|
Post by MikeR on Oct 29, 2014 15:27:21 GMT -8
Glad to see my memory is not going....yet. Mike
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Nov 1, 2014 10:35:59 GMT -8
I was told that it was A.P who had made this statement. If I am wrong, I apologise for the error.
But anyway, in regards to the FBI document & it's comment of " Eight year old witness in murder of cab driver Identified *Redacted Name* as possible subject in this matter" I am going to file another FOIA for the release of this suspects name.
I don't know about others, but for me personally, this one single redacted word/name in this document could be the key to breaking this case. The statement, after all, is clear in it's implication in that an on scene witness who saw the offender at the Cab, subsequently IDENTIFIED someone as being the man who he/she saw at the cab and therefore, by default, identified the Zodiac Killer. The questions I have are natural: 1) Why has this never been made known that a witness identified someone in any of the documentaries or official media reports? Why did it not get recorded in any of the police reports? At Lake Herman we see Witness Statements recorded in police reports from numerous witnesses including James Owen, Peggy and Homer Your & Stella Borges. Same with the other Zodiac crime reports. Yet, in this instance we see three witnesses in the report that dialed 911, and that's it. None of these three are the witness that ID'd the suspect because the three have their ages listed in the report and none of them are eight. You'd assume that in a case that lacks any positive Identifications via prints, DNA etc, the positive ID of a specific person as Zodiac by an on scene witness would be the best lead and widely known. Yet the reality is, nothing was made public regarding this then, or now barring a single footnote in one page of a FBI document.
2) Why has this eight year old not come forward or spoken about what, or more importantly who, he saw on Oct. 11th that night? With all other witnesses that have their surnames redacted we now know who they are. There isn't even a record of an eight year old giving a statement, let alone who the eight year old may have been.
If the man named in this document is still alive then they won't release his name. If this is why they are not replying and releasing this name then it can't be because it is, as I suspect it is, Kjell Qvale because he's deceased.
|
|
|
Post by Norse on Nov 1, 2014 10:55:01 GMT -8
Good questions, Welsh.
Part of the problem, as I see it, is that the Stine murder (for armchair enthusiasts like myself) suffers from a lack of reports in general. There is very little beyond AP's report. And that was made on the night - the investigation went on for years and there must be other reports out there. Toschi and Armstrong spoke to the teen witnesses, they must have spoken to Fouke and Zelms, they interviewed various other people too (including Arthur L. Allen - who was interviewed by Armstrong, IIRC), there must have been forensic reports (what is available here is just a basic form, not the actual comments from the people who examined the evidence, including Stine's shirt), and so forth - none of this is available in the form of reports.
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Nov 2, 2014 8:38:06 GMT -8
Good questions, Welsh. Part of the problem, as I see it, is that the Stine murder (for armchair enthusiasts like myself) suffers from a lack of reports in general. There is very little beyond AP's report. And that was made on the night - the investigation went on for years and there must be other reports out there. Toschi and Armstrong spoke to the teen witnesses, they must have spoken to Fouke and Zelms, they interviewed various other people too (including Arthur L. Allen - who was interviewed by Armstrong, IIRC), there must have been forensic reports (what is available here is just a basic form, not the actual comments from the people who examined the evidence, including Stine's shirt), and so forth - none of this is available in the form of reports. I agree Norse with your comment of " Part of the problem, as I see it, is that the Stine murder (for armchair enthusiasts like myself) suffers from a lack of reports in general." I have said myself previously that I find it strange that nobody saw or remembers seeing a cab stop and pick up a white male with Horn-Rimmed glasses in or near Mason/Geary St. at around 9:30pm because this is the Theater District. Maybe we can chalk that up to the fact there were too many people there and Zodiac was lost in the crowd so to speak. But it's not so easy to explain how he wasn't seen by more than three teens after he shot Paul. He murdered Paul not just on 'A' street, but at an intersection connecting Four streets which means he was 4 times more likely to encounter a passing vehicle at that location. Then you have the walk down Cherry, then down Jackson to Maple and for that entire walk he's flanked by homes on both sides. Pelissetti, speaking of his responding to the radio call of a robbery and possible assault at Cherry & Washington, said: " We (Himself and Frank Peda), fortunately, were very close & responded to the scene, and were able to do so with red light and siren at 9:55 at night, and got there very quickly." So Armond is responding with with siren and lights activated, Zodiac himself writes he was aware that they were using fire truck sirens to mask the sirens of their 'Prowl cars' and we know Fouke & Zelms are coming up Jackson St. Yet, given all this commotion, there are no reports indicating that anyone other than Fouke & Zelms saw anyone in the area that night and even they didn't publicly acknowledge this until Zodiac forced them into it by informing the Chronicle that '2 cops pulled a goof.' If Fouke & Zelms saw him but said nothing, are there other's also who's witness statements are being repressed? Well one is for sure, that of the eight year old's. "Toschi and Armstrong spoke to the teen witnesses, they must have spoken to Fouke and Zelms, they interviewed various other people too." Fouke said: " I never spoke to Toschi that I personally remember. He may have been the Inspector who came out and asked me about the composite drawing and I told him the suspect was older & heavier." (This is why I have long thought the well known wanted poster sketch of Zodiac is inaccurate because, according to Fouke, the age is wrong aswel as his weight.) And finally, In regards to the witness reports, or the lack thereof, the eight year old witness is spoken of in the FBI report in such a way as to imply there was an official record or statement taken from this witness because it's worded in that Document as though the receiver of the info should be aware of the situation with this witness. It states "For Attn. of Ident. Division, Eight year old witness in murder of cab driver identified *redacted* as possible subject in this matter." Now if the FBI were not aware of this witness, then they'd receive that communication with an air of "What eight year old witness in the murder of cab driver?" But that's not what the wording implies. So a record must have been made of this. I have been confident in my own mind for a long time now that Zodiac's threat of " School children make nice targets, I think I shall wipe out a school bus some morning..." was directed specifically at the eight year old witness, who would be a 'school child.' A school age child who Zodiac knew had Identified him to the police & was threatening this kid to shut his mouth in that letter. Zodiac does hint, indirectly, that this threat of wiping out a school bus was cryptic or did not mean what it literally said because he said "If you cops think I am going to take on a school bus the way I stated I was, you deserve to have holes in your heads." I take specific note of his saying 'The way I stated I was.." which to me is his way of saying "The way I said i would do it was not relevant, the symbolic ref. to school child was." If this is correct then it means that Zodiac knows who this Kid is that ID's him.
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Nov 2, 2014 8:46:31 GMT -8
But the question still remains, why is there no official record or report regarding the eight year old and his witness testimony? Some have suggested in the past that it could possibly be down to the witnesses age and his/her being a minor. Well that is just ignoring the fact that the three on scene witnesses who were all recorded by name & age are all themselves minors with, if memory serves me correctly, the youngest of the three not yet having reached his teens at age 11.
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Nov 2, 2014 9:04:36 GMT -8
See now if I were the cynical type, which I am, then I can only conclude the reason for this being concealed or not part of any official police report, is due to a deliberate and willing cover-up and the only reason that authorities would do this is because the person ID'd as the cabbies killer by the eight year old was someone that was either highly influential and powerful enough to really be, as Z declared himself - 'Crack-Proof' or, because he was a member of Law Enforcement.
It's not only this lack of witness report that makes this a plausible theory, it also explains why Fouke & Zelms themselves did not mention their encounter, and when they did, explained away their reason for allowing him to walk away as there being a mix up in ethnic/racial description by some bumbling dispatcher. It's highly convenient see that there simply is no mention anywhere what-so-ever of an incorrect suspect description being broadcast anywhere within the immediate weeks following the incident... Not until Zodiac decides to force their hand and go public with this & rub their faces in it & force them to reply to this claim he is making of "PS: 2 cops pulled a goof..." do we get an admission by Fouke to seeing him. The Dpt knows that there will now be uproar by the public who will demand to have the SFPD answer why they let this man walk away when he's literally within arms length of two cops.
The, and only then, do we get given the "Ah, yes, but what we forgot to mention until now is that, ermmm, some dispatcher hears the word "White" and interprets it as 'Black.' This is the reason we allowed the white guy to stumble off into obscurity and legend. Why did we never mention seeing the white male on Jackson? Ummm, next question please! Why did we make no mention of the incorrect ethnic broadcast until the offender had written and took the piss put of us by revealing we'd let him go? Errr.... Pass!
To borrow a quote from our lunatic friend.... "BULL SHIT!"
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Nov 2, 2014 9:53:46 GMT -8
Call me nuts, but I have even considered Toschi as Zodiac. Now before people call for my public stoning for blaspheme, give me a chance to offer grounds as to why....
1. David Toschi has returned to Washington & Cherry Streets Intersection every single year on Oct. 11th since the murder back in 1969. Now what other type of personality do we know of that will persistently return to the scene of their crime to relive it? We all know the answer is 'The Offender.' 2. The 'I am back with you' letter and the claim that it was a forgery written by one D. Toschi. Sherwood Morrill, speaking to the Chronicle, was asked did he agree with a colleague of his that this latest letter was indeed a forgery and one penned by Dave Toschi? Morrill replied: "That is ridiculous! The letter is genuine and matches Zodiac's previous handwriting. If Toschi wrote this letter, he wrote them all and he's the Zodiac."
3. Would explain why Fouke said nothing of seeing him on Jackson St. Would also explain why the eight year old Identifying Zodiac was kept out of the public domain, because it was one of their own.
4. Explains why, upon the receipt of the 78 letter, they kicked Toschi out of Homicide.
5. Zodiac did appear to stop actively killing after the events of October 11.
Now I am not necessarily advocating the above as being likely, it's simply a theory. The temptation is to dismiss the idea as ludicrous because of who the subject is and his title of 'Inspector.' But in reality, we are talking of serial killers, and serial killers are from all walks of life. Some are jobless uneducated bums (Ramirez) while others are employed in trusting positions (BTK).
If anyone, including myself, is egocentric enough to decide that we can rule someone out because they decided we can based on what he does for a living then that is not keeping an open mind to all avenues being a possibility.
Oooo look, that several posts in a row without reply. I was given a 'warning' over at another site for first degree thread clogging. The important people in power over there (Mods etc) I must not post 3 or more threads without reply. I apologised for posting messages on a forum for posting messages and was ordered to cease immediately or I would face the Death Penalty.
|
|
|
Post by Norse on Nov 2, 2014 10:30:29 GMT -8
Hehe, I'm gonna reply just to keep you outta trouble, Welsh...
And also to say that I have a hard time believing Toschi was Z. But the gist of what you're saying, as I interpret it, I nevertheless fully agree with it: There is no reason whatsoever to exclude ANYONE based on who or what they were. The idea that Z HAD to be this or that (a loner, a loser, blue collar, whatever) has never appealed to me.
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Nov 2, 2014 10:35:08 GMT -8
The Zodiac killer did not run away from the crime scene which would have called attention. Instead the Zodiac killer walked away from the crime scene which made it less suspicious when the police drove by on Jackson Street shortly after. For some reason, it seems that the Zodiac killer knew he was more likely to get caught if he ran away. Rich come on, you really think it was Zodiac not acting suspicious that secured his freedom that night. Here's what happened in this encounter as recalled by Don Fouke: Fouke rolls up to Maple and slows to take a look at a subject coming down the hill toward him who is approaching the Intersection himself. Whiite man see's Don's approaching cop car and quickly puts his head down to avoid eye contact. Don Fouke is about to roll up next to white man. White man turns, climbs set of steps and is now avoiding having to allow cops to see his face, nor ask him questions. So in a nut shell, upon seeing cops rapidly approaching , white male who appears to be coming from the direction of the scene itself, instantly responds by putting his head down so they can't see his face. Upon them getting closer and slowing down right next to him on the street, he reacts by turning away from them and walking in a direction going away from them and their vehicle when, had he continued on his path down Jackson, would have had to walk right by them and seems to have decided he didn't want this to happen. So after hiding your face and canging direction to avoid the cops, this isn't an act that would cause you to be suspicious? While I openly admit to having no training in Tactics of Law Enforcement nor am I a trained observer, I don't need to be to know that a man appearing to panic and do everything he can to avoid me as a police officer when a homicide has just happened 100, maybe 150 yards away, is someone I am absolutely not going to pass by and not confront. I'd be out of my car and have hands on the guy before he got to the top of the seven steps leading to 3712's driveway.
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Nov 2, 2014 11:02:20 GMT -8
Hehe, I'm gonna reply just to keep you outta trouble, Welsh... And also to say that I have a hard time believing Toschi was Z. But the gist of what you're saying, as I interpret it, I nevertheless fully agree with it: There is no reason whatsoever to exclude ANYONE based on who or what they were. The idea that Z HAD to be this or that (a loner, a loser, blue collar, whatever) has never appealed to me. I agree. That's why one criminal profiler stated the offender would be a loner, of no particular importance and a failure and a second profiler stated this will be a man who knows what it's like to have a degree of power and influence and having it, wants more and more and is going to the extreme and will be someone of a high social standing. The problem with trying to profile Zodiac based on his known MO, Victim types, kill locations and other things is that the only thing consistent about this killer is he is so inconsistent. Different gun each time. Then no gun at all but knife. Always attacks at night when it's dark until he doesn't and turns up for fancy dress at Berryessa. Always, without exception, targets young couples in lovers lanes until that exception on Oct 11. Cannot get enough of his publicity and fame basking in his being the front page story until he has a complete reversal and says he'll no longer announce his crimes and waves all rights to the credit thereof. Can always rely on him turning up to murder in one geographical area under one County's jurisdiction except for the bit where he doesn't every time, and turns up as thought he's collection as many Police agencies to pursue him as he can. Nothing about Z was 'traditional' or can be said to be a trait of a type of killer. If you told Zodiac you knew the answer, he'd abruptly change the question. I think he mixed truth with lies to confuse further in statements he made, and same goes for his poor spelling ability. Here is a ,am who can create , what one expert in cryptography said were 'extremely complex system, more than 26 symbols used to represent the 26 letters of the alphabet using multiple substitutions for high frequency letters known as homophones." Yes yes yes yes, but can he spell the word 'Bus' correctly? Lol.
|
|
|
Post by Norse on Nov 2, 2014 18:20:41 GMT -8
I think the "cab not in park" theory is plausible. It also fits several facts which are otherwise hard(er) to explain.
Why the whole song and dance in the cab? Wiping it down for prints? Handling Stine's body in the fashion described by the teens? Granted, they could have been somewhat mistaken as to precisely what Z was doing (as Welsh suggests above) - but he was doing something, a rather elaborate something. Pretty messy stuff, all things said and done, and it does NOT fit the idea of someone who has planned the thing well. It does fit the idea of a murder gone slightly wrong, though.
And furthermore, why turn east on Jackson? That's the big question for me. Well, he planned on going to Maple/Wash. He seems to say so himself and it's apparently confirmed by Stine's trip sheet (that damn trip sheet is another story, but nevermind that for now). Presumably he considered this a good spot. Maybe because it afforded him an easy route, straight north on Maple towards the intersection - and towards whatever his target was, a vehicle or a residence.
He HAD to turn east on Jackson (an otherwise bizarre move - if his intention was to get away from the scene and to safety as quickly as possible, the only sensible choice was to keep going north on Cherry until he could escape the residential area altogether) because the plan demanded it: There was something (access to something, either a vehicle or a house) near the Wash./Maple intersection which he simply had to get to.
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Nov 7, 2014 12:46:41 GMT -8
Good Points N. Your first comment/question is one that I myself have been pondering as of late, namely: "Why the whole song & dance at the cab?"
Specifically, I have long been curious as to why Zodiac took Paul's wallet & licence? We know why he ripped part of Paul's shirt off because we later see him use it as evidence to prove he is the one that shot the cab driver. But, at no time does he send a photo-copied photo of Paul's licence to the press or anyone else that we know of so, why take it? What possible reason could he have had? Hartnell offered up his cheque book, keys and wallet to Zodiac and, after Z had stabbed both he & Cecelia, walked off and left the belongings on the ground. The other day I was watching a documentary on professional Hitmen & in this documentary it was stated that sometimes, when a hit is carried out, the hitman will sometimes take the victims wallet, licence, or anything else that may confirm who he is to ensure that the correct and intended victim has been eliminated.
Now I am not suggesting that because Z took the wallet he must be a pro-hitman, the theory of 'Zodiac' being a deliberate serial killer hoax, the mad lunatic with no motive etc in order to mask the real intent & targeted victims has already been discussed many times. I bring this issue up simply because Zodiac, if we look to his previous 'events', was not a trophy collecting serial killer.
LHR - Ignores taking Faraday's class ring from the tips of his fingers. BRS - Dee's Drivers licence was found, according to Ed Rust, on the dash of the Corvair. It's very easy for Z to reach in and take it, but he does not. Lake B - Hartnell throws his wallet & keys at the feet of the masked and armed man, and after he stabs he & Cecelia, walks off and takes none of their possessions.
Yet, we arrive two short weeks later in the vicinity of Presidio Heights, and as you point out Norse, he is making a concerted effort to engage in several behavior's at the cab from wiping down the interior & exterior to taking several items off of Paul's body to take with him. As I said at the start of this post, we can safely say we know why he wanted a blood soaked swatch of Paul's shirt, but not his wallet & keys.
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Nov 7, 2014 13:08:04 GMT -8
I was also wondering if Paul had become the new owner of information regarding the Zodiac. According to Paul's sister, Paul was moonlighting as a cab driver while he was working on a degree in journalism and, Carol claims, had been due to start work for none other than the San Fran Chronicle in a few short weeks at the time of his death. Is this simply coincidence that Zodiac's final victim (that we're aware of) was about to start work at the Chronicle, the same Chronicle that The Zodiac wrote to and seemed to be his favored newspaper?
Norse you comment that this murder didn't look as though it was a well planned murder and it appears as though it may have been murder gone slightly wrong. That leads into another question of "Why only a two week period between LB and PH? Sure, the time frame between each attack got shorter each time but, from a couple Month gap to a couple of weeks? I thought myself that this murder seemed almost rushed, as though he (whoever he was) didn't have time to plan this in great detail for whatever reason. That's why I bring up the idea or possibility of Stine being seen as a threat or problem to the killer/s and there was a rush to silence the cabbie who was soon to join Avery & Co over at the Chronicle. Possibility, at least?
|
|
|
Post by Norse on Nov 7, 2014 17:34:31 GMT -8
If we accept the "car not in park" theory, Z may have had to start the engine in order to control the car properly - which means that he had to use the keys. And since he doesn't appear to have worn gloves - well, he would have left his prints all over those keys. Easier and less risky to simply pocket them rather than wiping them down and leaving them at the scene.
As for the wallet - I don't know. I suppose it's conceivable - as others have suggested in the past - that he may have planned on sending more evidence, beyond the shirt piece, in further communications, but that he never got around to doing this for whatever reason.
Is it possible that Z knew Stine - or that he at least killed him for a more specific reason (such as the Chronicle connection you mention, W)? Yes, I suppose it is. The Stine murder stands out as odd in so many ways that I don't think we should categorically rule out anything.
One possibility I have entertained at various times is that Stine may have said something, during that taxi ride, which provoked Z into action. At first glance this seems inconsistent with Z's style - but then again, what do we actually know about Z and his, say, mentality? His actions throughout the series (from LHR to PH) seem partly cautious/planned and partly just...haphazard almost. So, why not?
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Nov 7, 2014 18:45:06 GMT -8
If we accept the "car not in park" theory, Z may have had to start the engine in order to control the car properly - which means that he had to use the keys. And since he doesn't appear to have worn gloves - well, he would have left his prints all over those keys. Easier and less risky to simply pocket them rather than wiping them down and leaving them at the scene. As for the wallet - I don't know. I suppose it's conceivable - as others have suggested in the past - that he may have planned on sending more evidence, beyond the shirt piece, in further communications, but that he never got around to doing this for whatever reason. Is it possible that Z knew Stine - or that he at least killed him for a more specific reason (such as the Chronicle connection you mention, W)? Yes, I suppose it is. The Stine murder stands out as odd in so many ways that I don't think we should categorically rule out anything. One possibility I have entertained at various times is that Stine may have said something, during that taxi ride, which provoked Z into action. At first glance this seems inconsistent with Z's style - but then again, what do we actually know about Z and his, say, mentality? His actions throughout the series (from LHR to PH) seem partly cautious/planned and partly just...haphazard almost. So, why not? "One possibility I have entertained at various times is that Stine may have said something, during that taxi ride, which provoked Z into action." If that were the case, and it may very well be, then we would have to assume that there was a genuine and legitimate reason for Zodiac to be going to the Big Money Presidio Heights area of The Richmond District. In that scenario the Zodiac would get into Paul's cab with a benign and genuine reason of needing to get from A to B. Maybe the two were talking & the topic came around to The Zodiac and the passenger deliberately asked a leading question out loud like: "I don't know what I'd do if I came face to face with the Killer." Paul then may have said he though the killer was a total coward and said something like: "He's a sick SOB. You see what he wrote to the papers about enjoying killing more than getting laid? He must be a nut! I don't worry about encountering him though, he's never gone after a lone victim, only couples. I may have given him a ride sometime, you never know?" The passenger would probably have laughed and in a sinister tone replied: "Yeah, I suppose your right. Zodiac kills couples so your safe. Oh well, almost there now..." Z appears, in his letters anyway, to have a inflated sense of self and ego, and is constantly demanding that what he has to say be printed with a threat of more violence should they dare to refuse his demands. If Paul caused his passenger narcissistic injury so to speak, then the response is going to be Narcissistic rage which, given his ego, would have possibly got the better of him and he decided to pay Paul with Lead rather than silver.
|
|