Zodiackillersite.com

jroberson wrote:They were both hallucinating, then, because you can't have Mageau and Hartnell claim the Zodiac wasn't wearing eyeglasses and still have Cecelia saying otherwise.

Somebody is wrong here. They can't all be right.

Maybe the Kids & Fouke that saw Z in SF were wrong too.Wait, let me guess, the glasses were Stine's or they were part of his disguise? Some People don't need or wear glasses at all times.

Why would he deliberately choose to wear glasses at LB, under a bulky, ridiculous disguise, if he didn't need to wear glasses at all times? Why did Mageau say he wasn't wearing glasses at BRS? Why would he wear glasses to PH but not BRS?

Doesn't make any sense.

If he needed glasses for driving, he would have worn them at BRS.

If he could have worn either at any time, why would he choose glasses for LB when contacts (or no glasses) would have better suited him and his awkward disguise?

Like I said, it doesn't make any sense. Not to me anyway.

Look (no pun intended - or, no, actually intended), if the guy needed glasses, he needed glasses. That's usually how it is. And if he needed glasses, he would have been wearing glasses - at BRS and at LB.

At BRS he wasn't - that's what the evidence amounts to. At LB there is plenty of reason to think he wasn't. But we don't know for sure.

At LHR we don't know. At PH he was wearing glasses - whose glasses is a matter of some controversy. I personally have a hard time believing he grabbed Paul Stine's glasses and donned 'em for a disguise - I just think that's...I don't know. I'm waiting for a nice...something there. Perhaps he was, though. At any rate, he was wearing some kind of glasses, that's beyond doubt.

Conclusion: There is none. Other than this: He wasn't blind without glasses. If he had been, he would've been wearing glasses at BRS.

jroberson wrote:Why would he deliberately choose to wear glasses at LB, under a bulky, ridiculous disguise, if he didn't need to wear glasses at all times? Why did Mageau say he wasn't wearing glasses at BRS? Why would he wear glasses to PH but not BRS?

Doesn't make any sense.

If he needed glasses for driving, he would have worn them at BRS.

If he could have worn either at any time, why would he choose glasses for LB when contacts (or no glasses) would have better suited him and his awkward disguise?

Like I said, it doesn't make any sense. Not to me anyway.

Glasses vs contacts, I assume contacts were expensive back in 1969, and judging by the poorly worn mismatched tires at Lake B, Z did not have much $,so I think he likely couldn't afford them. Also, Mageau was blinded by a spotlight,how much could he have seen? He may have sen him when Z walked around, but it was dark,and Mageau would have needed to turn around,perhaps he couldn't see. Lastly, the Stine witnesses, they saw Z wearing those glasses immediately, could they have been part of a disguise? Sure, but then again I think it's just as likely Z wore glasses. And if for a second, Collins was telling the truth about Cecelia seeing glasses on Z before he put on the mask, then it's just one more incident of Z wearing glasses. All I know, is that Z wearing glasses is listed in multiple reports.

One thing I have learned over the past week(seemingly more than at any other time)is that every single clue, piece of evidence, Suspect, etc can be(and many times will be)argued. Luckily,the color of the sky isn't part of the case

morf13 wrote: Luckily,the color of the sky isn't part of the case

At least that has a scientific basis. Technically it is not blue.

Also, Mageau was blinded by a spotlight,how much could he have seen?

Mageau was blinded by the spotlight initially, before the Zodiac began firing. But Mike claims he saw the guy, IIRC, afterwards, as he lay on the ground.

And if for a second, Collins was telling the truth about Cecelia seeing glasses on Z before he put on the mask, then it's just one more incident of Z wearing glasses.

Cecelia said she saw glasses, the report goes, so he had glasses according to that narrative. Adding what Collins claims doesn't bump to the score 2 to 1 in Shepard favor. At best it remains 1 to 1. Cecelia is still just one witness, the only one at LB who claimed, allegedly, the Zodiac was wearing specs.

Lastly, the Stine witnesses, they saw Z wearing those glasses immediately, could they have been part of a disguise?

Immediately? They didn't see Stine arrive, nor did they see the Zodiac firing the gun. The kids came in after the action began, IIRC, which means they missed part of what happened, which might have included the Zodiac popping out of the backseat sans glasses.

All I know, is that Z wearing glasses is listed in multiple reports.

Yes, and if I scream "JFK was a Martian" off a mountainside, the resulting echo doesn't add increasing credibility to a falsehood.

Norse wrote:I personally have a hard time believing he grabbed Paul Stine's glasses and donned 'em for a disguise - I just think that's...I don't know. I'm waiting for a nice...something there. Perhaps he was, though. At any rate, he was wearing some kind of glasses, that's beyond doubt.

It is hard to accept but then where did Stine's glasses go? Down the rabbit hole?

Perhaps the Zodiac was wearing demo glasses, or reading glasses. Something he picked up at a drugstore or stole from an optometrist.

Or ordered out of a spy catalog.

jroberson wrote:

Norse wrote:I personally have a hard time believing he grabbed Paul Stine's glasses and donned 'em for a disguise - I just think that's...I don't know. I'm waiting for a nice...something there. Perhaps he was, though. At any rate, he was wearing some kind of glasses, that's beyond doubt.

It is hard to accept but then where did Stine's glasses go? Down the rabbit hole?

Perhaps the Zodiac was wearing demo glasses, or reading glasses. Something he picked up at a drugstore or stole from an optometrist.

Or ordered out of a spy catalog.

In his pocket, with Stine's shirt pieces & wallet

jroberson wrote:
It is hard to accept but then where did Stine's glasses go? Down the rabbit hole?

It has been rumored/speculated that the whereabouts of Paul Stine's glasses has been deliberately held back by LE to test whether or not a person reporting a possible suspect can be believed. In other words, IF LE is in possession of Stine's glasses and they get someone that comes in and says "I know who Zodiac is, I have his glasses" (ala Deb Perez) they will know that person is deluded.

I suppose that's a possible scenario. Since we have virtually nothing in the way of SFPD reports there is no way to know.

jroberson wrote:

Norse wrote:I personally have a hard time believing he grabbed Paul Stine's glasses and donned 'em for a disguise - I just think that's...I don't know. I'm waiting for a nice...something there. Perhaps he was, though. At any rate, he was wearing some kind of glasses, that's beyond doubt.

It is hard to accept but then where did Stine's glasses go? Down the rabbit hole?

Perhaps the Zodiac was wearing demo glasses, or reading glasses. Something he picked up at a drugstore or stole from an optometrist.

Or ordered out of a spy catalog.

Yeah, I know.

But look at it this way: He has no glasses. He becomes aware that he's being watched (by the kids). What does he do? He grabs the dead guy's glasses for a disguise. Does that make sense?

We don't have all the paperwork - that's a constant PITA* in this case. Stine's glasses could be in a cardboard box somewhere in San Francisco.

* That's a common acronym, isn't it?