Zodiackillersite.com

That makes sense.

Chaucer wrote:

TomVoigt wrote:

Chaucer wrote:It is far more likely that the operator knew what number Zodiac was calling from because he told her.

The operator could ring a particular phone without knowing the number.

Yes, I know. I'm not talking about the ringback. I'm talking about the trace. It was SOP for operators to ask for a caller's number during emergency calls in case of disconnection.

My hypothesis is that upon receiving the call from Zodaic, the PT&T operator asked for the nature of his emergency and the number he was calling from. He supplied both of them to her. With the number he called from already in hand, it would have been possible to locate the pay phone within minutes after he hung up with Slover.

As long as the line wasn't in use, they could just ring it back. No need to ask for the number. Also there was no need for the PT&T operator to know the nature of the emergency.

CharlesR wrote:You are too young

No, I'm not, I'm an old fart. I'm well versed in the way of pay phones. Operators would never continue or complete a call until you deposited the required amount. The only way you could avoid that would be to call collect but this is not a long distance call we are talking about.

Chaucer wrote:The standard procedure for PT&T operators prior to the 911 system when they received emergency calls was to ask for the nature of the emergency and the number they were calling from.

Standard procedure for Vallejo police dispatchers, not for PT&T operators.

CuriousCat wrote:

CharlesR wrote:You are too young

No, I'm not, I'm an old fart. I'm well versed in the way of pay phones. Operators would never continue or complete a call until you deposited the required amount. The only way you could avoid that would be to call collect but this is not a long distance call we are talking about.

DACS ( digital access cross connect system) does the job of the long distance operators. They used cords to connect you for toll calls but now the computerized machines do that. It put many people out of work too.

In a small office the night operator was almost certainly listening in on the line to hear what the call was because operators are very nosey. I worked with many ex operators who told me how they listen in on calls. The frame techs will listen to phone calls going to houses of ill repute, for entertainment while they wire orders at the frame. The operators are very bored and listen to many calls for something to kill time. But a police call they would definitely want to easedrop.

That is how the operator was involved with the call ringback. She was just nosey. And I know it was a she because the phone company only hired women as operators. That is how things were back years ago.

My idea was that perhaps the operator was placing an instate toll call because the Zodiac travelled away from the area of the murder. There was some period of time in which he could have driven off to a safer place. Now we know that was not the case. All idiosyncrasies must be investigated and delved into again to scrape for clues. There must be a loose thread somewhere in the case that can give up new evidence. That is the goal here.

TomVoigt wrote:

Chaucer wrote:The standard procedure for PT&T operators prior to the 911 system when they received emergency calls was to ask for the nature of the emergency and the number they were calling from.

Standard procedure for Vallejo police dispatchers, not for PT&T operators.

I can't speak for standard procedure for Vallejo dispatch, but it definitely was for PT&T operators. I have been in contact with several former PT&T employees from that era. Everyone from service personnel to cord board operators. Here is what one person wrote to me by email:

"If someone called the operator to report an emergency, we asked for the nature of the emergency and their telephone number (in case of disconnect) and stayed on the line until we successfully connected them to the police, fire department etc"

For context, this was a person who had begun work for PT&T as an operator in 1967 and retired after 33 years on the job.

ETA:

They also had this to say about "ringback"...

"When someone dialed "0" for operator, those call came in as lights on the board. Each prefix designated a specific part of town and pay phones had dedicated circuits that were colored red. This way, you knew that you needed to request funds from these calls. As long as the cord was attached to the circuit, you "held" the connection to the phone. Which means you could ring it back. Also, the phone had no access to a dial tone to dial any other number as long as you did not disconnect the cord. This was true for any number who dialed the operator. That was one way how calls were traced."

So that is that. There are no clues to be found. The operator stayed on the line per Pacific Telephone and Telegraph practices in case they were needed during emergency calls. So everything was as it should have been.