When determining the usefulness of the partial bloody fingerprint on Paul Stine's taxicab, located on the dividing panel between the driver side and rear passenger door, it is important to bear in mind whether the opinion is objective or subjective. Is the analysis of the bloody fingerprint, its location and origin based purely on grounded reasoning, or does the person giving their views on the fingerprint have an ulterior motive for arriving at the conclusion they did? In other words, had they already reached their conclusion beforehand and just worked backwards.

Let us assume for a moment that the partial bloody fingerprint was the Zodiac Killer's, and was of sufficient ridge detail to eliminate suspects. How many people with an unwavering belief in a particular suspect, or who had written a book naming a suspect, would want this assumption to be correct? If your suspect is Kjell Qvale, then the idea that this fingerprint was Zodiac's and had enough ridge detail to eliminate your suspect, is simply too unsettling to consider. Therefore, it's in your best interests to discredit the fingerprint as originating from Zodiac at all costs. Never could you declare it was a genuine Zodiac Killer print, because your book has the potential to go up in flames. Effectively your position is cemented from the get-go. If the bloody print doesn't eliminate your suspect, then that is the ideal scenario and everything is great. However, why risk the possibility that it could eliminate your suspect when it is far easier to discredit or question the fingerprint and keep your suspect in the frame for murder (hopefully indefinitely). Whichever scenario unfolds doesn't matter, because you have crafted for yourself a no lose strategy. You have essentially created your own firewall of protection.

The teenagers across the street from the crime scene stated that nobody approached the taxicab in the time between Zodiac leaving the scene and the arrival of Officer Armond Pelissetti. When Pelissetti arrived, he claimed he saw the bloody fingerprints on the left side of the taxicab, stating "I seen the bloody prints as I approached the cab - I mean, it was totally visible". This was before the arrival of any other people, such as emergency personnel, additional police units, reporters and bystanders. However, if you choose to discredit the bloody fingerprints, then you have to consider the possibility that Officer Armond Pelissetti was mistaken or lying, police had no protocol for securing a crime scene, ambulance crews had reason to attend to the stricken Paul Stine - and then having done so - travel around the taxicab and check what size shoes he was wearing, depositing their bloody fingerprints on the taxicab exterior in absence of any gloves (that one would assume was imperative at a crime scene). If you fear these partial fingerprints ruling out your suspect, then it is probably circumspect to believe that the whole crime scene was a circus of wandering individuals following no rules whatsoever. If you believe these fingerprints were left by the killer and were to find they subsequently ruled out your suspect, then it is very difficult to employ a sprinkling of revisionism later, and now disingenuously declare the fingerprints invalid rather than your suspect. The bitter pill of being wrong is usually too hard to swallow, so it's probably best to hedge your bets and discredit them first.  

The question has to be asked, as to why Arthur Leigh Allen was pursued right up to his death in 1992 for the Zodiac killings, if law enforcement believed the bloody taxicab fingerprints were deposited by the Zodiac Killer and had enough ridge detail to eliminate suspects in the case? One possibility, is that certain individuals in law enforcement were so blinkered in their belief that Arthur Leigh Allen was Zodiac, they themselves started questioning the origin of the fingerprints - unable to accept the fingerprints were that of the killer, having excluded Allen.

The real question is, if the fingerprints have enough ridge detail to be declared partial, or were deposited by the Zodiac Killer, would this possibility become too unpalatable to consider for certain people, when it could conceivably bring about the downfall of the suspect you have so carefully crafted over many years? Isn't it better to discredit the fingerprints first, then in the unlikely event the fingerprints don't eliminate your suspect, you can claim the spoils either way. The progression of crime fighting tools with the advent of DNA testing has made little impact in the Zodiac case. They are the new and improved fingerprint, but the same rules apply. Make sure you get your excuses in early - and if by some miracle a DNA fingerprint is procured from a stamp or envelope seal and rules out your charge - claim your suspect knew that biological material could be incriminating (or one day more so), or claim he didn't like the taste of glue from the stamps or envelopes, thereby recruiting random (can't remember) acquaintances to do the task for him - but above all - never accept a result will ever prove anything. 

If a piece of Paul Stine's shirt was mailed, along with his driver's license in a letter postmarked 1990, then you would expect that the majority of individuals would relinquish or question their indefatigable belief that Ross Sullivan and Earl Van Best Jr were the Zodiac Killer (and other suspects depending on the date of the communication). That would be a mistake. Their first thought would not be, let's examine the mailing and side with the preponderance of evidence. Their first thought would be, let us do everything humanly possible to discredit the mailing at all costs. An admission of being wrong, simply a step too far for some individuals. The inability to accept we may be wrong has become an inescapable feature of the Zodiac case, whereas it should be viewed as a strength. Whether it be fingerprints, DNA or hard circumstantial evidence, for some the case will never be closed. Unless of course, it points to their suspect and no other.    

Covered many times before, I would like to highlight what I believe is the most important aspect of the case with respect to locating and identifying the elusive Zodiac Killer (and because I've run out of material). This analysis is far from foolproof, but it relies on the instincts of a killer in the immediate aftermath of an attack or murder. I remember an episode of Dark Minds featuring M. William Phelps and John Kelly, in which an incarcerated serial killer stated his primary objective after the murder of a stranger, was to put as much distance between the victim and himself as soon as possible. Without any personal connection to his victim, there was no need for extensive concealment of the crime or interaction subsequent to the murder. The longer you linger in the near vicinity, the greater the risk of capture. This is exactly what happened at Blue Rock Springs Park on July 5th 1969, in which the Zodiac Killer failed to put the necessary distance between him and the crime scene that was available to him. He took 40 minutes to reach a payphone only 8-10 minutes away, effectively wasting 30 minutes in the interim. It has been suggested that the Zodiac Killer possibly parked up his vehicle and watched the unfolding events from a discreet location, or even went for a drink or bite to eat. While this is not impossible, is it the most realistic choice after a brutal attack near midnight on July 4th 1969?  

If you take a look at the Blue Rock Springs parking lot in the police report, it shows the bullet casings (slag) marked to the left of the passenger door, as though the bulk of the casings ejected to the shooter's left. Seven bullet casings were retrieved from this location, with two casings discovered on the back floorboard of the Corvair. This indicates that the killer must have leaned a considerable distance into the Corvair when returning and targetting Michael Mageau for the second time. At this juncture, Darlene Ferrin had been struck three times and Michael Mageau twice, having thrust himself backwards over the rear of the front passenger seat. There is a high probability that a killer leaning into the vehicle and over the front seat to sight Michael Mageau for the final two shots, would receive blood transfer from the vehicle interior onto his short-sleeved blue shirt. If the firearm continued to eject casings laterally, the gun would likely have to be some distance inside the vehicle for two of the casings to remain in the back passenger area of the Corvair. Any blood transfer from the seating to the perpetrator would now be a problem (whether the murderer has a jacket or not). Would a killer now choose to remain in the area 30 minutes longer than necessary in a public setting, seek refuge or place as much distance between himself and the crime scene as conceivably possible?         

A killer living in San Francisco would greatly diminish his chances of getting caught by heading home immediately, and making any desired phone call to police from somewhere equidistant to the crime scene and his residence (such as Richmond or Novato), rather than linger in the near vicinity he was last seen heading by Michael Mageau. He risks vehicle identification, along with incrimination through blood transfer to his clothing and gunshot residue. Not withstanding, he may still be in possession of the firearm. If the killer had originally intended to make the phone call to police from the Springs and Tuolumne payphone immediately (before the crime had been discovered), then something changed those plans. He effectively took 40 minutes to accomplish a task that should have taken no more than 10 minutes. Visible blood transfer to his arms and clothing may have been the deciding factor. Head home and separate yourself from the vehicle, blood transfer, gunshot residue and clothing. Then, without any visibly incriminating evidence, head back to the nearest payphone to make the telephone call you so badly wanted to make. This is also not without risk, but significantly lower than being spotted covered in blood. 

Law enforcement would very likely have canvassed the area around the Springs and Tuolumne payphone for eyewitnesses to the call, and scoured the near vicinity for any vehicle identified by Michael Mageau. The Zodiac Killer probably used the appeal from Vallejo Police Chief Jack E. Stiltz, who requested the writer to send a further correspondence "with more facts to prove it", as an opportunity to put distance between his residence and the payphone. He sent a correspondence to the San Francisco Examiner on August 4th 1969 with some very useful information to help police. Having never mentioned any of his victims by name, or dwelled on their actual killings, before or since, he was extremely helpful in providing police with a extremely detailed and convenient eyewitness to his payphone call. Not only did this eyewitness see Zodiac make the telephone call, but he was very helpful in providing police with the color of the Zodiac Killer's vehicle. The problem is, the police don't seem to have any recollection of this "shabbily dressed negro male, about 40-45 years of age" in the police report, or in the subsequent 51 years. Despite the fact an admission of his existence and his contact with police, would place him in no jeopardy whatsoever in 2020, there has been no report or spoken word that this negro male ever existed. The over descriptive nature of this helpful eyewitness by Zodiac, seemed designed to convince the reader that Zodiac was driving around in a brown car 40 minutes after the Blue Rock Springs attack.       

Why does a killer have to invent an eyewitness to his telephone call, if not to achieve a purpose? If law enforcement had been canvassing the local area, this was the perfect opportunity to redirect the police's attention. You first create a credible eyewitness by detailing his ethnicity, age range and what clothing he was wearing. Then your eyewitness can corroborate the testimony of Michael Mageau, who had on numerous occasions described his attacker's vehicle as brown. This adds validity to the claim of Zodiac, who is effectively cementing the notion of him driving around in a brown car. However, if police knew that no negro male had come forward with this information, then understandably they would have realized that the Zodiac Killer was selling them a story and justifiably have come to the conclusion that his vehicle wasn't brown at all. I highly doubt any serial killer voluntarily surrenders incriminating or helpful information to narrow the police search. In fact, the Zodiac Killer may have been doing quite the opposite.

It is my contention that the purpose of the section of letter highlighted above was primarily designed, not to throw police a curveball about the color of his vehicle, but to sell a story that he was still driving around in his vehicle. Why would a killer still be in this vicinity only 10 minutes from the Blue Rock Springs parking lot, 40 minutes later? Especially if he hadn't distanced himself from numerous pieces of incriminating evidence. The mention of my "car was brown" wasn't designed with the color of his vehicle in mind, it was designed to indicate that an eyewitness had corroborated he was still in possession of his vehicle through the testimony of Michael Mageau. The emphasis was placed on an eyewitness "walking by" to conveniently spot Zodiac as the phone rang, which drew his "attention to me + my car". The Zodiac Killer stated in the August 4th Debut letter, that "When I hung the phone up the damn thing began to ring & that drew his attention to me + my car". The mention of his car in this sentence is not required, other than to convince the reader he was still in tandem with his vehicle and could drive anywhere after the payphone receiver had been hung up. He chose his words carefully, so not to reveal he had walked to the payphone from a residence nearby. A residence he had to travel to immediately after the attack, because of blood transfer to his person from leaning inside the Corvair of Darlene Ferrin. The cries of Michael Mageau may have been his undoing. 

Two written messages were received on March 2nd and March 8th of 1981 in Atlanta, Georgia, either from the Zodiac Killer or somebody purporting to be him. The first, a business reply envelope postmarked Cleveland, OH, was mailed with the message "Please stop forced bussing or I will kill 3 more black boys in Atlanta in March", while the second continued a similar theme, but this time signed off with the name "Zodiac" and included the infamous Zodiac crosshairs. On March 18th 1981, a letter addressed to the "Editor of the Washington Post" was received (but postmarked February 17th from Prince George's County, Maryland), claiming to have information on the Atlanta killings, and requested that the editor place an advertisement in the newspaper stating "Daniel Please Call Home", after which, the writer would initiate further contact with the editor of the Washington Post. The author had incorrectly used the name Daniel instead of Darron, in reference to the missing Atlanta child Darron Glass.

It is unknown whether any of these communications originated from the pen of the Zodiac Killer, but it doesn't hurt to explore every avenue, particularly regarding the March 8th 1981 communication where the author stated "I used to stalk women, but I like to kill children now. At all my victims bodies I have left certain clues, but I guess it's too much for you Rebels to handle". So, are there any crimes or murders in the preceding months where the killer left any clues on or near any of his victims. Especially clues misinterpreted as inadvertent oversights by the murderer of the Atlanta children. We need to look at the March correspondence, allied to any recognisable Zodiac traits in previous months in Atlanta, particularly bearing in mind brown Caucasian hairs had been noted in the FBI files in at least one of the crime scenes - and considering the possibility that Wayne Williams may not be responsible for all the Atlanta killings.      

An unknown male Caucasian telephoned the Conyers Sheriff's Offce in Atlanta at 7:30 pm on January 8th 1981 and at 11:45 am on January 15th 1981, claiming responsibility for the recent Atlanta killings and giving directions to his latest victim. A search of the area failed to uncover any murder victims, resulting in the second telephone call to police by the white male, indicating they had searched the wrong area. The calls had been placed from a local convenience store. The caller made further threats to kill a white child from one of the subdivisions off Sigman Road in Conyers and giving a deadline of February 1st 1981. In between the two telephone calls, a search was conducted on January 10th 1981 close to Redwine Road and the I-285 in southwest Atlanta, uncovering the skeletal remains of two young children. Evidentiary value or "certain clues" were discovered at that location, which included The Best of Penthouse Letters: No.1 (a pornographic collectors edition), two pieces of white cloth with a blue stripe and magnetic recording tape.

Were these deliberately placed at the crime scene, or plain debris scattered at that location unrelated to the crime itself? Aural examination of the magnetic tape only revealed commercially recorded music. 

The Atlanta murders are extremely unlikely to have any connection to the Zodiac Killer. However, that doesn't mean he can be unequivocally ruled out in being the responsible for some or all of the letters and telephone calls to police, We know of his propensity to claim crimes he wasn't a participant in, along with his willingness to write communications and direct police to the scene of his crimes. But the most important feature regarding the two telephone calls to the Conyers Sheriff's Office on January 8th and January 15th 1981, is that they were both recorded. The white male's voice giving directions to the dump sites of victims (whether they bore fruit or not), should be of significance when considering the alleged letter from the Zodiac Killer on March 8th 1981. Many media hoaxers are prevalent during serial killings, muddying the investigations and making it difficult to ascertain truth from fiction. But if the Zodiac Killer was present in Atlanta during the early 1980s, then these two recordings would be worth listening to.