The earliest estimates of the payphone trace in Vallejo fall between 12:41am and 12:47am, meaning that the responding officer from Blue Rock Springs arrived at the Springs & Tuolumne payphone at approximately 12:50am to 12:56am. If the police officer was talking to a scruffily dressed black man around 40 to 45 years old, then the Zodiac Killer was still in the area observing this interaction. If the Zodiac Killer had earlier experienced this black man while talking to Nancy Slover, why was this individual still in the area of the payphone at least 10 minutes later?

​Had he passed the Zodiac Killer in the payphone to go somewhere and was returning home along the same sidewalk when police arrived? Did he live in the area and approached police to offer assistance when they pulled up at the payphone? Had he noticed the dangling receiver and spoken to the operator, who asked him to remain at the scene? Was he just hanging around the area, or was he homeless? There could be innumerable possibilities, but if the police arrived at the payphone and saw a black male in the area (or anyone else for that matter), it would have been correct police procedure to question the person to find out if they had seen a white male using the payphone in the recent past. If police did talk to the black male as Zodiac contended, then the obvious conclusion is that it was in the vicinity of the payphone. Only the police know for certain if they spoke to this black man, and only the police know if he matches the description given by the Zodiac Killer - and they have never openly confirmed or denied this interaction. 

The attack at Blue Rock Springs culminated shortly after midnight, on July 5th 1969, yet the phone call to Nancy Slover was placed at 12:40am, despite the journey time from the park being only 9 minutes. This opened up the possibility that the Zodiac Killer went home, changed his clothes and stashed his gun, before walking to the payphone absent of any incriminating evidence. This would mean that the August 4th 1969 letter which stated "The man who told police that my car was brown was a negro about 40-45 rather shabbly dressed" and "When I hung the phone up the damn X@ thing began to ring & that drew his attention to me + my car". was designed to misdirect police into believing the Zodiac Killer was still in his vehicle - and as such - he was not giving away the fact he was now on foot and thereby lived nearby.

​If the police encountered a black man by the payphone who matched the later description given by Zodiac in the August 4th 1969 letter, then adding his absent vehicle into the equation wouldn't detract from the verifiable characteristics of the man described by the Zodiac Killer, if the black male simply couldn't recollect a vehicle near the payphone. When reading "The man who told police that my car was brown", the police, if they knew that Zodiac's description of the black male was extremely accurate, may have assumed the Zodiac in his letter had just believed that the eyewitness saw and described his vehicle, when in fact he had not. If this was the case, this wouldn't harm his claims, it would further benefit the Zodiac story.

The Zodiac Killer hiding nearby on foot, observing the police talking to the black male by the payphone, would have been the far safer option for somebody now separated from their vehicle, the smoking gun, and their clothes, which could potentially have received blood transfer from leaning into the open window of Darlene Ferrin's Corvair. Conversely, absent of a residence (or accessible workplace nearby), the Zodiac Killer remaining in the area after the phone call for upwards of 10 minutes, with the car, gun and clothing he committed the crime with, would have presented far more risk for the Zodiac Killer. If he really did spot the black male talking to police by the payphone, it can be argued that he likely arrived at the payphone on foot to place the call to Nancy Slover.

​The million dollar question is, did the Zodiac Killer describe the man as "a negro about 40-45 rather shabbly dressed" because he was selling us a fictional character who spotted the vehicle of Zodiac, or did he give this overly detailed description of the man to taunt law enforcement or give them proof of his presence, because he was watching the responding officer talk to this individual when he arrived at the payphone? I doubt he inserted this black man into his letter for no reason whatsoever, but honesty. This "negro male" made an appearance in his August 4th 1969 letter because it benefited the Zodiac Killer in some way. I doubt we will ever get the true answer.

After the challenge by Vallejo police chirf Jack Stiltz in questioning whether the recent letter writer was the killer, the purpose of the following  August 4th 1969 letter was to provide law enforcement with details they could verify. The Zodiac Killer was correct that he did not open the car door, and was telling the truth that the window was already rolled down and Michael Mageau leapt into the back seat of the Corvair. Although he was incorrect about the exact point of entry of one of his bullets, he knew that Mageau was shot in the leg while in the backseat. This can be shown to be true because two firearm casings were found on the floorboard of the back seat.

​The Zodiac Killer then moved the clock forward by describing a shabbily dressed negro male about 40 to 45 years of age, who investigators could easily have verified existed by speaking to the police officers designated to the payphone in the aftermath of the double shooting. All of the above details were able to be checked by investigators. The one thing they couldn't verify for certain was whether the Zodiac Killer was still in his vehicle when the "negro male" spotted him. For that the police would have been reliant on the black man, who the Zodiac may have known could never have seen and described his vehicle, because he wasn't in one. But by adding into the equation that the negro male told police that his car was brown, he was selling the story a little more. The August 4th 1969 letter after confirming details at the crime scene, immediately jumped to "The man who told police that my car was brown was a negro about 40-45 rather shabbly dressed". This suggested one continuous sequence of verification regarding the events on July 5th 1969 - and something the Zodiac Killer knew police would be able to corroborate by interviewing the responding officer to the payphone. Why follow up the truth about the crime scene with an immediate lie and negate your credibility with something that was easily falsifiable?    

The potential presence of Zodiac near the payphone 10 or more minutes after speaking to Nancy Slover is probably one of the most, if not, the most important questions in the Zodiac case. A murderer still present near that payphone approximately 50 minutes (or more) after the Blue Rock Springs attack would be extremely important to know with regards to where he lived. If he was there, he was far safer without his vehicle and the smoking gun. The search parameters for the Zodiac Killer would narrow demonstrably.

WHEN THE BLACK MAN WAS WALKING BY [PT3]​

There were multiple newspaper articles between July 4th 1969 and August 4th 1969 that mentioned Michael Mageau's description of the Zodiac Killer's vehicle, including its brown color, so what was the purpose of the August 4th 1969 letter when it stated "The man who told police that my car was brown was a negro about 40-45 rather shabbly dressed", rather than just attributing this observation to Mageau? The obvious answer is that the Zodiac Killer was conjuring up an imaginary eyewitness to back up the earlier description by Mageau and misdirect us to the true color of his vehicle, which was anything but brown. To make this "negro male" more believable the Zodiac Killer may have added the "40-45 rather shabbly dressed" description to bring this fictional character to life. 

​However, if the police hadn't spoken to anybody other than Mageau regarding the color of Zodiac's car, then this attempt to misdirect the police would have been less than convincing and immediately disregarded. His efforts at misdirection would have been a complete waste of time and ink. Bearing in mind that the Zodiac Killer placed the negro male eyewitness observing him at the payphone as he was "walking by", the logical inference when he stated "The man who told police that my car was brown was a negro", was that the Zodiac Killer saw the negro male chatting to police somewhere in the vicinity of the payphone at a later time. We know that a responding officer left the Blue Rock Springs crime scene after the location of the payphone was traced in order to secure the location until an I.D. technician could dust it for potential fingerprints. 

It can be argued that the over-descriptive nature of "The man who told police that my car was brown was a negro about 40-45 rather shabbly dressed", highlighting his approximate age and attire, and selecting a minority demographic, was designed to bring this person to life. But what if the Zodiac Killer described the man in detail to prove to police he was actually observing their interaction with him by the payphone, meaning that Zodiac still had eyes on that payphone at 12:50am, or even later. Even if the payphone call (at 12:40am) was traced almost immediately, a police officer traveling from Blue Rock Springs to that payphone, couldn't have arrived much earlier than 12:50am. Did the Zodiac Killer live nearby, and/or did he just hide in the area to observe police activity around the payphone, hitting upon gold when he saw the black male, who was still in the area, conversing with the responding officer. As stated earlier, if no such interaction took place between police and a negro male by the payphone, then his claims in the August 4th 1969 letter would have had little impact with law enforcement. On the other hand, the Zodiac Killer taunting police in a letter by providing evidence he was still near the payphone at least 10 minutes after the call to Nancy Slover, may have been a little jarring. A negro male that police wouldn't want to confirm to the newspapers, just like they concealed the police sighting of a potential Zodiac on Jackson Street two months later.   

There may be other circumstantial evidence to support an eyewitness being present at the payphone that morning. How realistic is it that operators at PT&T called back that payphone immediately, as opposed to a delay of 10, 20, 30 or 60 seconds. Although Robert Graysmith was much maligned, he did offer something interesting regarding this matter. In his 1986 book "Zodiac" he wrote "When he said "good-bye", the man's voice deepened and became taunting  Nancy heard the sound of the receiver being replaced. She was left listening to the empty hum of the line. After he hung up, the killer must have stood for a minute in a lighted phone booth. Suddenly the phone began to ring; a middle-aged black man in shabby clothes who was passing by looked over and saw the stocky man in the booth. Turning his head away, the killer opened the door of the phone booth, plunging it into darkness. To stop the phone from ringing he unhooked it and let it hang. After a moment, he briskly walked off into the night".

Robert Graysmith may have had some knowledge of the operators actions that morning when he stated "After he hung up, the killer must have stood for a minute in a lighted phone booth". One would have expected the Zodiac Killer after declaring he was responsible for four murders from a payphone close to the police station, to have left the payphone immediately and headed back to his vehicle, which he claimed was alongside him in his August 4th 1969 letter. Yet according to Graysmith he waited in the payphone for at least one minute before it began to ring. The only logical reason why the Zodiac Killer was still in the payphone after a minute to hear it ring and subsequently remove the receiver, was if he saw the black man heading in his direction and used the payphone sides as a shield to his identity. He had just made a phone call to police claiming murder, so it would have been human nature upon seeing an approaching black man to remain concealed in the payphone, head down, and open its door to extinguish the payphone lights, rather than head out onto the sidewalk and risk being observed in close quarters by the black male. This would explain his reluctance to leave the payphone immediately and why he was still in it up to one minute after replacing the receiver. The fact he was still in the payphone after 10 seconds or more, rather than back at his vehicle and/or driving away, can be explained by the unwanted presence of an eyewitness "walking by" the payphone. An eyewitness he described in detail in his letter, who he later claimed he saw talking to police (probably by the payphone). When the PT&T operator rang the payphone back it briefly drew the attention of the black male to him and his car, irritating the Zodiac Killer and shaping his actions when he completed the payphone call to David Slaight from Napa after the Lake Berryessa attack.

WHEN THE BLACK MAN WAS WALKING BY [PT2]  
WHEN THE BLACK MAN WAS WALKING BY [PT3]

Ten injuries were noted at autopsy on the right hand of Cheri Jo Bates and only two on her left hand, along with brown Caucasian hairs found in blood at the base of her right thumb (microscopically different to her hair). Just like her killer, there was a 90% chance she was right-handed, which appeared to be her dominant hand during the attack. As was her right arm, which received two knife wounds to the axillay fold (armpit) and mid upper arm. A killer thrusting a knife forward while facing her is not born out by the autopsy report, as demonstrated in these three articles. She was close enough to her killer to grab his hair and scratch either his head, hands, arms or face (because of foreign skin under her fingernails), and likely tear the Timex wristwatch from his left wrist. If Cheri Jo Bates was being held by an assailant from behind with his non-dominant arm and hand around her neck and mouth, his hair, face, arms and wrists would all be in close proximity and make this possible.

Close quarter restraint was also evidenced by the narrow vertical grouping of wounds to her breasts and right axillary fold, and the close mirroring of the knife wound widths on her upper torso (1,4cm, 1.5cm, 1.7cm, 1.9cm) to the estimated width of the blade (0.5 inches/1.27cm), along with what seemed to be compression or strangulation petechiae noted on her forehead at autopsy. If the killer had been forcibly restraining or choking Cheri Jo Bates around the neck from behind, then this compression could increase intra-capilliary pressure by restricting the venous return of blood, thereby creating the petechial haemorrhaging evident on the forehead of the young woman..But why would our killer be using his left hand to choke her? - or as he put it - "grabbed her around the neck with my hand over her mouth and my other hand with a small knife at her throat".

​If we go by statistics, the killer would be right-handed, restraining her from behind with his left arm, while using his right hand to stab backwards into her upper torso. Because a right-handed person usually wears their watch on the non-dominant left side, it would mean that his watch would be over her mouth or neck during the initial part of the attack - and the area she would naturally grab to remove this restriction. This could explain why she pulled the watch from his wrist (and why skin was found under her fingernails). If the killer was facing Cheri Jo Bates and thrusting the knife forward with his right hand in an unrestrained attack, the chance of her being able to grab his left wrist and watch with enough purchase to remove it from his person would diminish in likelihood. It could be argued that there was a higher probability of the watch being yanked from his wrist before the stabbing began (or early part of the attack), because there appeared to be no blood found on the watch, which would be much more likely as the attack unfolded.  

This would explain why the watch was discovered 10 feet distant from her right foot, pulled from the assailant's wrist the moment his left arm was placed around her mouth/neck area. A brief struggle ensued, before she was thrust forward into the ground, detaching the straw bag from her shoulder.  A kick to her head and one knife wound to her back, probably culminated with the seven slice wounds to her neck. A brief, but undeniably horrible and brutal murder of a gregarious, intelligent young woman. 

Zodiac researcher Andrew Gray noted that the author of the Confession letter on November 29th 1966 typed "I plunged the knife into her and it broke", despite this never being featured in the newspapers or detailed at autopsy. It seemed strange to consider a hoaxer just inventing this unnecessary inadequacy regarding the attack if it didn't actually happen. Bearing in mind the sequence of events described above, the plunging of the knife into her appears to be describing the wound to her back, opposite the spinous process of her 7th thoracic vertebrae. This would explain why the small knife could have broken as it struck the bony processes of the spinal column. A broken hinge mechanism would now only be good for the final action of drawing the knife across her neck region, which the author described. Despite volunteering this unnecessary admission of a malfunctioning knife, the author of the Confession letter doesn't address the elephant in the room, notably the Timex watch found by the body of Cheri Jo Bates and mentioned heavily in the newspapers. The inclusion of the broken knife, but omission of the watch, forces one to conclude it was probably his timepiece.

The author of the Confession letter stated "Her breast felt very warm and firm under my hands" and "I shall cut off her female parts and deposit them for the whole city to see". This focus on "female parts"and "her breast", allied with the claim of "brush offs" in the very next sentence, gives rise to the notion of a sexually motivated attack when one considers there were only three knife wounds to her torso and all three were to her breasts (four attempted wounds to her breasts if you include the axillary fold injury slightly above the right breast). An individual who had focused his unhealthy attention towards the attractive young woman beyond his reach and unattainable, may have driven him to target the very objects of his desire - an attack on her sexuality. The knife wounds to this region was another detail that was absent from the newspapers. The author also claimed that "She let out a scream once and I kicked her in the head to shut her up". The scream was noted in the newspapers, but the "2 cm oblique ragged edge fresh non gaping laceration of the upper lip on the left side, that angles laterally from above and extends completely through the thickness of the lip" was exclusive to the autopsy. A severe kick to the head is perfectly capable of lacerating the lip from back to front without damaging the teeth, if delivered as an angular blow. 

The entire attack, short in duration, with "only" 5 stab wounds to her front upper torso and right arm (clustered in an area measuring 20cm horizontally and 10cm vertically), all above the breast line, taking place in a small section of the driveway, with petechiae on her forehead and the straw bag alongside and partially under her body, suggests an attack of close contact and restraint. The hair from the assailant at the base of her right thumb, the skin under her fingernails and the Timex watch found just 10 feel from her body, confirms this hypothesis and is commensurate with the details provided by the author of the Confession letter, who was probably the killer of Cheri Jo Bates.        

It has now been established that when Betty Main (or another) rang back the payphone at the intersection of Springs & Tuolumne, the Zodiac Killer pulled the receiver from the hook and left it dangling when he left the scene, which kept the line open and allowed Betty Main to trace the "silent" call. However, did she (or somebody else) speak to the shabbily dressed negro male, who the Zodiac Killer claimed saw him and his vehicle when he initially hung up the phone? Despite Betty Main being identified as the female who traced the payphone call, why would her supervisor "not allow her to give a statement to police at this time"? After all, somebody had just rang Nancy Slover and claimed four murders - and all Betty Main had seemingly done was keep the line open to effect the trace. Did Betty Main have some extra information that her supervisor wanted to first discuss with police? 

When the Zodiac Killer rang Nancy Slover at 12:40am he stated "I want to report a double murder. If you will go one mile east...... On Columbus Parkway to the public park, you will find the kids in a brown car. They were shot with a 9 mm Luger. I also killed those kids last year.... Good-bye". His phone call would have ended at approximately 12:41am  The details behind this call were then relayed by Mrs Johnson PT&T operator to police at 12:47am, while we assume the trace by Betty Main on the open line was still ongoing. When the trace was effected (estimated at 12:56am in the previous article), police at Blue Rock Springs were informed of the payphone location. This is assuming a trace took 15 minutes in 1969.     

But why would police initially be informed as late as 12:47am about something so important, some six minutes after the call ended? Once the Zodiac Killer ended the call, it appears that Betty Main rang back the payphone, while Mrs Johnson was sought and informed of the details given by the Zodiac Killer. This may explain why several minutes elapsed between the end of the Zodiac call and police being informed. If the police report is to be read a different way and the phone call location was traced at 12:47am (and didn't require 15 minutes from the time the Zodiac unhooked the receiver), then there is another possibility.

When Betty Main (or another) rang back the payphone, Zodiac removed the receiver and left the scene. However, where was the negro male at this juncture? If he was hanging around the area at the time, he may have belatedly noticed the hanging receiver and heard Betty Main on the other end, resulting in him picking up the receiver and talking to her. She may have immediately asked him to provide the location of the payphone, which he did at 12:47am. This could explain how Betty Main "traced" the payphone call in only six minutes and why the Zodiac Killer stated on August 4th 1969 "The man who told police that my car was brown was a negro about 40-45 rather shabbly dressed". If the Zodiac Killer saw the negro male picking up the receiver at 12:47am and providing Betty Main the payphone location, it would mean that the Zodiac Killer still had eyes on that payphone six minutes after he unhooked the receiver. 

But remember, the Zodiac Killer stated in his letter that "The man who told police that my car was brown was a negro", not "The man who told operators that my car was brown was a negro". If the payphone was traced via the negro male, Betty Main may well have told this individual to secure the payphone and wait until police arrived. If the call was traced at 12:47am, then the responding officer from Blue Rock Springs would have arrived at the payphone at approximately 12:56am. If the Zodiac Killer saw this policeman talking to the black man by the payphone, it is easy to understand why the Zodiac Killer believed the negro male who saw his vehicle relayed this information to police. But this would place the Zodiac Killer at a location where he still had eyes on the payphone 15 minutes after he ended the menacing call to Nancy Slover. So did the Zodiac Killer live nearby, or did he simply fabricate the story of the negro male?

​This question hinges on how long it took to trace a payphone in 1969. If it was traced at 12:47am, yet this process took at least 15 minutes in 1969, then the negro male becomes far more important to this story, bearing in mind he was placed at the payphone by the killer himself. Did the negro male request anonymity and why Betty Main's supervisor didn't immediately allow her to give a statement to police? The supervisor freely told police that Betty Main had traced the call, so what else happened on that open line that made her reluctant to allow Betty Main to be interviewed. Was it her conversation with the negro male? 

If the payphone location was traced before 12:47am (by the operator being given its phone number) and this time was only relevant to when Mrs Johnson called the police, then the responding officer from Blue Rock Springs could have been informed of the payphone location shortly after the Zodiac Killer initially hung up the phone. This would have placed a police officer at the payphone several minutes earlier (approximately 12:50am). But was the Zodiac Killer still in the area, observing the negro male converse with the officer?

THE PAYPHONE TRACE IN VALLEJO [PART ONE]

With the invaluable assistance of Zodiac researcher Jibberjabber who contacted various agencies on the specifics of tracing calls back in 1969, including the Connections Museum, we can now establish that when police first arrived at the payphone at Springs & Tuolumne the receiver was off the hook, just like at Napa. The Connections Museum wrote "If the caller hung up before the trace was complete, then no, the operator could not keep the line open from their end (and thereby trace it). It could be that he (the Zodiac) left the phone off the hook in the booth after making the call, so then the operator just had to stay on the line as well until the trace was complete".

​After the Zodiac Killer had finished speaking with Nancy Slover at approximately 12:40am, the Zodiac Killer hung up the phone, effectively ending the call. However, they could ring the payphone back, which Zodiac claimed alerted the negro male to him and his car. His response was to yank the payphone receiver off the hook and leave it dangling. But this effectively kept the line open as Zodiac walked away, such that the operator only had to wait a period of time to effect the trace. Robert Graysmith wrote in his book Zodiac "After he hung up, the killer must have stood for a minute in a lighted phone booth. Suddenly the phone began to ring. To stop the phone from ringing he unhooked it and let it hang". 

The Blue Rock Springs police report stated that at 12:47am Mrs Johnson PT&T operator called, not that the phone call was traced at 12:47am. According to the 2007 Zodiac movie a caller had to be kept on the line for 15 minutes to establish a trace according to Pacific Telephone. So if the Zodiac Killer yanked the receiver off the hook at approximately 12:41am and walked away, it would mean that Betty Main, who rang back the Springs & Tuolumne payphone, had to sit on this open line for 15 minutes subsequent to 12:41am to achieve a trace and discover the location of the payphone. If the movie was correct in claiming 15 minutes was required, then the payphone was identified at 12:56am. According to the police report, this was relayed to the Blue Rock Springs crime scene and a responding officer headed to the payphone. He would have arrived at the intersection of Springs & Tuolumne at approximately 01:05am to secure the payphone for fingerprint testing. The action of the Zodiac Killer yanking the ringing receiver from the hook in Vallejo likely shaped his actions at Main Street in Napa, where he pre-empted this possibility. Thanks to the work of Jibberjabber, I was able to revise the timeline of events surrounding the payphone trace.. 

THE PAYPHONE TRACE IN VALLEJO [PART TWO]

There is a case to be made that the Zodiac Killer placed five X's around his crosshairs on the Bus Bomb letter that aligned his attacks to the numbers on a clock face, tilted clockwise using magnetic north. This may have been the rudimentary precursor to his use of radians on June 26th 1970 and July 26th 1970 using Mount Diablo as the origin point. All of the canonical Zodiac attacks could have been deliberately chosen because of their location to satisfy this template, but only the murder of Paul Stine in Presidio Heights on October 11th 1969 was particularly fluid, in that the Zodiac Killer could engineer a precise location by directions issued to the taxicab driver. Paul Stine was murdered alongside 3898 Washington Street in San Francisco, although his original destination according to the trip sheet was the intersection of Washington & Maple streets. This is essentially insignificant when calculating the angle from Mount Diablo, which was 257 degrees in both instances. The 8 o' clock position is situated at 240 degrees, but tilted to magnetic north of 17 degrees in 1969, lands exactly at 257 degrees.     

Lake Herman Road and Blue Rock Springs are both encompassed by the 10 o' clock line tilted to magnetic north to make 317 degrees (30 by 10 plus 17). The Lake Herman Road murder site actually sits at 319 degrees and Blue Rock Springs at 318 degrees. Any error must be calculated over 30 degree increments, meaning that the 10 o' clock line (set to Mag. N) is 97% accurate for Blue Rock Springs and 93% accurate for Lake Herman Road. The latter would form the beginning of any predetermined template, because this was the first canonical crime. 

While the above three attacks conform largely to the "clock face" theory, Lake Berryessa deviates more significantly by landing at 340 degrees from Mount Diablo (approx 10:54 am/pm). If it conformed to the 11 o' clock position plus magnetic north, the attack should have fell at 347 degrees, so it shows an accuracy of only 77%. The red line below is where the attack should have occurred for 100% accuracy (exaggerated by greater distance). It doesn't fully negate the premise, but it challenges it somewhat. It could suggest that the Zodiac Killer formulated this presentation in the Bus Bomb letter after the fact, because he noticed the rough correlation of his attacks to a clock face. Three other possible explanations could be that the clock face theory is wrong, a daylight attack with a costume and knife created a greater challenge in selecting a suitable location, or the Zodiac Killer originally intended to kill on the eastern side of Lake Berryessa (which is less likely).     

The 9 o' clock position, which was the only unidentified line in the Bus Bomb configuration, I believed to be Daniel Williams, who worked at Salesian High School and was targeted by somebody claiming to be the Zodiac Killer in the weeks before the Bus Bomb letter. Salesian High School sat at 283 degrees, whereas the 9 o' clock position plus magnetic north was 287 degrees, an accuracy of 87%. This means we had Lake Herman Road (93%), Blue Rock Springs (97%), Lake Berryessa (77%), Presidio Heights (100%) and Salesian High School (87%). An overall accuracy for the "clock face" theory of 91%..The only attack that allowed him to comfortably take a victim to a specific murder location, rather than being governed by victims needing to be found at a desired location, was Presidio Heights. In this instance, the Zodiac Killer was 100% accurate. Although the Lake Berryessa accuracy was 77%, it only amounted to a 6 mile deviation clockwise from the murder location over 77 miles from Mount Diablo. As a rule (removing the mobile murder of Paul Stine), we would expect the closer the murder site to Mount Diablo, the more accurate the clock face theory conforms in respect to mileage error or fractions of it. Removing Lake Berryessa (and the only knife and daylight crime) from his canonical crimes, we find that the overall accuracy of the clock face theory rises to 97%.     

On November 16th 1970 Paul Avery published an article in the San Francisco Chronicle newspaper about a possible link between the Zodiac Killer and the murder of Cheri Jo Bates in Riverside on October 30th 1966. The Redlands Daily Facts newspaper also covered this story (see below), by noting the resemblance between the Halloween card mailed by the Zodiac Killer and the "Bates Had to Die" letters, which both were argued to have the "Z" signature. The San Francisco Chronicle and Redlands Daily Facts newspapers also covered the abduction story of Kathleen Johns, who at the time of her ordeal on March 22nd 1970 lived at 847 West Campus Way in San Bernardino, 12 miles from the murder site of Cheri Jo Bates, alongside Terracina Drive. The Zodiac Killer would graciously accept this "riverside activity" on March 13th 1971 when he wrote to the Los Angeles newspaper. But how could he simultaneously attach himself to the Kathleen Johns crime once again, while interjecting himself close to Riverside?     

On July 30th 1971, somebody claiming to be the Zodiac Killer mailed a letter to a Redlands resident stating "There is a bomb in your house that will go off tonight at midnight. Leave $1,000,000 at your front door at 11 p.m". Most reasonable people will accept that this demand was unlikely to be met by the resident of the house, yet it was a malicious threat nonetheless. We obviously do not know whether this letter was mailed by the Zodiac Killer, but if it was, it would be interesting to discover the name of the homeowner. A letter from the Zodiac Killer to somebody connected to the case would have had far more impact than a random Redlands resident plucked from the telephone directory.

​The border of Redlands was only 4.25 miles from the once home of Kathleen Johns (847 West Campus Way), where she had lived at the time of her abduction. Where was she living on July 30th 1971? Could the homeowner have been somebody connected to Kathleen Johns or to Cheri Jo Bates? If this letter was mailed by the Zodiac Killer, it may have been a strategic move on his behalf to connect himself to an area relevant to both Kathleen Johns and Riverside, arriving just 4 months after his claim of "riverside activity". 

The San Francisco Chronicle and Redlands Daily Facts newspapers highlighted the "Z" connection between the Halloween card and "Bates Had to Die" letters, so did the author of the July 30th 1971 letter provide a compelling literary connection to a Zodiac Killer letter? (preferably using a letter unreleased into the public domain). Although spelt slightly differently, the author of the July 30th 1971 letter signed off his communication with "har! har! har!", using three exclamation marks. When the Zodiac Killer mailed the second Fairfield letter on December 16th 1969 he signed off the letter with "ha! ha! ha!". We have two letters with laughing signatures, both referencing the Zodiac Killer, with the later communication mailed relatively close to the once residence of Kathleen Johns and Riverside murder of Cheri Jo Bates, both of whom were the main focus of the above two newspapers (and many more), coming 4 months after his admission of "riverside activity". Was this his attempt to apply significance to his claims on March 13th 1971? 

Recently deceased Zodiac researcher Howard Davis spoke with Kathleen Johns, stating "She told us when she jumped from the car and ran to a vineyard he was calling out to her and scanning the area with a flashlight and he was holding a gun. She told me she did mention it to an officer who didn’t take any notes as she spoke. They really didn’t want this to be a kidnap. Then in departing we were talking (and) she mentioned he sent her a Halloween card Oct.70 as l have posted several times. Inside it read:“To the lady in the blue station wagon”. She sent it to Paul Avery who had interviewed her relative to the abduction and did an article. We called him but he said he never got it". This claim by Kathleen Johns may carry some weight, because the telephone threats to Daniel Williams over a two week period beginning October 23rd 1969 by somebody claiming to be the Zodiac Killer, made the threat to "kill the lady in the blue house". The language adopted of "the lady in the blue" was pertinent in both instances.