went through Washington intersection and went up to next street which is Jackson, he turns left, heading west. He has his running lights on and says he was travelling between 35 -40 MPH. When he gets about 150′ from Maple St. is where he first sees Z coming down Jackson, on north side of Jackson, heading east. From the time Foukes first sees Z until he is upon him at 3713 Jackson, where Z turns and heads up steps, about 2 -3 seconds have elapsed. Not much time. Foukes says he slowed down looked at Z, who has made his way up the 5-6 steps and is standing there looking back at Foukes, and Foukes punches the gas and continues towards Cherry and Jackson where he meets up with Pellessetti. This is important, from the time Foukes leaves Z standing on those steps until Foukes meets up with Pellessetti @ Cherry and Jackson, a total of 6 – 8 seconds have elapsed. If I’m remembering it right from the bottom of those steps to Maple St. is 82′. It would take Z at least 12 seconds to cover that distance, not counting coming down the steps. So it’s impossible for Foukes to have seen Z at Maple street. He presumed, and has stated it since he wrote the report back in ’69, that Z headed that way. Absolutely no way for Foukes/Zelm to have seen Z near Maple, let alone heading towards the park.

All’s we know from that point on is that Z stays in area, close enough to hear the motorcicles in the park, but never states that he saw anything. If he were in the park he would have been able to see everything, not just hear it. It’s very late I have to get up early. I will continue this tomorrow. Cause it gets even more interesting after the video is produced. I wish I could have them both in a room for 5 minutes, we still have never received an accurate story from both of the RO’s.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:21 am

And if I am Fouke, I immediately sa, Oh Shit. I just saw that guy walking up these steps, let me turn around and go back to that house. Thats why I am kind of skeptical if Fouke EVER saw Zodiac walking up steps. I certainly believe he could have seen him walking down the street. I am in agreement, I dont think that he would have made it very far down Jackson before being seen. There are only 3 possibilities here…

A) He went into a nearby house(could explain being able to see, or at least hear what was going on, and would give him some cover)

B) He got into a car and drove away(would make it less likely he would be close by, especially if he just saw cops look right at him)

C) He walked into the presidio(wouldnt the confidence of the police & dogs rule this out? They said if there was a mouse there, they would have found it)

To me, this makes sense that Z likely went to a house nearby. I am making a list from the San Fran Directory of all the people living between 3400 & 4000 Jackson, especially between 3600 & 4000. Z wanted to be closer to Maple originally. His rendevous spot was close to Maple I think, maybe between Cherry & Spruce, or at the end of Maple. So far, I have not found anybody living at the address in which Fouke claims to have seen somebody go up steps. The closest I have found are the names of people at 3765,3746,3731,3755,3760,3737,

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 12:05 pm

Here is another angle, Morf:

At that time, San Francisco had a lot of crime, murders, mostly occuring in the Mission District, Tenderloin,
Fillmore District, Potrero and Bayview Districts – crimes there are almost on a daily basis and another murder would not make as much news.

Zodiac loved publicity.

That is one reason I think he picked the Presidio Heights area – an upper middle class-to-wealthy area where
crime rates are low.

Perhaps he had family there; maybe he drove to a "safer" area nearby and listened on a scanner.

There are speculations, of course, and anything is possible.

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 12:15 pm

There are not only houses on Maple in the direction of park , but there were many on Pacific facing the park. It is pretty easy to get to Pacific from Maple, you don’t have to climb over anything to do it. ( I have done it with heals on )
The house on Jackson that was supposed to be where z was seen going up the stairs, belonged to Mr X and no one else . It has been gone over many times before elsewhere. This is Mike R.’s suspects house. I think it is time we look at some of the other houses / apts.on Maple and on Pacific. Instead of rehashing all of the old stuff again and again.

I can picture the z watching the "kiddies" playing on the swings at that park during the day time. Could that be what made him think about shooting them as they came bouncing out of the bus ?

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 1:14 pm

There are not only houses on Maple in the direction of park , but there were many on Pacific facing the park. It is pretty easy to get to Pacific from Maple, you don’t have to climb over anything to do it. ( I have done it with heals on )
The house on Jackson that was supposed to be where z was seen going up the stairs, belonged to Mr X and no one else . It has been gone over many times before elsewhere. This is Mike R.’s suspects house. I think it is time we look at some of the other houses / apts.on Maple and on Pacific. Instead of rehashing all of the old stuff again and again.

I can picture the z watching the "kiddies" playing on the swings at that park during the day time. Could that be what made him think about shooting them as they came bouncing out of the bus ?

MrX did NOT live at the house that Zodiac supposedly walked up to

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 1:51 pm

There are not only houses on Maple in the direction of park , but there were many on Pacific facing the park. It is pretty easy to get to Pacific from Maple, you don’t have to climb over anything to do it. ( I have done it with heals on )
The house on Jackson that was supposed to be where z was seen going up the stairs, belonged to Mr X and no one else . It has been gone over many times before elsewhere. This is Mike R.’s suspects house. I think it is time we look at some of the other houses / apts.on Maple and on Pacific. Instead of rehashing all of the old stuff again and again.

I can picture the z watching the "kiddies" playing on the swings at that park during the day time. Could that be what made him think about shooting them as they came bouncing out of the bus ?

MrX did NOT live at the house that Zodiac supposedly walked up to

That is why he become a suspect . Please show me the report that shows the address you are showing , because that is not the house I was shown . We need to have this corrected if it is not the correct house. The house I was shown was in the middle of Jackson on the north side, not second from the corner.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 2:21 pm

I have not seen anything about this question, which I ask again, but it could play a major role…..

Does anyone know, for certain who was driving the patrol car – Foulk or Zelms? The officer on the passenger side (since the suspect was walking on the north side, going in an eastern direction, while the patrol car was headed north and southwest towards Washington) would have a better look at the suspect.

I still think the killer turned toward the house (which ever house it was), to pretend he was going there. He was not in a hurry, which would serve to arise more suspicion, and the dispatch stated a BMA. A very costly error, be remember, as I pointed out before, most crimes like what took place happen in the other districts on a regular basis, often more than one, and not being racial, it would be common to almost on an unconsious level to say "BMA" as most of the high crime areas involved someone of that description. A shooting in Presidio Heights, while possible, would be considered very rare.

patinky, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 2:34 pm

To me, this makes sense that Z likely went to a house nearby. I am making a list from the San Fran Directory of all the people living between 3400 & 4000 Jackson, especially between 3600 & 4000. Z wanted to be closer to Maple originally. His rendevous spot was close to Maple I think, maybe between Cherry & Spruce, or at the end of Maple. So far, I have not found anybody living at the address in which Fouke claims to have seen somebody go up steps. The closest I have found are the names of people at 3765,3746,3731,3755,3760,3737,

Morf, I tend to see it this way too. The rule book says the closer in time to the event the more accurate a statement is likely to be.

I can’t see anything sinister (such as CYA) in Fouke’s statement being different than the video made decades later. Time, memory and age can cause honest mistakes. In my view, some tend to think cops should be infallible when in reality they do professional work, even in 1969 but humans make honest mistakes. :sunny:

There’s no way the Zodiac would say, "I observed and heard the motorcycles from the the second-story window at my home on 3400 Jackson Street." So maybe he made up the proverbial story-with-a-grain-truth and said he was in the park.

He also possibly could have escaped in a car if he was quick and had the car parked and headed away from the scene.

I’ve always wondered if Stine’s killer did want to be dropped off at the original destination then on the spur of the moment decided Stine was an easy mark and at that point decided to make another kill. What would the likely conversation be between a male fare and a male cabby when the fare decides he wants to be dropped off somewhere other than the original destination. What reason would be given for asking to be taken on "up the road" so to speak?

onewhoknows, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:32 pm

Zodiac is in control now when he tells Paul Stine to go a block further, he’s in the front
seat, with a loaded gun. He’s giving directions, calling the shots. To hop in a car and drive
away near the scene would cause suspicion. Why doesn’t anyone believe Zodiac’s version
of the evening, that he hid in the Presidio? Here is someone familiar with the forrest, with the
woods, where he stalked and killed large game. Someone who knows about hunting dogs and
trails of scent. Zodiac planned each kill and he was very intelligent. I agree that the closer to the
actual event in time, the more reliable the report, unless someone was blatantly lying and I
don’t see Fouke’s motivation to do so. I am sure that the Police investigated all the homes
in that area, which are owned by wealthy high ranking citizens of SF.

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 4:13 pm

As far as I know the police didn’t go house to house , they only concentrated on the park area, they kept an all points bulletin through out the next day. Remember they were looking for a "robber" not the Zodiac at that time. The people living in those houses wouldn’t be thought of as needing more money, so I doubt that was something they gave any thought about doing. Of course I could be wrong about that, or anything else ? I think there would be a much longer report, like in the Lake Herman rd case, of people they talked to if they spoke to more people.

Something I saw today while searching for more Z stuff , was a picture of Paul Stine with out the blacked out face. Bruce 3 saw the same thing when looking at the picture. Paul Stine still had on his glasses, so Zodiac didn’t use his for any disguise. That to me is a biggie ! Also in the police report, they wrote that the only things the perp took were the wallet and keys, no mention of glasses missing. It is a hard picture to look at because of so much blood, I had to look at it upside down to make sure I was seeing thee glasses. I also used a magnifying glass. They were on his face , a bit crooked of course, but there just the same.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 4:23 pm

I think one thing all of us can agree on is that Z planned this crime in advance.
He studied the area well, and scouted where to park his car, and get his destination.

He took the bus to downtown S.F. Whether it was the 38 Geary Street line or the Jackson Street line, he left his car there for a reason – to get away.

Patinky:

The "reason" why the killer asked to be taken up one more block (and it was at the last moment, or Stine would have corrected the original entry in the log) will never be known. There is plenty of room for speculation, but as Graysmith, stated,
an obstacle was in the way. Someone walking a dog, people coming outside, anything is possible. All we can say is the original destination was Washington and Maple, and at the last minute changed to Cherry, one block up. Had Washington and Maple been the original crime scene, I doubt anyone would have seen him, but one never knows. The killer would walk downhill to his car and disappear into the night. There would have been no Foulk or Zelms, most likely, nor the sktech of the killer.

Luck was once again on the killer’s side. Out of all the known crimes he committed, the Stine murder was the closest brush he had with LE, assuming that was the killer the officers saw. Zelm was killed on duty a few months later.

Quicktrader, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:30 pm

Many ideas, but why not take the simple one?

Fouke saw him going up these stairs? Walking up six stairs in six seconds?

Who the f… lived/worked there, 40yrs ago?

QT

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:05 pm

…To me, this makes sense that Z likely went to a house nearby.

Pretty risky if he knew somebody there. There is always a chance someone would see you and if you are possibly a familiar face in the neighborhood, that couldn’t be good when the composite came out.

onewhoknows, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:23 pm

Good observations all. How about this, where do Zodiac’s claims and the officer’s
claims match? For example, we can say they both agree that Zodiac was in SF the night
of the Killing in that general area of the killing of Paul Stine. Where else do you find matches
in the accounts of the evening?

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 8:35 pm

Something I saw today while searching for more Z stuff , was a picture of Paul Stine with out the blacked out face. Bruce 3 saw the same thing when looking at the picture. Paul Stine still had on his glasses, so Zodiac didn’t use his for any disguise. That to me is a biggie ! Also in the police report, they wrote that the only things the perp took were the wallet and keys, no mention of glasses missing. It is a hard picture to look at because of so much blood, I had to look at it upside down to make sure I was seeing thee glasses. I also used a magnifying glass. They were on his face , a bit crooked of course, but there just the same.

Sandy, I have an upclose photo of his face, untouched. There are no glasses. The blood sort settled around his eyes. It’s pretty gruesome, so I won’t post it.

patinky, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 8:38 pm

Zodiac is in control now when he tells Paul Stine to go a block further, he’s in the front
seat, with a loaded gun. He’s giving directions, calling the shots. To hop in a car and drive
away near the scene would cause suspicion. Why doesn’t anyone believe Zodiac’s version
of the evening, that he hid in the Presidio? Here is someone familiar with the forrest, with the
woods, where he stalked and killed large game. Someone who knows about hunting dogs and
trails of scent. Zodiac planned each kill and he was very intelligent. I agree that the closer to the
actual event in time, the more reliable the report, unless someone was blatantly lying and I
don’t see Fouke’s motivation to do so. I am sure that the Police investigated all the homes
in that area, which are owned by wealthy high ranking citizens of SF.

How do we know Zodiac was familiar with the forest and that he stalked and killed large game and knew hunting dogs etc.?

If he knew scenthounds then he’d know they would have trailed or treed him so that makes me speculate he wasn’t in the woods or park of the Presidio.

It is factual dogs were used and it is a fact they didn’t rout the killer out of the park/woods. That suggests he wasn’t where he said he was. Those dogs are good, even in 1969.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 8:47 pm

Good observations all. How about this, where do Zodiac’s claims and the officer’s
claims match? For example, we can say they both agree that Zodiac was in SF the night
of the Killing in that general area of the killing of Paul Stine. Where else do you find matches
in the accounts of the evening?

I can tell you Zelm’s family states he talked to the man that night. That matches up with Zodiac’s claims.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 9:10 pm

There are not only houses on Maple in the direction of park , but there were many on Pacific facing the park. It is pretty easy to get to Pacific from Maple, you don’t have to climb over anything to do it. ( I have done it with heals on )
The house on Jackson that was supposed to be where z was seen going up the stairs, belonged to Mr X and no one else . It has been gone over many times before elsewhere. This is Mike R.’s suspects house. I think it is time we look at some of the other houses / apts.on Maple and on Pacific. Instead of rehashing all of the old stuff again and again.

I can picture the z watching the "kiddies" playing on the swings at that park during the day time. Could that be what made him think about shooting them as they came bouncing out of the bus ?

MrX did NOT live at the house that Zodiac supposedly walked up to

That is why he become a suspect . Please show me the report that shows the address you are showing , because that is not the house I was shown . We need to have this corrected if it is not the correct house. The house I was shown was in the middle of Jackson on the north side, not second from the corner.

Fouke now claims the address was 3713 Jackson, the address he saw Zodiac walking up the steps. Mr X lived at a house, with a number that was in the 3600 block of Jackson. Not very far away, but still, NOT the same address. You can ask Mike R, but I think the reason he started to suspect Mr X was because he wrote letters to the editors of SF Chron, and to boot, lived close to where Fouke saw Zodiac on Jackson

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 9:35 pm

I have not seen anything about this question, which I ask again, but it could play a major role…..

Does anyone know, for certain who was driving the patrol car – Foulk or Zelms? The officer on the passenger side (since the suspect was walking on the north side, going in an eastern direction, while the patrol car was headed north and southwest towards Washington) would have a better look at the suspect…

Fouke was driving.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 11:12 pm

I could find ZERO listings in the SF directory for a 3713 Jackson, not sure it even exists. Anybody try a title search on the property? If there is one, you can find ownership for the property back in 1969

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 10, 2012 11:35 pm

Just found out, there WERE houses on Maple, where Z walked. When he turned left off of Jackson, heading to teh Presidio, there were homes on that part of Maple. I thought there were not, but 34 Maple for example is in that section. For people with knowledge of SF, is there a Maple STREET as well as a Maple Ave? There must be, Maple Street in in the area of Presidio and is all nice homes, while Maple AVE has businesses.

Also, a question for anybody, the ONLY listings on Maple St close to where Z headed towards the Presidio is the address of 34 Maple,its right there where Z would have been. Two separate listings for people living there, a ‘Mrs. Donald H. Campbell’ & a ‘Mrs. William Sterba’. Any idea why two different women would be listed at one address? THe name DONALD H. CAMPBELL is interesting because I found multiple listings for it in Riverside & Santa Barbara in the 50s and 60s,but since its a common name, I cant be sure they are the same person.

At 100 Spruce,very close to the Stine scene, and address goven to Stine by Zodiac, there was a man named Milton C. Coburn. Not sure of his middle name, or age, but I found this interesting-
Name: Milton C. Coburn
Birth: 19 Apr 1909
Death: 12 Oct 1996 – Rancho Mirage, Riverside, California, United States of America
Civil: California

Name: Milton Cutler Coburn
Birth: 19 Apr 1909 – Hawaii
Death: 12 Oct 1996 – Riverside

A definite Riverside connection to somebody living right at the Stine murder scene, and Zodiac escape route???? This guy have any sons??

Seagull, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:48 am

I got tired of looking up addresses in the Presidio Heights area of Stine’s murder in the online Polk’s Directory so I copied and pasted a few of the pertinent streets. It’s not the tidiest cut and paste job I’ve ever done but I think it will help! The first column is Washington St., I didn’t remember to mark it like the rest. I copied all the addresses from Presidio Ave to Arguello Blvd. for Washington and Jackson Sts. and I copied the addresses from the Presidio to California St. for Cherry and Maple Sts.

I do notice that there was a vacant house on Jackson St. near the intersection with Maple St. Hummmm…

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 1:03 am

Very good stuff Seagull :cheers: Is that from 1969? Can you also add SPRUCE ST?

Seagull, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 1:08 am

Yes, it’s from the 1969-70 Polk’s Directory. Here’s the link if you want to look through other years-

http://archive.org/search.php?query=pol … 0francisco

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 1:19 am

I do notice that there was a vacant house on Jackson St. near the intersection with Maple St. Hummmm…

That’s creepy.

I notice a few now that you mention it.

Seagull, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 1:22 am

Here’s Spruce St.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 1:32 am

Eva Weil any relation to Eric Weil? I notice her on the list.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 1:34 am

Lots of psychiatrists in that last post Seagull!

And what does "no return" mean?

bayarea60s, Subject: The correct address is Sun Nov 11, 2012 3:31 am

The correct address where Foukes sees Z is 3725 Jackson St. In 1969, unlike today, that was the last address on Jackson before you would get to Maple. Today there is another house in there that was once part of the parcel that’s on the corner of Jackson and Maple, but actually has a Maple St. address. What Foukes stated was as he was approaching Maple St. he saw Z coming down the hill. When you are driving on Jackson heading west approaching Maple you can only see so far up the hill & that’s basically about 40′ or so from the steps. If Z is any further up the block on Jackson Foukes could not have seen Z as Foukes was approaching Maple.
Again, I can’t say this enough, Foukes never saw Z near Maple, the closest Foukes saw Z to Maple was on the steps of 3725 Jackson, which are the closest steps leading to a house in 1969 to Maple, but it would take Z over twice as long to get to Maple on foot, then it would take Foukes to be talking with Pellessetti @ Cherry and Jackson.
Foukes later says he assumed Z headed to the park. The one who had the best look at Z would have been Zelms. We’ve all been in the driver seat and tried to talk to someone on the sidewalk, you typically have to crane your head down so you can see the persons face, right? Well in this case when Foukes slows down to get a good look at Z, Z is up on the steps. I’ve been in the driver seat in front of those steps with a friend standing on that landing, you can see the guys legs from like the knees down. You have to bend way down to see the face, and Foukes would have to look around Zelms (hope he’s out of the way), to be able to see Z.
I’ve often wondered in the description, or a good part of it, if it didn’t come from Zelm’s. We know Zelm’s wife has always stated that in the few months Zelm’s was alive between Oct. 1969 and Jan. 1970 that Zelm’s always told her that they spoke with Z. But if anyone did speak with Z, I would think it would have had to been Zelm’s, not Foukes.
I don’t think Z lived in the neighborhood at all. I think he may have had access to a home in the area. As Sandy stated, there are tons of houses/apt.s on Pacific facing the park. Z wasn’t in the park, his first letter says he could hear the motorcicles, that’s all. I highly doubt Z would trap himself in a car on any street in the area. The easiest thing for a cop to do would be to do a car search, they’ve got cops that just saw Z.
I doubt Z had his car there at all, he probably left it downtown. If Z in his letter states he could hear the motorcicles and then doesn’t say he was in the park, that would have triggered SFPD to do a massive house to house, even after the fact. As Sandy stated we’re not sure the detectives ever did any kind of house to house inquiry, they didn’t need to cause Z was in the park, right?
5+ K9’s in that park that night, they would have found Z in minutes.
And remember Foukes car is travelling at about 50’/Sec. I think Maple to Cherry on Jackson is like 360′, so Foukes from the time he first sees Z, at about 100′ before he gets to Maple + the 360′ from Maple to Cherry @ 50′ per second = less than 10 sec’s.

Jem, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 6:25 am

Z couldn’t have risked leaving his car near the crime scene unless it would fit in with the other cars in the neighborhood. Did Z own a nice car? Did he rent or borrow one? Even if so, it would still be risky. Who knows when someone is going to remember the make, model, color, and even part of the plate number of an unfamiliar vehicle parked on the street?

Then there’s the fun Z would have missed out on by leaving the scene quickly. Seems he might have enjoyed that part even more than killing. Z must have scoped out the area while planning the crime. So why not look for a house that’s unoccupied, or a home where an elderly couple lives alone and don’t keep their back doors locked? He could have hidden away in an unused bedroom or even the attic for quite some time without being caught.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 7:43 am

So when z turned onto Jackson and was walking, was he on the side if the street closest to the presidio or on the other side closer to Washington ?

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 7:46 am

and what’s an orphanage doing there on Spruce?

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 7:50 am

I agree Bayarea, if zodiac didn’t say he went into the park or presidio they may have done a house to house search

Nachtsider, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 9:01 am

I still harbour the suspicion that Zodiac observed the police search from the safety of his getaway car, while slowly cruising past.

Seagull, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 9:50 am

Lots of psychiatrists in that last post Seagull!

And what does "no return" mean?

Spruce St. seemed to have a couple of professional office buildings near the intersection of California St. Going east, away from the Presidio, across California St. there were even more doctors offices. Children’s Hospital was on the west side of California St. between Cherry and Maple and where there is a hospital there are doctor’s offices.

"No Return" simply means that the people canvasing the area knew an address was occupied but no information was returned as to who was occupying the space as opposed to a space being obviously vacant. I recall that people would go door to door and ask who lived at an address, if no one was home they would leave a questionnaire but the canvassers would also ask neighbors who lived or occupied addresses where no one was home.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:29 am

I still think its possible that Zodiac gave Stine the location of ‘Washington & Maple’ because he wanted a quick escape into a waiting house or car. He likely may have realized that if he did the murder there, the cops might be investigating the houses and cars right in that immediate area, so he changed his mind to one block further, wash & Cherry. Then he could simply walk back to his waiting house or car putting a little distance between the crime scene and his safety.

A quick walk to the end of Maple would put him around these homes: (the most likely spots in RED)

MAPLE ST-
1 Maple..Frederick C. Whitman
34 Maple, L. Arundel Hopkins/ William Sterba/Donald H. Campbell (Several diff names at one residence???) Lambert Arundel Hopkins
101 Maple, John R. Gamble
SPRUCE ST-
1 Spruce St..Robert P. Lilienthal
2 Spruce St…Mabel Filmer
16 Spruce st, Iver Lyche
33 Spruce st, Mrs. M D Young
100 Spruce, Milton C Coburn
101 Spruce, orphanage
107 Spruce, Donald P. Hill
115 Spruce, Vecki Morrell
121 Spruce, Garrison Southara Jr

JACKSON ST- (after Maple if you are walking in Zodiac’s shoes)
3600 Jackson,Andrew Simpson
3616 Jackson,Robert S. Sherman
3625 Jackson, Reed L. Funston
3629 Jackson, Mark S. Cluett
3630 Jackson,John A. Vietor
3631 Jackson, Robert H. Footman
3633 Jackson,Wilfred E. Willis
3636 Jackson, Kjell Qvale
3641 Jackson, Charles P. Lebo
3653 Jackson, John G. Bowen
3660 Jackson, Rose N. Sutro
3673 Jackson, John P. Cox
3675 Vacant
3680 Jackson, Helen Laphan

(before Maple if you are walking in Zodiac’s shoes)
3712 Jackson, Fred W. Bloch,
3728 Jackson, Coll Mac
3731 Jackson, Ilse Jawetz & Allen B. Wheelis
3736 Jackson, Charles B. Ehrman
3737 Jackson, Vincent K. Butler Jr
3746 Jackson, Beatrice Saroni
3747 Jackson, Laurence Sanford
3755 Jackson, Thomas E. Bacon
3756 Jackson, Mary L. Durkin
3760 Jackson, John B. Ducato
3765 Jackson, Morton A. Rosenblum
3769 Jackson, Evan R. Peters
3785 Jackson, Francis D. Boylon
3858 Jackson, Louis K. Lowenstein
3850 Jackson, Jas Mailliard

So, is one of these people Zodiac? Is one of them related to Zodiac? Maybe Zodiac went to visit them and use them as an alibi or was house sitting, etc. Or maybe Zodiac just walked into the presidio(I doubt it), or went off in a waiting car. Again, the $64000 question, why this spot, out of all the spots in SF and sorrounding cities? He could have chosen more secluded areas, etc. I think he had some connection to this area. Maybe even one of the many psychiatrists in the area was treating Zodiac, and didnt know it.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:51 am

Going to start disecting these residents in that area to see any of them have potential ties or roots in Santa Barbara (Domingos/Edwards)or Riverside(Bates)-

Lambert Arundel Hopkins
Name: Lambert A Hopkins
Residence Year: 1939
Street Address: 2151 Mission Ridge rd
Residence Place: Santa Barbara, California Publication Title: Santa Barbara California City Directory

HE DIED 11/14/69

His son,
Name: Thayer Hopkins
Residence: 1943 – Santa Barbara, California, USA
He died in 2000

So they were in Santa Barbara back in the 40’s. Any relatives of theirs (grandsons?)stay there into the 1960’s?

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:12 am

Now here’s a good one!

3769 Jackson, Evan R. Peters

Name: Evan R Peters
Residence Year: 1972
Street Address: 383 Plaza De Sonadores M
Residence Place: Santa Barbara, California
Occupation: Hi
Publication Title: Santa Barbara, California, City Directory, 1972

He was born in 1901, too old to be Zodiac…how about a son? I think this guy was associated with something called KENWOOD PRESS. Anybody ever hear of that?

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 1:09 pm

Of all the Zodiac cases, the Stine murder is the one which has the least amount of police records released.

Zelms was closest to the paassenger, and would have had a better look.
He must have written a statement of what he saw. True, he was killed in the line of duty a few months later, but he still should have written something like Foulke did. Does anyone know if such a statement exists from Zelms?

I am not suprised that psychiatrists and probably other doctor specialties live there. It has to be upper middle class professionals. In the hangout/bay area, I will have to post the wealthiest area, Pacific Heights, where Dianne Feinstein, Willie Brown and other millionaires live. It is from the same year – 1969.

bayarea60s, Subject: Z’s Plan Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:38 pm

Morf….Z was on the N. side of Jackson closest to the park, a little over a 1/2 block walk from where Foukes and Zelms saw him.

Z had no idea he would within minutes of his murder of Stine, have a cop coming up his back end, and run into 2 SFPD cops who could ID him.

If he had a car in the neighborhood, he would have gotten in it and been gone from the scene. Some have suggested Z then drove around to a vantage point to watch the action? He didn’t know there would be any action in the park, or anywhere else. To imagine Z driving around the neighborhood to pick out a spot to me is absurd. To think he would just sit in his car on the street, in my opinion he wouldn’t do that either.

Now the empty offices around Spruce, Dr’s. etc., brings up an interesting thought. We know he was in a place where he could hear the action, he gives no indication that he could see anything.

bayarea60s, Subject: Why PH? Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:46 pm

I’ve always felt why Z chose PH was due to Manson. Charlie went into the richer areas of LA, and got a ton of publicity. Z, not to be outdone chose PH for that reason. Z was a media hog. Between Manson and the moon landing he had a lot of competition that summer. I think the PH scene began driving Z away from his Z persona and back to killing without bravado….It had become hotter I’m sure then he really wanted.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:47 pm

So where was the nearest phone booth?

I think we have really derailed this thread and there are numerous other threads this information would be better suited in. I’m afraid we might be missing some good info later when we try and search where this stuff was posted!

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:00 pm

Morf, you wondered why so many names at that one address ? Some of these homes had rooms for rent, some where apts. I didn’t see all of the street numbers for Maple listed in your list, there were some in the low 200 numbers on Maple near the park.
I thought that just because Zodiac was last seen on the north side of Jackson, doesn’t mean he couldn’t cross the street and go down Maple in the other direction back towards Washington ? I saw only one house in that direction that could over look the park, it was taller than the rest and had windows near the roof.
It is a good idea that you check for these names in other Zodiac kill areas, but these people who lived in Santa Barbara need to be placed there closer to 1963. Like R. Hunter who’s father did live in Santa Barbara in 1963 who had a connection to Donna Lass.

Myself I would be looking for someone who possibly lived in S.F., who had a connection to living or working in Vallejo /Napa/ Benicia , then see if I could connect him to Riverside or Santa Barbara.
Because we know for sure he killed in Benicia, Vallejo ,Napa, then S.F.
If he was a construction worker or traveling salesman , he could be anywhere at any time. If he was unable to keep a job for any length of time he could move to where ever work was.
Lots of If’s !

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:05 pm

So where was the nearest phone booth?

I think we have really derailed this thread and there are numerous other threads this information would be better suited in. I’m afraid we might be missing some good info later when we try and search where this stuff was posted!

LOL, I think that is a valid question Tahoe. We actually looked to see where one was , but it was too far away for him to make a call . I think he knew that and that was why he felt he would have to take some evidence with him and put it in a letter instead.

bayarea60s, Subject: Good Points Sandy Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:49 am

I do think Z was once based in SF or worked there, only because of the mailings he did from there. The one postmark from Pleasanton always stood out to me. It always reminded me of a guy travelling from SF to LA and on his way out of town. I’ve always heard of these serials when in their killing mode will travle for long periods of time to kill. so many variables. he may have never lived in N. Ca. as far as any registry goes. As Z 3 of his 4 N. Ca. known kills, were late at night, all were on weekends. Friday could have been his travel day. Comes into Bay Area, does his thing, and splits back to wherever. That would be pretty smart.

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:10 pm

BA 60’s, I agree with everything you mentioned ,including the Pleasanton letter being sent on his way down south . I think he was there to see it on the front page, but had possibly another reason to go there at that time.

bayarea60s, Subject: The Ultimate Irony Thu Nov 15, 2012 2:39 am

I’ve thought before wouldn’t it be ironic, and really smart of Z, to commit his crimes in N. Ca. and soon thereafter migrate to S. Ca., and visa a versa. Not saying Z , or any Serial Killer would think of that, but it would sure make it hard on LE.

onewhoknows, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 15, 2012 12:26 pm

He had knowledge of Police systems and Police politics, and understood that if he committed his
crimes in different jurisdictions that it would confuse law enforcment and that they would
not co-operate well with each other, hoarding their evidence.

sandy betts, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 15, 2012 12:36 pm

He had knowledge of Police systems and Police politics, and understood that if he committed his
crimes in different jurisdictions that it would confuse law enforcment and that they would
not co-operate well with each other, hoarding their evidence.

Exactly ! Although to hear them talk they will say they shared everything.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 15, 2012 2:15 pm

As I understand it, there was some sort of rivalry among the jurisdictions to see who would apprehend the killer. Vallejo PD was suspicions of SFPD, and
none of them shared everything in regards to information.

Today, things are different, thanks to computerized records and such.

Nachtsider, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 15, 2012 4:01 pm

He had knowledge of Police systems and Police politics, and understood that if he committed his
crimes in different jurisdictions that it would confuse law enforcment and that they would
not co-operate well with each other, hoarding their evidence.

No evidence of this.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 15, 2012 6:40 pm

He had knowledge of Police systems and Police politics, and understood that if he committed his
crimes in different jurisdictions that it would confuse law enforcment and that they would
not co-operate well with each other, hoarding their evidence.

No evidence of this.

It is interesting to speculate what one may or may not know, it this case, pertaining to police operations. I don’t think anyone can say, for a certainty what the killer knew, let alone who he was.

One reason we may get the idea that he knew something about LE procedures is that he deliberately committed his crimes in different jurisdictions. That is a fact. Whether the killer knew that officials from one jurisdiction do not mess with another is something we are not aware of, but can get the impression that the killer was smart and planned his crimes out. Beyond that, and the evidence that is known, the rest of anything about the killer is left up to guessing and opinions.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Thu Nov 15, 2012 6:45 pm

It would seem (LB car door), Zodiac thought he commited two separate murders in "Vallejo"…so was he thinking along the lines of jurisdiction?

Also, long before Avery’s revelation about CJB, LE in Napa and Riverside had communicated, and there were meetings amongst many police departments trying to solve this case. There is a newspaper article about it here at this site. Lots of top investigators got together right after Stine was killed. I do believe they truly tried and a lot of the "not sharing" was just not the case.

bayarea60s, Subject: T27 Fri Nov 16, 2012 12:18 am

Tahoe…

I agree. I don’t think anything the individual PD’s came upon that would relate to other PD’s cases would be hidden from them. It’s easy to look back and say well they should have done this or that. Today the way info is shared is generally much better, but it was what it was back then.
We can see in the video that within SFPD, there was an attitude. I don’t think it’s unique to SFPD at all. But we hear from both Foukes and Pellessetti, more or less, many things were left to the detectives to figure out. Not the first time I’ve heard that there’s animosity between the uniforms and the suits. It was what it was.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 16, 2012 12:52 am

I think it was probably a lot like these message boards.

There were probably just some individuals who didn’t like each other. Whether from other departments or within their own.

bayarea60s, Subject: Cops Fri Nov 16, 2012 3:15 pm

T27…

I know a lot of my east coast cop relatives, started as uniforms, and progressed their way to suits and said it was always an issue, between cops and detectives. I don’t think any detective / cop who came upon pertinent info (which I don’t think there was ever that much of), would keep it from other PD’s. Who else did they have to bounce stuff off of, but each other? Should they have had more meetings? I don’t know, if they didn’t have anything new to share, which they could do over the phone, why meet? They could have collectively maybe came up with a rule. whatever you have in your evidence room, stays there. No taking it home for show and tell or whatever the reason.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 16, 2012 5:11 pm

I have talked with 2 different cops, in two different jurisdictions investigating Zodiac, that share the opinion that Zodiac was somebody that they talked to in their investigation….Man, that makes me want to get my hands on that list of suspects & POI’s. Napa alone has a Suspect matrix of over 200 people(not including peopel cleared back in the 60’s and 70’s)

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Fri Nov 16, 2012 7:09 pm

Interesting, but I am not surprised. Trouble is, there was not enough evidence to charge any of the suspects.

bayarea60s, Subject: SFPD Sat Nov 17, 2012 7:31 am

I know the number released for years that SFPD said it investigated some 2,500 people. And with all the independent PD’s along the peninsula, down to SJ, and the East Bay side, they were all on alert too. So anyone they ran into along the way, I could see that number easily being over 3,000. So I would hope somewhere in there was Z. It would be great to see the list, but I don’t think that’s gonna happen.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 17, 2012 9:26 am

Here’s the big problem as I see it. These various jurisdictions have opened and closed the case multiple times. Sometimes, it seems like one agency doesnt know what the other has done. Recently, the DOJ dropped their investigation,but its not like they gave all of their materials to SF & NAPA,so SF & NAPA doesnt know what the DOJ had.

I really liked the idea of DOJ running it all,that way, all the agencies, Napa,SFPD,Vallejo,Solano even Riverside,Santa Barbara, could pull ALL of their info into one giant collection. For instance, what if there was a common suspect name turned in by NAPA,SFPD,and even RIVERSIDE….that would have to raise some eyebrows and they would likely pay special attention to a common suspect in various confirmed & unconfirmed Z crimes

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 17, 2012 1:09 pm

Morf, I take it you mean the state Department of Justice, as this was not a Federal case.

Yes, having all the information would make it easier to find similar behavior between the suspects, narrow it down and perhaps put some of them who
match patterns under observation.

Also with the complete list, the state could verify if the suspect is still around or not.

morf13, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 17, 2012 1:22 pm

Thats correct TRAIN, the CA Dept of Justice

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Nov 17, 2012 1:41 pm

I have been away from CA too long now (wish that would change), but I try to keep updated.

I heard talk about taxes being raised…..it would be nice to channel some funds to CA DEPT of Justice (Criminal Information and Investigation) for the purposes of such a project Morf mentioned. EVERY part of CA government from State down to cities are hurting. Not to even attempt to get into the political spectrum, but it would be a good idea for the state auditors to
carefully channel where the incoming funds are being spent.

onewhoknows, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Jan 07, 2013 11:46 am

So this thread kind of died, but with all the discussion about the Cheri Jo Bates murder, it made me want to continue in this vein.
The original idea of this thread was to cut away any "evidence" which could not be confirmed, such as officer Voulke’s belief he
saw the Zodiac Killer the night of the Stine Murder. And so this brings into mind this whole Cheri Jo Bates thing.
Is Cheri Jo Bates a confirmed Zodiac event? So far, the evidence we have is Sherwood Morrill determining that the person
who wrote the Bates letters and the desk poem, as the same person who wrote the Zodiac letters? Is that correct? and then
of course the JackAss himself, Zodiac taking credit for "crimes" "down there" meaning Southern California.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:29 pm

So this thread kind of died, but with all the discussion about the Cheri Jo Bates murder, it made me want to continue in this vein.
The original idea of this thread was to cut away any "evidence" which could not be confirmed, such as officer Voulke’s belief he
saw the Zodiac Killer the night of the Stine Murder. And so this brings into mind this whole Cheri Jo Bates thing.
Is Cheri Jo Bates a confirmed Zodiac event? So far, the evidence we have is Sherwood Morrill determining that the person
who wrote the Bates letters and the desk poem, as the same person who wrote the Zodiac letters? Is that correct? and then
of course the JackAss himself, Zodiac taking credit for "crimes" "down there" meaning Southern California.

I would have to say that since all we have in the CJB case is Morrill’s handwriting verification then the answer would be "no". She should not be included.

Bottom line, since handwriting alone would not be enough to convict someone, in regards to THIS thread, I say no. It is not 100% confirmed…and never will be unless he is caught.

onewhoknows, Subject: THE ZODIAC LETTERS CONFIRMED Sat Feb 16, 2013 1:27 pm

I understand there is some consensus of "known" and questionable Zodiac correspondence.
I also recently read that there were hundreds of fake Zodiac letters received by newspapers
that we have never seen?
Anyway I would like to see your list of known and unverified zoidac letters and why.
Here is what I beleive to be real Zodiac letters based on my knowledge of my suspect Peter Plante.
All of the letters upto the Melvin Belli letter are Zodiac’s. My suspect would have never used the words,
"please help me", unless in sarcasm, so the some of the verbage in the Belli letter seems off. I understand
a piece of Paul Stine’s short was sent with this letter. If Zodiac sent this, it was meant to intimidate Belli.
All of the letters to 1971 are Zodiac. SLA I would say isn’t Zodiac.
Yes on the Badlands letter, which Peter admitted to sending in, while his mother was present and acknowledged
as assiting him in 1978-79.
No, on the Count Marco letter, that is not Zodiac.
Yes on the May 1978 Letter. That was when we were married, on May 20, 1978, I was 19 years old. The verbage
in the May 78 letter matches what Peter would quote, including hatred of Cheif Darryl Gates (why?) and the use
of the word "Judas", which his father used with regularity.
On the unconfirmed and suspected Zodiac letters, once again based on Peter’s own words, the Confession Letter
sounds like him. When I left him in 1999, he had to be restrained one Christmas Eve, because he was threatening
to take his wire nippers and cut off my female parts to hang on a billboard for all to see.
Yes on the July 1978 letter, Peter took me to the scene of Lake Berryessa attack that month without saying anything about Zodiac.
No on the typed letter from 1978. I think Zodiac was avoiding typewriters because they could be identified easily, each with it’s own fingerprint.
Yes on the 1986 letter, I came from Sacramento and had lots of family up there, Peter was in Sacramento frequently. In the summer of 1986 Peter’s
behavior bcame dark and I left him with our son for about 6 months. Yes on the Holloween Cars letter, I sat and watched the movie with him.
Yes on the Pines Card. I will need more time to research the rest of the unconnfirmed material.
It would be interesting to see how my guesses line up with the DNA results from the letters. Mike R?

Nachtsider, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Feb 16, 2013 5:32 pm

Onewhoknows, is it not possible for you to make posts without mentioning your suspect? It gets tedious.

onewhoknows, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Feb 16, 2013 5:53 pm

Well I was hoping that you all would post which letters you feel are genuine Zodiac’s, and which are not, and why?
I will try to keep the posts about Peter in my thread, Onewhoknows POI. Something always makes you uncomfortable
about Peter, I wonder why?

Nachtsider, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Feb 16, 2013 7:31 pm

He doesn’t make me uncomfortable. It’s your constantly mentioning him that proves annoying. We get it; you think he’s Zodiac. Not everyone else does.

Zamantha, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sat Feb 16, 2013 9:28 pm

Onewhoknows, is it not possible for you to make posts without mentioning your suspect? It gets tedious.

Dear Onewhoknows, I/we understand your passion for your POI, but I have to validate Nachts post and request. We need to keep the threads on topic. Most posters like to look at letters, evidence & ideas without a POI in mind. Sorry, us Mods got a "little" lax in keeping this on topic. Appreciate your help. There’s a thread for Onewhoknows POI and all others.
Ok, back to topic.
Much Thanks, Zam*

Qz1, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Sun Feb 17, 2013 7:13 pm

Onewhoknows, is it not possible for you to make posts without mentioning your suspect? It gets tedious.

Dear Onewhoknows, I/we understand your passion for your POI, but I have to validate Nachts post and request. We need to keep the threads on topic. Most posters like to look at letters, evidence & ideas without a POI in mind. Sorry, us Mods got a "little" lax in keeping this on topic. Appreciate your help. There’s a thread for Onewhoknows POI and all others.
Ok, back to topic.
Much Thanks, Zam*

Is there not someone else to whom this would also apply?

onewhoknows, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:56 am

As the wife of the Zodiac Killer you would think I would get a little more respect…ha,ha,ha…
Yes for the sake of clarity it is best we keep our comments under our respective POI threads.
Having said that Peter Plante has not been eliminated as a suspect as have all the other suspects formally
listed on the Zodiac websites, correct me if am wrong please. And yes, plenty of people post while relating
to their POI, not just me. I am quite used to people not believing me, it doesn’t matter now that Peter is dead.
Zed’s dead, baby. I no longer live under the threat of my life.
This thread determined that so far, that Foukes is not considered confirmed evidence, and that Cheri Jo’s murder is
not a confirmed Zodiac killing. All work involved in solving the Zodiac crimes should now focus on what we do know.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:52 pm

I think what we are striving for in this forum is NOT POI’s, because, having been a Federal Agent, the EVIDENCE must match the suspect.

Therefore, the evidence must be examined to determine is it is genuine and can be confirmed usable. That is my understanding of the topic. I could be wrong, and I think we need to examine what is out there and determine whether we think the evidence is authentic or fabricated. We are aware there are so many Zodiac letters, and probabaly a lot more were sent that were bogus.

Once these facts are analyzed for authenticity, then we can compare them to POI’s (in another thread). At least, that is my understanding of it.

Speaking of evidence, I must state that LE does withhold crucial evidence just in case they find someone. For example, in the Black Dahlia, there are three critical pieces of evidence which has never been releasesd. A number of men came forward claiming to be the responsible. By questioning them, based on those three critical pieces, they were released.

The same circumstances apply to the Zodiac case, and in all killings. When I was in NIS, I could go into a police station, show my badge, but the police were not obligated, or probably would not show me what they had. The ONLY exception was if the killer attacked a Naval person, which would give us jurisdiction; then, agents would be able to go in an demand to see all evidence. It would be the team that was "on call" when the Naval involvement happened that would work the case.

Other that the above, NIS (now NCIS) or the FBI could not become involved, unless invited, or asked for assistance. They were in some circumstances.
The FBI could do ONLY what was requested – not initiate investigations on their own.

In the Zodiac case, and NCIS, that never happened.

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:04 pm

I thought it would be helpful to create a thread of KNOWN confirmed Zodiac evidence, so that
we might get a better idea of who Zodiac was. Each Item should be opened as a YES confirmed
or NO.

For example, we don’t know for sure that Foukes saw the Zodiac Killer that night, it could have been any man.
Foukes in a NO

We do know that Mike Magaeu did see his killer, so that ID would be YES
The teenagers saw the killer of Paul Stine, so that would be YES

We take confirmed eyewitness descriptions and create the physcial Zodiac from that.

I appreciate all the open mindedness hoping to find something overlooked, but let us look at what we have.

Personally if your suggesting we take Mike Mageau’s description as the one to go by, then my first question would be, which one shall we take? The one where he claims that ALA shot him, or the ammended version where he claims Darlene called the man ‘Richard’? And is this the suspect that, as in the original statement, happened upon him and Darlene at BRS, or is this the suspect that chased them all around town before he and Darlene decided that rather than drive to a Police Station, the best way to lose thier unwanted guest, would be to drive into an isolated, remote, dark parking lot?

I’m not blaiming Mike in one sense, the young man went through a harrowing experience, and i just think that either he is deliberately making up things because he was so traumatised, or he’s making them up to fit whatever he feels people want to hear. For example, ALA was a known suspect in the Zodiac case by the time he was asked to look at the photo line up with Allen in it. He would have known of Allen being suspected before even being shown his picture. He also never mentioned anything about being chased to BRS park, untill it was rumoured that Darlene may have had a stalker or a man she was afraid of that ‘Followed her’. Then we get the updated version of a man chasing them. Mike says Darlene didn’t say anything about the man who pulled up, and when asked originally did the man say anything, said "No, he just started shooting"
He also states that he and Darlene thought that it was a cop who had pulled in behind them (this would be consistant Darlene having her ID out when found). If they had been chased all over town, why would they think this was a cop? Wouldn’t it be likely that it was Darlene’s stalker? And finally, when Tom V was contacted by Blane, and Richard Gaikowski was touted as Zodiac and became a big topic for discussion and well known, Mike said in the interview for the documentary ‘This is the Zodiac Speaking’ "I believe Darlene may have said his name was Richard, i think, as i recall, she said his name was Richard".

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:32 pm

However, having said that, i think it is reasonable to take his description of the man as having some merit to it, based on it seeming to be consistant with the later description given by Cecilia (shortly before she passed away), and Bryan Hartnell’s. Mike said his assailant was a stocky man, with brown or dark coloured curly hair and had a large, round face. Hartnell seems to varify this when he gave the comment "Because i could see under the hood, It kinda looked like it was combed, it was brownish, you know, dark brown hair". He said he saw the hair as it hung down over the mans forehead. Cecilia also gave a description at Berryessa before to LE before the paramedics arrived. Her account is retold by the officer who was asking her questions on scene "Bryan and i were laying here on the blanket just chatting, and i saw this guy, he was coming down the hillside. He seemed to stop and watch us, and he’s just there looking at us." Asked how far away the man was she pointed to an area, where the Detective then said ‘That looks about 200 to 300 yards away’. She went on "Thats where he was when i first saw him. I went back talking to Bryan but would glance up every now and then and he’d be closer, and closer, untill in the end he was about 75 feet away and i told Bryan he had come down here, and when i he asked where, i looked and he had gone, he stepped behind a tree. The tree was 50 to 75 feet away, and when he stepped out he was pulling a hood over his head." The detective then asked her did she see him clearly before he put on the hood and she said "Yes". Dtv ‘What race was he?’ CS "White. Dtv ‘What colour was his hair? CS "It was Brown. It hung down over his forehead and was showing through the eye holes also." Dtv ‘How tall was he, look at me, i’m 5’10’ SC "Well he’s about your height, maybe an inch taller". Dtv. ‘How much did he weigh?’ CS "He was overweight, bulky looking. He was wearing all dark clothes and his jacket was bulky looking".

Bryan did later say that his jacket was the bulky looking thick type which is designed to make people appear bigger and admitted that even though he appeared large, he could have been skinny under the jacket for all he knew.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:41 pm

I wouldn’t put too much into what Collins (Napa Detective) says today. He also said they found the "three girls" by canvasing the lake with the composite the day of the killings. :no:

People REALLY need to go by those reports and what was stated at the time.

40 years of books and movies and discussion, and for Mike Mageau, a tough life.

In the police report, Mike describes the man as having "light brown, almost BLONDE, curly hair…which goes along with the composite description–with a buzz cut eliminating the curls. LB is the one that doesn’t mesh….for whatever reason.

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:54 pm

I wouldn’t put too much into what Collins (Napa Detective) says today. He also said they found the "three girls" by canvasing the lake with the composite the day of the killings. :no:

People REALLY need to go by those reports and what was stated at the time.

40 years of books and movies and discussion, and for Mike Mageau, a tough life.

In the police report, Mike describes the man as having "light brown, almost BLONDE, curly hair…which goes along with the composite description–with a buzz cut eliminating the curls. LB is the one that doesn’t mesh….for whatever reason.

I’d say the LB description is likely to be more accurate due to the fact it happened in daylight, and even though Z was wearing a hood, Bryan said he could see through the eye holes and saw his hair. The Description of the Presidio Heights offender possibly having light coloured hair (Blonde or Reddish tint), Fouke states in his report that this could very possibly have been distorted by the street lights.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:13 pm

I wouldn’t put too much into what Collins (Napa Detective) says today. He also said they found the "three girls" by canvasing the lake with the composite the day of the killings. :no:

People REALLY need to go by those reports and what was stated at the time.

40 years of books and movies and discussion, and for Mike Mageau, a tough life.

In the police report, Mike describes the man as having "light brown, almost BLONDE, curly hair…which goes along with the composite description–with a buzz cut eliminating the curls. LB is the one that doesn’t mesh….for whatever reason.

I’d say the LB description is likely to be more accurate due to the fact it happened in daylight, and even though Z was wearing a hood, Bryan said he could see through the eye holes and saw his hair. The Description of the Presidio Heights offender possibly having light coloured hair (Blonde or Reddish tint), Fouke states in his report that this could very possibly have been distorted by the street lights.

I have no doubt what-so-ever Bryan saw dark brown, combed hair.

Fouke stated the guy had light colored hair that was "possibly graying", but that could have been from the lighting. Must have been some darn good lighting on Z that night! It was like Fouke snapped a photo with his brain–so many details for whizzin’ right by!

Just saying that the only time Zodiac was every described with dark brown hair was at LB.

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Feb 18, 2013 5:20 pm

I wouldn’t put too much into what Collins (Napa Detective) says today. He also said they found the "three girls" by canvasing the lake with the composite the day of the killings. :no:

People REALLY need to go by those reports and what was stated at the time.

40 years of books and movies and discussion, and for Mike Mageau, a tough life.

In the police report, Mike describes the man as having "light brown, almost BLONDE, curly hair…which goes along with the composite description–with a buzz cut eliminating the curls. LB is the one that doesn’t mesh….for whatever reason.

I’d say the LB description is likely to be more accurate due to the fact it happened in daylight, and even though Z was wearing a hood, Bryan said he could see through the eye holes and saw his hair. The Description of the Presidio Heights offender possibly having light coloured hair (Blonde or Reddish tint), Fouke states in his report that this could very possibly have been distorted by the street lights.

I have no doubt what-so-ever Bryan saw dark brown, combed hair.

Fouke stated the guy had light colored hair that was "possibly graying", but that could have been from the lighting. Must have been some darn good lighting on Z that night! It was like Fouke snapped a photo with his brain–so many details for whizzin’ right by!

Just saying that the only time Zodiac was every described with dark brown hair was at LB.

Tahoe i have to agree that Fouke seems to have recalled a tremendous amount of detail for such a short sighting. To quote Fouke’s direct response to being asked, How fast would you say you were going? He said "Well, untill i saw him, probably about 35 or 40 MPH on a 25 MPH street. Slowed down as we passed him, i don’t know….still rolling, saw that it was a white male…..step on the Gas. 5, 10 15 seconds tops from first spotting him, to passing him."

Lets take Foukes average of 10 seconds. In that time he was able to remember the man walked with a lumbering motion, maybe a limp. Without stopping his vehicle & from a distance at night, could see his hair was light coloured and detect the odd few grey hairs. Is able to remember, and describe in great detail, what the man was wearing…Quote "Saw a white male adult, dressed in a derby, or 3 quarter waist length jacket with elastic at the waist, and on the cuffs, and regular flap down collars. He had a crew cut, he was wearing rust coloured pleated trousers which were unusual for the time. He had on engineering type boots, low cut shoe 3 quarters of the way in length, and tan in colour."

All this from 5 – 10 seconds, 15 at tops, of seeing him on a dark street.

I said in a different thread the other day that i believed Zodiac was telling the truth when he said not only that he spoke with police, but also telling the truth when he said " I was walking down the hill to the park when this cop car pulled up + one of them called me over…" I believe the only realistic way Fouke could have seen, and subsequently remembered, so much detail about Zodiac is if he’d actually stopped and spoke to him at a close range.

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Feb 18, 2013 5:25 pm

And Fouke’s comment of "He was wearing rust coloured pleated trousers" is striking. Were the trousers ‘Rust coloured’ because they were soaked on blood? According to the teens the man was in the cab at one point with Stines head resting on his lap as he was leaning over him to rip his shirt. If Stines head was on Zodiac’s lap, after he had been shot in the head, Zodiac’s trousers would have been absolutely soaked with Stines blood, so much so, that they probably appeared rust coloured completely.

trainmaster, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:40 pm

Very good theories, my British friend.

If Foulke did actually see Zodiac and even talk to him, it was a split-second, more like a millisecond. It would be incredible, especially in that lighting, for one to take in so much detail, while trying to rush to a crime scene.

One thing I don’t think anyone can argue about – luck was on Zodiac’s side that night – but, he sure encountered some unexpected events he did not plan on.

AK Wilks, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:47 pm

And Fouke’s comment of "He was wearing rust coloured pleated trousers" is striking. Were the trousers ‘Rust coloured’ because they were soaked on blood? According to the teens the man was in the cab at one point with Stines head resting on his lap as he was leaning over him to rip his shirt. If Stines head was on Zodiac’s lap, after he had been shot in the head, Zodiac’s trousers would have been absolutely soaked with Stines blood, so much so, that they probably appeared rust coloured completely.

If the man’s trousers were covered on blood, and Fouke did not see that, and just reported rust colored pants, then he is an idiot and one of the stupidist policeman ever. Or was practically blind.

Pretty sure rust colored just describes the color of the pants, red/brown.

traveller1st, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:06 am

I second that. Under not great lighting conditions blood would most likely make them appear black.

Qz1, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:47 pm

Reflective perhaps? ‘Neath the the street lights, moonlight and the red and white technicolor strobe of the oncoming cruiser.

Jem, Subject: Re: YES or NO Confirmed Evidence Wed Feb 20, 2013 3:30 am

His pants would have been soaked, but not completely. Not all the way down to the hem or cuff. They would have been splotchy. Is it possible that Fouke reasoned something like, "Hmm.. very near to a crime scene I encountered the killer, whose pants were soaked in blood. If I had noticed that his pants were quite wet, I would have have been suspicious, because he could have been an accomplice. But I didn’t notice, and that must be because.. hmm.. his pants must have been rust colored."

I’m not saying Fouke lied. Or didn’t. Just that memory is volatile, and this kind of reasoning might well have caused him to falsely "remember" rust colored pants. Someone, think it was Nachtsider? mentioned that black pants would hide a blood stain better. Dark blue or navy also. What I wonder is – if Fouke had realized this, would we now be reading a different description of Z’s pants?