One Man and His Dog.

[Norse]

Norse in answer to your first question, please read this thread-

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=1102

Open the attachment in WC's first post to see the FBI document that mentions the eight year old witness.

Great - thanks!

[Bayarea60s]

Bay Stated...

"And if Z had a car waiting on W. Pacific, then the question to DF would be, "did you see any car driving out of W. Pacific towards Presidio Blvd"? I would think if DF saw tail lights he would have given chase."

Norse Stated....

"Just a minor point which struck me: DF and AP didn't know they were chasing the Zodiac. They were after a cabbie killer. So, I would think the idea of him having a getaway car parked nearby wouldn't have occurred to them - at least not as an obvious possibility. I think they were primarily - perhaps exclusively - looking for a man on foot."

To Norse.....
I was just thinking it would be a good question for Fouke. Did he see a car leaving the area? And if that's all the movement he saw on W. Pacific would he have pulled the car over, or waited at the scene for the rest of the cops to arrive....

[Bayarea60s]

Seagull Stated....

"Norse in answer to your first question, please read this thread-

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=1102

Open the attachment in WC's first post to see the FBI document that mentions the eight year old witness."

I found it interesting that on page 1 of that report they'd taken the fingerprints of a POI, and they didn't redact his name. I don't think I've ever seen that before where the name isn't redacted. Of course the name in question who the 8 year old said it could be, that name of course is redacted.

[Wolf 49]

Does this hairline resemble a composite we all know?

Maybe KQ1 (Mr. X) walked his dog while KQ2 (Mr. X's brother, shown in the photo) hid 'under cover' in KQ1's house.

Team Zodiac?

[Wolf 49]

And if I screwed up there in that previous entry and posted something I should not have, then apologies all around. I'm still rather new here, and like a 4-year-old, I often don't know the rules well until I get my wrist slapped.

[Welsh Chappie]

Excellent points, Welsh Chappie. We will never know how Zodiac escaped.

After thinking a bit more about this and rereading his letter, he says the cops could have caught him if they'd waited for him to come out from under cover. That makes me think perhaps he just lingered where he was, knowing the cops were off looking for him and by the time it was obvious they were searching the park, he must have started relaxing so felt he could just gradually work his way away from the spot you indicate.

Now wouldn't you think too that by the time the police cordoned off the park and were searching there that a crowd might have gathered outside? If so, Zodiac could have just joined the looky-loo's and pretended to be a tourist in town who was just passing by if anyone should have asked.

I really have a hard time thinking Z was Qvale as that all seems to have come from the eight year old. In my mind, I wonder how mature that kid was and how sharp. Also I would like to know just how it was that the child identified the man. In all the commotion and horror, it would be confusing enough to an adult, I'd think but even moreso to the child.

Kids are usually pretty curious and observant and I'm assuming these lived at the address in the affluent neighborhood. I just wonder how much people there, at that time, really knew or saw their neighbors. If Qvale really had a dog that he was in the habit of walking, then I'd agree he'd be rather well-known by the neighbors even if only seeing him with the dog.

Reading about his successful business and seeing his age however, really makes me think he could not be Zodiac and the child was confused.

I've been to San Francisco at least five times in my adult life. I had a car and drove there at least three of those times and remember that the houses have garages and that parking can be difficult. I'd say it is a safe bet that Mr. Qvale had a very nice car that he drove and parked in his own garage. Further, I'd think that he could then enter his home from the garage without being seen by the neighbors but that is just a guess from seeing the video that was posted and my recollections of driving in San Francisco.

So many people walk there and there are so many tourists that I wonder just how many neighbors really know each other, even by sight.

Zodiac said he was under cover so that could mean lots of things if he was telling the truth. Could he have slid under something literally, such as a car parked on the street? If there was an alley, he could have found a good spot.

Do you know if the Boy Scouts have a lesson about this? If for example, Z had been one, he may have gone by some things he learned there....like always be prepared?

"Excellent points, Welsh Chappie. We will never know how Zodiac escaped."

Thank you.

"I really have a hard time thinking Z was Qvale as that all seems to have come from the eight year old. In my mind, I wonder how mature that kid was and how sharp. Also I would like to know just how it was that the child identified the man"

Well as things stand, we do not know who the eight year old named as the name is redacted in the document. As I am sure you are aware, I have a FOI request pending that seeks the release of all named suspects in that document where the privacy laws no longer apply, ie, if they are deceased. I have a feeling that the name of the man given by this eight year old will turn out to be Qvale, and if it is, then I agree with you that this alone is evidence, but evidence from a witness who is eight years of ago.

What I do think makes Qvale extremely valid as a suspect is the fact that Armond Pelissetti names Qvale as the man being out on or near Maple that night.

"Also I would like to know just how it was that the child identified the man."

Again, I also found this question interesting. The document doesn't say "Eight year old witnessed suspect at cab and named *Blank* as possible suspect. No, rather it specifically states that the eight year old 'Identified' *Blank* as possibly responsible. Well the key word there is identified. He must have either been shown a suspect photo line up or he'd have to have picked the man out on the night it happened. I said previously, and this is only a theory of mine, that what happened that night was as follows:

Don encounters Armond on Cherry and discovers that the suspect in the shooting is actually a white male, not black, and that he's wearing glasses and has a crew cut. Don, realising that the man he just passed matches this description, tells Armond he's just seen him turn onto a property at the corner of Jackson and Maple. Armond gets there and Qvale is still standing in the drive. Armond then asks Qvale to accompany him back to Washington and Cherry where the eight year old is asked to view Qvale in the back of the police car. Seeing him, the child confirms 'That's him.'

[Welsh Chappie]

Bit more detail regarding Qvale's Lake Tahoe place....

Qvale Lake Tahoe sketch.png

And

Qvale Lake Tahoe map resize.png

[Welsh Chappie]

Seagull Stated....

"Norse in answer to your first question, please read this thread-

http://www.zodiackillersite.com/viewtop ... =23&t=1102

Open the attachment in WC's first post to see the FBI document that mentions the eight year old witness."

I found it interesting that on page 1 of that report they'd taken the fingerprints of a POI, and they didn't redact his name. I don't think I've ever seen that before where the name isn't redacted. Of course the name in question who the 8 year old said it could be, that name of course is redacted.

Bayarea60s: The name of the suspect isn't redacted because this document is one I personally uploaded after receiving it back from the FBI/DOJ after submitting a FOIA request. The name 'Robert Hale West' was, and still is, redacted in all other publically available versions of this document, except the one you refer to here.

[Norse]

Re: how the kid identified the guy.

One possibility is that a neighbor approached the cops on the night, saying that their 8yr had witnessed what happened. The cops then questioned the kid, asking him/her what the guy looked like and whether he/she had seen him before. The kid then says, yes, it was so-and-so.

For what it's worth I think this is what happened with the kids across the street too: they were questioned and one of them said that he/she thought the suspect looked like so-and-so (someone who lived nearby). This person was then picked up and brought to the crime scene, where the kid then concluded that he/she had been wrong - it wasn't the guy after all.

I still wonder whether the report is simply mistaken about the witness' age - and that this "8yr old" was in fact one of the kids across the street. If it wasn't we're dealing with two separate witnesses who both recognized Z as a local guy. And the big question then becomes: did they recognize the same guy?

[Welsh Chappie]

Re: how the kid identified the guy.

One possibility is that a neighbor approached the cops on the night, saying that their 8yr had witnessed what happened. The cops then questioned the kid, asking him/her what the guy looked like and whether he/she had seen him before. The kid then says, yes, it was so-and-so.

For what it's worth I think this is what happened with the kids across the street too: they were questioned and one of them said that he/she thought the suspect looked like so-and-so (someone who lived nearby). This person was then picked up and brought to the crime scene, where the kid then concluded that he/she had been wrong - it wasn't the guy after all.

I still wonder whether the report is simply mistaken about the witness' age - and that this "8yr old" was in fact one of the kids across the street. If it wasn't we're dealing with two separate witnesses who both recognized Z as a local guy. And the big question then becomes: did they recognize the same guy?

Highlighted Statement: I wouldn't rule that out, I have even written the very same thing on another thread (or may even be earlier in this one). But again, I have to go back to the way it is worded in the document....

FBI document eight yr old wtns 1.png

He/she actually identified someone. If, as you suggest, the police simply interviewed the eight year old after the fact after his/her parents had contacted police then I would expect the document to say something like witness saw suspect and thought he recognised him as *blank*.

Also, the way the document is written it's suggests that of the several suspects named in the document , one of them is the guy that the eight year old names. So it seems that they may have suspected him due to some other reason other than the eight year olds identifying him and listed him as a possible Person of Interest. Then at the end of the document the writer says that of the suspects listed above, an eight year old witness who saw suspect at scene subsequently identified Suspect C as possibly being responsible.