Xen's Name, Age and Address Highlighted? Why?

7/30/2016

Just a very short Article, which is more of a quick question really, to ask if anyone knows why only one suspect, Xenophon, has his DOB/Age highlighted in the document, as well as His residential address. Is it as I am assuming, His age is underlined because it fits right in with Fouke's estimated 35 - 45? Is His address pointed out as relevant because it's obviously on Jackson, close to the scene itself? And what is the meaning of a penciled 'X' right before his surname Anthony?

Checking Page One's suspects reveals no such added penciling in of any sort. Yes, some are still redacted but even prior to this document below being released, the redacted version could still be seen showing some of the pencil markings.

Here's a visual to show what I am referring to:

46 Comments

Richard

7/31/2016 06:33:46 am

Yes they were possibly highlighted as relevant details. Even though the document above this one in the FBI files is headed 'Urgent 11-6-69' and the one below is dated 11-7-69, it is highly unlikely it took nearly a month for this to be recognized as an important sighting, whether it went anywhere or not. The document above states 'end page one' and the following one above states 'page two' so it obviously is followed up material. When page one is concluded it is dated November 12th 1969 and this is when the document above was likely typed, this coincides exactly with the Donald Fouke memorandum being typed up, that differed slightly with the three teenagers. If this document was then followed up with latent fingerprint testing why did it take exactly one month to possibly fingerprint the above subject, if that is the case. If the 8 year old, no matter where he was located surely didn't wait several weeks before coming forward with this information. Also Donald Fouke and the three teenagers gave descriptions of the murderer in reasonable detail, wouldn't it not have been the same process with the 8 year old. If he viewed the killer by the taxicab why didn't he sit down and have a sketch drawn from his recollections, whether or not he identified a person, or at least detail the clothes of the assailant. This now brings me back to the police report and the second page where it mentions #2 SUSPECT "WMA, in his early forties, 5'8", heavy build, reddish-blond, crew cut hair. wearing eyeglasses, dark brown trousers, dark (navy blue or black) "Parka" jacket, dark shoes. Suspect should have many blood stains on his person and clothing, suspect may also be in possession of the keys to the Yellow Cab, possibly has wallet belonging to the victim. Last seen walking north on Cherry Street, from Washington Street.". This was not the description given by the 3 teenagers. There was a consideration it could have come from Donald Fouke, but there is no mention of him in the police report and he never countersigned it, only Pelissetti. So my question is, did this description originate from the 8 year old. The age states early 40's, not the spread of 35-45 that Fouke gave. Considering Xen was 38 in 1969, early 40's is close, certainly closer than the 3 teenagers, if it were Xen spotted in the area and may be a better explanation for the revised composite sketch. The 8 year old's description was #2 SUSPECT in the police report and was later incorporated to include the second sketch. If you look at the revised sketch it may look older, but doesn't seem to add 50 pounds like Donald Fouke said. The police report also said "Suspect should have many blood stains on his person and clothing, suspect may also be in possession of the keys to the Yellow Cab, possibly has wallet belonging to the victim. Last seen walking north on Cherry Street, from Washington Street". The 8 year old naming Xenophon, if he gave the #2 SUSPECT description, therefore must have spotted him with a view of the suspect heading up Cherry and accounts for the amended sketch, that apparently was never attributed to Donald Fouke. It may have been Fouke but there are two options now. But the November 12th date of the 8 year old sighting raises questions and its apparent matching of the Donald Fouke memorandum.

Alex Lewis

8/16/2016 07:23:23 pm

Well it's important to have as much accurate and correct detailed information about a crime and/or suspects as possible otherwise something that is hugely important to the crime itself such as witness ID of a suspect, that gets lost in the shadows of nowhere.

Today I came across a comment on a Zodiac video that not only humbled me personally, but reminded me of how important it really is to have as many detailed facts presented to us as possible. The Youtube member commented on His/Her belief in Gaikowski as most likely suspect and then said:

"I also found this blog recently and it swayed my opinion a bit. The suspect here is Lawrence Kane and I knew about him before as a suspect, but would usually dismiss him because there was never a whole lot of info, but I remember seeing the significant similarity in his writing style. This blog really gave great really in-depth info on him as a suspect, and I think he's quite up there as a suspect."

Having someone make such a statement is something that not only reassures Me that I have presented a deent case and argument for Kane on the page I wrote, but I'm also truly humbled and appreciative that all the hard work putting the page together and documents successfully retained from official sources was all worth it just for that one reader alone because it challenged an opinion they had held previously because they were not, as they stated, given the details and facts about Lawrence.

Richard

7/31/2016 07:51:04 am

If you take 2 key details [1] that the police report said the suspect "was last seen walking north on Cherry Street, from Washington Street." Then any description in the police report by inference could not have come from Donald Fouke. He saw the suspect on Jackson St. Therefore #2SUSPECT logically had to derive from a second source that didn't include Donald Fouke, remembering he never countersigned this report either and apparently hadn't let his superior officers known of his sighting until after the 12th October 1969, with his memorandum only surfacing one month later. The amended sketch does say 35-45, but crucially the sketch states "supplementing our bulletin of October 13th 1969, additional information has developed the above amended drawing of murder suspect". This was claimed to have been amended by the three teenagers, and this may be partly true, albeit with the influence of a third party. Donald Fouke apparently didn't contribute to the sketch. Remember what he said in the 2007 Zodiac documentary "When the composite drawing came out at Richmond Station and was posted on the wall he looked similar to the man I had seen on October 11th, I then wrote a scratch to my lieutenant to forward to homicide division, so they would have the additional information and appearance of the suspect." In other words his memorandum provided the additional information regarding the sketch, and considering this was November 12th, the amended composite could not have originated from him, having been made in the middle of October. The question therefore is how did the teenagers jump from a suspect from 25-30 yrs to a suspect 35-45 only days later without external influence. Not only that, but the police report itself issued on the 12th October, before the bulletin sketch of October 13th and only 8 hours after the actual murder contained # SUSPECT 2 describing somebody in their early 40's. How can the teenagers describe a 25-30 yrs suspect in the October 12th police report, contribute to a sketch being drawn up, to be issued on October 13th showing a man 25-30 yrs, but only 8 hours after the crime have issued the #2 SUSPECT also, describing a man in his early 40's. This couldn't have originated from the three teenagers, it certainly wasn't from Donald Fouke as already explained, so it had to originate from a third party, who as I've already stated must have viewed Zodiac heading up in the direction of Cherry, as the police report mentions no later sightings. The only third party we know of is the 8 year old, who if supplied this description, had to be in view of Cherry St and a high probability he is the child resident at 3898 Washington St in 1969. This appeared in the FBI files on November 12th. These obviously are not public knowledge at the time. After the threat on schoolchildren by Zodiac on October 13th, it may have been realized it was unwise for the newspapers to mention three teenagers viewing the crime scene killer. This was mentioned as early as the October 12th article by Keith Power. I don't know if this was regarded as errant journalism placing eyewitnesses in danger, but I cannot recall him writing another Zodiac article after that, but anyway the information had now been released and as you've said many times Alex may be why Zodiac made a veiled threat on schoolchildren for the first time. The police therefore likely acted responsibly in guarding the identity of the 8 year old, especially if he lived close to the scene and also had named an individual. There may have been a cautionary approach, even in placing this on file, with obviously the identity of Zodiac unknown. The three teenagers were higher profile, calling police and leaving their residence, hence got mentioned in the newspapers, however clearly the 8 year old was more of a silent witness, who's identity was understandably protected, along with his named subject.

Richard

7/31/2016 08:46:41 am

The October 12th Chronicle article did detail a man seen running into Julius Khan playground about 40 yrs. This does tally with the #2 SUSPECT mentioned in the October 12th police report. However the police report as I have already stated only mentions the suspect last seen heading up Cherry Street, so #2 suspect likely doesn't originate from the Jackson/Spruce/Playground sighting.
What this means is that we now have 4 sightings [1] The 3 teenagers [2] The 8 year old [3] Donald Fouke [4] Julius Khan playground eyewitnesses, effectively in that order. Donald Fouke never contributed to the police report on the 12th, it couldn't have been the JK playground eyewitness, otherwise the police report would have said "suspect last seen heading into Julius Khan playground", which it didn't, so considering the teenagers were describing a 25-30 year old, the only other eyewitness left is the 8 year old. However the sighting of a 40 year old heading into the park is closest to the #2 suspect in the police report, thereby possibly validating the suspect as likely 40'ish and possibly validating the sighting of the 8 year old, who named a 38 year old suspect.
If we follow this train of logic, then the 8 year old is responsible for #2 suspect in the report on the 12th in his early 40's, the next people who come forward by the 12th describing a man about 40 are the eyewitnesses by Spruce and Julius Khan playground, the direction you would expect the killer to be travelling if he lived further down Jackson, as referenced in the above document. But why would the above named subject head into Julius Khan playground. He had just had a close shave with Donald Fouke and his next available thoroughfare to escape Jackson Street was Spruce. The above named subject travels through the park for cover to the vicinity of his house, re-enters and rushes home.
This however brings up one resounding question regarding the 8 year old. Surely Xen or a photograph of him would have been presented to the 3 teenagers, Donald Fouke and the JK playground eyewitnesses to see if this was the same man they saw that night.
Or were further suspects only ruled out via fingerprints, suggesting their confidence of the blooded print as having originated from the killer.

Alex Lewis

8/17/2016 06:12:35 pm

Ok, well if the police report mentions an incident whereby a WMA is observed running into J.K Park then obviously it's logical to assume that this observation was given to Police by an unknown 3rd Party. There are two immediate question's that spring straight to Mind when considering this sighting, the first is:

- Who would be available on hand in such an area to see this? I think Kids playing in J.K Park can be excluded, it's just after 22.00 in October which means darkness fell long before this Park & Area become Zodiac's very own personal playing Ground. Adults in or around the area.....Again, why? For what purpose? Doesn't seem the most likely of places to be hanging around. That leaves the residential houses and rear upper floor windows overlooking the Park area? Possibly. Second Question I have is. . .

- Where did this WMA now running into J.K come running from? The assumption will be, if this is implied to be Zodiac running into the Park, that He came via Maple Wall Entrance? If this were the claimed route from whence He came then it immediately makes Me want to question 'Where the Hell has Kjell Gone?' Pelissetti turned to look down toward Maple Street's Wall entrance through into the Presidio and noted:

"Got all the way down to the next corner which was Maple. Had to decide again which way to go and so I looked to My left, toward the Presidio. It was much darker there, I couldn't see anybody scaling a wall or anything into the Pesidio, and I figured the chances of finding someone in that area was almost Nil.
"I turned to the Right and I saw A Man walking His dog. He was somewhat older than the description I had, A whole lot thinner, and had absolutely no blood on His clothes. I asked that gentleman if He saw anyone in the area and He told me 'No'."

Armond is now going to turn and leave back up Jackson, may take what, 30 to 45 seconds to get from Maple area back up To Cherry? Minute at tops. Now Armond has got back as far as, and onto, Cherry when according to Armond "And at that point Officer Don Fouke, who was with what I believe was a rookie officer, Eric Zelms, at the time pulled up very quicly in their police car...."

So AP has left Maple, and just approaching Cherry and here come Fouke rolling up on what should be a Mr K. Qvale & His dog., but Qvale has achieved a fete Houdini would be impressed with by disappearing from Maple altogether....*Poof*...Gone! And replacing The Multi Millionaire Vehicle Import Tycoon is a 2nd White Male who is coming down Jackson which is very odd in itself seen as Armond seems to have misses Him having just seconds before gone up that very street, and this WMA is minding His own Business, stumbling along the sidewalk, appearing at times to have a shuffling lope odd unsteady Gait, who goes up some steps.

I'm going no further at this point Rich Cause it's is going to continue to get oddly baffling and further confusing!

Richard

8/17/2016 08:48:00 pm

Don't forget Alex that Pelissetti met Fouke before he met the dog walker, not after.

Alex Lewis

8/18/2016 12:19:05 am

"Don't forget Alex that Pelissetti met Fouke before he met the dog walker, not after."

Well there's never really been clarification on this and have debated or discussed this point many a time over at Morf's. According to the 2007 chronology Armond is clearly declaring He had walked down to Maple on Jackson, and back up and had made it onto Cherry Street. Armond Has ran us through His travelling to Maple & Back and Speaking to His Gentleman with a Dog and after running through this states "At that point Officer Don Fouke, with rookie Eric Zelms, Pulled up very quickly in their police car. . ."

Richard

8/19/2016 07:01:44 am

The reason is, that if Donald Fouke passed Zodiac and then bumped into Pelissetti after he had already walked down Jackson, met the dog walker and returned to Cherry down Jackson, it follows that Pelissetti would have seen Zodiac also. To put it another way and considering that section of Jackson is two minutes at normal walking pace, it would mean that when Donald Fouke met Pelissetti at the top of Cherry, 2 minutes prior Pelissetti would have been at Jackson and Maple, and considering Fouke had just passed Zodiac some 20 seconds earlier, it would mean Pelissetti would have been at the Jackson/Maple intersection before Zodiac had even reached it, which we know was not possible.

Richard

7/31/2016 09:24:10 am

I may be reading too much into this, but the police report is separated into #1, #2, #3, #4, #5 and #6.
#1 details the crime and the fact the three teenagers had given a description to the police dispatcher. It states "Description was obtained from reportees." This means the description had already been recorded.
#2 Was a separate description of a man in his early 40's.
#3 States "LOSS to be determined. All property of victim in possession of the coroner.
Then the report says #4 N/A #5 N/A #6 N/A. Why footnote three items with nothing after them. My guess is they would have said #4 SUSPECT, #5 SUSPECT and #6 SUSPECT. These were the three teenagers, but their description had already been noted by the dispatcher and already recorded. The police report was signed by Pelissetti and Peda. Had Pelisstti omitted the three teenagers description, writing NOT APPLICABLE, because it had already been noted or had he already incorporated their description of the suspect into #2 SUSPECT as a sort of amalgam of their description and the 8 year old. This #2 SUSPECT description straight after the crime did not mention 25-30 yrs, so was Pelissetti getting this from another eyewitness close to the scene. It could possibly be argued he spoke to Donald Fouke at the top of Cherry or sometime on the 11th and remembered Fouke mentioning a man in his 40's, however if he incorporated this in the police report he should have mentioned David Fouke and the last sighting of the suspect heading up Jackson Street, which he didn't. So if Pelissetti is correct in the report and above board, the #2 suspect had to derive from a second source, close to the scene and #2 is separate to #4, #5 and #6, ie the three teenagers.

Richard

7/31/2016 09:30:09 am

Did Pelissetti question the 8 year old near the scene, but was advised to not mention the witness in the report, in view of the delicate information given by this eyewitness.

Alex Lewis

8/13/2016 06:18:21 pm

"Did Pelissetti question the 8 year old near the scene"

I wouldn't think so, He was consumed with updating all other units that the Suspect wasn't a BMA, but A WMA: "I couldn't get to the radio fast enogh to let everyone else know..." Declares Armond. By everyone else Richard Armond means everyone else except for Donald Fouke, He's not listening obviously as He seconds later, post Armond's Update, runs across a WMA.

Armond doesn't know of Don's refusal to believe A word He says at this point, and after broadcasting the update that Fouke recoils at, shut's His patrol car door, tunnels His vision along Cherry, and using His special training, attempts to make it down the length of the street without getting shot in the head and thus, making His attempt to run the gauntlet a spectacular failure. Armond is playing 007 slinging Himself over car bonnet's, Fouke is responding red light and siren to the Julius Kahn sea-saw and in the meantime Mr Qvale is walking His pooch muttering "What the Fk is going on?"

Alex Lewis

8/13/2016 06:39:00 pm

I wouldn't blame Kjell if He was indeed found on a driveway, I would run off street too with Army Pelissetti approaching. Kjell would be ordered to 'FREEZE, DROP IT!' Referring to Kjell's poodle. God forbid Armond takes the suspect to the floor cuffing Him....I mean you can't do that to someone as important and rich as A Kjell Qvale, who has connections other portant peep's.

AP would be on His knees "I'm sorry Your Majesty, ohh please don't have Me kidnapped & used in the Annual Sacrifice at Bohemian Grove."

I'm sorry, but you have to draw the line at attempting to arrest those who belong to A Secret Society/Club. They'll have anyone who tries shipped to Holland to be Euthanized immediately!

Richard

8/13/2016 11:18:10 pm

Armond Pelissetti may have been updating other units, then headed off to Jackson, but he returned before 10.10pm as stated in the reporr. Any eyewitnesses could have approached him at this point, or even spoke to Peda, who passed the eyewitness to his partner. The police hung around the area of Presidio Heights until the early hours, ample time for eyewitnesses to come forward, including the 8 year old.

Alex Lewis

8/13/2016 11:42:48 pm

"Armond Pelissetti may have been updating other units, then headed off to Jackson..."

He dashed to His Radio, that much I believe. However, No 'correction' or 'Amendment' was broadcast for a WMA suspect and not BMA, No error was ever broadcast I am Totally satisfied in my own mind of that. He spoke to Becca's Brother who admitted that when Pelissetti arrived on scene, He was stood on W'ton and Cherry St Intersect. looking down Cherry. So, logic and reason say that He told Armond that the responsible was literally just turning out of their View onto Jackson heading toward Maple and it was this crucial information that Armond dashed to broadcast to let all responding unit's know to respond West along Jackson and use Caution, suspect is on street between Cherry and Maple on Jackson Street, suspect is A WMA, Blue Zipper Jacket and is wearing Dark Rimmed Glasses. Will be armed and dangerous, use extreme caution."

That's what Armond dashed to put out over the air I am absolutely convinced without any doubt at all, and His broadcast is what led Don to be vigilant and approach Maple cautiously looking for a matching suspect. I would say the cops probably saw WMA and stopped and immediately got out and drew their weapons because they'd have to be complete idiots and suicidal to roll up on a WMA who is armed or believed to be, and sit there in their car and shout to Him "Excuse me Lunatic, seen anyone acting sus...... Hey hey! Now don't you go pointing that gun at Me you prick, that's dangerous and it could discharge accidentally! Throw it away at once and come over here now shit-face!

Alex Lewis

8/18/2016 01:03:47 am

"Did Pelissetti question the 8 year old near the scene?"

I don't know Rich. However, I've just had a fantastic idea!! Why don't we ask Armond? And when I say We Rich I obviously mean, You :-)

Oh come on now Rich, He loves discussing this case with the amateur community and you need only to ask Mike Rodelli for proof of that. I can't remember the specific Word Mr Pelissetti uses now when He affectionately refers to Mike, but I know it's "That Sad little something or other from Rhode Island"

Go on Rich, give Him A ring, I am wondering what title Mr Pelissetti will bestow upon You. . .

"That F'ing Limey from across the Pond" I am going for. Hehe

I cannot contact Him Rich on account of being Welsh, His fellow dispatched Patrolman D. Fouke has already shown Contempt for The Welsh by offering up a belief that Zodiac is A Welsh Man.

"That man I saw, He had a Welsh Ancestry and that's a fact! I mean let's not mess about here, lets get straight down to Racism! The Welsh did it! If you are Welsh then it's a scientific fact that your one of two things! Your either a Coal Miner, and if not, then your A Serial Killer! And when they have coal Mining serial Killers then many go down the mine never to return! Zodiac is Welsh, and I have solid and irrefutable evidence. . . I am the evidence, and I have said so. F****g Welsh Zodiac killing little pricks, where's My Sniper Rifle I'm going to Wales!

Donald must hate His Welsh Wife is all I can think of.

Richard

7/31/2016 09:43:55 am

The police report in my opinion points to four identifications of the suspect - #2, #4, #5 and #6, all before the suspect reaches the top of Cherry. This may be the biggest indicator that the 8 year old child was in a position to view the suspect heading up Cherry, and likely a resident of Washington Street. A positive identification much more likely in view of the time Zodiac spent at the taxicab, but whether the Zodiac and the above named subject are one and the same depends on the context of the sighting. Was the above named subject just innocently walking in the area and was viewed by the 8 year old about the same timeframe, nevertheless an intriguing question.

Alex Lewis

8/13/2016 10:34:50 pm

Rich I just can't see this Forth witness being associated with or at same residence as the other three. Rebecca and Her Brothers, Witnesses One, Two and Three all recalled by Name By Pelissetti in His reporting of the incident. And if Eight Year old was with Becca and Brothers at the same residence, how and why would the youngest of them recognize the Man as Xen, yet the older three fail to?

I was wondering earlier if the Eight Year Old witnesses silence is due to them being almost certain the ID'd the correct person on the night. Imagine you are certain Rich when asked 'Is this Man the man You observed at the Cab outside on Oct 11?' and the kid is adamant 'YES' only to have Law Enforcement return shortly thereafter to inform the child "We couldn't find any other witnesses, nor corroborating evidence and so unfortunately Kid, We've had to let Him go without charge. By the way, He knows you ID'd Him, All the best Child."

At Age Eight I think I'd collapse with fear each time darkness fell and I heard the echoing knock at the front door.

Serious though, if this witness has reason to believe "Oh I got it wrong, I was too young, though I knew who I saw but made a mistake" then surely they'd have no concerns or fear in coming forward to state as such?

Thing is Rich, even if you contacted someone who fit the age and area, and it turned out to be the correct person and they were the said Witness mentioned in FBI Document, if He/She responds claiming "Sorry, I am not who your seeking" then we can never prove different. Their name is not recalled, and this here is the exact and specific reason why police are duty bound to list the names and addresses of all witnesses, so that their statements can be verified or discounted.

In the Legal World a Law Maxim states, off top of my head, something to the effect of: 'If the name is not found, the thing does not exist.' Or something like that, I'll look up the actual wording later. The Point is, in A Court of Law, this witness has not been given an identity and therefore nothing that is alleged to have been said by them is admissible.

Alex Lewis

8/13/2016 10:51:49 pm

It's not just this one Eight year old, the other witnesses that were named and recalled by AP in His report, they have kept an almost half-century long silence on that night's events, too.

There has to be a reason for their never speaking of this in my opinion, especially at or around the time the 2007 Hit 'Zodiac' was due for release, The Makers spent Millions no doubt on the Movies pre-release Marketing and Publicity. It was a smash Hit in the States as a whole, I imagine in SF specifically it would have been difficult not to hear people talking about the film all over the City.

I am not suggesting it's A 'Someone' that they fear, but maybe a something, a knowledge gained on Oct 11 about something, I don't know what, but they saw or know something and in my opinion it's significant enough, maybe even concurs with Bettye's "The true ending it will shake the Earth" assertion that they decided to adopt the attitude of "I ain't saying anything, I am not getting involved

Alex Lewis

8/13/2016 11:03:20 pm

Well Look, if this eight year old had Identified a person and, upon receiving the document Non redacted had revealed the Eight year old witness had identified a 23 year old WMA from Alaska visiting the area or whatever, just basically ID's someone who doesn't match perfectly with Mr Fouke's description of His up close encounter with a WMA, then I'd concede that Witnesses ID is not supported or backed up by any other evidence or facts.

However, the fact that the Kid Identifies a White Male, who happens to reside closeish to the scene, and just happens to corroborate and match the age description given by A Trained Observer. . . Evidence of Identification by witness now given strength and backed up by Police Officer who also saw Suspect He described as being "Thirty-Five to Forty-Five years of age." Eight Year Old Identified Thirty Eight Year Old Local Man Xenophon Anthony as POSSIBLE subject responsible. What more need I say?

Richard

8/13/2016 11:38:36 pm

If SUSPECT#2 in the police report is not the 8 year old, or if it is, I find its lack of attribution strange. Two of the teenagers were named in the police report yet redacted, the 8 year old was only mentioned as 'the 8 year old'. Why not name the child and redact it like the others. If the 8 year old description wasn't present in the police report, coupled with the FBI report a month later, are we to assume the 8 year old never came forward immediately or it was kept under wraps for some reason.

Richard

8/13/2016 11:50:37 pm

If I had been approached by the movie producers to give my input of the night of October 11th, I would have certainly jumped at the chance. The perks certainly outweigh the disadvantages and I am sure they would have been compensated well, not to mention the chance to highlight the case in the public eye and generate renewed interest in the case, which can only be good for the victims families, who desperately want it solved. The fact we have never seen or heard from these people in decades is a strange one, after all just about everybody else involved in the case has had their pennies worth. Bryan Hartnell revisited the actual murder site at Berryessa, which must have hit him hard, even Mageau turned up. The three now adults however, who got the longest prolonged view of the killer actually en scene have never been seen since. There is more to this story than meets the eye.

Alex Lewis

8/14/2016 12:08:34 am

Rich, Don tried to explain away His non detaining of A WMA (only after Zodiac writes, 'PS 2 Cops pulled a goof' and not before) by claiming "Ah well that was because the initial broadcast was incorrect and said suspect was an NMA."

Convenient. But wait, here's a fellow cop who swears that before trying not to get His head blown off, He issued an updated correction to "Let everybody else know." So Mr Fouke, even if your phantom error prone dispatcher had gave the NMA, it would not be relevant as your colleague has saved the day by issuing an update! Yayyy! Ohh, you don't agree? You say the first you were aware of the 'Correction' was when Armond informed you in person at Jackson & Cherry area? *SIGH*

Ok, moving on.... We know you knew the suspect was White no matter what now, and so, now We may need to know the real reason why you allowed Him to walk away and did not detain Him, and worse still, never requested His details?

See Rich I just have not been able to shake off the idea, because the evidence will not allow Me to, that there's a WMA here that Fouke believes was beyond approach and arrest, maybe a superior. If it is not due to His knowing who this WMA is when encountering Him, and recognizing Him as A superior that answers why He let Him Go, then surely He had to obtain the Name of this Male. That's not even something He needs Police Training to do, it's fuc**** automatic and obvious. Yet Don Fouke changes His version time and time again and yet Hiding Noting and would have Us believe He does not know who He saw that night because He forgot to ask Him His Name.

Mate, if others want to accept such absolute F'ing nonsense that quite frankly, is insulting to the intelligence to ask Me to accept as 'That's what Happened Alex, Honestly!' then that's up to them.

If refusing to believe such utter utter bull shit just because it's a Man with a badge that say's it means I am labeled a Conspiracy Theorist, then so be it. The official version is also theory, it's not fact and cannot be, factual truths don't change with tine, their stories do & have!

Alex Lewis

8/14/2016 12:23:22 am

I believe in the authentic nature of the 3rd party witness who commented on what Rebecca and Her Brother had told them about what happened in that they stop at the point in the chain of events where Armond has been told where Suspect has just gone, and takes off in pursuit of Him.

"And what happens Next, well, that is for someone else to tell at another time..."

Sounds absolutely believable as a statement made by them for Me. This part here as Armond takes off along Cherry closing distance on Zodiac from behind Him, as fellow unit responds from the opposite direction and is imminently about to cut Zodiac off........"That's for someone else to reveal at another time..."

Yep, right where we are about to snare WMA in a no escape available trap and Don stops Him while Armond comes to assist on foot, **drum roll please.....** AND.......Nothing! Silence. Mismatching accounts, contradictions appear, memories fail, and nobody knows nor can remember.

Yes, I believe there is nothing they are concealing. Cops lie and contradict each other over facts of a homicide for no good reason all the time. Except obviously, they simply never ever do!

Alex Lewis

8/14/2016 05:53:21 am

"If the 8 year old description wasn't present in the police report, coupled with the FBI report a month later, are we to assume the 8 year old never came forward immediately or it was kept under wraps for some reason."

My opinion/answer.. the latter. The slightly confusing thing is Rich, San Francisco are sending this Teletype to the Director of the FBI for Attn of Ident. Division and seem to suggest by the way they word their final statement that the FBI are aware of this witnesses they speak of. Let's assume the FBI have no idea that A witness has observed the suspect and IDENTIFIED Him. SFPD just saying out of the blue in a footnote, "By the way, the eight year old witness in P. Heights, He/She Identified Xenophon Anthony as possibly responsible...."

If I'm the Director reading this, My first response is going to be "Witness. . .Positive Ident. . .Witnessed the event unfold/Murder of Stine, what witness are they talking about!!

SFPD would likely have said something, if the FBI didn't already have knowledge of a witness ident, "A Crime Scene witness observed offender at taxi in immediate aftermath of Homicide and subsequently identified Suspect above, Xenophon Anthony, as possibly being the responsible."

However, The SFPD do not. They declare,for specific info of Ident Division: "San Francisco Police Dpt advise that 8 yr old witness identified Xen. . ." A kinda "You know the witness we are referring to..." I may be mistaken in making this assumption and am far from certain that is actually the implied message here, but it reads this way to Me.

The only justifiable reason I can come up with for their keeping this witness off the radar so to speak is due to the witness possibly having information that SFPD deemed crucial and if it was let out, could tip Z off and/or Z may take action to get rid of something the Kid saw Him in possession of.

I can imagine of the media got wind of a witness in the case naming/pointing out someone and positively Identifying them as Zodiac. The poor Kid would leave Home for the school bus and wouldn't get 10 yards before 7 reporters bombard the poor boy/girl: "Mr So and So, can you confirm you recognized Zodiac?" "Did you give the Police A Name?" What did you see on the night? "Have you received any threats from Zodiac?" "What is Zodiac's true Name.....Kid, can you give me His Name....KIDD!"

Alex Lewis

8/14/2016 09:42:48 am

"The police report in my opinion points to four identifications of the suspect - #2, #4, #5 and #6,"

What, you mean as in Four separate Identifications made by Four on scene witnesses of One Suspect? Four people told cops on scene "Yes, Him, that's the Guy" pointing to a detained White Male with Police at the roadside on Jackson sort of scenario?

Well if that happened then something is wrong here beyond question because while I don't understand nor accept it not being reported, I can however accept One Ident. made by a single witness is not going to result in an Indictment and Prosecution, it's not as reasonable to believe and accept Four people positively identified One, meybe even more than one suspect out there that night and this resulted in no arrest, no questioning, no anything. Unless, as previously mentioned, 'The Identity of Zodiac/s was such a bombshell (I dunno, let's use Mr Toschi as the example here) that Law Enforcement deliberately covered the identifications up.

Richard

7/31/2016 10:40:19 am

The above document is page 2. Page 1 has been stamped 12th November. The Zodiac PDF2 of the FBI files page 9, mentions two suspects residing in San Francisco by the murder site and working in San Francisco. This is also dated 12th November. Do you believe a connection exists to the above document, since it's stamped the same day, or does another suspect live close by that we don't know. The redacted sections don't fit Kjell Qvale.

Alex Lewis

8/14/2016 07:26:28 am

Rich you recon a personal Tel. Call from yours truly to the Fedewal Bewrow of Speculation may do any good? You know, a friendly "Ahh good afternoon, do not hang up when I declare 'Zodiac Case' followed by the words 'Welsh Chappie' or I will have no choice other than to harass Davey Sobonya once again with 138.4 FOIA Filed....and that's just Monday Mornings effort!."

No but serious, ask them and declare I am not looking for a full explanation as to why a crucial witness did not appear anywhere in Police Reports along with their most Case Breaking Potential Positive Suspect Ident, but rather point them to the Document and Quote beginning "FOR INFO IDENT. DIVISION" and ask them for advice on how I may go about determining why this referred to Identification here never made it to any official SFPD reports and as such I wish to know, if possible, what the circumstances were that led to Positive Ident along with the resulting actions undertaken by Authorities?

I don't think I will push it and demand upon them answering

Good Afternoon, Agent John Doe FBI Public Relations Dpt, how may I help you?"

My response, in a cadence/strange accent: "GET ME THE EXCELLENTLY IMPRESSIVE JOHN DOUGLAS ON THE BLOWER NOW RAT FACE, MOVE IT MOVE IT MOVE IT!"

Richard

8/5/2016 03:24:48 am

The first composite sketch on the Zodiac on October 13th '69 has some unusual statements on it "Suspect takes cab in downtown area at 9.30 pm and sits in front seat with driver. Tells driver destination is Washington and Laurel area or area near park or Presidio. Upon reaching destination, suspect orders driver to continue on at gunpoint into or near park where he perpetrates robbery."
This is remarkably different from the perceived Washington and Maple destination supposedly on the trip sheet. Yes it could be an error, but the idea that you would get the street name completely wrong on such an important flyer is incomprehensible. The nature of the crime yes, but to pluck a name out of nowhere seems odd. The trip sheet could answer a lot of things, without it the supposed destination of Washington and Maple is just that. If the Zodiac had pulled a gun on Stine at Washington and Laurel, then the idea Zodiac held Stine under gunpoint is not as far fetched when you consider the taxicab being found at Washington and Cherry.

Alex Lewis

8/14/2016 06:02:37 am

I agree totally Rich, good observation. The comments/statements are made assertively as if not in question. The wanted posted doesn't declare "suspect takes cab at approx: 21:30 Hrs and it is believed rides up front with Victim" which you May expect them to state if they are not 100% sure of the Zodiac's position in Paul Cab. Not really given much attention to this before, good spot.

Alex Lewis

8/14/2016 06:11:27 am

Maybe thought Rich it's deliberate incorrect information circulated on the WANTED poster in an attempt to goad a responsive rebuttal letter from Z. They know from previous communications with Him that when LE question if it's really the killer writing and if so, ask Him for more details He obliged gleefully that He's more than happy to supply even more Specific Details from the Good times of His homicidal rage.

Maybe they're hoping He see's the poster and is offended at such inaccurate info and compelled to write another "Contrary to what the idiotic Police & Their Wanted Poster Says, I did not ride up front on the journey over there by Washington streets and Maple Streets. .

Unlikely, but not out of the question.

Richard

8/14/2016 07:21:13 am

Alex, sorry I am not replying as much lately. At the moment I am in the process of completely revamping the site, every page, adding much more information and decluttering it of unnecessary banner links. Have managed about 12 pages or so. Just another 20 odd to go. I shall catch up in comments shortly my good friend.

Alex Lewis

8/14/2016 08:02:53 am

No need to apologize mate.

Lets revamp the site along with The Invention of our Official Title: "The British Association for Amateur Sloths for The San Francisco Zodiac Case."

Chief of Chiefs, His Majesty & Pharaoh: Alexander the Grate of Wales.....MBE!

Supreme Website Leader and WBC Heavyweight Champion of....A Website? Mr Richard of England, (A Nationality I am trying to overlook! ;-)-

PUBIC NOTICE: The British Association for Amateur Sloths for The Zodiac Case are currently recruiting New Members. Please submit applications for membership, along with your annual membership fee of £350.00 to R. Grinell, Cash-Quick Enterprises Ltd and He'll take approx. 14 days to review your application before swiftly refusing it, without refund. Have a nice day.

If your rehash, or overhaul of The site isn't to my taste Richard that's OK, I'll just tell you to go back to this format we have here now. What are Friends For? *Grin*

Alex Lewis

8/14/2016 08:13:28 am

I'm adding the Legal Maxim, One of the Guiding Wisdom's The Law's Attributes to itself that declares as added above to the thread....

Alex Lewis

8/14/2016 09:27:24 am

I know I have referenced Several times now The Law & Its Legal Maxims, but not only are the Maxims a list of Moral Guidelines (for want of a better Expression/Term) but many of them are extremely relevant: Here are a handful more:

- The best interpretation is made from things preceding and following; i.e., the context.

- Frequently where the propriety of words is attended to, the meaning of truth is lost.

- Words are to be interpreted according to the subject-matter.

- Fraud lies hid in general expressions.

- Often it is the new road, not the old one, which deceives the traveler.

- Let justice be done, though the heavens should fall.

- What does not appear does not exist.

(Here's one for the Document & Comment of "FOR INFO OF IDENT. DIVISION...")

. . . - It is improper to pass an opinion on any part of a sentence, without examining the whole.

- In ambiguous things, such a construction is to be made, that what is inconvenient and absurd is to be avoided.

- To refer errors to their origin is to refute them.

- To conceal is one thing, to be silent another.

And Finally, for now anyway. . .

- Suppression of fact, which should be disclosed, is the same in effect as willful misrepresentation.

Richard

8/5/2016 03:42:11 am

We have several things regarding the above document and Xen.
He was 38 years on October 11th 1969, therefore matching Donald Fouke's age range and the #2SUSPECT in the police report. The 8 year old witness matches the boy, who was 8 years and 2 months of age, living at 3898 Washington Street on October 11th 1969. The suspect headed along Jackson eastwards in the direction of 3218 Jackson Street. Actually Laurel Street is only just over 1 block from 3218 Jackson Street and this address is very close to where Zodiac may have re-emerged from the park. (not withstanding that he may not have entered the park as you have already attested Alex). The taxicab came to rest at Washington and Cherry, the trip sheet supposedly stated Washington and Maple, but we don't know that for certain. Zodiac could even have said Washington and Maple to the taxicab driver, but had no intention of stopping there, to throw police. There are so many possible scenarios Alex, there could be still a twist in the tail.

Alex Lewis

8/13/2016 12:38:48 pm

I don't think it's plausible, well, maybe even possible, if it could be discovered if Xen had any connection to, or was ever known to use, the St Francis Hotel?

I was pondering the comment made by Hines regarding what Dave Toschi said to him about a phone call being made for the cab.

It is alleged that Zodiac had called to order this cab and had done so using 'The Payphone in Downtown Union Square.'

It jumps out at me the term or choice of wording here of 'The' opposed to 'A' payphone. Is this suggestive of there only being One and that is 'The' Payphone in Union Square ?

Alex Lewis

8/13/2016 11:20:14 pm

"He was 38 years on October 11th 1969, therefore matching Donald Fouke's age range and the #2SUSPECT in the police report."

Absolutely Agree. It's not solid evidence, but consistent and corroborative evidence from Two Independent witnesses both unaware of the other when they give their evidence.

" The 8 year old witness matches the boy, who was 8 years and 2 months of age, living at 3898 Washington Street on October 11th 1969."

Again, not proof positive, but consistent and matches the evidence, this time, the age of stated witness and a resident's age overlooking the area of relevance.

"The taxicab came to rest at Washington and Cherry, the trip sheet supposedly stated Washington and Maple, but we don't know that for certain"

Agreed. It could simply be Zodiac and another of His deliberate games to state Maple, knowing He's going to end up at Cherry before He leaves Union Square or just as likely to be His actual Intended Location but upon arrival, A Vehicle lights approach the Intersect coming up/down Maple while He is approaching it on W'ton, or maybe simple pedestrian activity. It was only 22:00, an hour at which many are still awake and up.

"There are so many possible scenarios Alex, there could be still a twist in the tail."

And therein We have to ask. . . Have the waters been deliberately muddied with version after version, claim then counterclaim, factual declaration by One immediately refuted by the other. It's your classic Misinformation Scenario, simply put so much out there and change your story so many times, mix lie after lie with the odd truth and pretty soon the people won't know what the F*** to believe!

Alex Lewis

8/6/2016 07:35:33 am

Just returned after a few days and there is a lot to digest in your responses Rich. Firstly mate, than you and I appreciate the replies and your opinions.

"(not withstanding that he may not have entered the park as you have already attested Alex)"

Yes, but I feel it's more important and relevant to declare I have also attested to My opinions being Un-challengeable and not open to argument on pain of death. Hehe.

Ok, the serious bit....

"I may be reading too much into this, but the police report is separated into #1, #2, #3, #4, #5 and #6."

Rich I don't see how anyone can say, believe or accuse You or I of 'Reading too much into something' when the crux of what we are discussing is a unmentioned, undocumented witness who is not any of the known and recorded witnesses across the street, and this witness who is mentioned nowhere in any official police report is the most significant witness not just in PH incident, but the entire Zodiac Killer Case.

If I am wrong or someone else wishes to debate Me on this point, I am here waiting. How can a witness who put's a name to the suspect called Zodiac by positive Identification of Him after He/She "Witness in murder of Taxi Driver" identified the offender by Name and if anyone wishes to argue or debate as to why leaving this witness and more importantly their Ident out of any official reports and support this and say why, I'm here all for that debate.

Some may offer: "Well they obviously followed it up and determined the witness was wrong and Xen was in Ohio" for example. Ok, my response to this would be "Then no reason whatsoever not to document just that.... "Witness ID's Xen, Investigative efforts in following week reveal Xen out of State, as such, Mr Anthony cleared from Investigation."

Alex Lewis

8/6/2016 07:45:37 am

I don't want to have Xen declared My Personal 'Pet Suspect' because that's a term I associate with a person's theory on who Z is to the exclusion of all others.

Yes, at present, I would say Xen is in position No.1 on my personal list of Suspects, but it's not because I am the person who got His name released, or that I think His name is a great name (Although, you have to admit even begrudgingly, Xenophon is a Cool Name, One shared by a Greek philosopher & Historian) but His being My No.1 suspect at present is not really a personal decision or choice I made, it's simply due to that thing I keep mentioning....The Preponderance of Evidence.

Alex Lewis

8/6/2016 10:44:10 am

If we move away from Still Spoken language of Greek to the Late and Deceased Language of Latin, I give this philosophical declaration as one we may wish to remember:

"semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."

Now for them that are not fluent in Latin like Myself (If you believe that, then I also have, up for sale, the Golden Gate Bridge) the above translates to English as:

"the necessity/burden of proof lies with He who lays the charge."

And this is why I avoid forming opinions or pushing a suspect as Z unless I, the one charging Xen as POI No.1, can offer proof or my reasons why. The Burden is mine, and I carry it willingly.

I won't overlook evidence of any kind if that evidence doesn't support The immeasurable importance of My illogically opinion. For Example: Science & it's support for "BIG BANG theory"

If Science tells me that it is not physically possible to have an apple appear in an empty room and do so out of thin air & from nowhere, then science is ignoring (willfully and knowingly) the huge flaw in the 'Big Bang Theory.' If it violates All known Natural laws to have something be extracted or simply come to be from absolute nothing, then this applies to their Theory of the Creation of our Universe too, which overlooking or discounting it because it smashes their own theory to bits, well that's ill advised!

Richard

8/8/2016 04:02:36 am

Have submitted a FOIA to South Lake Tahoe for records and police reports pertaining to Donna Ann Lass, and then I'm going to contact the San Francisco Chronicle.

Alex Lewis

8/13/2016 11:04:53 am

I was going through my documents I have compiled via FOIA the other day & didn't realize I had that many.

I was talking to a police officer earlier this week and telling Him of my interest in this case and explained the witness ID of a suspect that never appeared in any reports and asked Him if He could maybe think of a reason why that may be. He said No, He couldn't. I was talking to Him about this case for a while as He'd never heard of it.
He referred to me as "A Walking Encyclopedia of Current Affairs.' I am not one to ever brag Rich, as you know yourself, if One looks up 'Humble' in the Dictionary, there is no written definition of this word, just a simple photograph of Me. Hehe

Alex Lewis

8/13/2016 11:14:29 am

No,but in all seriousness Rich I feel so much empathy for Donna's loved ones. Whether Z was her assailant or another is not relevant mate inasmuch as it's not who killed her (I think it's almost certain She met with foul play) but rather, where did He/They put her.

I said before, as unjust as Paul Stine's death was, as inexcusable and cold blooded, and His life matters then and does now no more and yet no less than any other. . . at least His loved ones can go mourn His senseless death at His grave-side.

Donna's Mother, Her Father, Her Sister and all who loved Her never have had that most smallest of luxuries and the not knowing must be far worse than if they knew she met a horrid end. This was why Harvey Hines persisted till the end of His life, trying to find and give Her family some answers and for that alone, I commend Harvey Hines the Detective and above all, H.H the Man.

Alex Lewis

8/13/2016 02:47:04 pm

Anyway, I am now about to leave this specific thread here and head to another so if everyone present would please come to order and: All Rise. . Honorable Judge Humble has declared a recess.

PS. I was watching a clip of Boxing Promoter Eddie Hearn the other day who humorously said exactly what I had many months back. . . "Do you think I can charge people to ask me a Question? Twitter fans who wish to put a question to me, do you think I can charge them to ask me? 10p? Maybe?" Love a bit of humor and sarcasm.

Alex Lewis

8/13/2016 12:43:04 pm

Sadly though Rich, FOIA's in relation to Donna Lass may come up against a brick wall because it's a missing persons case that while may not be classed as an 'open' investigation, it will likely be termed 'Ongoing' and as such, requests for info in terms of evidence they have in Her case, that will almost certainly be denied.

Alex Lewis

8/14/2016 01:26:04 pm

Attention Irate Division! Immaturity see's Welsh Chappie identify Non Promotion Awrded as possible reason for weeping"

I...i've been sat here all day waiting for Richard to Pop the Question, and still One is abandoned to the unknown.
Richard all day I've been waiting to sat "I DO!" and, *voice breaking* you didn't ask *flods of tears,,,,, I AM DROWDING!

Why oh why Richard won't you pop the important question?

"Welsh Chappie, Would you do Me the honor of being my Newly installed sole Website Moderator?"

Then I'll become offended "Noooo! Too Late, I have accepted a Moderating Job Offer from, um, the Highly saught after website.....ummm, yes... Gum-e-Gum.co.HeewwwwK.

Na i'm joking, I wouldn't be interested in moderating chat/posts. I am applying for your site's 'Door Man' vacant position so I can bash certain people over the head and deny entry. Salary, negotiable.

Xen's Name, Age and Address Highlighted? Why?

Leave a Reply.

Categories

Xen's Name, Age and Address Highlighted?﻿ Why?

Leave a Reply.

Categories

Xen's Name, Age and Address Highlighted? Why?