What the police want you to believe is that he drove by the white man on Jackson Street because he was given a description of a negro male adult. So in the minute that Officer Fouke drove the distance before encountering the man, are we to conclude that the dispatcher only relayed "be on the lookout for a negro male adult" and nothing more? The description of the perpetrator given a month later by Officer Fouke was almost identical to the description given by the teenagers. We had "early forties" and "35-45 years", "heavy build" and "medium heavy build", "reddish blond crew cut hair" and "light colored hair in a crew cut", "dark (navy blue or black) Parka jacket" and "dark blue waist length zipper type jacket (navy or royal blue)", "dark brown trousers" and "brown wool pants", with both wearing glasses.
Despite the fact that his description of the subject on Jackson Street virtually matched the description given by the three teenagers to the dispatcher, I doubt many negro male adults in 1969 had a reddish blond or light colored crew cut. If we are to believe the event-changing story of Officer Fouke being furnished with a description of a negro male adult, why did neither the dispatcher or Officer Fouke not question the description of the negro male adult having reddish blond hair? Even without the description of the hair, everything else was close enough to have warranted stoppiing the white male on Jackson Street.
Once Officer Fouke had determined the man was white, there was no need to examine this man from top to bottom, and then make a note of his posterior features. He was responding to an assault and robbery on a taxicab driver and his primary motivation should have been to head to the crime scene. However, if he was really looking for a white man when he approached Jackson Street, then this amount of detail would be understandable - especially if he stopped the subject and was informed of a "man waving a gun" up the street.
Both officers were approaching a crime scene with reports of a man leaving the intersection of Washington & Cherry and heading north up Cherry Street. They would have been scouring the sidewalks for any potential suspects heading their way, not looking at the sky for potential hang gliders. If Donald Fouke was really responsible for the entirety of that memorandum, it is not only strange that he was totally oblivious to what Eric Zelms saw that night after one month had elapsed, but it would suggest that Eric Zelms played no part in the description given. The later claim that Eric Zelms admitted to stopping the Zodiac Killer on October 11th 1969 is evident by the contrived memorandum, designed by individuals above the pay grade of Officer Fouke to paint a completely different picture of the events that unfolded on Jackson Street that night. There is little reason to believe a negro male adult ever passed the lips of any person on October 11th 1969, and every reason to believe that Officer Fouke was coerced into putting his signature to a memorandum to refute the writings of Zodiac, who had just claimed he was stopped and let go that night.