For Anybody living in Northern California during the later 1960’s and early 1970’s, you could not help but be familiar with the infamous ‘Zodiac killer’, a mad man that stalked unsuspecting young couples while they enjoyed each other’s company in secluded quiet areas.  At the time, they didn’t seem to have a care in the world, but if they had known that a mad man was watching them, they would likely have been on guard.

From December, 1968 until September, 1969, the Zodiac Killer attacked three couples, two in Vallejo, and one in  Napa, before finally breaking his pattern by killing a lone taxi driver in San Francisco.  In all, Zodiac is confirmed to have murdered five people, and seriously wounded two more. His tools during these crimes included multiple small caliber handguns, a knife, and pre-cut lengths of plastic clothesline.  Zodiac’s last confirmed attack took place in October,1969, but along the way from August, 1969 until July,1974, Zodiac also attacked with his own words and a blue felt tip pen.

The Zodiac killer mailed many letters to Bay area newspapers including taunting clues, and coded ciphers, as well as proof that he was responsible for the crimes. During this time, many unsolved crimes in the Bay area were attributed to Zodiac, many of which did not fit Zodiac’s known MO, but frightened residents were quick to lay the blame at his feet. Some of the names linked to Zodiac during this period included Kathleen Johns, a woman from San Bernardino who was driving north to the Bay area to visit her Mother in 1970. She was attacked outside of Modesto after pulling over for a man that signaled to her that her tire was about to fall off. She survived and later identified her attacker as Zodiac from a police sketch of him. Another possible Victim commonly attributed to Zodiac is Donna Lass, a nurse who went missing after her late shift at a Casino in South Lake Tahoe in 1970. Lass, vanished off of the face of the Earth, and later, a postcard attributed to Zodiac was mailed to the San Francisco Chronicle, seemingly taking responsibility for Lass vanishing. In neither of these cases was there ever any solid evidence that Zodiac was responsible for these attacks, but these ‘victims’ will likely forever be thought of as ‘Zodiac Victims’.  The big question is, could there have been any other names that could be verified to be true Zodiac Victims? The answer would soon come.

In 1970, Chronicle Reporter Paul Avery, a Zodiac aficionado, and a personal recipient of one of Zodiac’s letters, made a Zodiac connection to a 1966 murder in Riverside, California.  In October, 1966, a young Riverside college student named Cheri Jo Bates was murdered outside of her school Library.  Her attacker disabled her vehicle, and waited for her to come out of the library. When she couldn’t start the car, he came along acting as a good Samaritan and offered to help. Instead of helping her, he was able to lure her into a darkened and isolated area away from the parking lot, and then attacked her savagely with a knife.  Her murder was so gruesome, that she was nearly decapitated. The murder left the quiet town of Riverside in a state of shock. But the shock would only deepen a month after her murder, when a ‘confession’ letter was mailed to the local newspaper in Riverside. The typed letter claimed responsibility for the Bates murder, and provided details which apparently only the murderer would know. Most frightening of all, the letter’s Author promised more Victims. On the six month anniversary of the murders, another series of letters was mailed to the newspaper, the police, and most chilling of all, to the Victim’s Father. The letters, this time scrawled in disguised hand printed words, stated that Cheri Bates “Had to die”.  At some point after the shocking  letters had been delivered, a desk was discovered in  Riverside College storage by a Janitor. The desktop had a morbid poem etched, and then written over with ink. Fearing that this poem had something to do with the Bates murder, the desk was put into evidence by Riverside PD.  Meanwhile, Paul Avery felt so strongly that this 1966 crime was the work of Zodiac, that he personally hand delivered the written letters in the Bates case to Zodiac case Questioned Document examiner, Sherwood Morrill. Morrill, who was a very skilled and experienced examiner examined the Bates case letters and desktop, and came to the final conclusion that the Bates case writing was “unquestionably the work of Zodiac”. This was a major development in the Zodiac case, and had seemingly linked Zodiac to the southern California area prior to his reign of terror in the Bay area. The Zodiac link to Riverside and the Bates case went public, and after a delay, Zodiac finally wrote a letter taking credit for the murder, but warned police “you are only finding the easy ones, there are a hell of a lot more down there”. Was Zodiac being truthful? Indeed police would link another possible  crime near Goleta in the Santa Barbara area to Zodiac.

In June, 1963, two High School seniors,  Robert Domingos, & Linda Edwards, enjoyed themselves on a secluded  beach while they celebrated ‘senior class ditch day’. While they played on the beach, a killer made his way towards them. He attacked them suddenly, and apparently took them by surprise. He held them at bay with a gun, likely a .22 rifle. Police feel that he ordered the female victim to tie up the male using pre cut lengths of rope. At some point, they resisted and a struggle ensued. The couple made a break for it before the killer unleashed a series of shots, cutting down the two young students. The killer then coldly walked up to them both as they lay defenseless on the ground, and fired more shots into them at close range.  The killer then drug their lifeless bodies into a nearby shack, and attempted to set their bodies on fire possibly to destroy evidence. Their bodies were soon discovered, and  the surrounding towns were left devastated by the terrible crime. Who could have done such a thing? As it turns out, years later, the Santa Barbara County Sherriff’s Department would link this crime to the later September, 1969  Zodiac attack at Lake Berryessa in Napa, based on similar MO and evidence found at the crime scene which police have never disclosed publicly.

The Bates case, as well as the double Murder of Domingos & Edwards combined many elements and common traits of some of  Zodiac’s crimes, and for that reason, these cases have been linked to Zodiac for decades. However, there is another case that has all of Zodiac’s finger prints on it, shares much of the  MO from his crime, and happened right in the middle of his stomping grounds in Alameda County in 1967, yet, you likely have never heard of this case, or the possible link to Zodiac. These Victims may certainly be Zodiac’s ‘Forgotten Victims’.

Late on the Evening of June 8, 1967, a couple parked on a dark and secluded area on  Vallecitos Road in Alameda County. The couple, was Enedine Molina & Fermin Rodriguez. While they shared their time alone, they were interrupted by an unknown assailant who ordered the couple from the car.  Mr. Rodriguez was shot apparently as soon as he exited the vehicle. The killer then ordered  Ms. Molina into his car, and drove off with her, leaving the Mr. Rodriguez dead alongside Ms. Molina’s station Wagon. The killer drove a few miles, and stopped close to the entrance of Sunol Regional park. At this time, he either let Ms. Molina out of the car, or she escaped. Whatever the case, Ms. Molina ran for her life, undoubtedly terrified into the darkness. Behind her, her Abductor followed training his gun on her, and shooting her once in the back, thus ending any chance of an escape. She died where she fell.  The murderer then walked off into the night. A nearby resident, called the Santa Rita police substation and reported that they had heard two gunshots. Responding Officers located Ms. Molina’s lifeless body around 11pm, and immediately started an investigation, which they processed for about three hours. At around 2:30 am, on his way back to the police substation, the same Officer that had located Ms. Molina’s body, noticed her station wagon parked on Vallecitos Road. After stopping to check it out, he then found the body of Mr. Rodriguez. Mr. Rodriguez had been shot twice from the front, once in the chest and once in the shoulder. The weapon used to murder the couple proved to be a small caliber handgun, later identified as a .22 caliber, a favorite weapon of the Zodiac. The police had no immediate suspects, and ruled out rape or robbery.

Enedine Molina and Fermin Rodriguez, didn’t fit the typical profile of Zodiac victims. They were both older, Molina was 35 and Rodriguez was 37. Most of Zodiac’s victims, were young student -aged Victims. Both were Hispanic, and all of Zodiac’s Victims, caucasian. Additionally, Molina & Rodriguez were not married. In fact, Molina had been recently divorced, and Rodriguez was still married. They had been lovers for many years, and apparently, their Families were aware of this. Following the murders, police logically investigated the Families of the two victims, including one logical potential suspect, the ex-husband of Ms. Molina. After questioning, he was ruled out as a suspect. The police were left with not much to go on, no motives, and no suspects.

The murders of Molina & Rodriguez happened BEFORE the first confirmed Zodiac Murders of December 20,1968, and AFTER the letters were mailed in the Cheri Jo Bates case in April, 1967.  The murders happened in Alameda County, which lies south of Vallejo where Zodiac’s crime spree seemed to be centered, and East of San Francisco where most of Zodiac’s letters were mailed from. In fact, if you placed markers on a map in Vallejo, San Francisco, and near the area in Alameda County where the couple was attacked, you would have an almost perfect  triangle on the map. Did Zodiac actually live within that triangle? Interestingly, the spot where the couple was attacked and murdered, is very close to the town of Pleasanton. Zodiac mailed a letter postmarked in Pleasanton in March, 1971 to the Los Angeles Times Newspaper.  With no motive, or suspects, the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office  did not have much to go on in this senseless double murder. But, some troubling clues would soon surface.

As the investigation continued, it was revealed that each of the two Victims, Molina & Rodriguez, had each been followed by the same unknown man in the weeks leading up to their murders. In one incident, Mr. Rodriquez reported to his Wife that he had seen the car parked in front of his home, but could not identify the Driver. (I tried unsuccessfully to obtain descriptions of the car or its’ driver).  In addition, both Victims received phone calls leading up to their murders. The phone calls  almost always came between 10 & 11am or between 7 & 8pm. The caller never spoke, and only the sound of heavy breathing could be heard on the other end of the line. Perhaps most troubling, was that these calls continued even AFTER the murders. In the Zodiac case, Robert Graysmith, Author of the best seller, ZODIAC, reported that during his research and investigation of the case, that he had started receiving calls from a heavy breather, and that the calls  usually came around 10:30 in the morning, the same as the calls to Molina & Rodriguez. Additionally, Family Members of Zodiac Victim, Darlene Ferrin, reported ‘Heavy Breathing’  calls to their homes on the night of her murder.  The source of any of these phone calls has never been positively identified. Also of note, it has been reported by Darlene Ferrin’s Family, that she had a stalker who used to follow her, and was seen parked in front of her house. The parallels between the Zodiac case, and this 1967 double murder are hard to ignore.

When I first discovered the Molina/Rodriguez case while researching the Zodiac case, I was actually floored by the parallels to the Zodiac. The attack of a lone couple on a secluded lovers lane, the choice of weapon, a .22 handgun, the fact that the male was shot immediately upon exiting the car, and the female was shot in the back while she ran (these facts were quite similar to the first confirmed Zodiac attack on 12/20/68), the possible stalking of the Victims, the phone calls, and the complete lack of motive,  it was all so similar to the Zodiac case, that it couldn’t be ignored. I checked around on the internet and in newspapers, and found that this case was never connected to the Zodiac murders, despite happening in the same area, and not long before the Zodiac murders officially started. I felt that there was an overwhelming chance that this was indeed an early Zodiac crime, so much so, that I contacted the Alameda County Sheriff’s Department with my suspicions in April, 2010.

“I am Intrigued by this”, was the response I got from Alameda County Sheriff’s Dept, Sgt Scott Dudek.  Dudek, now retired, was in charge of Alameda County’s unsolved cold cases. During his 25 year career, he had become quite a skilled investigator, and was well respected. He told me that investigators he knew in Alameda county had suspected Zodiac could possibly be involved  in some of their unsolved crimes, and that some of them had theories on the matter, so the mention of ZODIAC  was not new. But Zodiac being possibly connected to the murder of Molina & Rodriguez, WAS new. In fact, Dudek had to go back and find the old case files and records, as this had truly become, by definition, a ‘cold’ case. Not much had happened in the 43 years since the murders had been committed, and Sgt Dudek had trouble finding the materials on the case. Finally, he had located the actual case info and listing in their records, but was never able to locate the actual case files or full reports with all of the major case information. Apparently, many old files & records had been lost, damaged, or destroyed over the previous 43 years. Sadly, things like this are common with old cold cases. It was truly a letdown for both of us, but Sgt Dudek did have some very good news to share. Although the records & files on the case were no place to be found, the ballistics information as well as the actual bullets and/or casings  were still in their possession, and Sgt Dudek said that they were actually in very good shape. An examination of this evidence could be compared against ballistic evidence from any of the Zodiac crime scenes, specifically against the 12/20/68 Zodiac murders.  Sgt. Dudek and I corresponded by email & phone several times, sometimes on a daily basis. We were both excited that this crime might possibly be linked to the Zodiac case, and we hoped it might aide in solving the Molina/Rodriguez case, or maybe even the Zodiac case itself.

One day, Sgt Dudek contacted me and was excited to let me know that he had been in contact with the Solano County Sheriff’s Dept, and they were going to send him some of their ballistics evidence from the 12/20/68 Zodiac murders on Lake Herman Rd (bullets and/or casings)for comparison with the evidence that he had in the Molina/Rodriguez case. The initial reports as far as lands, grooves,  twists, etc were already  similar between the two cases, but a conclusive match would need to be made from examination  under a microscope. The evidence Solano sent was too badly damaged for any kind of definite match and the results came back as inconclusive. Both Sgt Dudek and myself were disappointed.

While all of this was going on, Sgt Dudek was in the process of retiring. He was trying to take a partial retirement where he could stay on specifically for just cold case investigation. His plan was to reach out to the Family members to see if anything additional could be learned from them that might help provide more clues or aide in solving the double murder. In the meantime, I reached out to a Family member of one of the Victims, and tried to see if they might have any information. Although they were initially excited about the interest in this case, they ultimately decided that it might open up old wounds, and that the Family had moved on. It was around this time that I found out Sgt Dudek would not be staying on, and would fully retire.  Between his retirement, the lack of any full police records on the case, and the fact the Family  of the Victims did not want to get involved, I discontinued my research of this case, but I never stopped thinking this case may very well be the work of the Zodiac.

There were still some things that didn’t seem to fit Zodiac, mainly the lack of any bragging from him after the murders, especially in the form of taunting letters. But, there seemed to be more pieces that fit compared to things that didn’t. In the end, we will likely never know if these two people were victims of the Infamous Zodiac Killer, but at least like Cheri Jo Bates, and the other possible Victims of the Zodiac, we now know their names, and we know that no matter who murdered them, we know their murders were senseless and motiveless, and deserve to be solved.

Morf, the long-time Zodiac-community contributor known for – among other things – convincing the FBI to release a bunch of Zodiac-related material, used to operate a web forum at zodiackillersite.forummotion.com. Recently, he has revamped the forum and relaunched it on its own website: zodiackillersite.com. This new site, which of course has all the active members from the previous forum, is sure to become a hub Zodiac activity. If you’re at all interested in the case, I encourage you to stop by and check it out.

A recent Vanity Fair article, Disaster Movie, discusses various aspects of the poorly-made movie, The Innocence of Muslims, which triggered violent protests across numerous Arab and Muslim nations.

What’s interesting, from a Zodiac-Killer perspective, is the way in which those involved with the film are trying to disassociate themselves from it. In particular, one of the actresses, Cindy Lee Garcia, filed a law suit claiming the creator of the film did not have permission to use her image (that’s a new one…). She further claimed that the release documents which bore her signature had been forged. To substantiate the assertion, she enlisted the expertise of a questioned-documents examiner whose claim to fame is that he worked on the case of the Zodiac Killer. From page three of the article (emphasis added):

Garcia is asserting copyright interest in The Innocence of Muslims, since she says she did not sign a release granting Nakoula the right to use her image. (Garcia’s suit includes expert testimony from a forensic analyst who worked on the case of the Zodiac Killer, asserting that Garcia’s handwriting and signatures on the releases provided by Nakoula are forged.)

I’m not sure if many of us will be paying attention by the time all of Ms. Garcia’s legal battles get settled. If you’re really interested, you may be happy to learn that the actress is writing a book about her experience, entitled: The Innocence of Cindy Garcia.

If you haven’t been over to zodiackillerciphers.com recently, you should head over and have a look. Dave’s added some really good content, including a detailed look at the 408 solution and some thoughts on the lesser-known concerned citizen who anonymously sent a solution key for the 408 to police.

Dave’s blog has so much interesting stuff, I’ve given up on commenting on all of it. Instead, I’ve added an RSS feed to his blog in my sidebar. It’s replacing the #ZodiacKiller twitter feed (let’s be honest, that wasn’t providing a whole lot of value…). Hopefully, this RSS feed will encourage people to regularly check out zodiackillerciphers.com.

Some analysis regarding the killer’s use of the letters ‘F’ & ‘K’, and related thoughts. I don’t buy into it, but it’s certainly on topic.

http://www.zodiacciphers.com/1/post/2012/12/fk-im-crackproof.html

Symbols are a universal creation of the human mind. In fact, the argument can be made that we cannot help but create symbols, which are often vital to our well-being and overall psychic health. Symbols also convey complex and hidden meanings that reach far beyond their overt simplicity. Just look to our nightly dreams for an example of how we spontaneously create symbols and their often-powerful impact on our lives. We live in a world of symbols, some borrowed, some created, but all meaningful at many levels.

Those who create symbols and use them effectively are always conveying information that is complex and important. Often, these symbols also provide an understanding of the symbol creator, the kind of information that penetrates deeply into the unconscious motivation of the individual who formed the symbol. Symbol creators are telling us much about themselves, along with the message they wish to convey. They are also offering information that is frequently convoluted and involves a wealth of thoughts and relationships. Symbols, then, are a kind of shorthand to convey an intricate story that contains hidden parts or meanings.

It’s clear that the Zodiac killer was a symbol creator. He fashioned and used symbols in a variety of ways and with a compulsion that is impossible to ignore. His use of symbols also grew, evolved, and became more complex and intricate as he continued to attack his victims and write his missives. Zodiac created obvious symbols in his written communications, sketches, and artwork. He also created symbols in his physical movements and actions. In other words, Zodiac used symbol-creation as a way to communicate his overall message as well as tell us a good deal about himself. For the killer, this kind of creative process was not limited to pen and paper. It spilled over into his physical life and became a part of his movements and actions.

The most obvious of Zodiac’s symbol creations was the infamous “cross-hair” that became his personal signature. For Zodiac, this was a symbol of Self, a unique and powerful public signature that held multiple layers of meaning. Once he placed this symbol into the public consciousness, and linked it directly to his actions, Zodiac staked a claim to that symbol of Self that became a permanent fixture of his journey. No one could misunderstand his use of this symbol and no one could ignore it’s overt meaning. It also contained layers of relevance that spoke to his ferocity, willingness to take risks, and as an ever-present danger to the public. This symbol conveyed fear on a large scale, along with other, less obvious, meanings. It was his most personal and arguably potent symbol-creating effort.

The killer used many different symbols from several disciplines throughout his ciphers. Each symbol was somehow meaningful to the cipher creator, although not necessarily as crucial or important as his Self symbol. However, each of these lesser symbols was chosen for a reason and, therefore, each of them point back to the cipher-creator in some way. When taken together, they tell a story. Overall, the ciphers provide a sort of dictionary of symbols, a collection that was unique to Zodiac. When taken as a whole, they help form a picture of the man who selected those symbols for specific reasons, even if those reasons were not fully conscious at the time they were chosen. To understand their importance, this collection must be viewed in its entirely and not dissected by the use of outside sources alone. In my view, it is a mistake to look only at the symbols Zodiac used to create any single cipher. Each cipher, as a whole, is also a symbol. Each page upon which it was written is a symbol. Taken together, each cipher is a macro-symbol that is both inherently complete and tells a powerful story, including the three-part cipher that so captivated the public. Each was prepared with care. Each conveyed important and specific information.

Zodiac also used symbol-making in several of his crimes. His carefully designed appearance at Lake Berryessa was a powerful example of an individual who was compelled to create a real-life symbol of himself, his presence, and his meaning. This was not simply a disguise. It was the enactment of a symbol-creating process that was designed to convey a powerful meaning. Since it was uncertain (to him, initially) whether or not his victims at Lake Berryessa would survive Zodiac’s attack, it also seems clear that he could have been creating the “disguise” symbols as part of his own overall journey, however one might define that path. The bottom line is that the killer created powerful symbols for the Lake Berryessa attack, symbols that were both worn on his person and scribbled on a victim’s car. These symbols, along with the crime, complete a symbol-making chapter of Zodiac’s overall story.

The Paul Stine murder was also rich in symbolic meaning. Zodiac’s use of the “public” location of Washington and Maple Streets, set alongside the more private actual location of Washington and Cherry Streets, provides a double layer of symbology. This use of symbolism, wherein there are several layers of meaning, is typical of all powerful symbols. In fact, the more powerful the symbol, the more layers of meaning can be discovered. The Stine attack, like the Lake Berryessa attack, was rife with the planned use of symbols. Once again, it was both a self-sustaining chapter of his story as well as a snapshot of his persona and motivation at that time. When the chapters of the Zodiac story are assembled from the viewpoint of symbol-creating, they provide us with a remarkably detailed portrait of the man and his crimes.

It is impossible to give the subject of Zodiac’s symbol-creating compulsion the full discussion it deserves in the confines of a short article. There are so many nuances that lie behind this kind of behavior and its potential importance to the Zodiac story. The most vital point is to keep in mind that symbol-creation remains a critical component in the Zodiac saga. His communications, his ciphers, his doodling and greetings, along with his actions, form the Zodiac story as he wished it to be known. It must be viewed in its entirely and as a self-supporting system rather than as a collection of borrowed items. Not doing so has led to many misunderstandings about this man.

There have been a few attempts to address this issue but, in my view, each has failed for a simple reason: Each has attempted to assign specific meaning to the Zodiac symbol collection by referencing individual symbols to outside, impersonal definitions. In fact, it seems that Zodiac created his own treasury of symbols that are self-defining, complete within themselves. Even though it is easy to believe that Zodiac borrowed most of his symbols from outside sources for the sake of convenience, he actually created his own symbolic litany that was self-supporting and holistic unto itself. The key to understanding Zodiac’s use of symbols is to understand them within their own context, within the scope of how Zodiac created and used them.

So, in order to approach an understanding of how and why Zodiac created his treasury of symbols, and what they truly mean, one has to start at the beginning. By examining his movements, his actions, as well as the more obvious use of symbols, one can see how Zodiac created and evolved his use of personally meaningful symbols, and how informative and complex they became. It is like the unfolding of a story within a story, except that the words are replaced by symbols, and the use of these symbols points directly back at their creator.

The next time you study one of Zodiac’s symbol-ridden works, such as a greeting card or an unsolved cipher, try to view it as a self-supporting, self-sustaining chapter in his own story. Take his work for what it is, within itself, as a first approach. Try to work out the meaning of the chapter as Zodiac wrote it, then move on to the next chapter of symbols. As one very small example from Zodiac’s ciphers, view his Self-symbol for what it is, not merely as a character subject to substitution. View its importance and interpretation in the way the author of the cipher originally intended. When taken as a complete body of work, these chapters of symbols form an amazingly complete picture of the man who, in all probability, wanted us to understand him much better than we do today.

[Editor: Exactly 43-years ago from the time of this article's publication, the Zodiac Killer murdered his last definite victim, Paul Stine, at the intersection of Washington and Cherry Streets in San Francisco. In honor of this somber anniversary, Zodiac Revisited submits the following article, written by our always-thoughtful contributor Michael Kelleher.]

Although, at first glance, this article may seem to address a rather narrow aspect of the Zodiac saga, it has implications that can impact the unsolved mystery on a much broader basis. The question posed here is a simple one: did Paul Stine know his killer or was he a victim of opportunity? Also, what can we learn about Stine’s movements on the night of his murder that might shed some light on this question?

First, a brief word about sources, and an acknowledgment. There are many excellent documents, diagrams, and photographs available on the Internet that speak to the Stine murder. Copies of official documents are also available, such as the Pelissetti Report, which provide a wealth of background information. Many of these were used in preparing this article and the reader is encouraged to hunt them down and study what is available. As horrific as it was, the Stine murder remains an important element in the Zodiac story, and it does so in many ways that are not immediately obvious. Also, I would like to acknowledge the work of Ray Grant on the Riverside Timeline. I’ve discussed his material elsewhere on this website. It was his method that prompted me to look at the Stine case in a similar way.

Background

The Yellow Cab Company was a fixture in San Francisco decades before Paul Stine was murdered. The company was in its heyday in the 1960s and well into the 1970s before it went through bankruptcy and reorganization. Yellow Cab still exists today but in a different structure and as a co-operative operation. However, at the time Paul Stine worked for Yellow Cab, their taxis were ubiquitous, especially in the downtown areas of the city. Fares were reasonable, courtesy was the order of the day, and cabbies were well known for their intimate familiarity with San Francisco. Although there were a few competitors at the time, Yellow Cab was, by far, the biggest game in town.

The cabbies worked hard for their tips, which could be significant if the driver was able to maximize his fares on short trips in a city that was relatively small in terms of geographical area. Hailing a cab in any of the downtown areas was common and easy. This was especially true of what was known as the Theater District or near Union Square, Chinatown, the Financial District or any of the other bustling areas of the inner city.

Jobs were relatively easy to come by in those days, and driving a cab allowed a good deal of flexibly if, like Paul Stine, your days were busy with other matters. That Stine became a Yellow Cab driver is not surprising, given his educational pursuits and other demands. That Stine would want to work nights and weekends seems obvious. That’s where the action was to be found, particularly shuttling fares back and forth from the downtown areas.

Paul Stine’s Timeline

Fortunately, we can assemble a reasonably accurate timeline for Paul Stine’s movements on the night of his murder. While reading through this timeline, it’s important to remember that a cabbie could not predict his movements with any certainty. His movements were dictated by the demands of his fares and the occasional radio dispatch from the Yellow Cab operations center. So, once Stine set foot into his cab that night, he was not typically able to control his movements beyond the choice of routes to his destination, which was not great in a city like San Francisco. His travels would be dictated by events and opportunity. With that in mind, here is a reconstruction of Paul Stine’s movements that night:

20:45 Time approximate. Stine reports to work at the Yellow Cab Company. His arrival time is later confirmed by Yellow Cab to investigators. Upon his arrival, Stine is given a waiting fare from Pier 64, San Francisco, to the San Francisco Airport.

20:55 Time approximate. Stine arrives at Pier 64 to pick up his fare. The driving time from the Yellow Cab garage to Pier 64 was no more than 9 minutes using the most likely route. At the time, Pier 64 was an “open pier” that accommodated houseboats and other vessels with occupants, a small but vibrant artist colony, and minor peripheral businesses (mostly cottage businesses). Yellow cab calls from this location were not unusual and customers typically waited at the entrance to Pier 64 for a quick pick-up by arriving taxis.

21:20 Time approximate. Stine arrives at the San Francisco International Airport (SFO) to drop off his fare. At this point, he has two options: 1) to wait for a return fare to take him back to San Francisco, or 2) to return directly to San Francisco to take advantage of the busy evening demands for a taxi in the downtown area. Stine likely noticed that the queue for available taxis was long and that he would be sitting idle for some time, waiting for a fare. He would have decided to return to San Francisco alone and head for the Theater District/Downtown to maximize his chance of fares. The quickest route from the Airport in those days was via Highway 101, with an average travel time of 21-25 minutes, depending upon traffic. The return trip would use the same route and, despite a different destination, would take the same travel time.

21:45 Latest. Stine arrives at the Theater District/Downtown, probably at Mason and Geary streets, the heart of the busiest part of the city, where taxis would most likely be needed. He immediately receives a radio dispatch to 500 Ninth Avenue. This address is in the Richmond District of San Francisco, about 3.3 miles from his current location with a traveling time of about 13 minutes. However, before he could begin the trip, Stine was hailed by a single male on foot who requested a destination of Washington and Maple Streets. Although this was not the most convenient direction for his planned destination, it was close enough that he could deliver his fare, cut across city streets, and still arrive on Ninth Avenue within a reasonable response time.

21:57 Latest. Stine drives past Washington and Maple to Cherry Street, stops his taxi, and is shot and killed. His most likely route to this destination would have been via Geary to California, to Parker, to Maple, which is a distance of 3 miles and a travel time of no more than 12 minutes, probably slightly less.

22:10 Stine is pronounced dead at the crime scene.

What Can We Learn?

Given that Stine’s movements were relatively certain that night, it seems unlikely that he made any “off the radar” trips or stops for personal reasons. There simply wasn’t enough time for that to happen. He was also in his first hour of work and wanted to be available to as many potential fares as possible. This accounts for his attraction to the downtown area where he knew, from experience, there would be a good deal of activity at that time of night. Trips meant tips, so the more trips the better for the driver.

The fact that Stine positioned himself in the Theater District was a decision of opportunity based upon experience. He had already been on a relatively long trip from the Airport without a fare, so his decision made good sense. It seems impossible that a potential attacker would know Stine’s location that evening since the driver, himself, made that decision based upon an event he could not have foreseen (the Pier 64, Airport fare, and return trip).

The most likely scenario is that Stine was in the wrong place at the wrong time, by sheer happenstance. The unpredictable nature of the events from his check-in time at Yellow Cab that evening led him to his unfortunate situation without any additional planning.

Was Stine hailed by someone he knew, who then turned out to be his killer? The forensics of the murder cannot validate this point and there is no reason to make this assumption. The fact that Stine picked up a random hail with the intent of filling the fare on his way to a dispatch call not only makes sense from a cabbie’s point of view but makes financial sense. There is no compelling reason to go beyond these relatively simple facts, and Stine’s understandable actions.

So, it seems that the issue of whether or not Paul Stine knew his killer can be addressed simply by looking closely at his actions and movements that night. Stine was a victim of opportunity. There is nothing in the case that is of significant weight to come to a different conclusion.

This of course, raises a much broader question: were Zodiac’s other victims also opportunistic or was Paul Stine an exception? It’s a fascinating and lingering question that has been addressed in many ways by many individuals. Until the case is solved and the results made public, each reader must come to his or her own conclusions. In the meantime, the most persistent unresolved issue surrounding the Stine murder is why Zodiac selected such a precise location for his attack. What was it about this location that was so crucial to the crime, that held so much meaning for the killer?

This is a re-write of an article that first appeared about a year ago but is no longer available elsewhere. It is in response to those who have asked questions about how to best proceed with a Zodiac killer theory.

Over the years, I have received mail and email from many individuals who believe they have something important to share about the Zodiac case. Most often, these are theories about the killer’s identity, unknown or undiscovered victims, or the meaning of his unsolved cyphers. Some of these theories proved to be sound, some not. Some started out well and died of their own weight. Others live on. In any case, the majority of people who contact me are sincere in their efforts and have invested a good deal of their time and energy in pursuing their theories. It is usually easy to cull out the weak theories from the material that should be given a hard look. It is always wise to give a theory at least some thought, no matter how far-fetched it might seem at first glance.

Overall, this is a good thing for the Zodiac case. Theories are important and can lead to significant breakthroughs in the case. Good theories often open up new areas of research for others to follow. However, how these theories are handled, assessed, and eventually brought to a wider audience is critical to their outcome and effectiveness. All too often, even the best theory dies an ugly death simply because it was mishandled after it was prematurely put forth to a wider audience.

So, I would like to offer a few ideas if you are someone who is working on a case theory and thinking about bringing it to a wider audience.

Most individuals with a theory have already spent a good deal of time scouring through Zodiac-related message boards and websites. This can be a good thing, so long as the theory itself has not been spread across the amateur community. In other words, while your theory is still in its formative stages, and even after it is fully formed, it is a mistake to discuss it on public message boards. Your theory should remain confidential and discussed only with other individuals in whom you can place your trust, with certainty. Once your theory is exposed to the broader community, it becomes fair game for all, regardless of their motives or intentions. Is this something you really want to happen with your hard work and good ideas without proper planning?

Thankfully, you can still find a few Internet enclaves of sanity in which to share some of your ideas, but you’ll have to work at it. They are far outnumbered by less useful destinations. Typically, this kind of enclave will be tightly restricted as to members and tightly monitored for content. In other words, those who participate have been well screened so that both their contributions and approach to others is known and respected. It’s important to remember that you are ultimately looking for a few, key personal contacts and not for group membership.

You may not like the idea of a “private club” but, in the current wide-open message board environment, it is the best alternative. Don’t expect to simply walk your way into the enclave, sit down and begin theorizing. You will need to earn your way there, based upon your own contributions in a more open, public environment. However, when you are invited in, you’ll find some really sharp people with open minds and good ideas to share. When you do begin to participate, you can feel more comfortable sharing your ideas, still taking it all slowly and carefully.

It’s vital to bring one or two other people into your confidence to check your work and help you with how to proceed with your theory. These individuals must not only know the Zodiac case but also understand how to proceed with your theory in a way that it will be fully heard and given an objective assessment yet remain yours and yours alone. In other words, individuals who have proven they can pull this off by their own actions, not merely their own words.

If you carefully read message boards and Zodiac-related websites over a period of time, you will come to know the posters well, regardless of whether or not they use their real names, which is a matter of personal choice and done for a variety of reasons. You will come to know them by their own words. Common sense is the key here. Does the poster spend his/her time attacking others, making premature judgments about the views of others, or simply negating all ideas not their own? If so, eliminate them from your potential list of confidants. Look for openness, a positive attitude, a willingness to listen to others; a person who responds intelligently and respectfully. If that pattern of behavior is absent, strike the poster/writer off your list. Judge by the pattern of behavior and not by a single post or topic. We all have good and bad days. Fortunately, we all disclose our patterns over time and across a variety of topics. Take the time to look for those patterns.

Does the poster/writer ask meaningful questions that demonstrate an openness to new ideas? Does the poster/writer have a long history of this kind of behavior over a variety of theories and ideas? Does the poster/writer avoid personal attacks, negative views and unwarranted criticism? If so, put them on your potential list. The bottom line is simple enough. Whenever an individual writes a comment or post, he/she tells the reader at least as much about himself/herself as about the subject of the post. Look for patterns, openness, and an honest, inquiring attitude. Use the same techniques that you would if you were to meet the individual in person. We all have an inbred sense of others that helps guide us through life when we deal with individuals we are trying to get to know. Use this same sense when reading through message boards or websites while looking for someone to help you with your theory.

When you find someone who might be of help, approach carefully. Use only private communication and move your conversation immediately to email, off any message board or other private message system. Start slowly and work to develop a relationship with your new contact. Assess whether or not your contact wants to become involved, and at what level. Once again, look for patterns in communication and judge them over more than a single communication. Insist, up front, on confidentiality. Without confidentiality, everything else is up for grabs.

If you feel that your new contact is not being honest, drop him/her immediately and stop communicating. Move on to someone else, but only after assessing what went wrong the first time. This is a good time to re-examine your theory, all the communications (which you should always save) as well as re-examine how you selected that individual in the first place. Over time, you will become more adept at making good choices about those with whom you wish to share your ideas.

You may sometimes find that your contact has not been wholly trustworthy. This happens. Hopefully, you have not given away the store in your initial communications. Trust takes time. If you’ve made a poor choice, move on and keep working at it. We’ve all made these kinds of mistakes. Learn from them. The important thing to remember is to cease all communication with that individual.

It’s vital to remember that simply because someone doesn’t agree with your theory it doesn’t necessarily mean that person is wrong. In fact, your theory may be wrong and they may be right. When your contact disagrees with you, examine why. Does the disagreement make sense? Is it offered in the spirit of helpfulness and honesty? Is it objective? Be ready to re-think your theory and pursue a different path.

If you are working on a theory and it has already taken root in the online community, you will have an uphill battle ahead of you. Not only will you be subjected to all kinds of feedback, offered up for all kinds of reasons, you will also be unable to get the toothpaste back into the tube when it comes time to put your theory in front of those who can truly do something about it. There is a general theme often expressed among members of the online community that all theories should be fully laid out in public so that they can be discussed and assessed. In an ideal world, this is a wonderful idea. In practice, it doesn’t work because it is based upon a false assumption that all commentators on a theory are objectively searching for the truth. This is simply not the case. As your reading of various message boards should have already indicated, there are people with all kinds of complex (and often personal) motives out there. It is not an easy task to find those individuals with legitimate motives. However, it can be done.

So, the bottom line is to move carefully and quietly. It is vitally important to correctly asses with whom you will share your work. Do not make the common mistake of simply throwing your theory out into the community to see what happens. Unless, of course, you just want that fifteen minutes of fame. If that is what you are seeking (and many do), you will probably get the attention you are seeking, although it may not be of the quality you would like.

If you are serious about your theory, keep it to yourself and work towards recruiting one or two people who can truly help you and who know how to proceed. Judge them by their history, experience, behavioral patterns, as well as their own words. Build trust, which will take time. In the end, it will be worth the effort. The best theories I have read have been handled in just this way. They are not great in number but they were usually sound and a few of them are still alive and kicking. It’s always possible that one (or more) is correct and can add valuable knowledge to the Zodiac case. The beauty of these few is that they are still viable and untainted by the chaos that inevitably follows from ill-planned public disclosure.

If you’ve done everything right, you might find yourself in the situation of wanting to move into a broad public arena with your ideas. This is a whole process unto itself. It demands skill and care equal to your determination to succeed with your theory. It is also a perilous journey, and one that you cannot complete on your own. At this point, call in the professionals and continue to keep your theory quiet. In the end, you will be much more comfortable using the tools of careful planning, patience, and good support. Once your theory has been put into the public arena in the best possible way, head on back to those message boards and websites. You will be amazed at what you find and what you’ve learned along the way.

And . . . don’t forget to write that book! A topic for another day.

[Editor: This book review is the first article from a new contributor, caresut]

Author: John Robert Jordan
Publisher: CreateSpace (June 2012)
Availability:  Paperback and Ebook format at Amazon.com

I was apprehensive when first seeing a new Zodiac killer book that is almost 600 pages long.  Purchasing the book was inevitable, I’ve never came across a Zodiac killer book and been able to pass it up.  When the book arrived, I was unsure if I had it in me to read every page.  Could there be anything new or interesting in it?  Well, I finished it in less than a week.

My favorite chapters involve the author attempting answer the often discussed question: was the Zodiac a bad speller?  Mr. Jordan goes into great detail on this subject and offers some interesting comparisons between the known Zodiac letters and the alleged Zodiac letters.

I did not particularly care for the chapters involving the occult and the equinox/solstice theories.  These topics have never been of great interest to me. Of course, other readers may have a different opinion.

Each confirmed Zodiac murder and also the possible Zodiac murders and abductions are discussed in this book.  The author does a good job of describing these events.  Although, I did not agree with many of the author’s theories, I still enjoyed the way he laid them out for the reader to decide.

The book itself is well organized.  Each chapter has footnotes.  There are 17 chapters and a conclusion where the author describes his profile of the Zodiac killer.

Three appendices offer a Zodiac timeline, a killing claim timeline, and the coroner reports on David Faraday and Betty Lou Jensen.

The author does not have a suspect, which is rare for Zodiac killer authors nowadays.  He tends to sometimes disparage researchers and detectives, both past and present.  This did not bother me, but might offend others.  The errors I noticed were minor and mostly typos.  All in all, I wish the author would have limited this book to the analysis of the grammatical errors and a discussion of the murders.  Nonetheless, I would recommend Hunter Among the Stars to anyone with a good knowledge of the Zodiac killer mystery.

Synopsis: The author, who claims to have lived with the Zodiac killer for two decades, tells her personal story. Numerous photographs and other images add interest to the story.

Although I often receive evaluation copies of books (or proposed books), I don’t often write reviews. I am generally not comfortable with passing judgment on  the written work of others, unless there is something that especially grabs my attention. This book did just that, although not for the reasons that would seem obvious from the synopsis.

The author proposes that she married and lived with the Zodiac killer for over twenty years, and she outlines a good deal of information that may (or may not) point in that direction. She isn’t the first person to claim an intimate knowledge of the uncaught killer and she certainly will not be the last. In this sense, she is but one of many others. However, that is not what captured my attention and kept me reading. In fact, I finished her book in a few hours without the usual sleepiness that often besets men of a certain advanced age.

I suppose it’s best to begin with the preliminaries that all book reviews seem to mandate. I’ll make it as quick and painless as possible, just four sentences.

This is not a polished piece of work. It has many rough spots, lacks good editing, and drifts off more than once. In other words, it is not a technically pleasing read. However, what is lacks in polish it makes up for in heart.

I have never met the author, never spoken to her, and never had more than a single-line email exchange. Yet, after reading her book, I felt as though I came to know this woman and understand her struggles. In fact, I came to like her and care much more about her personal journey than the Zodiac theory she originally  set out to memorialize.

It’s a difficult thing to describe, but one knows when a writer is being open and honest. In fact, I think all readers develop this sense after enough time and words have passed. In my view, this author was sincere and open, even when it must have been very difficult to do so. After reading her book, I felt that the writer told me everything she knew, holding nothing back. It was all there; the pain, the frustrations, the failures, and the deep fear that she often felt. She made no attempt to hide her mistakes, soft-pedal the bad times, assign blame, or make excuses for herself or anyone else. This is something I rarely find among writers, who are often careful to distance themselves from the uglier parts of their stories. This author put it all out there, as far as I can tell, and that kept me turning the pages.

Did the author achieve her goal of putting forth a solid Zodiac theory? In the end, that will have to be decided by each reader. I felt that it fell short in a number of technical areas, such as timing, dates, that kind of thing. The theory is loose, much too loose for me. However, it’s certainly at least as good as many other theories floating around in Zodiac-land. She has worked with a variety of law enforcement agencies and provided all that was asked of her. Be her right or wrong, she is going about things in a way that seems to make sense and, from what I can tell, has been above-board, even when the story became obviously very hard to recount.

Can I recommend this book? Yes, but not for the obvious reasons, as I mentioned earlier. This is a personal journey and, in many cases, it’s a painful one. I wasn’t many pages into her book before I found myself far less interested in her Zodiac theory than I was in her personal journey. Another reader may come away disappointed that the author didn’t wrap-up the Zodiac case in a neat bundle. I, for one, am glad she took me along on her journey, all the roughness notwithstanding.

This is a relatively short book but it’s not an easy read, in the traditional sense. Don’t expect lots of polish here. However, if you have a heart, this writer may just get to you the way she got to me.