|
|
Post by DavidUK on Mar 3, 2016 1:47:25 GMT -8
Interesting point Ricardo
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Mar 3, 2016 12:25:13 GMT -8
"how many people walk their dogs to the other side of town last thing at night, they don't, they walk round the block"
You got to have a dog before you walk it anywhere, and according to certain people who spoke to Armond Pelissetti over the phone in a recorded conversation (accidentally of course) it is alleged Armond admitted that. . . (Paraphrasing here)
"He didn't have a dog, Nor was He walking it or Himself anywhere on the street. He was stood on a driveway entrance to a property. He wasn't doing anything, He was just standing there. I called Him to me and I kept this man there with me for some time."
Now Mike Rodelli made this known publically and if there is no merit to this claim regarding Armond He certainly didn't respond with the expected "I have no idea what He is talking about." No, He called Mike "That idiot from New Jersey."
Interesting though isn't it that, Unlike Kjell who will sue the Half of Planet Earth if His name gets mentioned publicly in relation to Zodiac because that's what innocent people/Innocent witnesses in the area of crime always do, Armond did not threaten legal action for these outrageous lies being claimed about Him. It's strange He didn't issue the legal defamation of Character threat against Mike R for claiming this, or are the threats absent because He knows He did admit to exactly what Mike R says He did and Armond knows there was, according to Mike, a recording of it?
He'd look brilliant in His Civil Court Case: "My client, a police officer and a SFPD cop with an impeccable record, never ever said any such thing." ... Then the defendant plays His evidence and Armond is sinking lower and lower in His seat until the Judge asks why the Plaintiff is under the table and to come out and do so with red face for lying.
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Mar 3, 2016 12:28:08 GMT -8
And Kjell had dogs I can attest to that. I also can attest to knowing they were kept on His ranch with His prized Horses because He featured in a magazine with picture of Him with His dogs that the article explained was Kjell with His dog that He keeps on His ranch with the other animals.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ricardo on Mar 8, 2016 22:15:02 GMT -8
And Kjell had dogs I can attest to that. I also can attest to knowing they were kept on His ranch with His prized Horses because He featured in a magazine with picture of Him with His dogs that the article explained was Kjell with His dog that He keeps on His ranch with the other animals. Here is a photo of Kjell and one of his favorite horses, Silky Sullivan.  www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/rip-kjell-qvale-94-a-man-who-loved-horsepower/Which magazine had the article about Kjell and his dogs? |
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Mar 12, 2016 9:47:41 GMT -8
I can't remember the name of the magazine off hand Ric but I will try and find it for you. Won't be long...
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Mar 13, 2016 0:56:52 GMT -8
Rick I have looked for it, not to any great extent, but searched google with several search terms and I just can't find it. However, I do remember the Ranch featured in the article was Green Oak Stud Farm in Napa Valley, where Kjell's Star performer resided in Silky Sullivan.
I can see the photograph still in my minds eye of Kjell with His dogs with the caption accompanying the photograph stating, paraphrasing here: "Above: Mr Q with His two dogs who, along with Silky Sullivan, reside on the Green Oak's Ranch." Something like that.
I think the article was either interviewing the Ranch caretaker, or was about Him and His time there, I know the Ranch Hand Kjell employed to live there and take care of the animals and stables was speaking at length in this article. The Ranch caretaker may have been silky's trainer, can't remember for sure.
I wanna say it was a car/racing magazine feature opposed to horse racing one but again, not absolutely confident about that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ricardo on Mar 26, 2017 4:03:23 GMT -8
And Kjell had dogs I can attest to that. I also can attest to knowing they were kept on His ranch with His prized Horses because He featured in a magazine with picture of Him with His dogs that the article explained was Kjell with His dog that He keeps on His ranch with the other animals. Which magazine had the article about Kjell and his dogs? I can't remember the name of the magazine off hand Ric but I will try and find it for you. Won't be long... Rick I have looked for it, not to any great extent, but searched google with several search terms and I just can't find it. However, I do remember the Ranch featured in the article was Green Oak Stud Farm in Napa Valley, where Kjell's Star performer resided in Silky Sullivan. I can see the photograph still in my minds eye of Kjell with His dogs with the caption accompanying the photograph stating, paraphrasing here: "Above: Mr Q with His two dogs who, along with Silky Sullivan, reside on the Green Oak's Ranch." Something like that. I think the article was either interviewing the Ranch caretaker, or was about Him and His time there, I know the Ranch Hand Kjell employed to live there and take care of the animals and stables was speaking at length in this article. The Ranch caretaker may have been silky's trainer, can't remember for sure. I wanna say it was a car/racing magazine feature opposed to horse racing one but again, not absolutely confident about that. I am still looking for the magazine article. However, I did find out that Kjell had a dog named Jack. Here is a photo of Jack.  The dog was named Jack because someone named Jack gave the dog to Kjell. Sometimes Kjell would follow the dog on his motorcycle. |
|
|
|
Post by Judy on Apr 16, 2017 17:36:22 GMT -8
I am reading all this about Kjel and I am in awe. My father was Kjel Qvale's personal contractor. He remodeled his home in SF and built him the horse stable with no inside supports in Napa. He also worked on his car showrooms -- British Motor Cars. When my dad passed away Kjel was very supportive and went out of his way to help my mother. This information about the Zodiac killer is really upsetting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rubislaw32 on Apr 17, 2017 2:53:00 GMT -8
As a regular contributor to this site,thank you Judy,for your post.
Its fascinating to read about your father's relationship with Kjel Qvale.
Mr.Qvale sounds as if he was a contented businessman,and happy with his life,in general.
Certainly,I would suggest,in contrast to Zodiac,who clearly harbored a complexity of personal problems,below the surface [?].
As far as documentation indicates,Law Enforcement were unable to clear Mr.Qvale,as a suspect,until 2002.Thirty-two years after the murder of Paul Stine.
We can,perhaps,perceive that Mr.Qvale adopted an understandable indignant stance,at even being associated with Mr.Stine's murder - and could afford good lawyers.
Possibly a ''recipe'' for belligerence that got out of hand [?].
That Mr.Qvale remains a person of interest,in the case,has probably more to do with the time it took for his name to be cleared.
My feelings are that he was completely innocent of any involvement.
This site is however,a debating forum,and we must respect the rights of others that might have different opinions.
Thanks again,for your intimate insight.
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Sept 25, 2017 15:41:47 GMT -8
In all fairness, there is one person who is responsible for Kjell's name ever being remotely associated with, and linked to, The Zodiac Killer Case and it's Armond Pelissetti!
Press play button on Video clip below & skip/FF to 1:17:45 (1 Hour, 17 Minutes and 45 Seconds) where the relevant part will begin, a part in which Mr Pelissetti refers to glancing Right at Jackson & Maple Street Intersection and He, quote: "Saw A man walking His Dog.. .". That Man, at least He claims in private, wzs K.Q.
|
|
|
|
Post by WelshChappie on Sept 27, 2017 12:15:45 GMT -8
And in regards to the Auto-Import Supremo Mr Q, I did not know Myself until sometime last year that ABC Documentary Crew had taken Mike Rodelli and His claims serious enough to feature Mike R on their documentary and referred to His suspect only as a Prominent and successful Businessman from San Francisco, who obviously wasn't named by/on the Documentary for legal reasons.
However, on that same Docu, the Producers had approached The 'Businessman' for His response to the allegations made by Rodelli, which Kjell replied saying it's simply absurd. Kjell was then asked would He be willing to supply ABC with His DNA which they would then test against Un-Subs DNA partial profile discovered sealed behind the stamp on an known, authenticated Zodiac envelope? Kjell said "Sure" and gave then His DNA.
Now the fact that Kjell had done this freely, of his own choice, without Warrant or Court Order to obtain it, led Me to conclude, before I heard the result officially, that He did not contribute the DNA that was found on that sticky-side of a stamp affixed to the Oct 13th 'I am the Murderer of the Taxi Driver' letter, thus certainly a Zodiac Letter because of the swatches of Paul's shirt accompanying it, and almost certainly the DNA of the Letter Writer as it came from an affixed, air-tight/sealed underside of a stamp that would have required the sender to lick before applying. It dramatically decreases almost to zero possibility that the DNA itself may have been deposited by Cross-Contamination means also, because again, it's sealed and air-tight.
The DNA was cross checked and an interview with the actual lab tech that carried out the testing was conducted on the Documentary for Kjell and Two other suspects, Kjell, like both other suspects, was ruled out conclusively as the person that had deposited the DNA. In short, Test conducted, Result found: Negative, non-match!
This for Me, this was enough to focus my attention elsewhere and move on from K.Q as a suspect. I am the first to criticise other's who have, upon discovering their suspects DNA didn't match Un-Sub's, respond with "Zodiac killed the people, another person wrote the Letters..." or as I like to call this, 'Clutching at Straws' so I hold my own feet to the flames when it comes to the standard reached as to the acceptance of evidence and conclude therefore: 'Let's move on'
|
|
|
|
Post by Hoganpc on Jan 7, 2018 8:57:51 GMT -8
Qvale would not mail incrimnating evidence to a newspaper after being Id’d by SFPD as the person they encountered on Jackson St, thereby identifying himself as the killer. The letter writer stated that he talked to PD and PD said it was Qvale. I haven’t read about this elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hoganpc on Jan 7, 2018 19:36:45 GMT -8
Hey Mike, thanks for clarifying. And I am aware that Armond is said to have stated privately that Kjell was actually on a driveway at or on Maple street and I know that no such drive exists on Maple. I think it's only logical to assume that the driveway at Maple that Armond speaks of is the same one that Fouke recalls seeing the White Male turn onto and that's the drive that is at the Maple Street intersection, but isn't on Maple itself, but actually on Jackson. Whatever the specifics or actual detail regarding the specific driveway or on which street etc, that's all irrelevant in my humble opinion because the question that takes precedence over any other is: Why is Armond lying about Kjell being out walking a dog if he actually saw him standing in a driveway? What possible reason could a serving police officer have to lie about where it was he saw a prominent man that night and claim he was innocently out walking a dog if he was not? So Qvale mails a portion of Stine’s shirt to the chronicle in order to incriminate himself in the murder. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoganpc on Jan 7, 2018 19:46:58 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 Therefore Qvale would not have mailed Stine’s shirt. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoganpc on Jan 7, 2018 19:50:26 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.
Don was correct in that conclusion. |
|
