Zodiackillersite.com

replaceablehead wrote:

Assuming he didn't turn his head I would tend to think a position in front of the ear with the exit wound lower than the entry wound would be more consistent with a shot fired from front.

Based on the autopsy report, the trajectory of the bullet was slight back to front. From the top/front of the ear to the middle of the opposite cheekbone. That would suggest a shot from the rear.

However, as Tom pointed out, there are other ways to achieve that kind of trajectory, but a shot fired while sitting in the backseat seems more logical to me.

But we're sure the entry wound is definitely in front of the ear?

Based upon the autopsy and the ME report, yes. The shot was fired at very close range (probably against the skin) just a few centimeters above and in front of the right ear with the bullet traveling slightly forward and downward into the opposite cheekbone. There was no exit wound. The bullet hit the left cheekbone, fragmented and came to rest in the temporalis muscle on the left side of his skull.

TomVoigt wrote:Zodiac claimed he wiped the cab down to leave fake clews. I believe he meant that he wiped the cab to give the impression he might have left fingerprints somewhere. AKA a ruse.

Also, according to Carol Stine, nobody rode in the front of Paul's cab unless Paul knew and trusted them.

Did the Robbins kids see Z wiping down the right front door?

It doesn't make logical sense for Z to wipe down a door he did not touch, in order to leave a false clew, and then tell us he was leaving a false clew.

Logically, if he was leaving a false clew, he would not tell us it was false - he would let us believe it was actual. What Z would have us believe is that he left a false clew, and then told us it was false, which negates and makes the whole thing an absolutely pointless effort.................. if we believe him, which in my opinion, we should not.

Can't speak for Tom and he may know the answer to your question. As for Zodiac saying about fake clews. I said this awhile back and think Zodiac really did leave his thumb print and realize it later. Then had his letter days later saying he left false clews and use airplane glue and etc. He was on damage control and knew they had his print. So wouldn't believe two you know whats he said in the letter.

I'm probably being obtuse. But I'll say again, a shot from in front of the ear whilst totally possible from the back seat seems slightly less likely than behind the ear assuming the head is not turned.

You'd be able to do it easily enough from the back right hand seat, but a right handed person would have to turn a few degrees, again still totally possible, and reach around in front of the ear. It's a very slight difference in terms of probability but I think if you ran the test 100 times, 70 times you'd have the entry wound behind the ear. A person sitting in the front seat is marginally more likely to shot in front of the ear and person in the back is marginally more likely to shot behind the ear. It's very slight though.

I also have zero problems with the shooter reaching across their body as a reach and slight turn is necessary from either position.

At best the autopsy shows equal probability.

StitchMallone wrote:Can't speak for Tom and he may know the answer to your question. As for Zodiac saying about fake clews. I said this awhile back and think Zodiac really did leave his thumb print and realize it later. Then had his letter days later saying he left false clews and use airplane glue and etc. He was on damage control and knew they had his print. So wouldn't believe two you know whats he said in the letter.

I agree.

I also wonder what purpose pretending to wipe down the cab door would've accomplished, if Z hadn't known he was being observed. When he walked away, the Robbins kid followed him for a ways, so he knew at that point he was being watched, but did he know it when Lindsey Robbins was still inside, when Z was doing his wiping?

In other words, if wiping the cab was misdirection, it would have been pointless unless Z knew it was being witnessed by someone.

If Z knew/suspected he was being watched, and if it HAD been misdirection, a brilliant fake wipedown hoping there would be some other previous passenger's print there on the cab that would lead LE down the wrong path, why in the world blow it by saying it was false, and that no print found could possibly have been his due to the glue on his fingertips?

Two more reasons I agree - Z wiped the cab because he had touched it, and he was trying to scrub away evidence he may have left.

Marshall wrote:

StitchMallone wrote:Can't speak for Tom and he may know the answer to your question. As for Zodiac saying about fake clews. I said this awhile back and think Zodiac really did leave his thumb print and realize it later. Then had his letter days later saying he left false clews and use airplane glue and etc. He was on damage control and knew they had his print. So wouldn't believe two you know whats he said in the letter.

I agree.

I also wonder what purpose pretending to wipe down the cab door would've accomplished, if Z hadn't known he was being observed. When he walked away, the Robbins kid followed him for a ways, so he knew at that point he was being watched, but did he know it when Lindsey Robbins was still inside, when Z was doing his wiping?

In other words, if wiping the cab was misdirection, it would have been pointless unless Z knew it was being witnessed by someone.

If Z knew/suspected he was being watched, and if it HAD been misdirection, a brilliant fake wipedown hoping there would be some other previous passenger's print there on the cab that would lead LE down the wrong path, why in the world blow it by saying it was false, and that no print found could possibly have been his due to the glue on his fingertips?

Two more reasons I agree - Z wiped the cab because he had touched it, and he was trying to scrub away evidence he may have left.

Agreed on all and good post and your last sentence sums it up for me.

replaceablehead wrote:I'm probably being obtuse. But I'll say again, a shot from in front of the ear whilst totally possible from the back seat seems slightly less likely than behind the ear assuming the head is not turned.

You'd be able to do it easily enough from the back right hand seat, but a right handed person would have to turn a few degrees, again still totally possible, and reach around in front of the ear. It's a very slight difference in terms of probability but I think if you ran the test 100 times, 70 times you'd have the entry wound behind the ear. A person sitting in the front seat is marginally more likely to shot in front of the ear and person in the back is marginally more likely to shot behind the ear. It's very slight though.

I also have zero problems with the shooter reaching across their body as a reach and slight turn is necessary from either position.

At best the autopsy shows equal probability.

What if Zodiac was left handed ? That may throw a monkey into the wrench.

What if he had hook instead of a hand?

replaceablehead wrote:What if he had hook instead of a hand?

Yea and him being left handed is a crazy never possible theory ? Sorry!

No that was just a joke. Although now that you mention it does highlight the number of possible variables. I think the best way to approach the information without being overwelmed is to ignore such variable as turned heads, or left handedness, even though they're not at all unlikely. Just for the sake of getting things in order before we start throwing them into the mix too early.