|
|
Post by MikeR on Jun 23, 2014 11:17:00 GMT -8
Click the image to enlarge:
Hi- I think that was probably a function of the fact that a "v" and a "u" resemble each other and people expected a "u" to follow a Q. So they misspelled it as "Quale." Mike |
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Jul 4, 2014 18:50:24 GMT -8
When speaking with Butterfield over the phone, Pelissetti is alleged to have said in relation to the white guy standing on a driveway that he admits in this conversation is Kjell Qvale, that:
"I kept this guy around for a while."
Mike was it you that once questioned why Armond would 'Keep this man around' and didn't let him go straight away and asked why would he do this if he wasn't suspicious, or words to that effect?
I just been thinking about this very question. What reason would Pelissetti have to detain the guy there on the street? Were there blood stains visible on his clothes? Maybe. But I think given that we know that an eight year old witness 'IDENTIFIED' someone as the shooter that night, it's plausible, even very likely, that Armond kept Kjell there while he either radioed another unit to bring one of the witnesses around to where he and Kjell were in order to see if the kid would point Kjell out as the man that had just shot the cab driver or, Armond had kept Kjell around with him and took him back to the area of the scene and witnesses and the eight year old ID'd him. I would imagine that if the police drove the kid down Jackson they probably asked him to look over at the sidewalk and if you see the man that just did this, point him out. With that, Patrol Unit drove down Jackson to Maple where Armond had kept Kjell on scene and visible on to the passing unit coming down Jackson and when the Eight year old looks over and see's Armond Pelissetti standing on the sidewalk with Kjell, the eight year old points and says "There, that's the man who just left the taxi, he's standing next to the police officer." The cop driving probably asked him "Are you positive that is the man that you saw kill the taxi driver?" and he answered "Yes."
The patrol Unit with the witness on board then very likely radioed to Pelissetti himself saying "Positive ID made by witness." This is why I have always said for years now that Zodiac fired off that letter without delay with the threat of "School Children make nice targets." If Zodiac, Kjell Qvale, knew that the kid had positively ID'd him on the street, then he isn't going to waste any time sending a cryptic threat in his next letter. I always though it was stupid of Zodiac to write and confess to shooting the cabbie when he knew a cop saw him that night and keeping his mouth shut would mean nobody would even know that this was Zodiac. But he did, knowing he'd been seen by police. If he'd been seen and Identified by a witness, then he'd have to write this letter really to intimidate the kid into keeping his mouth shut.
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Jul 4, 2014 19:22:22 GMT -8
I just came across this (Click to enlarge and read):
In 1973, Armond Pelissetti was the Probation Officer for the Youth Court in San Francisco. Is it just coincidence that the home on Jackson Street, No. 3712 where Don see's Zodiac turn into and also the same drive I believe Armond saw Zodiac standing on, is it just coincidence that the female occupant of this residence is none other than Helen Bloch, herself a probation officer for the Youth Court as seen below?
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeR on Jul 5, 2014 7:07:41 GMT -8
Hi WC,
This is an interesting find about AP being a probation officer. I had never known that.
As for why he would have kept KQ around, he sure is emphatic that he had "absolutely no blood on his clothing." The way AP's story has evolved over time, who knows where he ran into KQ? KQ said he was in England that night. So it is a teeming mass of confusion over a story that should be as simple as a police officer asking a citizen if he had seen anyone walking in the area and the man shaking his head and the officer immediately pressing forward. Of course, nobody finds this odd because it has to do with KQ. The last someone spoke to AP, he said he first saw KQ in KQ's front yard was the initial contact point. Such a seemingly simple story but nobody can keep it straight. Sigh!
As for the eight year-old, there is no mention of him or her in anything AP wrote or said, so it has to remain in the realm of speculation at this point.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Jul 5, 2014 12:56:49 GMT -8
Well I don't have a degree in either Geography or physics, but I am fairly confident that Kjell Qvale cannot be in the United Kingdom on Business while also being detained by the San Francisco Police Dpt. in Pacific Heights in the State of California (Lol).
But on a serious note, I thought earlier that the answer could be that Kjell is being honest and was out of State on that night and Armond spoke to Bjarne who told Armond that he was actually Kjell to deflect suspicion. But then I recalled a comment that Armond makes that tends to rule that out and again indicated that it really was Kjell out there that night. The comment in question made by A.P is this: "I turned to the right, and saw a man walking his dog. He was somewhat older than the description I had, a whole lot thinner, and he had absolutely no blood on his clothes." The 'whole lot thinner' remark would suggest that this man is, as A.P has suggested, Kjell Qvale as Kjell is fairly tall with a very slim, lean build.
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeR on Jul 5, 2014 22:30:31 GMT -8
Hi-
Well, if it was Bjarne, then AP did a lousy job of verifying to whom he was speaking that night. But my money is on KQ. Unless Bjarne used to walk his dog for him every night...KQ did tell me in 2006 that he only walked a dog "twice in his life."
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Jul 15, 2014 10:41:46 GMT -8
I think Don did speak to the guy and either recognised him as Kjell Qvale or asked him straight out what his name was and why he was in the area. If you listen to what Don says in the 2007 Documentary after describing the encounter and the suspects description, he says:
"Seeing that it was a White Male, in an affluent area walking along the street, we didn't think it was the suspect."
Now this one sentence alone has several implications to it. First, he appears to be hinting that he knew the white guy had legitimate reason to be there in the area. I mean what Don is almost as good as saying is "Seeing that it was Kjell Qvale in an affluent area walking along the street, we didn't think this was the suspect." In other words, it sounds like Don is saying that he realised it was Qvale and because he realised this was multi-millionair vehicle import tycoon Mr K. Qvale, he didn't think he was at all likely to be the suspect. Remember, at this point it appears as a Cabbie Robbery gone bad and Multi Millionaire Kjell isn't going to have need to rob a cabbie of a few dollars.
This then makes what he says a bit later on in the documentary more understandable. When asked why he didn't report that the white guy had turned and gone toward a house, Don gives this as his reply:
"I didn't think about it in the report.... because I assumed that he didn't live in the neighbourhood, an upper middle class neighbourhood."
What does this comment potentially infer? Well, Don is replying to a direct question asked by the narrator of: "It didn't seem like an important piece of information to you that a possible suspect had walked up to a house?"
To me Don seems to be suggesting he didn't think about it in the report because he assumed that the offender didn't live there in that area...and he knew that this white guy he'd seen did, Mr Qvale. He is as good as saying "I knew it was Kjell Qvale and he lives in this affluent area, and I assumed that the actual offender did not."
And Don has again inadvertently made another Fouke up here. He states that upon seeing that it was a white male that, I quote "We didn't think it was the suspect." What's this 'We' business all about, I thought Don said Eric had not seen the white guy and that he was checking the other side of Jackson Street out of his passenger window.
And the final thing Fouke said once in an interview that for me, suggests he knew it was Kjell he encountered that evening is Don's comment for another filmed interview saying:
"I think I second guessed myself that night, we should have stopped and talked to him..... But we didn't."
What could he possibly have meant by second guessed himself? I think Don is saying that when he realised the male was Kjell Qvale he automatically decided that it isn't going to be him responsible because of his social standing and successful business ventures. Don may have let Kjell go on his way because he was Kjell who he assumed couldn't be the suspect because, well, because he's Kjell Qvale. I think that's what Don means by 'I think I second guessed myself that night." He second guessed himself based on his belief that such a wealthy and prominent citizen like Qvale simply could not be responsible for this because he has no motive. Second Guessing himself as to what the motive may be, and an assumption that millionaires are all Saint's incapable of, nor having reason to, commit cold blodded murder. He also assumed at that time that the motive for the Cab Drivers murder was Robbery, again second guessing himself as to what type of offender would be responsible for this crime.
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Jul 15, 2014 11:16:15 GMT -8
Now I know there will be those that, upon reading the about claims I have suggested, will instantly dismiss this and ask "Why wouldn't Don just say it was Qvale if he really did know it was him?" Then they will dismiss the above idea's as speculation and say no evidence for Don concealing that he knew the identity of the White Male on Jackson and if he did, there is no motive or reason for him to not want to say. Well, yes there is reason for him to keep this quiet because Armond Pelissetti also encounters Qvale at Jxn & Mpl Intersection and Armond does not report this encounter by naming Kjell as the man he ran into in any report and has only once made any public reference to the encounter and when he did, he would only refer to this person as 'A man walking his Dog."
Pelissetti seems to go out of his way not to give any name or info about this 'dog walker' specifically. Who's 'encouraging' Armond to stay quiet about the encounter and name of the man with who he had this encounter? A.P is going out of his way, for whatever reason, to not admit or declare that the guy he spoke with was Qvale.
If A.P won't give Qvales name as the party in question, should we expect Don Fouke to do anything other than the same? Especially if the word's come down from a higher up that "Your not to make mention of Mr Qvale by name as being the individual you both encountered that evening."
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeR on Jul 16, 2014 14:06:24 GMT -8
Hi-
AP HAS given Qvale's name. He gave it to Butterfield in 2005 but told him not to tell me. Butterfield was on the phone to me five minutes later. My friend Jim had to wrestle it out of him in 2008...but he confirmed again that it was KQ had had spoken to. He also gave it up in 2011 to another researcher.
BTW, this whole flap about the 340 on Tom's site is very interesting to me. The passage that Z wanted so desperately for the Chron to print had to do with him disappearing into the park. In that 340 character passage, he mentions twice that he went into the park. He also says it another time in that 11/9 letter. I have always felt that "He doth protesteth too much" and wanted to reinforce the visual image of him slipping into the park because he didn't want anyone to get an idea that he actually lived in PH.
Just IMHO...
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Jul 17, 2014 7:25:22 GMT -8
Firstly, this post is not a factual interpretation of what Officer Fouke was saying, but it is simply my opinion regarding Fouke's comments and what can be read into them by the words he uses and applying logic and reason to his statements.
Don simply must have recognised the white Male he saw that night as local resident Kjell Qvale because if he did not, then we are asked to believe the following:
Don spots the white male at or near Maple and the white male turns onto a driveway to a house. Don get's a good look at this man and drives on past because he's under the false assumption that the suspect is Black. Sixty seconds or so later Don Fouke is informed by Armond Pelissetti that, Quote "No, he is a white male" to which Fouke replies "Shit, that was the suspect" referring to the guy he'd just seen turning onto a driveway.
Now, if Fouke is clueless as to the identity of that white male he just passed, then we must believe that Fouke, knowing full well that this male is armed and extremely dangerous (having already dispatched one victim with a bullet to the head) simply did not bother speedingback to this residence to ensure that the suspect is not hiding in their back yard or worse still, gained entry to their property and holding the family inside hostage. We must believe that after the entire grounds of the Presidio and Julius Kahn had been searched 'Tree by tree and bush by bush' and turned up nothing which would now dramatically increase the odds that the suspect is still in or on the grounds of that house that he was last observed heading toward, and yet, Fouke still doesn't bother mentioning it and by doing so is showing gross misconduct in the carrying out of his duties by ignoring a strong possibility that the lives of the occupants of this residence are in extreme danger by a man who he already knows is armed and extremely dangerous and won't hesitate to introduce a piece of led into the brain cavity of an innocent person.
Either Patrol Officer Donald Fouke is the most stupid, incompetent, bumbling idiot employed by the SFPD or, he didn't go back to that house because he knew that the white male that he saw going toward it was Kjell Qvale, the multi-millionaire, and he's not going to be our suspect surely? In my opinion, it's the latter of these options that resulted in Fouke not going back there. No reason to go back there looking for him because he isn't the offender surely? And as Fouke said when asked why he didn't think it was important to mention that a suspect had been seen going toward a house, replied "I didn't think about it in the report cause I assumed that he (the suspect) didn't live in the neighbourhood." Don is, in a roundabout way, saying that he didn't think about that white male approaching a house in his report because he knew that it was Kjell Qvale, and his next comment indicates this also when he states "Because I assumed that he (Homicide suspect) didn't live in the neighbourhood" and he knew that this guy he'd just passed, did. "I didn't think about it in the report" because he didn't think of him, Qvale, as a suspect in this homicide so why mention he'd been seen approaching a house when you don't consider him a suspect because you know he lives there and the offender surely did not?
Again, this is why Don Fouke said years later "I think I second guessed myself that night. Should have stopped and spoke to him, but we didn't." He second guessed himself in that he simply did not believe that Qvale was going to be responsible.
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Jul 17, 2014 8:07:03 GMT -8
Let's put it this way then, if Don Fouke ever admits to knowing the identity of the white male he saw and possibly even spoke with that fateful night, and comes clean and states that it was Kjell Qvale, then that in and of itself, will be enough for me in my own mind to put this case to rest. Why? Because of this....
Don Fouke: "We turned west on Jackson Street. As we approached Maple street I noticed, on the north side of the street, a White Male Adult, dressed in a Derby, or three-quarter waist length jacket with elastic at the waist and on the cuffs and regular flap down collar (In his Memo he recalls the colour as Navy Blue and that it was part way zipped up). He had a crew cut. He was wearing Rust coloured (Rust Brown according to the Memo) pleated trousers which were unusual for the time. He had on engineering type boots, low cut shoe, tan in colour."
Now, compare that description with what Bryan Hartnell states that Zodiac wore when he attacked and stabbed he and Cecelia just two short weeks before Don's encounter: Hartnell makes the following observations:
"And now, to backtrack a bit, I was really trying to see what he looked like. He had on pleated pants, these old type of suit pants. He had on this cotton coat, you've seen the kind, you just turn the collar up once, and the zipper down the front. It was dark blue. I don't remember seeing his shoes."
But we know he wore an engineering type boot here also because impressions were found in the Earth that were so clear that the actual design and make of the boot could be determined, A Wingwalker.
So, Bryan's attacker wore a navy blue zipper jacket with a collar, pleated trousers and military style boots. Don Fouke's white male wore a Navy Blue zipper jacket with flap down collar, pleated trousers and as Fouke put's it "Engineering type boots."
Sounds to me like, based on the two independent eye witnesses here from two separate scenes and dates, both Bryan & Don are describing the same man, or at the very least, someone wearing the exact same attire both at Lake Berryessa and Pacific Heights.
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Jul 17, 2014 14:16:17 GMT -8
Hey MikeR:
"AP HAS given Qvale's name. He gave it to Butterfield in 2005 but told him not to tell me."
I know Mike, but I meant A.P won't give this man's name publically. That's why I used the example of A.P saying "I turned to the right and saw a man walking his dog." Armond refers to him simply as 'A Man' in this interview and has never named him publically.
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Jul 21, 2014 7:56:59 GMT -8
Mike, both you and I have brought up the possibility of Bjarne somehow being involved but it's the other brother, Knute Qvale, that resembles the suspect more than Bjarne and Kjell.
Don Fouke was adamant that the white male he had seen looked older and heavier than the composite drawing and said that he also had a distinctive widows peak hairline (meaning V shaped at the front). The composite that is thought to be based on Fouke's recollection clearly shows the widows peak hairline.
Now here is a photograph of Knute....
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Jul 23, 2014 17:55:00 GMT -8
See if I was a cop who responded on Oct 11 and encountered Kjell Qvale 100 yards from the scene of a murder appearing to be standing on a driveway without legitimate cause or reason to be there and looks suspiciously like a man trying to hide from responding unit's on the streets and that man said to me "Do you know who I am? I am Kjell Qvale, member of secret society club Bohemian Grove and Internationally recognised Vehicle Inport Tycoon and multi millionaire" Then I'd reply "Are you, there's nice.... Your under arrest on suspicion of Murder, you have the right to remain silent..."
Below and to the left in this photo is the steps that Fouke claims the suspect he saw turned and claimed up. To the right is the driveway of the same residence and, it is my belief, the same driveway mentioned by Armond to Mike Butterfield in which he encounters Qvale "Just standing there." Armond states that this driveway Kjell was standing in is at "Maple Street" and this has caused some confusion because there is no such driveway on Maple St. 3712 Jackson and it's driveway are located at Maple Street Intersection with Maple St Presidio Entrance running right alongside it, but the actual house is on Jackson Street. Driveway AT Maple, but ON Jackson.
(Click Image to enlarge)
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Jul 23, 2014 23:39:20 GMT -8
Hey Mike, I have been thinking about what Armond, Don and Z have said about what happened that night and what, given then statements made by each, likely happened......
Don and Eric come up Jackson and as Don maintains, do not stop the White guy as he turns onto a house pathway. He then, as he said, 'Steps on the gas' and speeds uphill to run into Pelissetti on Cherry. He's told the suspect is white and Don, now realising the guy he just passed matches the suspect description, does say to Armond "Oh Shit! That was the suspect!" It's the logical thing you'd do. It's also logical that when Don said "Oh shit, that was the suspect" to Pelissetti that he'd also have told Pelissetti where he'd seen him. At this, one of the units, either Armond's vehicle or Don's, Probably AP's with Don's vehicle facing Washington, speeds back down Cherry, onto Jackson and toward Maple Intersection and the house near the corner where Subject was last observed heading toward. As the Vehicle approaches Maple Intersection, it stops as the Officers look across to the house and Pathway that a white male, matching the suspect description, had just seconds before headed toward. No sign of him on the pathway to the homes front door, so they inch forward to check the gated drive situated next to the pathway itself and are somewhat shocked to see that the guy's now come off the path and is simply standing in the adjacent driveway. Here's why that makes sense:
Zodiac claims that "This cop car pulled up and one of them called me over."
If this is accurate then this encounter simply could not have happened as Don & Eric came up Jackson as Zodiac shuffled down Jackson on the North sidewalk. Why not? Well there would simply be absolutely no need to 'Call' anyone over from anywhere because Don's on the right side of the road obviously and Zodiac is on the right sidewalk of the street from Don's perspective so if he pulled up to ask Zodiac something he'd literally be within arm's length of him.
However, if your coming down Jackson from Cherry then your now on the opposite side of the road to the house and drive where this white guy was last seen and if you stopped your cruiser at the intersection of Maple in the right hand lane then the gated driveway, along with any person standing within it, is now going to be on the other side of the street and would require them to call him over to them. And that's surely what they'd do if they saw a potential suspect that is guaranteed to be armed in the shadows of a driveway. Surely they get out of their vehicle and draw their weapons and order the male to come out from the darkened driveway onto the sidewalk with his hands raised in view to make sure he wasn't holding a weapon?
I mean it makes perfect sense that if he was seen by Armond "On a driveway, just standing there" as Butterfield stated Armond had privately admitted to him over the phone, then two things are going to happen as a result. 1. Armond is going to demand he explain why he's seemingly hiding in the garden of a residence out of view of passing police and 2, the guy on the drive is going to say the only thing remotely plausible given the circumstances and is almost certainly going to say exactly what Zodiac says he told them in his letter and that he dashed onto that driveway because some man came running by with a gun in his hand and he, the most innocent citizen, feared what this man may do so he ducked into the driveway instinctively for fear of being shot at. And if it's Kjell on that driveway, even more plausible because he is going to tell them not only that he ducked into that gated driveway to avoid a gunman that went running by but that he only lives 3 or 4 doors down. "I Live there Officer, 3636, you see it? The huge multi-million dollar mansion. My name is Kjell Qvale.
See this is why I believe Armond is claiming he walked from the scene to Jackson & Maple in order to eliminate himself as the cop in question mentioned by Zodiac as having called him over cause Z said 'This cop car pulled up and one of them called me over." Well couldn't be AP, he said he went after the armed and dangerous suspect on foot on a street that AP himself admits "Has innumerable alcoves and parked cars" and stated that he "Used every technique I knew so i didn't get my head blown off." Bull S*it, no cop in his right mind would go after an armed man at night on foot in a street where he's a sitting duck for any hidden gunman to take a shot at, not if that cop had a car to go after him in anyway. Plus, driving after the suspect isn't only a far safer option, but it also increases the chances of catching him by gaining ground 10, 15 or 20 times faster than you can on foot. AP also says that yes, he spoke with a white male that night and asked him had he seen anyone go by? That's strange isn't it because that's also the exact same question Zodiac said he was asked by the Cop that stopped him on Jackson that night too!
And the icing on the cake? AP is trying his level best to point the finger at Fouke & Zelms as the unit responsible for stopping Zodiac by claiming that "In subsequent conversations with him (Fouke), he did tell me that he had stopped someone." To which Fouke adamantly denies by saying "We never stopped the man, we never talked to him. That is an emphatic statement by me! I wouldn't make the denial" and again in the same interview and a few sentences later got slightly frustrated and said: "We DID NOT stop the Zodiac! We didn't stop anyone! I wish Eric Zelms were alive today to tell you so."
Finally, it wouldn't make any sense if Fouke saw the suspect turn onto steps and head down the driveway and when he finds out seconds later that was likely to be the shooter decide to floor it to Jackson Blvd and handbreak a 180 turn right onto West Pacific Avenue to cover the rear of the house as a potential escape route if he knows he's likely in the front of the residence somewhere where he last observed him unless, obviously, he and Eric had sped around to West Pacific to cover the rear wall escape route because a second unit is at the very same time screeching to a stop out front on Jackson Street and likely to make any hidden suspect on that property make a dash for the rear garden and over the fence out back and escape into the Presidio because Don and Eric would then be waiting to throw a surprise party for the suspect as he is desperately scrambling to scale the fence to evade Armond coming down the pathway toward the gate to the rear garden. It's a classic technique police use to flush out possible hidden suspects and the only scenario that makes any logical sense otherwise we would have to believe the following: Don knows the suspect has just approached the front of a home on Jackson, a suspect he also knows is armed with a firearm and won't hesitate to use it to kill someone, and Don, fully aware that the lives of the occupants of 3712, Fred and Helen Bloch, are potentially in mortal danger, decides that he'd going to go for a spin in the Presidio down along West Pacific Avenue. I can hear eyebrows raising and heads shaking at the very suggestion that this is what Don did that night because Armond was busy skipping along Cherry, doing a twirl turning right at Jackson & Cherry Intersection, then moonwalking backwards down the hill on Jackson till he arrives at Maple. Whatever!!!
|
|
