Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
JonathanVonErich

New lead in the Zodiac Killer Case ?

432 posts in this topic

I know his name

Well if this is true then try to give the information to The FBI or to one of the police department in the Bay area ( San Francisco and around ).

If it's a joke ( I'm sure it is ) then forget it... :mellow:

Still no update about the picture, keeping you posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know his name

John Merrick?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at the nose, the jaw, the ears... Sorry but I don't think The Unknown man is indeed Jim Phillips. Remember: The picture was first showed 4 months ago, then it was showed 1 month ago on a very popular TV show watched by millions and millions of people, so if indeed the Unknown man was Darlene's ex-Husband mr. Phillips then why did nobody from Darlene's past (Sisters, Family, Friends, ex-Husband himself) came forward to reveal the identity of this man ???!!! The fact that after 4 long months nobody came forward with a name is to me proof that the man on the picture is not her ex-husband/Family member/Close friend.

And I have read everything about the Zodiac Killer case, I have researched this case since 2000, have been in communication with many investigators who have worked on the case and In my opinion your theory doesn't make any sense. First of all you have no evidence to back up your claims. Show me the evidence sir, that's all I want. After years of reading everything about the case, asking questions to people who know everything about it, after buying 5 books on the case I never found anything, never found one single piece of evidence telling me that your theory is true. I think it's an interesting theory, but you have no evidence to back it up, sorry.

I have heard, read about this theory claiming that The police conspired to create a Serial Killer(Zodiac) simply to take care of some people who were involved in a Drug ring.

Right now all we know is: Betty Lou Jensen, David Faraday, Darlene, Cecelia Shepard and Paul Stine are all definite Zodiac victims. So the police conspired or Hided the real facts about the murders of a 17 years old boy and a 16 years old girl, who were very good students, simply because David was buying a little bit of drugs here and there ?? And then the police wrote a letter to themself, providing many details that were not known to the general public, simply to create a Serial killer !??

So the police Conspired or Hided the real facts about the murder of Darlene Ferrin, then writing letters and sent them to the Vallejo Times-Herald, San Francisco Examiner and San Francisco Chronicle, giving details that only the killer could have known !??

The police conspired or Hided the real facts about the murder of Cecelia Shepard and attack on Bryan Hartnell, two respected students who have no criminal past, two students who were Attacked on Daytime by a man wearing a costume featuring the symbol of the Zodiac Killer !!??

And the police conspired or Hided the real facts about the murder of Paul Stine, a man with no criminal past, then sent a letter to the San Francisco Chronicle containing a portion of Stine's bloody shirt !!??

The police wrote more than 20 letters/cards/ciphers to the Newspapers/Authorities simply to create a Serial Killer !!??

I respect your opinion sir, but your theory doesn't make any sense to me, and I know for a fact that most people agree with me. But if you have something to back up your claims then please share with all of us. :tu:

ARGH!! I just spent 1/2 an hour typing a response and pressed the back button on my browser by accident!!!

when i regain the will to live i will respond again.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at the nose, the jaw, the ears... Sorry but I don't think The Unknown man is indeed Jim Phillips. Remember: The picture was first showed 4 months ago, then it was showed 1 month ago on a very popular TV show watched by millions and millions of people, so if indeed the Unknown man was Darlene's ex-Husband mr. Phillips then why did nobody from Darlene's past (Sisters, Family, Friends, ex-Husband himself) came forward to reveal the identity of this man ???!!! The fact that after 4 long months nobody came forward with a name is to me proof that the man on the picture is not her ex-husband/Family member/Close friend.

And I have read everything about the Zodiac Killer case, I have researched this case since 2000, have been in communication with many investigators who have worked on the case and In my opinion your theory doesn't make any sense. First of all you have no evidence to back up your claims. Show me the evidence sir, that's all I want. After years of reading everything about the case, asking questions to people who know everything about it, after buying 5 books on the case I never found anything, never found one single piece of evidence telling me that your theory is true. I think it's an interesting theory, but you have no evidence to back it up, sorry.

I have heard, read about this theory claiming that The police conspired to create a Serial Killer(Zodiac) simply to take care of some people who were involved in a Drug ring.

Right now all we know is: Betty Lou Jensen, David Faraday, Darlene, Cecelia Shepard and Paul Stine are all definite Zodiac victims. So the police conspired or Hided the real facts about the murders of a 17 years old boy and a 16 years old girl, who were very good students, simply because David was buying a little bit of drugs here and there ?? And then the police wrote a letter to themself, providing many details that were not known to the general public, simply to create a Serial killer !??

So the police Conspired or Hided the real facts about the murder of Darlene Ferrin, then writing letters and sent them to the Vallejo Times-Herald, San Francisco Examiner and San Francisco Chronicle, giving details that only the killer could have known !??

The police conspired or Hided the real facts about the murder of Cecelia Shepard and attack on Bryan Hartnell, two respected students who have no criminal past, two students who were Attacked on Daytime by a man wearing a costume featuring the symbol of the Zodiac Killer !!??

And the police conspired or Hided the real facts about the murder of Paul Stine, a man with no criminal past, then sent a letter to the San Francisco Chronicle containing a portion of Stine's bloody shirt !!??

The police wrote more than 20 letters/cards/ciphers to the Newspapers/Authorities simply to create a Serial Killer !!??

I respect your opinion sir, but your theory doesn't make any sense to me, and I know for a fact that most people agree with me. But if you have something to back up your claims then please share with all of us. :tu:

ok....deeeeeeep breath and i'll start again!

i know that you're the resident Zodiac expert and i fully respect your opinions on this case...so i'll pose a few queries now but the intention is not to annoy but to provoke debate and test your arguments...

* - the 2 photos further up - there are more similarities than differences between them...many more...it seems to me that people are looking for the differences more than the similarities...because they want to see the zodiac killers face...a case of people being too close to the woods to be able to see the trees in my opinion....you said that:

The fact that after 4 long months nobody came forward with a name is to me proof that the man on the picture is not her ex-husband/Family member/Close friend.

perhaps they have 'come forward'....perhaps you simply aren't aware of this....but even if no-one has come forward in no way is that proof of anything.

*

after buying 5 books on the case I never found anything, never found one single piece of evidence telling me that your theory is true.

i've several books also...all of them are predicated on there actually being a zodiac killer...is it then really so odd that these authors don't consider the possibility that there may be no zodiac killer as popularly understood? people seem to accept 'his' existence as fact and THEN investigate the case...tryin to find out the identity rather than simply amassing the facts of 'the case'.

*

Right now all we know is: Betty Lou Jensen, David Faraday, Darlene, Cecelia Shepard and Paul Stine are all definite Zodiac victims.

no. we know they are all murder victims...not that they were all killed by the same person. we know that someone sent a letter to the press and included a piece of Stines shirt that he was wearing when he was killed. we don't know that this was the person who killed him. indeed in that same letter threats were made (against school kids) which were never carried out.

the linkage is thru letters to the media only.

*i dispute your position that letters were sent with details 'only the killer would have known'. the police would also have known them. and probably journalists also.

*'The police conspired or Hided the real facts about the murder of Cecelia Shepard and attack on Bryan Hartnell, two respected students who have no criminal past, two students who were Attacked on Daytime by a man wearing a costume featuring the symbol of the Zodiac Killer !!??'

again there is no direct evidence to connect this attack to any others...the symbol was known by the police and journalists at this point. it's possible that someone attacked this couple to 'prove' the existence of Zodiac by wearing such a symbol. i don't understand how the police would have to conspire and lie about this attack...

And the police conspired or Hided the real facts about the murder of Paul Stine, a man with no criminal past, then sent a letter to the San Francisco Chronicle containing a portion of Stine's bloody shirt !!??

as i said earlier all the letter proves is that someone tore a piece of stines shirt off, wrote a letter and sent it to the press...nothing more.

The police wrote more than 20 letters/cards/ciphers to the Newspapers/Authorities simply to create a Serial Killer !!??

toschi was proven to have written fake letters to the media...as i'm sure you're aware...this doesn't prove he wrote the zodiac letters (i don't think he was directly involved) but it does demonstrate how people manipulate the media.

there are various other bits and pieces that have led me to the conclusion i have arrived at....the rumoured vallejo PD involvement in drugs etc but it's a long time since i've looked at this case and i can't recall them all right now.

all i ask is that you consider this theory when looking at evidence.

for the record i also believe that jack the ripper was not a serial killing case and was instead a media creation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

i know that you're the resident Zodiac expert and i fully respect your opinions on this case...so i'll pose a few queries now but the intention is not to annoy but to provoke debate and test your arguments...

Like I said I really respect your opinion and hopefully you didn't thought I was being rude or angry at you, I was simply stating my opinion just like you did. You obviously know the case very well yourself, so I'm glad to have this little "debate"/discussion with you, sir. :tu:

* - the 2 photos further up - there are more similarities than differences between them...many more...it seems to me that people are looking for the differences more than the similarities...because they want to see the zodiac killers face...a case of people being too close to the woods to be able to see the trees in my opinion....you said that:

At first I was looking for similarities but I have found more differences than similarities. Like I said I am no expert but to me the ears, jaw and nose are not the same, but I can understand why some people are seeing more similarities than differences, I only gave my humble opinion, like I said anything is possible, but the fact nobody came forward with a name after all this time is, to me, proof that this man was not close with Darlene's family and friends, in other words can't be Darlene's ex-husband.

perhaps they have 'come forward'....perhaps you simply aren't aware of this....but even if no-one has come forward in no way is that proof of anything.

If somebody came forward with a name then nobody know about it. Zodiackiller.com, the first place the picture was showed, are still searching for the identity of the man and America's Most Wanted, who showed the picture to millions of people on February 19, are still showing the picture on their website and are still searching for the answer. If they know something then they decided not to share with the public.

We can be sure nobody came Forward between November(The first time the picture was showed on Zodiackiller.com) and February(when America's Most Wanted showed the picture on February 19). You are right, the fact nobody came forward is perhaps not proving anything, but I still think it is really strange. The Webmaster of Zodiackiller.com was at one point very close with Darlene's sister Pam, he did many interviews with her, even watched documentaries about the case with her, he know the family very well, so I am sure one of Darlene's family member or a friend would have come forward and would have told the identity of the man, the fact nobody did after all these months is strange.

i've several books also...all of them are predicated on there actually being a zodiac killer...is it then really so odd that these authors don't consider the possibility that there may be no zodiac killer as popularly understood? people seem to accept 'his' existence as fact and THEN investigate the case...tryin to find out the identity rather than simply amassing the facts of 'the case'.

I accept "His" existence simply because I never read anything, never discovered evidence that the case was something other than a Serial Killer wanting publicity and wanting to taunt the police anyway he could. Trust me sir: I think the Theories that it was something else than a Serial Killer (Police conspiracy, media creation, more than one killer, one man killing and the other one writing the letters) are all very interesting and all of them deserve to be investigated. Sadly There is no evidence to back up these interesting theories. I have researched/read all I could find about these theories and I think there is a very good possibility that more than one man was involved, but sadly we have absolutely no evidence to back up these theories, and for now the only thing we can be sure is that one man wrote letters to the police/newspapers, giving details only the killer could have known, giving evidence(Stine's bloody shirt) that he was indeed the killer and right now the only logical theory we have, the only theory who makes sense is the theory that the murders were made by the man who wrote the letters/cards/ciphers, that this man calling himself Zodiac was indeed the only killer. I wish we could find evidences to back up other theories, but sadly wright now we have only evidences to back up the Serial Killer theory.

no. we know they are all murder victims...not that they were all killed by the same person. we know that someone sent a letter to the press and included a piece of Stines shirt that he was wearing when he was killed. we don't know that this was the person who killed him. indeed in that same letter threats were made (against school kids) which were never carried out.

Like I said all we know now is that one man wrote all the letters/cards/ciphers, we can be 100% sure that all the letters were written by the same individual, so we have no choice to say that this man was indeed the killer of Betty Lou, David, Darlene, Cecelia and Paul. He gave details only the killer could have known and since we have no evidence to back up the theory that the case was a Conspiracy by the Police department/that they were more than one killer then we have to believe All of these murders were indeed made by one man, the man who wrote the letters/ciphers, the man who called himself Zodiac. Sad but true.

And we all know "Zodiac" was a liar. Once "he" said he killed a cop when the police had already arrested a suspect in the case, another time he wrote something about making a bomb but all of this was not true. In his final letter he said he had kill 37 person but neer had evidences to back up his claims. "He" was a liar and knew how to play with people's mind.

the linkage is thru letters to the media only.

*i dispute your position that letters were sent with details 'only the killer would have known'. the police would also have known them. and probably journalists also.

I agree with you.

But we have to work with facts, and right now the facts are that this man, man who positively wrote all the Zodiac letters, gave details about the murders that only the investigators knew, sadly we have no evidence to back up the fact the letters could have been written by a police officer, a journalist who was involved with the case. We have to work with what we have, basically the letters are all we have, and since the man who wrote the letters said he was a killer and not a police officer then we have to follow that lead and investigate the existence of a serial killer. Sad but true. Until a former police officer/journalist comes forward and tell us the truth we have to follow the lead we have, and the lead we have right now is that a serial killer was behind the murders/attacks.

again there is no direct evidence to connect this attack to any others...the symbol was known by the police and journalists at this point. it's possible that someone attacked this couple to 'prove' the existence of Zodiac by wearing such a symbol. i don't understand how the police would have to conspire and lie about this attack...

Again I agree with you, but The man who killed Cecelia and attacked Bryan that day left writings on Bryan's car (dates of the murders of Betty Lou, David and Darlene) and the writings on the car are similar or at least looks like the writings of the letters. I agree, it could have been anybody wearing the costume, after all this murder/attack were completely different than the previous murders, the M.O. was completely different but again we have to work with what we have, so since Zodiac said he was the killer/the writings on the car then we have to follow that lead. It's not much, I know, but these are the "facts" we have.

as i said earlier all the letter proves is that someone tore a piece of stines shirt off, wrote a letter and sent it to the press...nothing more.

Well we can be sure that the same man wrote all the letters/cards/cipher, that we can be 100% sure. If my memory is correct Zodiac wrote 21 letters/or cards/or ciphers to the Authorities or different newspapers of the Bay Area and I know you won't agree but still : The letters are what we have right now, and since they were written by one man then the murders were also made by this one man. I know it's a controversial statement but like I said we have to work with what we have, and the only thing we can be 100% sure is that the letters were written by the same person.

toschi was proven to have written fake letters to the media...as i'm sure you're aware...this doesn't prove he wrote the zodiac letters (i don't think he was directly involved) but it does demonstrate how people manipulate the media.

Toschi was proven to have written only ONE letter, one and only one, and the letter wasn't even close of being a genuine Zodiac letter, you can compare the two and you can clearly see all the differences, really it wasn't even close, so there is no way Toschi could have written all the Zodiac letters, like I said it wasn't even close of looking like a genuine Zodiac letter.

But I agree with you, it does demonstrate how people manipulate the media, good point.

there are various other bits and pieces that have led me to the conclusion i have arrived at....the rumoured vallejo PD involvement in drugs etc but it's a long time since i've looked at this case and i can't recall them all right now.

all i ask is that you consider this theory when looking at evidence.

I always did my friend, I have researched this theory and others (more than one killer, media creation etc.) but I have never found one single piece of evidence to back up these different theories, so right now we have to investigate a Serial Killer since that's the only lead we have for now. Again sad, controversial but true.

for the record i also believe that jack the ripper was not a serial killing case and was instead a media creation.

I agree 100% with you. :tu:

Sorry if I made some grammar mistakes, French is my first language and I wrote this post while I was in one of my classes, so lots of noise and hard to concentrate. ^_^

It was a pleasure "debating" with you sir.

Edited by JVE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what people are forgetting is the sketch is a sketch. Of course it wont be an exact match. It's a representation of what the police THINK he looked like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what people are forgetting is the sketch is a sketch. Of course it wont be an exact match. It's a representation of what the police THINK he looked like.

Good point my friend, However we know the sketch is very accurate. The sketch was made after three witnesses saw a man leaving Paul Stine's Cab right after he was killed. The three witnesses watched the suspect from approximately 60 feet away as he wiped down the cab with a cloth after killing Stine, they had a very good look at him. As a matter of fact a few days after the sketch was circulated throughout the Bay Area in the form of a wanted poster, the witnesses requested the sketch be altered to make it more accurate. Now perhaps Zodiac was wearing a costume that day ( fake glasses, clothes to make him looks bigger ), we don't know for sure, but the sketch really looks like the man who killed Paul Stine.

Still nothing new on the pic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point my friend, However we know the sketch is very accurate. The sketch was made after three witnesses saw a man leaving Paul Stine's Cab right after he was killed. The three witnesses watched the suspect from approximately 60 feet away as he wiped down the cab with a cloth after killing Stine, they had a very good look at him. As a matter of fact a few days after the sketch was circulated throughout the Bay Area in the form of a wanted poster, the witnesses requested the sketch be altered to make it more accurate. Now perhaps Zodiac was wearing a costume that day ( fake glasses, clothes to make him looks bigger ), we don't know for sure, but the sketch really looks like the man who killed Paul Stine.

Still nothing new on the pic.

I understand and completely agree, I think it just niggles at me when people nitpick at the tiniest details in a police sketch. Often they are very accurate, but it's near impossible to get everything an exact match. Thanks for the info :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I understand and completely agree, I think it just niggles at me when people nitpick at the tiniest details in a police sketch. Often they are very accurate, but it's near impossible to get everything an exact match. Thanks for the info :)

You made a very good point, a sketch will never be perfect. The best example of this is in the case of Dan "D.B." Cooper, the unidentified man who hijacked a Boeing 727 aircraft on November 24, 1971. The first sketch of Cooper was not accurate and it took the help of the TV show Unsolved Mysteries to make a more accurate sketch. For years the sketch of Cooper was not accurate and I'm sure it didn't help the investigation. But in the case of Zodiac, or at least the killer of Paul Stine, we have 3 witnesses and can be sure the sketch was accurate, not perfect of course, but still very close.

Still nothing new on the picture.

Edited by JVE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know how tall Darlene was? Because witnesses claim the suspect to be 5ft 11 to 6ft. So, if Darlene was like 5ft 1 or something the guy next to her in the picture couldn't possibly be around 6ft. Also, I am very suprised no one has come forward claiming to know this man, He has a ring on his ring finger so that indicates that he must have been married and he's also wearing a watch (I know the watch part is probably irrevelant but Zodiac is a watch brand maybe could have been inspiration to his name?) I don't know I'm just throwing ideas out there. It's uncanny how much the composite sketch looks like the man in the photograph. I really do hope something comes of this. I've been trying to follow this case the best I can and it just flabbergasts me how the suspect has never been caught. There's got to be someone out there that knows something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Does anyone know how tall Darlene was? Because witnesses claim the suspect to be 5ft 11 to 6ft. So, if Darlene was like 5ft 1 or something the guy next to her in the picture couldn't possibly be around 6ft. Also, I am very suprised no one has come forward claiming to know this man, He has a ring on his ring finger so that indicates that he must have been married and he's also wearing a watch (I know the watch part is probably irrevelant but Zodiac is a watch brand maybe could have been inspiration to his name?) I don't know I'm just throwing ideas out there. It's uncanny how much the composite sketch looks like the man in the photograph. I really do hope something comes of this. I've been trying to follow this case the best I can and it just flabbergasts me how the suspect has never been caught. There's got to be someone out there that knows something.

Thanks for sharing.

According to most reports Darlene Ferrin was approximately 5 feet 5 inches tall, so it's safe to say the man on the picture is between 5 feet 10 inches and 6 feet tall, the same height "Zodiac" would be.

Well we don't know if the watch brand "Zodiac", popular in the 60's, was indeed an inspiration for the killer's name, but it's one of the theory. Arthur Leigh Allen, who some people still think is the best suspect in the case, had a "Zodiac" watch like that one. Note the logo on top of the watch is the exact same logo of the killer:

seawolf1.jpg

(courtesy Zodiackiller.com)

Still nothing new on the pic, it's really strange. If indeed the name of the man on the picture was released then nobody know about it.

Edited by JVE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

This page provides some background information on the picture and who the man could be. It also talks about Tom Voigt (the man who first posted the picture online) and Darlene's sister Pam and discusses how neither is considered all that credible - especially Pam.

Pam has identified the man in the picture as Richard Gaikowski, but most find that to be a misidentification.

Here's some side by side comparisons of the "mystery man" next to Richard Gaikowski and Jim Pihillips (Darlene's ex-husband). The page linked to also mentions Bryan Hartnell, one of the Zodiac's victims, as a possible match with the "mystery" man, but that idea is largely dismissed and Tom Voigt seems to be the only person that thinks it's a possibility.

Unidentified%20Man%20Gaikowski%20and%20Hartnell.jpg

Unidentified%20Man%20and%20Jim%20Phillips%20Comparison%20Points.jpg

Based upon the small amount of information available about the picture and the man in it my hunch is that it's simply a photo of Darlene Ferrin with her ex-husband Jim Phillips

Edited by -Left Field-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for sharing.

According to most reports Darlene Ferrin was approximately 5 feet 5 inches tall, so it's safe to say the man on the picture is between 5 feet 10 inches and 6 feet tall, the same height "Zodiac" would be.

Well we don't know if the watch brand "Zodiac", popular in the 60's, was indeed an inspiration for the killer's name, but it's one of the theory. Arthur Leigh Allen, who some people still think is the best suspect in the case, had a "Zodiac" watch like that one. Note the logo on top of the watch is the exact same logo of the killer:

seawolf1.jpg

(courtesy Zodiackiller.com)

Still nothing new on the pic, it's really strange. If indeed the name of the man on the picture was released then nobody know about it.

Interesting stuff JVE, I wasn't even aware of the watch association. No surprise there, I don't really keep up with things like this and tend to avoid them for the most part because the business of murderers (particularly on the serial murderer scale) tend to depress me and I don't need anything more than my job for depression inspiration. :P Which brings me to my next thought... Perhaps this was a disgruntled Zodiac employee?

I'm sure this avenue has been explored. Or, at least, I'd be surprised if it hasn't. But that doesn't mean that it didn't click in my head as soon as I saw your post.

Oh, and dekker... I totally feel you dude.

ARGH!! I just spent 1/2 an hour typing a response and pressed the back button on my browser by accident!!!

when i regain the will to live i will respond again.

Been there, done that, hate it. I remember typing out a huge response with references and formatting... it took me over an hour to compile and type... and then I must have hit a random key combination and it was all gone. I was stunned. I sat looking at my monitor for a good 40 seconds without moving and barely breathing. I was in total shock.

That is why I type most of my responses and copy/paste them into notepad now, saving them at regular intervals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some side by side comparisons of the "mystery man" next to Richard Gaikowski and Jim Pihillips (Darlene's ex-husband). The page linked to also mentions Bryan Hartnell, one of the Zodiac's victims, as a possible match with the "mystery" man, but that idea is largely dismissed and Tom Voigt seems to be the only person that thinks it's a possibility.

Based upon the small amount of information available about the picture and the man in it my hunch is that it's simply a photo of Darlene Ferrin with her ex-husband Jim Phillips[/font]

It can't be Bryan Hartnell, Bryan was around 6 feet 6 inches tall, the man on the picture is not that tall, so it can't be Bryan. It doesn't even looks like Hartnell. The man doesn't look like Gaikowski too.

I have seen the comparison made by the site Zodiackillerfacts.com and to me this comparison is not accurate. You can clearly seee that the nose, the ears and the jaw is different, to me the man on the picture is definitely NOT Darlene's ex-husband. The comparison made by this site is, to me, not evidence that the man is indeed Jim Phillips.

But thanks for sharing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anybody thought about the idea that maybe its not the ex-husband , but a new malre friend that she was seeing-because he filled a "type"? My sister for example picked back to back boyfriends who were dark skinned,dark eyed, shaved head, mustache/goatee, and both werre losers. If you looked at certain pictures of either of these winners.....the kind of look alike. Just because the had the 1960's "birth control" glasses and ubiquitous 60's short sleeved white button down leisure shirts. If she had met a man who filled a type for her....that would make sense,it also might have served Zodiac's purposes ( if thiswas Zodiac or he did know his victim) that this young lady felt a certain comfort with men who had this kind of wholesome bookish/nerdy look.

JUST MY OPINION AND OBSERVATION

P.S. _ J.V.E. -I expect an autographed copy of the first book Brother!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Interesting stuff JVE, I wasn't even aware of the watch association. No surprise there, I don't really keep up with things like this and tend to avoid them for the most part because the business of murderers (particularly on the serial murderer scale) tend to depress me and I don't need anything more than my job for depression inspiration. :P Which brings me to my next thought... Perhaps this was a disgruntled Zodiac employee?

I'm sure this avenue has been explored. Or, at least, I'd be surprised if it hasn't. But that doesn't mean that it didn't click in my head as soon as I saw your post.

Well the only link we have between the watch brand and Zodiac is that the man who was the prime suspect in the case for years, Arthur Leigh Allen, had a "Zodiac" watch, but the killer never talked about the watch brand in one of his letters. Of course since the symbol of the brand is the exact same as the one used by the Killer, since both the brand and the killer were named Zodiac then it would be easy to think the Killer found his nickname/symbol because of the brand, but we have no evidence that he did. But it's one of the interesting theory. The watch is one of the interesting fact linking Allen to the case, but we have no real, solid evidences against him.

Has anybody thought about the idea that maybe its not the ex-husband , but a new malre friend that she was seeing-because he filled a "type"? My sister for example picked back to back boyfriends who were dark skinned,dark eyed, shaved head, mustache/goatee, and both werre losers. If you looked at certain pictures of either of these winners.....the kind of look alike. Just because the had the 1960's "birth control" glasses and ubiquitous 60's short sleeved white button down leisure shirts. If she had met a man who filled a type for her....that would make sense,it also might have served Zodiac's purposes ( if thiswas Zodiac or he did know his victim) that this young lady felt a certain comfort with men who had this kind of wholesome bookish/nerdy look.

JUST MY OPINION AND OBSERVATION

P.S. _ J.V.E. -I expect an autographed copy of the first book Brother!!!!

Very interesting observation Al, thanks for sharing.

We know Darlene was very popular with men, she had a lot of male friends and after divorcing Jim Phillips she had another husband, Dean Ferrin. As a matter of fact maybe she was too popular; Darlene's sisters claim a man delivered gifts, followed and harassed her in the months before her murder. We can't be sure if it's true, but if these allegations are true then this is maybe the proof that Darlene knew her killer, then the importance of finding the name of the man on the picture. Again : I don't believe the man on the picture is indeed Jim Phillips, right now we have no evidence to backup this claim, sadly.

And about the book: Don't worry Al, I won't forget you my friend. :tu:

Edited by JVE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to dispute whent that picture was taken:

"Police believe the photo was taken in San Francisco in the summer of 1966 or 1967."

Na-uh... I'd be surprised if anyone in San Francisco would be wearing a long sleeved winter sweater, what look to be wool pants, and winter boots in the summer. At the very least, their estimation of the time of year it was taken is likely wrong. I woudn't expect her to be in shorts and a tube top, but not what is clearly winter clothes.

Also, the man in the photograph is wearing a wedding ring, she doesn't appear to be uncomfortable around him, she has her arm around him and she is slightly leaning comfortably in toward him. (if anything, she looks semi-annoyed with the photographer)

I don't follow this old story, but that picture rings as someone she knows at least relatively well... but regardless...that photograph wasn't taken in summer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to dispute whent that picture was taken:

"Police believe the photo was taken in San Francisco in the summer of 1966 or 1967."

Na-uh... I'd be surprised if anyone in San Francisco would be wearing a long sleeved winter sweater, what look to be wool pants, and winter boots in the summer. At the very least, their estimation of the time of year it was taken is likely wrong. I woudn't expect her to be in shorts and a tube top, but not what is clearly winter clothes.

Also, the man in the photograph is wearing a wedding ring, she doesn't appear to be uncomfortable around him, she has her arm around him and she is slightly leaning comfortably in toward him. (if anything, she looks semi-annoyed with the photographer)

I don't follow this old story, but that picture rings as someone she knows at least relatively well... but regardless...that photograph wasn't taken in summer.

Interesting, thanks for sharing, I didn't even thought about looking at her clothes. But the boots she is wearing doesn't looks like winter boots, it looks like the kind of boots a 20 something years old woman would wear during any seasons. Same for the sweater, seems like something a woman could wear during spring and even colder summer days. Perhaps you are right, but her clothes don't really look like winter clothes, after all the weather in San Francisco is not as hot as the weather in LA, maybe it was a cold summer day, who knows.

And I agree with you, she doesn't appear to be uncomfortable around him and I'm sure she knows this man at least relatively well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Interesting, thanks for sharing, I didn't even thought about looking at her clothes. But the boots she is wearing doesn't looks like winter boots, it looks like the kind of boots a 20 something years old woman would wear during any seasons. Same for the sweater, seems like something a woman could wear during spring and even colder summer days. Perhaps you are right, but her clothes don't really look like winter clothes, after all the weather in San Francisco is not as hot as the weather in LA, maybe it was a cold summer day, who knows.

And I agree with you, she doesn't appear to be uncomfortable around him and I'm sure she knows this man at least relatively well.

no way... I live in Seattle and have all my life our summers are even cooler than SF's, I've also been to San Francisco more times than I can count... no one dresses like that in summer in Seattle or San Francisco unless they're a total dork (and by all accounts, this young woman was no dork). I don't care if it was the 60s and that she was in her 20s.

Even the print on her sweater is a winter print. They would have been wearing small flats, Keds, or some kind of sandal. Never boots and never long sleeved winter printed sweaters. Summer time is for button up blouses, tees or other light cotton wear. If it was chilly, they'd throw on a cotton cardigan sweater or a light cotton casual jacket.

No way. I'm standing firm on my knowlege of fashion and the weather in San Francisco in summer. Once the weather hits into the low to mid 60s in San Fran or even Seattle, women ditch their long sleeved sweaters more or less. Especially in the late 1960s when appropriate dress was far more an issue than it is now.

You can't apply today's standards of dress to the 1960s. Ya sure, today you seen young girls wearing stupid Uggs in summer, but that would not have been the case in the 1960s (and even today you'd see those Ugg girls wearing their fugly boots with shorts or jeans with a light blouse, never a winter printed sweater.)

Edited by MissMelsWell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no way... I live in Seattle and have all my life our summers are even cooler than SF's, I've also been to San Francisco more times than I can count... no one dresses like that in summer in Seattle or San Francisco unless they're a total dork (and by all accounts, this young woman was no dork). I don't care if it was the 60s and that she was in her 20s.

Even the print on her sweater is a winter print. They would have been wearing small flats, Keds, or some kind of sandal. Never boots and never long sleeved winter printed sweaters. Summer time is for button up blouses, tees or other light cotton wear. If it was chilly, they'd throw on a cotton cardigan sweater or a light cotton casual jacket.

No way. I'm standing firm on my knowlege of fashion and the weather in San Francisco in summer. Once the weather hits into the low to mid 60s in San Fran or even Seattle, women ditch their long sleeved sweaters more or less. Especially in the late 1960s when appropriate dress was far more an issue than it is now.

Ok Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us, I think you are right, the more I look at the picture and the more I think you are right. Very good call Miss, I didn't noticed what Darlene was wearing. The fact we don't know the exact time the picture was taken is very frustrating, and we still don't know how the authorities/the website got a hold of the picture. :hmm:

Perhaps knowing the exact time the picture was taken won't solve this enigma, but then again maybe it hold the answer to this mystery. If you want to share more please do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know next to nothing about the Zodiac cases or this photo of the victim... I only know what I can see.

I'd almost go as far to say as the pants she's wearing may actually be SKI pants. Did the victim ski?

Remember, San Francisco, even in the 60s was a very fashion forward city. Women would have been wearing bell bottomed jeans as a first choice or tailored suits or flowing batik or printed skirts, mini skirts were awfully popular around that time. Think two styles for women in the mid-late 60s.... Jackie-O or hippy.

Her pants are clearly a heavy wool. You can tell by how the fabric is laying (and how the fabric is distorted around the knees from sitting down). The cut is very much like ski stirrups and the sweater looks like a ski sweater, but it disturbs me that it's a little boxish and large for that time period. As far as I'm aware, women weren't wearing straight legged wool pants really as casual wear in summer or winter. But would have worn exactly that if they were going or had been skiing. My mom had ski pants that looked almost identical to those.

His pants are also wool, however they're a lighter weight finished wool and right in line with the time period (slim pant legs) and men who worked in offices in office jobs would wear short sleeved cotton shirts under their suit coats. Men's fashion was taking a turn for the wilder about this time, but conservative men would have continued to wear the boring white shirt with short sleeves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd almost go as far to say as the pants she's wearing may actually be SKI pants. Did the victim ski?

Now I remember : Darlene's address book contained at least 3 crossed out references to ski resorts/hot spots in the Lake Tahoe area, so Darlene could have been someone like lots of others in Northern California who go skiing up in the Sierra Mountains near Lake Tahoe.

So the picture would have been taken before or just after she went skiing.

Again thanks for sharing your wisdom, Miss, very good job. Again perhaps these details are not really important, but then again they could be. :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There you have it.. she's dressed for skiing or had just finished skiing. I'm almost certain of it. Pretty good call since I have no idea who this girl is or anything about this case. LOL. I'm really just a fashionista. LOL.

I'm also a watch collector. This man's watch may or may not be a Zodiac brand. Zodiac Watches back then would have been expensive for one... but more interestingly, they were favorites of Navy Seals and other military special forces whose watches might have to be submerged in water, OR for someone who changed time zones frequently (they have an adjustable outer dive ring on them in most cases and were very waterproof). This man's watch looks more like a dress watch than a dive watch. DIve watches are pretty bulky, I have a Tag Heuer, so I know this to be the case. LOL. I'd say from the brilliance of his time piece, it was new... perhaps a christmas present? A very expensive christmas present at that time to be honest. I also had a hard time finding a good picture of a 1960s Zodiac watch that had a black face... they existed, but they still didnt' look right compared what distinguishing details I could pick out. It's hard to say if that mans watch is a Zodiac; I'm going to guess... no. But I'm willing to be wrong on that.

I'm not willing to be wrong that her clothes are winter clothes though... with a high probability that they are ski wear. LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also a watch collector. This man's watch may or may not be a Zodiac brand. Zodiac Watches back then would have been expensive for one... but more interestingly, they were favorites of Navy Seals and other military special forces whose watches might have to be submerged in water, OR for someone who changed time zones frequently (they have an adjustable outer dive ring on them in most cases and were very waterproof). This man's watch looks more like a dress watch than a dive watch. DIve watches are pretty bulky, I have a Tag Heuer, so I know this to be the case. LOL. I'd say from the brilliance of his time piece, it was new... perhaps a christmas present? A very expensive christmas present at that time to be honest. I also had a hard time finding a good picture of a 1960s Zodiac watch that had a black face... they existed, but they still didnt' look right compared what distinguishing details I could pick out. It's hard to say if that mans watch is a Zodiac; I'm going to guess... no. But I'm willing to be wrong on that.

Wow, Thanks for sharing your knowledge about the Zodiac brand, not many people know a lot about this brand, Thanks !

In my opinion the man on the picture is not wearing a Zodiac watch. Like you I've tried to find a good picture of a 60's Zodiac watch with a black face and had a hard time doing so, but after my research and reading your last post (thank you) I'm sure his watch is not a "Zodiac", but then again the possibility that it could be a "Zodiac" is very intriguing.

Interesting Fact: Size 10 1/2 Wing Walker shoe prints were recovered from the scene of the murder of Cecelia Shepard on Sept. 27, 1969. These unique kind of boots were really hard to find, in fact you could only have them if you were in the military or knew someone in the military, so in a way a link can be made right there between the boots and the brand (used mostly by military).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, Thanks for sharing your knowledge about the Zodiac brand, not many people know a lot about this brand, Thanks !

In my opinion the man on the picture is not wearing a Zodiac watch. Like you I've tried to find a good picture of a 60's Zodiac watch with a black face and had a hard time doing so, but after my research and reading your last post (thank you) I'm sure his watch is not a "Zodiac", but then again the possibility that it could be a "Zodiac" is very intriguing.

Interesting Fact: Size 10 1/2 Wing Walker shoe prints were recovered from the scene of the murder of Cecelia Shepard on Sept. 27, 1969. These unique kind of boots were really hard to find, in fact you could only have them if you were in the military or knew someone in the military, so in a way a link can be made right there between the boots and the brand (used mostly by military).

My thing is Swiss watches... which Zodiac is. But because i like to buy them and wear them, I mostly research ladies models.

This is some information about Zodiac watch history in general:

http://www.swiss-watches-guide.com/zodiac-watches.html

They became the "official" watch of the Navy Seals sometime in the early 1970s, but were popular dive watches prized by SEALS before then as well. I know that there is one model prized by Vietnam SEALS in particular.. it had an orange face (very unusual for the '60s) there is another dressier watch, but still a dive piece, that had a navy blue bi-directional face. That model is rare, it did have a metal band, but I don't think the one that man is wearing is that watch. That watch appears to have a very solid black face. A bi-directional blue face would show some metalic color shift.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.