On October 21st 1969, the San Francisco Chronicle ran an article entitled 'Lawmen Pool Their Zodiac Clues', stating "Meanwhile, police circulated a new composite drawing of the 'Zodiac' suspect based on further questioning of the three witnesses to Stine's killing". It appears on the face of it, that the sighting of a trained police officer, Donald Fouke, who apparently told Armond Pelissetti mere minutes after the murder of Paul Stine his passing of a man on Jackson Street, played absolutely no part in either composite. To disregard the input of a highly trained professional police officer seems rather curious, if not disrespectful.
Armond Pelissetti stated in the 2007 Zodiac documentary "It seemed that Officer Fouke in that amount of time felt that he had stopped the Zodiac. Well, it's very hard to say whether he did or not, it would be a point of conjecture at this point, and he seemed quite upset. Fouke was also very clear about what the person was wearing- it just so happens the area is extremely well lit, and I cannot imagine him not seeing the shine of blood on the clothing if it had been Zodiac. I feel bad for him if he believes that was Zodiac. I don't think it was".
Despite the fact Donald Fouke gave an extensive description of the man, in an "extremely well lit" area of Jackson Street, not dissimilar to the description given by the three teenagers - that he witnessed only minutes after the murder, traveling in the same direction as proffered by the three eyewitnesses - his recollection was roundly dismissed as Zodiac, by not only Armond Pelissetti, but the hierarchy involved in submitting both police sketches, who seemingly never consulted him. Only eight and a half hours later, dated October 12th 1969, Armond Pelissetti countersigned a police report with Frank Peda stating that the suspect was "last seen walking north on Cherry Street, from Washington Street". Officer Donald Fouke's sighting near Jackson and Maple was therefore clearly not recognized in this police report at all. Evidently, not a ringing endorsement to the observations of a trained member of law enforcement. The three teenagers apparently were the only eyewitnesses considered.
This description tallied with the teenagers, but is described as #2 SUSPECT in his early 40s. By October 13th 1969, and up to October 18th 1969, the suspect in the sketch submitted to the public was described as 25-30 years. But in the October 12th 1969 police report it details a man in his early 40s. If this wasn't Donald Fouke or the three teenagers description - then who was it?
There was a report in the San Francisco Chronicle on October 12th 1969, describing a man seen running into Julius Khan playground, but this couldn't have been #2 SUSPECT in the police report, because the police report stated the suspect was "last seen walking north on Cherry Street, from Washington Street". The only other eyewitness was an 8-year-old child in the FBI files, secured by Alex Lewis and later redacted to read 'Xenophon Lusby Anthony, WMA, DOB 28th February 1931, resides at 3218 Jackson Street, San Francisco. For Info Ident Division, San Francisco Police Department advised; 8-year-old witness in murder of cab driver identified Anthony as possible subject in this matter'. The individual in this document would have been 37 years of age on October 11th 1969 - between the 35-45 age range offered in the revised sketch on October 18th 1969. This is not inferring that Xenophon Lusby Anthony was the Zodiac Killer, only that the description of the 8-year-old could very well have been the #2 SUSPECT description given in the police report, and the sighting must have occurred somewhere between the crime scene and the top of Cherry Street. After all, the man was "last seen walking north on Cherry Street, from Washington Street".
However, Sick E. Von Brutal, a member on Ophion1031's 'This is the Zodiac Speaking' forum, stated that he "got a Facebook reply back from Robert von Hafften today and he told me that he was not the 8-year-old witness from the FBI report". Whether he didn't want to get involved in the Zodiac case, or actually wasn't the 8-year-old child described in the FBI report- one may never know. But if this definitely wasn't the child, who observed somebody he thought was Xenophon Lusby Anthony, subject in the murder of Paul Stine, then this unidentified 8-year-old child must still have resided somewhere between the crime scene and the top of Cherry Street (if responsible for the description in the police report).
Was Xenophon Anthony a case of mistaken identity by the 8-year-old child? If so, then we could still be looking for a killer who resembled Xenophon Anthony on October 11th 1969. Somebody described as "35-45 years, approximately 5'8", heavy build, short brown hair, possibly with red tint, wears glasses" and "in his early forties, 5'8", heavy build, reddish-blond, crew cut hair and wearing eyeglasses" by four eyewitnesses, before the killer even reached Jackson Street that night. It may be the case, that the Zodiac Killer's features lie somewhere between Xenophon Anthony and the widely distributed police sketch. Xenophon Anthony was cross checked for fingerprints in the FBI report and ruled out as the contributor to any retrieved from the taxicab of Paul Stine, but his identification by the 8-year-old, assuming the child previously knew Xenophon Anthony, could still be be very useful in validating the accuracy of the sketch supplied from the memories of the three teenagers that night.
This article has subsequently been developed into a revised version, doubting that the three teenagers ever gave a description to police of a suspect aged 25 to 30 years. See the article The Zodiac Was About 40 in 1969.