Zodiackillersite.com

Posted: **Mon Aug 11, 2014 11:32 am**

As to the missing shirt piece...surely you would think that the coroner's report would include an inventory list of items associated with the victim, i.e. clothing, jewelry, etc. After all it would be part of the chain of evidence.
And surely it would be quite obvious that there was a large rectangular portion of the victims shirt missing. Would it not have been the coroner's job to inventory, process and bag this evidence?

Posted: **Mon Aug 11, 2014 12:47 pm**

Well, there's no reason to think they (the coroner, I mean) didn't bag and tag everything. I've never seen a coroner's report from the Stine case - only a record of death, where there's an autopsy surgeon's report, a pathologist's report and a toxicologist's report, but no coroner's report (the fields are blank and there's no signature). That probably doesn't mean there was no report - nor are the other "reports" anything more than brief conclusions as to the cause of death, etc.

Someone no doubt recorded the existence and the state of that shirt somewhere - but not all the material pertaining to the case has been made public.

Posted: **Mon Aug 11, 2014 1:05 pm**

Just seems like something as strange as a 6"x 4" piece of shirt torn from a victim clothing would have shown up in a crime scene report by police.
Is it possible to request a coroner's report?

Posted: **Mon Aug 11, 2014 2:02 pm**

Talon wrote:Just seems like something as strange as a 6"x 4" piece of shirt torn from a victim clothing would have shown up in a crime scene report by police.
Is it possible to request a coroner's report?

In theory that's possible - yes. In practice, though, in this particular case - I honestly have no clue. It usually comes down to whether it's a matter of public record or not. If it is, all you have to do is pay for a copy - and then wait (could take months). If it's not a matter of public record, though - you usually have to be next of kin or have a very good reason, i.e. being curious won't cut it.

You should ask morf about this, by the way - he knows far more about this stuff than I do.

Just seems like something as strange as a 6"x 4" piece of shirt torn from a victim clothing would have shown up in a crime scene report by police.

True enough. But they apparently failed to notice that a piece was missing when they looked him over at the crime scene. The latter isn't all that strange if his shirt was bloody, yanked up and crumpled. And so it didn't make it into Pelissetti's report. The latter is pretty much all that's available, as far as I know, bar a summary of sorts from the California DOJ - which should mean that there is plenty that has never been made public in the Stine case. I for one would like to know whether they recovered Stine's trip sheet or not - and exactly what the kids told a) Pelissetti and b) Toschi/Armstrong and exactly how their description of the suspect made its way into the composite sketch.

And - not least - exactly who, if anyone, was picked up and brought to the crime scene for identification (by the kids). All of this is a matter of record - partly referred to indirectly or in redacted form in the FBI files - it's just not a matter of public record yet.

Posted: **Tue Aug 12, 2014 3:18 am**

One thing that is weird about the shirt pieces - they had been cut out quite neatly in a rectangular shape..does this actually imply that Z was not in a stressed situation? After having shot Stine into his head only seconds before? Tough...

Another point - Stine, imo, wasn't chosen accidentially, at least not in his role as a cab driver. Z did take some pair of scissors (or comparable) with him to cut those shirt pieces out, those later to be sent to the newspaper. Would anybody do that with e.g. a dead body lying on the street? Rather not, as people could immediately pass by on the street after hearing a shot. This better (~) had happened inside a cab. The crime, using such scissors, had definitely been prepared in advance, comparable to LB where Z had avoided his face to be seen before approaching his victims.

What shocks me most is the way Z had taken his time to wipe the cab, cut the shirt pieces.

1.) The crime HAD to be prepared, it did not happen accidentially.
2.) The crime, imo, was not supposed to happen on the street as passerbys could have disturbed his procedure of cutting out the shirt.
3.) Therefore Z had known that the crime will happen inside e.g. a cab.
4.) Even more, Z was aware that he will take this 'trophy' , he had already known that he will later send a piece of shirt by letter.
5.) And he did not cut it in a hurry but rather controlled, in a rectangular way (fitting into e.g. an envelope).
6.) He therefore was aware of about how the shape of the shirt should look like.

One more thing is weird...the position of Stine - the shirt pieces had been cut out from the back of his shirt, which is actually where Stine finally was lying on. So Z really must have moved the body of Stine after cutting out the pieces.

http://www.zodiackillersite.com/viewtop ... f=30&t=400
http://zodiackiller.fr.yuku.com/topic/2711#.U-nMefl_tu4

QT

Posted: **Tue Aug 12, 2014 3:29 am**

Coffee Time wrote:
themysterymachine wrote: How many people handled the body and were in contact with the blood, people who could readily be suspected of absently touching a handle and leaving a print? How secure was the scene?

SFPD checked the prints against police and ambulance drivers. Pelissetti got there pretty quickly, Zodiac had only just strolled away from the scene.

Generally speaking, though, I have more faith in the prints from the phone and the Exorcist letter than anything they got from a cab that God-knows-how-many people touched before the shooting even occurred. If there was a high quality photo of the so-called "bloody" print I could scrutinize, I might feel differently. I guess what it boils down to is, if they find a good suspect whose prints match prints from Stine's cab, that helps build a case against him -- the problem is eliminating suspects based on prints which may not even belong to the perp.

I was wondering if they had checked those prints, comparing them with those people known to have been on the scene. But I am with you on the cab prints in general- perhaps blood could even have dropped on the handle as Z was exiting or entering and then perhaps someone touched it, smearing it- this is beyond my range of expertise, but I find it so troubling that anyone could have been eliminated by these prints. Included, yes, excluded, no freaking way.
And the paper- the palm print found- that one is tricky. Could have had some paper on a table and someone could have put there hand there, tho apparently it is in such a position to suggest the writer themselves. To me the "exorcist" letter looks genuine. So yes, inclusion, not exclusion.

Posted: **Tue Aug 12, 2014 3:35 am**

Norse wrote:
themysterymachine wrote:Thanks Norse, and I agree that the idea of a hoaxer is preposterous in the extreme. But I like to have plenty of ammo and want to make sure i have a clear and cogent argument in my mind, as I am finding it a helpful motivation in combing through the evidence. And as I saw on a board a few months back (when I was still a lurker) someone mentioned that even bad suspects or preposterous theories are worth paying attention to because it forces you to examine all the details and take nothing for granted. I am finding that to be very true and a great motivator. And it also led me to start wondering about the lefthandedness of the killer. Because we know who else is lefthanded, and ambidextrous.

DuckKing, you said "I'm pretty sure that those pictures show Paul after the paramedics arrived on the scene, as the RO reports that Stine was inside of the car when he got there, not partway out as you can see."

Ok. If this is true, and I don't mean to derail the topic here, feel free to shuffle this around, but this calls the gravity of the fingerprints into question right away. How many people handled the body and were in contact with the blood, people who could readily be suspected of absently touching a handle and leaving a print? How secure was the scene? Obviously they did not go in suspecting this was a Z killing, it was a pretty routine shooting. Would they have paid close attention to these things? These minute details that could render the fingerprints absolutely meaningless in terms of eliminating the suspects? I think I started a thread on this very thing. This whole reliance on these fingerprints to eliminate suspects just KILLS me if its false. Could have been the guy who moved the body from its original position.

According to Pelissetti the scene was pristine - or words to that effect. But what that means, in this context, is another matter. They took control prints of all personnel who was involved with searching the cab, handling the body, etc. That is on record.

But Armstrong is also on record saying that it was a "public cab" and that it was "full of prints", presumably from customers, i.e. people who couldn't possibly be checked out via control prints. So, who knows. To me, at least, it seems clear that SFPD weren't confident that any of the prints belonged to Z. If they had been, they wouldn't have relied on handwriting to the extent that they did. Or, for that matter, they wouldn't have kept Allen on as a suspect in the case - his prints were taken in the early 70s and they didn't match any print lifted from the cab or from anywhere else.

I guess the prints were supposed to have some weight due to Stine's blood being mixed up with them. So if they absolutely could eliminate the emergency personnel that lends at least some credibility to them belonging to Z. But again, some sort of splash of the blood lands on the frame or the handle on the way out, some ride-along unknown touches it, creates a false lead. Makes me really nervous, as I am sure it did the SFPD, to lend too much weight on it. Its too rickety to stand as some crime-solving beacon of truth.

Posted: **Tue Aug 12, 2014 1:40 pm**

To me it's clear - I could be wrong, though - that they didn't actually have a great amount of faith in any of the prints.

But - and this might be important - the co-called "bloody prints" (the ones they were seemingly most confident about) weren't necessarily prints in blood (it would be incredibly sloppy of Z to touch a visibly bloody surface with his bare hands in such a way that it would leave a clear print): They could be prints with traces of blood "under" them, i.e. prints made on top of a surface that had traces of blood on it BEFORE the prints were made. If the latter is the case, it would strongly suggest that these prints were indeed left by the killer.

But I don't know if the latter IS the case, nor do I know to what extent they were able to determine which came first - the blood traces or the prints.

I do, however, think that we can be reasonably sure that these key prints (bloody or not - the ones they felt most likely belonged to the killer) weren't left by a cop or an ambulance driver: They did take control prints and presumably cleared everyone who had been at the scene that night.

Posted: **Tue Aug 12, 2014 1:57 pm**

QT: The shirt business is clearly puzzling. But I personally don't think Z had planned in advance to a) hail a cab, b) have the driver take him to a quite spot, c) kill him and d) take a piece of his shirt.

If this had been his plan, why Presidio Heights? Smack in the middle of a residential area? Nice and quiet neighborhood, certainly, but still - there would have been MANY places which would have suited this plan better, even locations within the same general area. Secondly, he would have brought along a pair of scissors for the job. He didn't, though - the shirt was TORN off, not cut.

I think some of the Stine elements were happenstance. To a certain extent Z improvised. The idea to grab a piece of Stine's shirt may have occurred to him there and then.

The whole business of wiping down the cab is troubling too, by the way. If he planned the attack carefully, he surely wouldn't have left prints all over the place which needed wiping. The wiping down part seems to suggest two possibilities to me: 1) He didn't plan to kill Stine in just that fashion. Part of it was planned, part of it was happenstance and/or a blunder of some kind. 2) He was telling the truth in his letter. He WAS leaving "fake clews" of one kind or another.

Posted: **Tue Aug 12, 2014 3:21 pm**

Norse wrote:QT: The shirt business is clearly puzzling. But I personally don't think Z had planned in advance to a) hail a cab, b) have the driver take him to a quite spot, c) kill him and d) take a piece of his shirt.

Well, obviously he did do so..

If this had been his plan, why Presidio Heights? Smack in the middle of a residential area? Nice and quiet neighborhood, certainly, but still - there would have been MANY places which would have suited this plan better, even locations within the same general area. Secondly, he would have brought along a pair of scissors for the job. He didn't, though - the shirt was TORN off, not cut.

To get away towards Letterman Hospital? Wasn't some of it cut, some of it torn off (different directions?)?

I think some of the Stine elements were happenstance. To a certain extent Z improvised. The idea to grab a piece of Stine's shirt may have occurred to him there and then.

The whole business of wiping down the cab is troubling too, by the way. If he planned the attack carefully, he surely wouldn't have left prints all over the place which needed wiping. The wiping down part seems to suggest two possibilities to me: 1) He didn't plan to kill Stine in just that fashion. Part of it was planned, part of it was happenstance and/or a blunder of some kind. 2) He was telling the truth in his letter. He WAS leaving "fake clews" of one kind or another.

close_12.jpg

Zodiackillersite.com

Shirt Pieces

Re: Shirt Pieces

Re: Shirt Pieces

Re: Shirt Pieces

Re: Shirt Pieces

Re: Shirt Pieces

Re: Shirt Pieces

Re: Shirt Pieces

Re: Shirt Pieces

Re: Shirt Pieces

Re: Shirt Pieces