On August 10th 1969, somebody mailed a typewritten communication to Vallejo Police Sergeant John Lynch providing the code key to the 408 cipher, that may or may not have been authored by the Zodiac Killer. The communication, ending with "concerned citizen", was withheld from publication. This means that a second communication mailed just two months later, on October 7th 1969, again addressed to Vallejo Police Sergeant John Lynch, with the phraseology "code letters" and ending with "a good citizen", was very likely was the same author. This was the cryptic footnote by Sergeant John Lynch regarding the "good citizen" letter.

The writer has a strong feeling of ESP. While having these feelings, the writer writes with a pencil. On occasion, while thinking of the code letters, the pencil wrote: ''Go to 56 Beach Street. I get the name Jerry, perhaps he knows people or his name is XXXXXXX''.  

It had been approximately two months since any Zodiac communication was received, yet the "good citizen" letter referenced ESP and 56 Beach Street. A form of ESP (Extra Sensory Perception) is second sight, whereby a person perceives information in the form of a vision about future events before they happen. Four days after the "good citizen" letter, the Zodiac Killer entered the taxicab of Paul Stine on October 11th 1969. After his murder at the intersection of Washington & Cherry Streets, the Zodiac Killer was believed to have entered Presidio Park just a few minutes later, mocking law enforcement in a letter he mailed two days later, in which he stated "The S.F. Police could have caught me last night if they had searched the park properly instead of holding road races with their motorcicles". The northeast corner of Presidio Park is 296 meters from Beach Street. This means we have a letter mentioning 56 Beach Street just four days before the Zodiac Killer escaped into Presidio Park, the northeast corner of which sits near the western tip of Beach Street. This street runs from Pier 39 to the Palace of Fine Arts,  A contributor to this website informed me that:"56 Beach St is the old block numbering from the original planning maps, which comes out as 1654/1656 on the street numbering. 1654/56 Beach St, San Francisco, CA is a condo home that contains 2,141 sq ft and was built in 1938".  

On April 20th 1970, the San Francisco Chronicle ran an article on the murder of Robert Michael Salem at 745 Stevenson Street in San Francisco. The pseudonym "Zodiac" was written in blood on his apartment wall next to the body. The San Francisco Chronicle noted that "Salem's designs have been exhibited in England, Japan and Russia under State Department cultural exchange programs. Until last year (1969) he had been the lighting designer for restoration of the historic Haslett Warehouse. The address of the Haslett Warehouse is 680 Beach Street at Hyde. This location is less than one mile from 1654/56 Beach Street (see map below). The author of these two "code" communications from "concerned" and "good" citizens may not have been Zodiac, but did they know the identity of the killer?

Have you ever wondered who inspired the Zodiac Killer to mail in a piece of Paul Stine's bloody shirt after the murder in Presidio Heights in 1969? The same member of law enforcement who influenced the arrival of the Zodiac pseudonym on August 4th 1969. The only reason the 'Debut of Zodiac' letter was ever sent to the San Francisco Examiner is because Vallejo Police Chief, Jack E. Stiltz requested the writer of the July 31st letters to prove he was the killer, asking the murderer of three to write another letter "with more facts to prove it". This request by Vallejo Police Chief, Jack E. Stiltz was published in the San Francisco Chronicle on August 2nd 1969, followed by the San Francisco Sunday Examiner & Chronicle on August 3rd 1969.

​The Zodiac Killer's response was swift, sending a letter to the San Francisco Examiner on August 4th 1969, replying directly to Jack Stiltz and stating "In answer to your asking for more details about the good times I have had in Vallejo, I shall be very happy to supply even more material". Without this prompt by Jack Stiltz, the pseudonym of "Zodiac" may never have come to pass - at least not by August 4th 1969.

The next communication was mailed just over two months later, on October 13th 1969, admitting to the murder of Paul Stine in Presidio Heights only two days earlier. But the Zodiac Killer hadn't forgotten that Vallejo Police Chief, Jack Stiltz had doubted his involvement in the attacks at Lake Herman Road and Blue Rock Springs, by stating he required "more facts to prove it". So, the Zodiac Killer in advance of the taxicab driver's murder, decided to remove a piece of the victim's shirt and leave law enforcement in no doubt he was the true killer at Presidio Heights. Two days later, he mailed the Stine letter, stating "I am the murderer of the taxi driver over by Washington St + Maple St last night, to prove this here is a blood stained piece of his shirt". The Zodiac Killer was responding to law enforcement who doubted him previously, but primarily to Jack Stiltz's comments in the newspapers back on August 2nd and August 3rd 1969. 

In his next descriptive letter on November 9th 1969 the Zodiac Killer would continue this theme, with Vallejo Police Chief, Jack Stiltz still in the back of his mind. The Zodiac Killer was angry with the San Francisco Police Department for "telling lies" about him, threatening to change his way of collecting slaves for the afterlife. He would finish this communication by warning San Francisco law enforcement not to bluff him, by stating "To prove that I am the Zodiac, Ask the Vallejo cop about my electric gun sight which I used to start my collecting of slaves." Jack Stiltz was the "Vallejo Cop" that the Zodiac Killer addressed on August 4th 1969 when he wrote to the San Francisco Examiner and described his "small pencel flash light (taped) to the barrel of (his) gun". 

​Therefore, Vallejo Police Chief, Jack Stiltz was instrumental to the August 4th 1969 'Debut of Zodiac' letter in which the pseudonym "Zodiac" was revealed to the world, as well as the inspiration for the Zodiac Killer to decide in advance of his San Francisco murder, that something from the victim (a shirt piece in this instance} had to be mailed with his next correspondence, "to prove" undeniably he was the killer.     

The "Zodiac" Atlanta letter was mailed on March 8th 1981 claiming to be the Bay Area murderer of five, and suggesting their passion was to now target children. The author was clearly interjecting themself into the Atlanta Child Murders, for which Wayne Williams would eventually be convicted on February 27th 1982. The only way to prove this is an authentic Zodiac communication is to find something on the letter that corresponds strongly with something that the Zodiac mailed between 1969 and 1974, but was unreleased to the public. The Zodiac letters and cards were widely published in the newspapers, however, the majority of the envelopes were not in the public domain by the arrival of the Atlanta letter in 1981. The Vallejo Times-Herald, October 28th 1987 "Halloween" envelope was shown to perfectly mimic the exact thirteen words on the unreleased Vallejo Times-Herald, August 31st 1969 envelope, including the lack of punctuation (and possible incorrect spelling of Herald to Herold). This attempted to show that the Zodiac Killer was still actively writing letters in 1987. A similar technique can be applied to the Atlanta envelope, postmarked March 8th 1981. The Atlanta letter may be pointing us in the right direction. In the letter (shown below) it can be noted that the author dedicates much of the text to the San Francisco murder of Paul Stine and October 13th 1969 letter.

The author begins the Atlanta letter referencing "San Francisco" and referring to the murder of children, stating "I'll kill children because they are so easy to pick off", and that he had "left certain clues" at his victims bodies. In the letter referencing the murder of Paul Stine on October 13th 1969, the Zodiac Killer stated "School children make nice targets, I think I shall wipe out a school bus some morning. Just shoot out the front tire + then pick off the kiddies as they come bouncing out". In the second letter on November 9th 1969 mentioning his exploits in San Francisco, the Zodiac Killer stated "If you wonder why I was wipeing the cab down I was leaving fake clews for the police to run all over town with, as one might say".  It is clear the author of the Atlanta letter heavily focused this communication towards the murder of children, reminiscent of his letter mailed in the aftermath of the Paul Stine killing.

The October 13th 1969 envelope mailed to the San Francisco Chronicle had not been released into the public domain at the time the Atlanta envelope and letter was mailed in 1981. The October 13th 1969 envelope was the only confirmed communication mailed by the Zodiac Killer that carried small Zodiac crosshairs on the address side of the envelope, just like the Atlanta envelope mailed eleven and a half years later. An Atlanta letter that mimicked the October 13th 1969 letter threatening to "pick off" children. We now have two envelopes from the 1980s that mimicked previously unreleased envelopes in 1969, thereby pouring cold water on suspects like Ross Sullivan and Earl Van Best Jr, who died prior to 1987.  Unfortunately, I doubt any amount of evidence will change the Zodiac narrative of a killer whose confirmed communications ceased in 1974. These beliefs have become so embedded and entrenched into Zodiac folklore, that any attempt to challenge the pervading narrative can be likened to throwing a pebble into the Pacific Ocean. 

Six days before the Atlanta letter, on March 2nd 1981, a business reply envelope, postmarked Cleveland, OH, bearing the press printed address "The Danbury Mint, Richards Avenue, P.O. Box 5260, Norwalk, Conn" was mailed with the handwritten note: "Please stop forced bussing or I will kill 3 more black boys in Atlanta in March". On or around May 2nd 1971, the Zodiac Killer encoded a message in a 148 character cipher instructing law enforcement to "stop listening to phonys" or he "will skin 3 little kids" (not in the public domain by 1981). The Zodiac Killer latched onto the murders of Debra Gaye Furlong (14), Kathie Reyne Snoozy (15) and Kathy Bilek (18) in San Jose and Saratoga (in 1969 and 1971), claiming he was responsible for stabbing all three, despite these murders having been committed by Karl Francis Werner. He then threatened to kill a further three children. The exact same tactic employed a decade later in Atlanta, by interjecting himself into the murders of black children he was likely not responsible for, by once again threatening to kill three more children if his demands were not met. 

THE MURDERS THAT SHAPED BERRYESSA 

On October 22nd 1969, Eric Weill (Sam) rang into the morning KGO-TV Jim Dunbar Show - but when Jim Dunbar and Melvin Belli interviewed this man it was on the understanding he may have been the infamous Zodiac Killer, with the host asking him "Did you try to call us one other time, about two or three weeks ago". This suggests that Jim Dunbar was aware of a previous attempt by the Zodiac Killer to contact the show prior to the murder of Paul Stine in Presidio Heights on October 11th 1969. Many have considered the possibility that the Zodiac Killer may have rang into the Oakland Police Department at 2:00am on October 22nd 1969 requesting to appear on the Jim Dunbar Show, but when the show aired later that morning his appearance was hijacked by mental patient, Eric Weill, who impulsively contacted the show under the guise of the Zodiac Killer. Prior to the murder of Paul Stine on October 11th 1969, the Zodiac Killer had committed three attacks in Benicia, Vallejo and Napa County, with no known attacks in San Francisco, so why would Eric Weill take it upon himself to contact the Jim Dunbar Show in San Francisco in advance of the Paul Stine murder.

A much stronger case could be made for the Zodiac Killer wanting to contact the Jim Dunbar Show in San Francisco just several days prior to his murder of Paul Stine in San Francisco. The Zodiac Killer had already made threats to "cruse around all weekend killing lone people in the night then move on to kill again" if his cryptograms were not published in the newspapers on August 1st 1969, and that he was not happy to see he "did not get front page coverage" for his exploits thus far. Therefore, one could argue that the Zodiac Killer had tried to contact the Jim Dunbar Show before the murder of Paul Stine to threaten the citizens of San Francisco that his terror would soon be felt on the streets of the big city. Jim Dunbar asked the "Zodiac Killer" (Sam) "Did you attempt to call this program one other time when Mr. Belli was with us?", suggesting that the Zodiac Killer had previously chosen to ring a San Francisco TV show with a resident San Francisco lawyer as guest, just a few days prior to the Zodiac Killer switching his attacks to San Francisco. The other possibility, is that a mental patient just took it upon himself to contact a San Francisco TV show in absence of any murders being committed by the Zodiac Killer in San Francisco prior to the attack in Presidio Heights.  

The Zodiac Killer would go on to deny he was the caller to the Jim Dunbar Show in the recently decoded 340 cipher, in which he stated "That wasn't me on the TV show". But he very likely could have tuned into the broadcast to view the spectacle unfold. Without the full transcript of this call to the Jim Dunbar Show, it would be interesting to find out how many times Eric Weill pleaded for the help of Melvin Belli. On December 20th 1969, it is clear that the Zodiac Killer linked the Paul Stine murder with the Jim Dunbar Show by mailing a piece of Paul Stine's bloody shirt with the correspondence, with the letter itself carrying a mocking tone by using the phrase "please help me" on three occasions, in accompaniment to the phrase "I cannot reach out for help". It is clear that this cry for help was a disingenuous attempt at ridicule from a killer who either listened to the Jim Dunbar Show on October 22nd 1969, or read the subsequent newspaper articles. On October 22nd 1969, the Los Angeles Times reported that "Belli was put on the line, and the voice said "I want help". On October 23rd 1969, the Desert Sun newspaper claimed that Melvin Belli told the caller “All of San Francisco wants to help you. The hand is out, you can feel the hands out.” The Zodiac Killer would make these cries for help the bedrock of his December 20th 1969 communication. 

​If anybody "can help" in pinpointing the exact date that Melvin Belli appeared on the Jim Dunbar Show immediately prior to the October 22nd 1969 call, please let me know by using the Zodiac Killer forums. Thank you. PART 1.

In the early hours of October 22nd 1969, a phone call was made to the Oakland Police Department asking for either Francis Lee Bailey or Melvin Belli, two prominent attorneys, to appear on the KGO Jim Dunbar Show in San Francisco that morning. A few hours later, somebody rang into the Jim Dunbar Show pretending to be the Zodiac Killer, adopting the less menacing name of "Sam" once prompted. That person was later identified as a mental patient, Eric Weill. When the 340 cipher was deciphered by Dave Oranchak, Sam Blake and Jarl Van Eycke in December 2020, the Zodiac Killer message finally revealed what everyone knew all along - that the Zodiac Killer never made that call to the Jim Dunbar Show. However, he didn't deny making the phone call to the Oakland Police Department. But why would the Zodiac Killer make a phone call to Oakland police to arrange an appearance on the Jim Dunbar Show in San Francisco? Why not ring the Jim Dunbar Show directly? The answer may lie in the Jim Dunbar Show on October 22nd 1969, spoken by Jim Dunbar himself.

This was the dialogue between "Sam" (Eric Weill) and Jim Dunbar:
Jim Dunbar: Sam, let me ask you a question. Did you attempt to call this program one other time when Mr. Belli was with us?
Sam: What?
Jim Dunbar: Did you try to call us one other time, about two or three weeks ago when Mel Belli was with us? 
Sam: Yes
Jim Dunbar: And you couldn't get through, the phones were tied up. Is that it?
Sam: Yes  

It could be argued, when you listen to this exchange between the host and caller, that "Sam" has no idea what Jim Dunbar is referring to when he mentions a previous phone call received at the Jim Dunbar Show. He hesitates profoundly when asked the question, before saying "what". This could mean that the Zodiac Killer had previously phoned the Jim Dunbar Show between October 1st and October 8th 1969. When Jim Dunbar and Melvin Belli are interviewing the caller, they are doing it under the presumption this could be the Zodiac Killer. So when they ask "Did you try to call us one other time, about two or three weeks ago", they are effectively asking the Zodiac Killer if he rang two or three weeks ago. This suggests they were aware of a previous call from the Zodiac Killer prior to the murder of Paul Stine. The Zodiac Killer may have rang the Jim Dunbar Show in early October but failed to get through. In other words, he attempted to call the TV show but the call was rejected for whatever reason. They may have thought it was just another crank call. This is probably why the Zodiac Killer eventually decided to ring the Oakland Police Department instead - getting them to relay the message to the Jim Dunbar Show - which they obviously did. There seems to be no other good reason why the Bay Area murderer would place a call to the Oakland Police Department, other than his failure to get his message across to the Jim Dunbar Show before October 11th 1969. It should also be noted that the San Francisco Police Department were inundated with calls after the murder of Paul Stine, probably forcing the Zodiac Killer to target his phone call to a 'less busy' police department and thereby guaranteeing the delivery of his message this time around. But what date was Melvin Belli on the Jim Dunbar Show prior to October 22nd 1969?  PART 2.

By August 4th 1969 the Zodiac Killer had shot four young people, killed three and mailed four letters, including three parts of a 408 character cryptogram. However, this didn't afford him the front page coverage from the San Francisco Chronicle and San Francisco Examiner that he thought he richly deserved. The August 6th 1969 front page coverage in the Chronicle, featuring the brutal stabbings of teenagers Kathie Reyne Snoozy and Deborah Gaye Furlong in San Jose, was almost certainly the inspiration for the Zodiac Killer to switch from gun to knife and appear on the shores of Lake Berryessa brandishing a long-bladed weapon. This murder and attempted murder on September 27th 1969 secured him front page coverage due to the brutality of the attack. So why would the Zodiac Killer revert back to the use of a gun in his next attack. The answer may lie in the newspaper articles subsequent to the Lake Berryessa attack, in which the Zodiac Killer was portrayed as a psychotic, sexual deviant who likely focused heavily on the female sex. As explained in the previous article, the Zodiac Killer did not specifically target couples, or primarily direct his ire towards the female, but this didn't stop the sensationalized newspaper articles and the irresponsible statements by law enforcement, who portrayed the Zodiac Killer as a man starved of a meaningful heterosexual relationship, with an underlying sexual problem.

This was exemplified by the San Francisco Examiner on October 1st 1969, just ten days before the Zodiac Killer targeted a lone male in San Francisco on October 11th 1969. The Examiner ran with the headline "Sex Fiend Sought For Six Killings", followed by the opening paragraph of "A psychotic killer police say brutally slays females for sexual gratification is loose in the North Bay today". If you are wondering where the San Francisco Examiner got six killings from - they had incorporated the murders of Snoozy and Furlong in San Jose, who were also mentioned in the newspaper article (which is what the Zodiac Killer had hoped for by committing the Berryessa attack). The newspaper article continued by stating the Zodiac Killer was "a mentally ill person, who must get his sex gratification from the act of killing. With a gun it was not as much as a knife. He wants to be caught". If you want to drive the Zodiac Killer back to killing with a gun and targeting a lone male by design, then these are the sort of irresponsible statements you release in the newspapers, rather than attempting to pacify the killer into writing more communications or another cryptogram. It really isn't any surprise that the Zodiac Killer entered the taxicab of Paul Stine just ten days later. If you need any more proof that the Zodiac Killer was inspired by this newspaper article, take a look at the wording in the Paul Stine letter on October 13th 1969. The killer wrote "I am the same man who did in the people in the north bay area", in response to the newspaper article which stated the Zodiac Killer was "loose in the North Bay today". Law enforcement also claimed that the Zodiac Killer wanted "to be caught" in the Examiner. The Zodiac Killer replied in the Paul Stine letter: "The S.F. police could have caught me last night if they had searched the park properly". It is also little surprise, that the Zodiac Killer accepted these six killings - added on Paul Stine - and claimed seven murders on November 8th 1969 in the Dripping Pen card, with the addition of the "Aug" murders of Snoozy and Furlong, attributed to him in this newspaper article.    

The Zodiac Killer was extremely annoyed when he didn't get the publicity he felt he deserved, writing to the San Francisco Examiner on August 4th 1969 and informing the newspaper: "I was not happy to see that I did not get front page coverage". Page three of the Bus Bomb communication about "2 cops pulled a goof" insisted that the Chronicle "must print in paper", following it up on page six with "PS. Be shure to print the part I marked out on page 3 or I shall do my thing". On December 16th 1969 the Zodiac Killer mailed a letter from Fairfield demanding "you better print".

Subsequent to his October 13th 1969 letter claiming the killing of Paul Stine, the Bus Bomb letter was the immediate communication in which he elaborated upon the details of this crime, and the first and only time he highlighted a specific section of text, demanding "must print in paper".. One has to ask, what prompted the Zodiac Killer to highlight these sixteen lines of text and insist they are not omitted from the newspaper? This is the section of text where he claimed officers Donald Fouke and Eric Zelms stopped and spoke to him, before he directed them away from the crime scene on a wild goose chase. The details of this interaction (whether the officers stopped him or not) was never publicized in the newspapers prior to the arrival of the Bus Bomb letter. This clearly irritated the Zodiac Killer enough for him to demand its publication.

This insistence of "must print in paper" was probably caused by the failure of the San Francisco Chronicle to publicize his threat on schoolchildren twenty-five days earlier. The Zodiac wrote in his October 13th 1969 letter "I am the murderer of the taxi driver over by Washington St + Maple St last night, to prove this here is a blood stained piece of his shirt. I am the same man who did in the people in the north bay area.The S.F. Police could have caught me last night if they had searched the park properly instead of holding road races with their motorcicles seeing who could make the most noise. The car drivers should have just parked their cars and sat there quietly waiting for me to come out of cover. School children make nice targets, I think I shall wipe out a school bus some morning. Just shoot out the front tire + then pick off the kiddies as they come bouncing out". Unfortunately for the Zodiac Killer, the San Francisco Chronicle omitted the final paragraph (highlighted in blue).  

Law enforcement instructed the Chronicle newspaper to whitewash this section of text until they considered the best course of action, not wanting to instil widespread panic in the local community. The newspaper duly obliged on October 15th 1969, when under the banner of The Boastful Slayer they carried no mention of the threat on schoolchildren. This must have irked the Zodiac Killer, who delivered a malicious phone call to Santa Rosa on the same day, threatening to kill schoolchildren by way of a bomb on a school bus. This call, not only coincided with the October 15th 1969 newspaper article, but it carried the same threat as the omitted Zodiac text, almost certainly confirming that the phone caller to Santa Rosa was the Zodiac Killer. But why did the Zodiac Killer threaten Santa Rosa rather than the San Francisco Police Department?

Although this cannot be proven, I doubt the Zodiac Killer phoned the Santa Rosa Police Department or the Press Democrat newspaper, and just stated "I am the Zodiac and I am going to blow up a school bus and kill kids in Santa Rosa", before hanging up. It is extremely likely this threat was inspired by the omission of text from the Chronicle, and he promised to kill schoolchildren in Santa Rosa and other locations in the Bay Area if the San Francisco Chronicle didn't include the omitted threats from his original letter on October 13th 1969. It is possible that Santa Rosa authorities contacted the police in San Francisco, who backpedaled their initial decision to avoid more widespread threats. Two days later, on October 17th 1969, the Chronicle newspaper published the threat on schoolchildren under the headline of Astrologer Joins Hunt for Killer. Their decision to omit Zodiac's text was reversed inside of forty-eight hours. This demand to print wouldn't be forgotten by the Zodiac Killer on November 9th 1969.

Three days after the Bus Bomb letter, on November 12th 1969, the San Francisco Chronicle under the banner of Zodiac's New Message printed the entirety of the "2 cops pulled a goof" section that Zodiac demanded they publish, which coincidentally fell on the same day as Officer Donald Fouke's interdepartmental memorandum of his encounter with a WMA on Jackson Street, shortly after the murder of Paul Stine. The Zodiac Killer's demand of "must print in paper" may have worked on both October 15th 1969 and November 9th 1969 - and why they are most likely the same person.  

ASSOCIATED ARTICLE: PROOF:OCTOBER 15TH 1969 SANTA ROSA CALLER WAS THE ZODIAC KILLER 

From October 23rd 1969 to November 2nd 1969, Daniel Williams, a Richmond High School teacher received a series of sadistic phone calls that culminated in somebody attempting to kill him by lacing his soft drink with arsenic. Had he not noticed the metallic taste and spat it out, Daniel Williams would have been a "dead duck" as the caller had promised.

In a letter to the San Francisco Chronicle postmarked October 13th 1969, the Zodiac Killer threatened to "wipe out a school bus some morning. Just shoot out the front tire + then pick off the kiddies as they come bouncing out". A telephone threat to bomb a school bus and kill children from somebody claiming to be the Zodiac Killer was targeted at Santa Rosa on October 15th 1969, prior to the details about "wiping out a school bus and picking off the kiddies" had been released by the newspapers. There were reports of a possible gunshot being heard by a Santa Rosa bus driver on October 17th 1969. These threats on schoolchildren brought a massive response from school officials and law enforcement, who laid out extensive measures to combat the perceived threat by the Zodiac Killer. Extra security to the buses also came in the form of police vehicles shadowing the schoolchildren to and from their respective schools.

On October 21st 1969, the San Francisco Chronicle released an article entitled Fear Rides the Yellow Bus, stating "A climate of fear hangs over the Napa Valley. The fear is over "Zodiac" and his terrifying boast to "wipe out a school bus". No one takes the threat lightly, Zodiac has already struck here. The task of trying to insure the safety of 10,000 youngsters who ride the Napa Valley Unified School District is immense".  It was two days later that Daniel Williams started receiving menacing phone calls from a caller claiming to be the infamous Zodiac Killer. The caller stated that "he intended to kill several persons" and on one occasion said he "had gone to a Martinez school in search of victims but left when he found police there". Bearing in mind the heightened security around school buses and therefore school premises, this was entirely plausible. This could easily have been interpreted as an empty threat from another hoaxer, but it's a fair assumption that the phone caller and arsenic poisoner were one and the same. There were probably many idle hoaxers latching onto the Zodiac case during this period of uncertainty, but I doubt many were prepared to back up their threats with murder, as was the case in the attempted poisoning of Daniel Williams. If this person was prepared to kill a school teacher, then it's not beyond the realms of possibility he was prepared to kill schoolchildren in Martinez (where Daniel Williams lived) or the city of Richmond, where Daniel Williams taught at Salesian High School.   

If this was the Zodiac Killer, how did it come to be that Daniel Williams was selected as a possible target by the Bay Area murder? The Zodiac Killer may have selected Daniel Williams by staking out his school and following him home. He now has a credible victim who police won't dismiss as an attention seeker. Daniel Williams also teaches schoolchildren, making him the ideal target for the Zodiac Killer. When Daniel Williams relays the details of the "Zodiac" phone calls to police, such as the man claiming he "had gone to a Martinez school in search of victims but left when he found police there", it adds veracity to the threats in the current climate. In the mind of the Zodiac Killer, he knew that these phone calls would be readily dismissed as just another hoax by police, so he needed to elevate these threats to the next level and show law enforcement he wasn't just playing games.

The Zodiac Killer, by poisoning the soft drink of Daniel Williams with arsenic, having previously stated he "had gone to a Martinez school in search of victims but left when he found police there", must have concluded that his visit to a Martinez school, in accompaniment to Daniel Williams being a Richmond school teacher, was more than enough to occupy law enforcement on several fronts. He may have thought that if the police didn't take the threat of murder seriously, then they would likely take nothing seriously.

With the failed poisoning on November 2nd 1969, the Zodiac Killer wrote in the Bus Bomb letter "up to the end of Oct I have killed 7 people", possibly indicating he hadn't yet finished with Daniel Williams (or possibly wanted us to believe that). When the phone caller to Daniel Williams mentioned his visit to a Martinez school, he concluded that police would never catch him because he was "too smart for them". In the Bus Bomb letter on November 9th 1969, the Zodiac Killer stated "The police shall never catch me, because I have been too clever for them". The Zodiac Killer was certainly a clever wordsmith, but was he responsible for the attempted murder of Daniel Williams? 

Inspired by the great work of Druzer on the Zodiac Killer Site forum, we can delve further into the possible Zodiac Killer threats toward Santa Rosa during the October of 1969. It was highlighted in the last article that a person claiming to be the Zodiac Killer phoned authorities in Santa Rosa (likely Santa Rosa Police Department) on, or shortly before October 15th 1969, threatening schoolchildren with bombs. This was crucially important, as the Stine letter text of "School children make nice targets, I think I shall wipe out a school bus some morning. Just shoot out the front tire + then pick off the kiddies as they come bouncing out" had not been released to the newspapers at this juncture. This was compelling evidence that the phone caller to Santa Rosa was very likely the Zodiac Killer. If that wasn't nearly enough, there is a little more to bolster this claim.

On October 17th 1969, KRON News footage featured an interview with a school bus driver who claimed that someone fired a shot at the bus she was driving. The woman was driving a school bus in Santa Rosa. She stated "As I came around this bend I heard a loud shot from the left hand side of the bus. The children heard it too. Now I don't know if anything struck the bus. We can't find anything that struck the bus". The woman was confident she had heard a shot that day.

The release of Keith Power's article in the San Francisco Chronicle on October 17th 1969 revealed that school bus drivers had been issued with evasion tactics in the event of a Zodiac attack. The article not only released the Zodiac threat on schoolchildren, but stated "Detectives issued an all-points bulletin yesterday, with advice to bus drivers if an attack is, in fact made. The drivers were told to keep the bus in motion "at all costs", instruct passengers to lie on the floor and to attract as much attention as possible with horn and lights". The perceived attack on this school bus in Santa Rosa could easily be attributed to imagination or hysteria, bearing in mind the attention the Zodiac Killer had drawn over recent months. However, the story given by the bus driver becomes more significant when we consider the October 21st 1969 article in the San Francisco Chronicle. It stated "Even before starting on its routes each vehicle has undergone a thorough check to make sure a bomb isn't aboard. Someone hinting he might be Zodiac has telephoned such a threat in Santa Rosa. The man responsible for the safety of the students who ride the buses is Fred Sowash, the district's transportation director. Since last Wednesday (October 15th), when he learned of Zodiac's threat, Sowash has been devoting 18 to 20 hours a day to blunt it". 

This bomb threat (October 15th) on schoolchildren with respect to Santa Rosa was only made available in the San Francisco Chronicle on October 21st 1969. Therefore, it must be considered extremely coincidental that the first major news footage of an attack on a school bus, happened in Santa Rosa just four days earlier. This attack on a school bus could have happened anywhere in the Bay Area, but it just happened to occur in Santa Rosa, just two days after a man claiming to be the Zodiac Killer rang Santa Rosa authorities threatening schoolchildren on buses. If they weren't the same person, then it has to be a massive stroke of luck for the Santa Rosa caller on October 15th 1969 to pre-empt the details in the Stine letter, which was shortly followed on October 17th 1969 by a reported shooting of a school bus in Santa Rosa, that coincidentally occurred in the same location as the target chosen by the caller.

Law enforcement were skeptical that any shooting took place on a school bus in Santa Rosa on October 17th 1969. If this was the case, then the reported "loud shot" heard by the bus driver just happened to never occur in Santa Rosa, rather than the innumerable other places in the Bay Area.

October 22nd 1969: PALO ALTO (AP) - Patrol cars convoyed school buses around Palo Alto yesterday after a telephoned murder threat by a man claiming to be the Zodiac killer of five persons. The caller to the Palo Alto Times said he intended to "pick the kids off as they get on the school bus." The weird slayer, who signs himself "The Zodiac," made a similar threat in a letter to the San Francisco Chronicle last week after the Oct. 11 shooting of a taxi driver. Handwriting tests and descriptions of two victims who survived have convinced police that the same person. The district transportation supervisor said an armed guard might ride with each of the system's 25 buses. Officers in Napa and Vallejo, areas of the first three murderous attacks, some 75 miles north of Palo Alto, have been convoying police officers. Palo Alto Police Chief William Hydie called the new threat "extremely serious," but warned against over reaction to what might be a crank call.

This threat was extremely similar to the October 13th 1969 letter, in which the Zodiac Killer claimed "School children make nice targets, I think I shall wipe out a school bus some morning. Just shoot out the front tire + then pick off the kiddies as they come bouncing out". At no point in either the October 13th 1969 letter or the Palo Alto telephone call did the perpetrator claim anything other than "picking off the kiddies as they come bouncing out" or "picking the kids off as they get on the school bus". The emphasis was squarely on shooting schoolchildren in close proximity to a school bus.

The mailing of the Bus Bomb letter on November 9th 1969 was the first time the Zodiac Killer suggested he was going to blow up a school bus by use of a bomb. He mocked the police who believed he was going to "pick off kids" by use of a firearm. The Zodiac Killer stated "If you cops think I'm going to take on a bus the way I stated I was, you deserve to have holes in your heads". He continued "What you do not know is whether the death machine is at the sight or whether it is being stored in my basement for future use. I think you do not have the manpower to stop this one by continually searching the road sides looking for this thing. + it wont do to re roat + re schedule the busses because the bomb can be adapted to new conditions". It was painfully clear that the Zodiac Killer was intimating the use of a bomb to kill schoolchildren. However, the November 9th 1969 communication may not have been the Zodiac Killer's first contact with police with respect to blowing up a school bus. This threat was telephoned through to the Santa Rosa Police Department a matter of days after the Paul Stine murder on October 11th 1969. The call arrived on, or shortly before October 15th 1969.

On October 21st 1969, the San Francisco Chronicle released an article entitled Fear Rides the Yellow Bus, stating "A climate of fear hangs over the Napa Valley. The fear is over "Zodiac" and his terrifying boast to "wipe out a school bus". No one takes the threat lightly, Zodiac has already struck here. The task of trying to insure the safety of 10,000 youngsters who ride the Napa Valley Unified School District is immense. The district encompasses an area of Southern Napa County of 229 square miles. Sixty-four bright yellow buses travel the county roadways each day - often into areas where houses are a couple of miles apart. The vehicles go a total of 4,000 miles daily in and from elementary schools, three junior highs and one senior high school. Even before starting on its routes each vehicle has undergone a thorough check to make sure a bomb isn't aboard. Someone hinting he might be Zodiac has telephoned such a threat in Santa Rosa. The man responsible for the safety of the students who ride the buses is Fred Sowash, the district's transportation director. Since last Wednesday, when he learned of Zodiac's threat, Sowash has been devoting 18 to 20 hours a day to blunt it".   

This article was released on Tuesday, October 21st 1969, indicating that the threat Fred Sowash was aware of last Wednesday, must have been delivered by the man claiming to be the Zodiac Killer on October 15th 1969 at the latest. The telephone threat could conceivably have been delivered as early as October 14th 1969, the day before the October 15th 1969 article in the San Francisco Chronicle, which first reported a connection between the Paul Stine murder and the Zodiac Killer. But crucially, the October 15th 1969 Chronicle article withheld the threat of "School children make nice targets, I think I shall wipe out a school bus some morning. Just shoot out the front tire + then pick off the kiddies as they come bouncing out", for fear of stateside panic. This meant that any telephone caller to Santa Rosa Police Department on October 15th 1969 threatening to blow up a school bus and kill schoolchildren, gave this information over the phone before any threat on schoolchildren was ever released in the newspapers. This caller effectively pre-empted the last paragraph of the Stine letter in absence of its contents being published. This almost certainly means, that the telephone caller claiming to be the Zodiac Killer on October 15th 1969, was the Zodiac Killer. He not only threatened schoolchildren before the full Stine letter contents were made public, but he threatened the use of a bomb to attack a school bus, twenty-five days before the Bus Bomb letter was postmarked. 

                                       THE SANTA ROSA THREAT:MUST PRINT IN PAPER

Subsequent to the official police report regarding the Paul Stine murder on October 11th 1969 there has been limited further contact with the Robbins teenagers, who observed the Zodiac Killer in and around the taxicab that night. The later recollections of the Robbins kids went something like this: Not many know this, but Lindsey (being 16. feeling immortal, and believing the suspect to be armed with only a knife) ran out of his door to see where Zodiac was going. He ran to the corner of Cherry and watched as Zodiac continued his casual pace right up to the corner of Jackson & Cherry.
At this exact point, the first SFPD car arrives with two officers. One, Pelissetti, approached Lindsey and tried to extract what was happening. The other officer went to the cab and found the bloody victim. While Pelissetti was asking questions, Lindsey was trying to explain that the suspect was in sight on Cherry St. By the time Pelissetti got the point, they both looked and the Zodiac was gone. The following is not to doubt their recollections, but much of the interaction between them and Officer Armond Pelissetti remains unresolved.

According to their statements, they told Officer Armond Pelissetti that the man walking towards the intersection of Jackson and Cherry was the attacker of Paul Stine, clearly pointing to the man walking north on Cherry Street on the east side. "By the time Pelissetti got the point, they both looked and the Zodiac was gone". However, there seems little to show that Officer Armond Pelissetti ever got the point. Moments later he would discover to a 99.9% certainty that Paul Stine had been killed. With the perpetrator having been clearly pointed out to him walking up Cherry on the east side (close to Jackson), it doesn't take much reasoning to conclude he turned east into Jackson Street, given the time that they looked away and looked back. Wouldn't the appropriate course of action taken by Pelissetti been, to have got to the radio and immediately informed the other units of a white killer traveling east on Jackson Street towards Maple. The killer at that point would have had considerable journey time along Jackson Street before a possible exit at the next intersection. But from what we have seen in the various interviews from Pelissetti during the last five decades, there is no mention of his discussion with the teenagers and why he failed to act on their pointing to the killer (assuming their story to be accurate).

In the 2007 Zodiac documentary he stated "The kids had told me that whoever had done this crime left the cab and was ambling or walking down Cherry Street in a northerly direction, kinda towards the Presidio. I walked that way myself, I did not run, because there are innumerable alcoves and parked cars. So, I went down following every technique I knew so I didn't get my head blown off. Got down to the corner of Jackson Street - had to make a choice - I was on the east side of the street so turned right to the east and went up in that direction". This statement seems to negate that any conversation between him and the Robbins kids ever took place, or that he completely ignored everything they pointed to that night. If he had been told by Lindsey that the perpetrator was approaching the corner of Jackson and Cherry, and then was gone, not only would he have known the killer was not hiding behind a parked car or in any alcove along the majority of Cherry Street, he would have known the killer likely turned east on Jackson Street. But the impression given in the 2007 documentary was of an officer unaware of being told anything. His only reason given for turning east on Jackson Street was because he was already on the east side, not that the perpetrator was pointed out to him on the east side of Cherry, and then moments later had vanished.

There still remains another conflict regarding this statement by the Robbins kids. If Armond Pelissetti and Donald Fouke received the initial radio broadcast (APB) at the same time (about 9:58 pm), with Armond Pelissetti arriving at the crime scene no quicker than 40-50 seconds, then Pelissetti is getting Zodiac pointed out to him approaching the intersection of Jackson and Cherry at about the minute mark. One minute into Donald Fouke's journey, he gets a visual on the Zodiac Killer approaching Jackson and Maple, with one block separating the sightings at the same time of 9:59 pm.

If both sightings are of a lone Zodiac Killer, then one of the stories pertaining to the Robbins kids or Donald Fouke is factually incorrect. One killer can't be in two places at the same time. To this day, the discrepancy has yet to be explained.

It isn't surprising that we never heard from the police dispatcher who took the call from the three teenagers on October 11th 1969, because the narrative was closely controlled by the San Francisco Police Department, who, could be argued, concocted a tissue of lies regarding the supposed misunderstanding in respect to the description of the suspect. One month after the murder of Paul Stine, their lack of transparency was compounded by an unnecessary memorandum written largely on behalf of Officer Donald Fouke in the third person. For reasons unknown, the San Francisco Police Department could have just denied the Zodiac Killer's claims of "two cops pulled a goof" in the November 9th 1969 letter, but decided to concoct a memorandum on November 12th 1969, underlining and seemingly inventing a reason why officers Donald Fouke and Eric Zelms didn't stop the white male adult. It was apparently because the dispatcher had radioed a description of a negro male adult to responding personnel. The closing of ranks to protect Officer Donald Fouke, because he stopped the suspect and let him on his way, ultimately left Donald Fouke twisting himself inside out during an uncomfortable interview in the 2007 Zodiac documentary, which accompanied the Fincher movie. Are we really to believe the dispatcher took a full description of the suspect from the three teenagers, and nobody, including the dispatcher and responding officers, thought it strange that a negro male adult in 1969 had a reddish-blond crew cut.   

Donald Fouke was approaching the intersection of Jackson and Maple Streets, when he observed a man matching virtually every characteristic passed to him over the radio by the dispatcher, apart from the skin color of the suspect, Despite the fact this man had a light-colored hair in a crew cut - the same as the description given to Fouke - he naturally didn't believe it to be the suspect because it wasn't a black male with a blond crew cut. Doesn't this seem rather strange? As Officer Donald Fouke approached the subject, the first thing he would have realized was the man was white. A cursory glance would have been all that was required to realize this wasn't the perpetrator of the attack on the taxicab driver. He could logically have asked the man in passing, had he seen a negro male adult in the area, but apparently he denied ever speaking to the shuffling man. This makes the memorandum even more unbelievable, when we consider the glossary of detail Officer Donald Fouke went into regarding the "man he wasn't looking for". 

In the November 12th 1969 memorandum, Officer Donald Fouke was attributed the description of the subject, as "a WMA 35-45 years, about 5'10", 180-200lbs. Medium heavy build - Barrel chested - Medium complexion - light colored hair possibly graying in the rear. Crew cut - Wearing glasses - Dressed in dark blue waist length zipper type jacket (Navy or royal blue). Elastic cuffs and waist band zipped part way up. Brown wool pants pleated type baggy in rear (Rust brown). May have been wearing low cut shoes". Amazing detail provided by Officer Donald Fouke, bearing in mind he was looking for a negro male adult. Not only describing the elasticated cuffs and waist band part way up, as well as the low cut shoes (later described as tan engineering boots), but took the extraordinary step of noticing the man possibly graying in the rear and having baggy pants in the rear also, despite knowing by now the man was white. One could be forgiven for believing they actually stopped the Zodiac Killer, to facilitate such clarity of detail. Officer Donald Fouke noticed all of this, yet was apparently unaware whether his partner Eric Zelms (who was seated closer to the sidewalk) saw anything. If Donald Fouke was able to provide such a vivid and clear description of the killer on November 12th 1969, then he was capable of providing this description the night of the crime. Do we really believe that neither Fouke or Zelms thought to report this sighting of a man on Jackson Street at the appropriate time - or that they were not interviewed by their superiors to what they saw that night? Are we to believe that no communication happened between Officer Donald Fouke and his superiors for one month until the belated memorandum? Officers Armond Pelissetti and Frank Peda (the first officers at the crime scene) countersigned a police report the following morning, yet inexplicably we heard nothing from the two officers who crossed paths with a killer. The whole story leaves a lot to be desired.       

Had officers Donald Fouke and Eric Zelms simply passed the white male and continued onwards without stopping, then from their initial position when receiving the first radio broadcast (APB), they would have arrived at the crime scene in no more than 90 seconds (likely less). Officer Armond Pelissetti would still have been at the crime scene, supposedly retaking the updated description from the teenagers and updating all other units. This is not the story told in the 2007 documentary, which was littered with inaccuracies during the retelling of events from October 11th 1969. Officer Donald Fouke never turned into Cherry Street traveling west on Jackson Street. According to the 1989 Crimes of the Century documentary, he apparently received the second and amended description from Pelissetti while heading towards Arguello Boulevard. If we accept the negro male adult story, we still have the added problem of Officer Donald Fouke heading away from a crime scene he is supposed to be responding to. Had he headed to the crime scene directly from the first radio broadcast, he would have been receiving the updated description from the intersection of Washington and Cherry Streets, alongside Armond Pelissetti and Frank Peda (and certainly not at the top of Cherry as told in 2007). Instead, he was receiving it from near Arguello Boulevard. What is the reason for Officer Donald Fouke heading away from an assault and robbery on Washington Street? The obvious answer is, he was directed there by the Zodiac Killer, exactly as was described in the November 9th 1969 Bus Bomb letter, when he claimed "two cops pulled a goof". The reason Officer Donald Fouke was able to recall such detail about the Zodiac Killer, is because he stopped and questioned him - and thereby explaining why he didn't travel directly to the crime scene that night.

Investigators discovered two sets of bloody fingerprints on the taxicab of Paul Stine, murdered at the intersection of Washington and Cherry Streets in Presidio Heights on October 11th 1969. The first set of prints were discovered on the dividing panel between the driver side of the taxicab and left rear passenger door. The second set of prints were discovered on the outside handle of the right front passenger door of the taxicab. Both these sets of prints were circled in red in the police report. The following excerpt from the FBI files details the findings. It clearly states that "The latent prints that show traces of blood are believed to be prints of the suspect". Since the prints from the right front door handle were believed to be prints from the killer, it's fairly obvious that they showed traces of blood. This is why they were circled with a red pen.

If the Zodiac Killer rode in the front passenger seat of the taxicab that night and executed Paul Stine, he most certainly would have received some back spatter to his hand and gun. He may also have transferred blood to his hands in the process of removing a piece of Paul Stine's shirt. If this was the case, why was no blood found on the inner door handle, yet was discovered on the outer door handle? The killer had every reason to touch the inner door handle to leave, so may have used a handkerchief to avoid getting fingerprints on this handle. However, upon exiting the front passenger door, there was absolutely no need to ever touch the outer door handle with your fingertips to close it. Just close it by pushing the door with any other part of your body (leg, foot, lower arm, elbow, shoulder, or using the handkerchief). Despite the three teenagers having described the Zodiac Killer wiping down the front passenger door with a handkerchief, it is apparent that he still left bloody prints. 

A killer traveling in the back seat would also have received back spatter on his hand and gun, but no blood was recorded being found on the inner back passenger door handle. The murderer would then have exited the right rear door and entered the front passenger door. The question would now be: did the killer successfully avoid (or even attempt to avoid) placing his fingerprints on the front outer door handle as he entered the front compartment? Bloody fingerprints were retrieved from this handle, so it's possible the answer was no (he could always attempt to clean the handle upon leaving, as noticed by the three teenagers). The killer managed to avoid depositing bloody fingerprints on the inner and outer door handle at the rear. He also avoided depositing bloody fingerprints on the front inner door handle. The only door handle to contain the killer's bloody fingerprints was the outside of the front passenger side. A handle that a front passenger never needed to close with a bloody hand, but a handle that a back passenger certainly needed to open when entering the front of the taxicab.

If the Zodiac Killer entered the front passenger door at the beginning of the journey, then it's possible he deposited a normal fingerprint on the outer door handle that required wiping away after the murder. However, a wiping motion with your fingerprints protected by a handkerchief, would be extremely unlikely to deposit any bloody prints. But if bloody prints were already on the handle, caused by a back seat passenger entering the front compartment, wiping them down upon leaving could fail to remove all of them. There will always be the claim that these fingerprints were deposited by responding personnel, despite the fact that this was a managed crime scene, with the option of elimination prints at a later date. This claim is usually trotted out by researchers with a vested interest in a particular suspect, who they don't want ruled out by bloody fingerprints. Rather than rip up years of research, it is much easier to rip up the evidence. The balance of probability in the Paul Stine murder leans toward a Zodiac Killer who rode in the back of the taxicab that night, although like most things in the Zodiac case, there is always room for doubt. 

There is an extremely credible argument that the murder of Paul Stine on October 11th 1969 in Presidio Heights took place at the intersection of Washington and Maple Streets, with the killer effectively driving the taxicab one block further west. The Zodiac Killer, with little doubt, planned the taxicab murder in advance with the express intention of removing a piece of Paul Stine's shirt and mailing it to the San Francisco Chronicle.

On October 12th 1969, the Chronicle ran an article clearly stating that the "three younsters saw a scuffle near the cab, which was stopped on Washington Street near Cherry Street, about 10 pm". Despite this statement, the author of the October 13th 1969 letter claimed "This is the Zodiac speaking. I am the murderer of the taxi driver over by Washington St + Maple St last night, to prove this here is a blood stained piece of his shirt". The decision to contradict the newspaper and use the words "over by" could be argued as a correction by the Zodiac Killer, especially in light of the three teenagers testifying that they heard no gunshot that night. Had they been drawn to the window by the sound of a gunshot (that they possibly didn't recognize as one), a killer traveling in the back seat of the taxicab would have been visible in the rear of the taxicab when they arrived at the window. At best, the killer would have been exiting the rear of the taxicab and approaching the front passenger side door.

The Robbins children explicitly relayed the following information: "The first kid at the window said the driver looked "sick, or something". Lindsey and Rebecca went to the window and saw the driver laying across the front seat, head toward the passenger door. His head was in the lap of another man (passenger). Rebecca saw blood and said out loud, "he's stabbing that man." She was seeing blood on the victim and saw the glint of a knife, so she assumed a stabbing was taking place". This backs up their contention of not hearing a gunshot because the Zodiac Killer could not have achieved this position on the front seat in the time between the fatal shot and the kids responding to it. The murderer was already in the front seat with the victim's head lying across his lap (their interpretation). Their claim of a seeing the "glint of a knife" would be bolstered by the arrival of the removed piece of shirt just two days later. Many claim that the shirt was torn but a Zodiac Killer who had planned this murder in advance surely would have used a knife to facilitate the speedy removal of a section of Paul Stine's shirt. The "glint of a knife" seemingly corroborates this assertion.             

Is it possible the three teenagers heard no gunshot because the killer used a suppressor? The claim by the Zodiac Killer to have murdered Paul Stine "over by Washington St + Maple St" would obviously have been an explanation for no gunshot being heard at Washington and Cherry, but was the author of the October 13th 1969 letter telling the truth? I believe he was.

The author of the October 13th 1969 letter would reference Washington and Maple Streets despite the fact that nobody but the police knew the taxicab trip sheet contained the destination of Washington and Maple, other than the killer. The killer chose the Washington & Maple intersection as his destination (logged in the trip sheet by Paul Stine), and mentioned it in the October 13th 1969 letter because this was the designated location to murder Paul Stine. This clearly shows that the author of the Chronicle letter not only inserted the shirt piece as proof he was the murderer of Paul Stine, but knew the contents of the trip sheet and its destination. There was nothing to gain from the killer's perspective by claiming the murder at a different location to the one reported in the newspapers. In fact, a murder at Washington and Maple ticks so many boxes from the perspective of a killer who meticulously planned this murder and was intent on securing a shirt piece from the victim to prove his involvement in this crime. Especially because this crime would never have been believed to be the work of Zodiac without such proof. The Washington and Maple mention on October 13th 1969 just another layer of proof in view of the taxicab trip sheet.    

It is believed that the killer parked his vehicle somewhere close to Presidio Park to facilitate his escape. The first thing the killer has to do then, is select a location for the murder in close proximity, but not too close. If you look at the previous four intersections east of Washington and Cherry, it becomes apparent that Washington and Maple is the ideal location in a built-up city. As with Washington & Cherry, the residences at Washington & Spruce, Washington & Locust and Washington & Walnut are in extremely close proximity to the street - and obviously pose great danger if you are firing an unsuppressed 9mm weapon in any of those locations. In a population dense section of the city it becomes apparent that a murder at Washington & Maple is the ideal location. Or to be more exact, the location at, or slightly west of the Le Petit Trianon (a historical landmark in San Francisco at 3800 Washington Street, based upon the Chateau at the Versailles Palace in France). A gunshot within a taxicab located here isn't impervious to detection, but it is much less likely to draw unwanted ears and eyes when you compare it to the corner of Washington & Cherry. A killer committing a murder at the location where the taxicab was found would be doing so just 20 feet from the front door of 3898 Washington Street with numerous other residences in close proximity. Now compare that intersection with Washington & Maple. Where would you commit the murder?              

By committing a murder here the Zodiac Killer can afford himself two layers of protection. He knows he needs time to wipe down the taxicab and secure a piece of Paul Stine's shirt, so is firing a weapon just 20 feet from the front door of 3898 Washington Street, or 50 feet from the house occupied by the three teenagers the ideal choice, when you are going to spend one to two minutes inside a taxicab removing a piece of the victim's shirt and wiping away incriminating evidence? The more sensible option would be to commit the murder at Washington & Maple in a much more secure location, then as an insurance policy (just in case somebody overheard a shot), relocate one block further west where no shot would have been heard. Then you would feel much more comfortable just pulling up to the sidewalk in the taxicab and claiming the shirt piece without fear the gunshot has drawn unwanted attention. The only action the killer had to perform was to shoot Paul Stine at Washington & Maple before he switched off the meter, push Paul Stine to the right, then access the pedals of the taxicab and leave. If somebody had heard what they believed to be a shot near the intersection of Washington & Maple, within a matter of seconds the killer would have been gone.  

I see no tangible benefit of a killer offering up a second location to police and therby provide the opportunity for police to investigate the possibility of a second set of eyewitnesses at Washington & Maple. I have little doubt that the police would have searched for eyewitnesses at this second location offered by the killer, but it appears that they found none. Testimony that the Zodiac Killer's choice of committing the murder at Washington & Maple was the correct one. Unfortunately, he hadn't banked on the three curious and lively teenagers at Washington & Cherry who just so happened to look out of the window at an inopportune moment with respect to the Zodiac's activities. Despite this, the delay of responding officers to the crime scene gave him just enough time to escape capture. 

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 blooded 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.