Allen was NOT 6'5", 325 pounds


Zodiackiller.com Message Board: Arthur Leigh Allen: Allen was NOT 6'5", 325 pounds

By Tom Voigt (ac94c198.ipt.aol.com - 172.148.193.152) on Wednesday, August 16, 2000 - 11:36 pm:

Just for the record, Allen was a shade under 6'0" and weighed between 220 and 275, depending on what he had for breakfast.

By Douglas Oswell (199.251.67.33) on Thursday, August 17, 2000 - 05:27 am:

Given anything between the extremes, that would have made Allen a rather huge-looking man, girth-wise, something that the eyewitnesses certainly would have keyed on, to the extent that there would have been no ambiguity regarding his appearance.

By K.C. (fnord.armstrong.com - 12.4.204.73) on Thursday, August 17, 2000 - 04:10 am:

Does anyone know why Allen was given a "less than honorable discharge"? Was it due to homosexual acts?

By Tom Voigt (ac940187.ipt.aol.com - 172.148.1.135) on Thursday, August 17, 2000 - 10:27 am:

Allen's discharge was due to his being arrested by VPD.

By Michael (ip202.lancaster5.pa.pub-ip.psi.net - 38.32.27.202) on Thursday, August 17, 2000 - 01:10 pm:

Tom, what was the charge? and disposition? It is unuseual to be discharged for a minor civilian offense.

Michael

By Tom Voigt (ac9ebbfe.ipt.aol.com - 172.158.187.254) on Thursday, August 17, 2000 - 01:27 pm:

It's all at the Allen File. I posted Allen's rap sheet over a year ago.
He was arrested for disturbing the peace. The charges were dismissed, but he was still discharged from the service.

By Bill Baker (pool0694.cvx5-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net - 209.178.154.184) on Thursday, August 17, 2000 - 02:48 pm:

Tom, Disturbing the Peace is a pretty broad classification, from my experience, covering acts from fist fights to playing a stereo too loud. Any further on what Allen did to get arrested? That may help to explain why his conduct was objectionable enough to be discharged from the military.

By Chrissy Shaw (dial-99.farmtel.net - 209.207.16.99) on Thursday, August 17, 2000 - 07:26 pm:

Dear Sirs:

I would like to point out that even trained individuals often time have a severe problem in estimating height. That problem is compounded in stressful situations. Having looked down the barrel of a cocked .38, I can assure you, the height was not a critical factor in my recall. The barrel looked as big as a sewage drain pipe. I can only imagine what the belching fire put in M.M.s mind. Mr. Brian was on the ground as far as I know and it is the worst place to attempt a reliable estimate of height.

At best, and I have practice, I never get closer than within three inches. CS

By Jake (spider-tp084.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.204.214) on Thursday, August 17, 2000 - 07:38 pm:

Tom told me a story once about Allen rumbling with five Marines -- and winning! If memory serves, I think it was even Lyndon Lafferty who arrested him. Lafferty went on to join the ranks of Zodiac Cops on a Mission, writing "solutions" to the Z codes that looked like a cross between the kiddie page in the Sunday comics and the diaries of Mark David Chapman. Anyway, the more I think about this story, the more I suspect apocrypha: it's the kind of data that would fit right in at the Allen File page, and since it isn't there, I'll bet it's because it couldn't be verified.

--Jake
http://members.aol.com/Jakewark/index.html

By Tom Voigt (ac9148a2.ipt.aol.com - 172.145.72.162) on Thursday, August 17, 2000 - 09:33 pm:

Bill, the DP charge was the result of Allen breaking down the door of Ralph Spinelli and kicking his ass. Spinelli knew what was good for him, so the charges were dropped.

Jake, that fight took place in Vallejo while Allen and Lafferty were in high school. The opponents weren't Marines, I believe they were just neighborhood tough guys. Allen won, and bloodied his knucks in the process. (Lafferty witnessed it.)

By Edward (adsl-63-204-74-6.dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net - 63.204.74.6) on Friday, August 18, 2000 - 08:55 pm:

It's interesting that the police (by arresting him) in effect ruined Allen's naval career (if indeed he ever had hopes for one).
Getting a "less than honorable discharge" would certainly be viewed as something derogatory in his father's eyes. This is
another point toward the long list of reasons for Allen as a good suspect. Zodiac's hatred of the police is well documented. He
must have had a run-in with them somewhere along the line that (in his mind) triggered that hatred.

By Kevin M (cx206582-c.mesa1.az.home.com - 24.21.120.22) on Saturday, August 19, 2000 - 02:35 am:

Good point Edward. With his father in the position he was, that must have really been something for Allen to get that discharge. Daddy couldn't have been a happy camper. Getting a "less than honorable discharge" from the Navy means basically one thing: You are a major loser, or "shitbird" as we used to put it. His dad would have been real embarassed by it too. That being said, I don't see where it translates to hating the cops. First of all, having spent some time as an MP in the Navy, I can tell you that they're not going to kick you out of the Navy with a "less than honorable" just cause' you got into a fight with some civilian. Must have been something more. Probably, he was a loser and had all kinds of problems while he was in, and there may have been one event that finally broke the straw so to speak.

By Douglas Oswell (247.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.17.247) on Saturday, August 19, 2000 - 05:18 am:

The most logical thing, to my mind, is that Allen's homosexual inclinations may have come to light.

The Unabomber-Zodiac Connection

By Tom Voigt (ac948b61.ipt.aol.com - 172.148.139.97) on Saturday, August 19, 2000 - 12:26 pm:

Allen also was found having weapons in plain sight in his car. The combination of troubles is what probably did in his military career.
In fact, Allen lost his teaching job at Travis AFB because of leaving weapons in his car.

By Edward (adsl-63-204-74-233.dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net - 63.204.74.233) on Saturday, August 19, 2000 - 12:35 pm:

Didn't Bill Baker once mention that either the ammo or a container was found at the Santa Barbara beach murders that could be traced to Vandenberg or Travis AFB?

By Tom Voigt (ac948b61.ipt.aol.com - 172.148.139.97) on Saturday, August 19, 2000 - 12:39 pm:

I'll let Bill answer that, but Allen didn't teach there until a few years after the Santa Barbara murders.

By Bill Baker (pool0293.cvx11-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net - 209.178.189.38) on Saturday, August 19, 2000 - 09:14 pm:

Edward, yes, the lot number on WW Super-X .22 long rifle ammo boxes found with the victims was determined to have been available at Vandenberg AFB, and was the only location in our area at the time.

Tom, you advised me several months ago that Allen taught school at Santa Rosa School in Atascadero until sometime in 1963, and then worked at Travis AFB teaching 7th and 8th grades for the '63-'64 school year. Has the Travis info been corrected or amended?

By Tom Voigt (ac9a9dcb.ipt.aol.com - 172.154.157.203) on Saturday, August 19, 2000 - 09:25 pm:

I just double checked Allen's personnel file, and he taught at Travis AFB during the 1963-64 school year.

By Bill Baker (pool0277.cvx5-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net - 209.178.153.22) on Saturday, August 19, 2000 - 11:53 pm:

Allow me to amend one of my earlier comments regarding the ammo used in our case. The ammo was Winchester-Western .22 long rifle, but I don't recall (I don't have access to the forensic reports and it's been too long since I've seen the actual items) if they were Super X with a copper wash or not. I say this because I recall reading that the Super X .22 copper wash LR did not come out until 1967. Sorry I can't be more definite, but I didn't want to be misleading in my info.

By Ed N. (spider-tn034.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.207.59) on Monday, August 21, 2000 - 05:24 pm:

As far as what Bill Baker mentioned concerning the ammo from Vandenberg: if the lot number of the ammo was traced there and only there, then that can mean only one thing. Having worked with munitions during my Air Force career, there is one major thing that differed between accounting for munitions and accounting for just about everything else: we had to have 100% accountability, all the time, and no less, or someone (the NCOIC) had to explain to the General just where his bombs and/or bullets went.

Now, if we assume that those bullets came from (read "were stolen from") Vandenberg, then whoever did it must have had access to them. That is, special clearance, and a means to get the keys to get into the storage area. Unless he was a very high-ranking officer with a reason to be there, the only others who would be in a position to take anything would have been someone who actually worked in the munitions storage area. And having worked in such a place, that would be next to impossible, because of the accountability thing. They simply couldn't have been stolen without someone eventually finding out, and heads would have rolled over that.

The only other possibility I can think of is that such munitions were issued to someone with a need for them, where accountability is not as strict, such as a supply point. Simply put, a supply point is where someone, such as the SP's (security police, the Air Force version of the MP's), put in a request for a specific ammount of muntions needed for the year based on past usage, which is issued to them at the beginning of the year. Whenever they need anything, they more-or-less just come into the storage area and take what they need, and then send muntions operations (where I worked) what was termed an MSI, which is a supply point expenditure, and then it was subtracted from the record. I never actually worked supply points, but that is how I understood they operated, and as far as I know, they just had to report what they used, but I don't remember if proof was required (such as spent bullet shells, etc).

In any case, even though I was in the Air Force in the mid 1980s, I don't imagine things were too different in 1963. Of course, it's also been a long time since I was separated from active duty, and my memory of the day-to-day operations are a little foggy (considering I have no need to remember them these days).

So, my assessment of this situation, based on my own experience, is that if the ammunition used in the 1963 murders did in fact come from Vandenberg, then barring the theft of any from the muntions storage area (of which there would have been some record at the time), then it is likely to have come from a supply point located there and would probably have been stolen by the supply point custodian, who could easily have written off the spent ammo as being used for something else.

It also just occurred to me: how old was that lot number? It's not likely to have been too old (not more than a few years), and could easily have been stolen in the years preceeding 1963. Likewise, if it was an expired lot and was marked for disposal, then about the only people who could easily have taken any would have been EOD (Explosives Ordnance Disposal), pocketing whatever they wanted at the burn site and writing them off as destroyed.

By Edward (adsl-63-204-75-209.dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net - 63.204.75.209) on Monday, August 21, 2000 - 05:52 pm:

Was ammo sold in the PX?

What does the military do with .22 ammo in the first place?

I know that for years the military has been offering ammo through a government program to clubs teaching youngsters who were learning to shoot. But I've never heard of soldiers using any handgun below a .38.

By Ed N. (spider-wi021.proxy.aol.com - 205.188.197.26) on Monday, August 21, 2000 - 07:02 pm:

Good question, they may have, but since I did not own any guns while in the Air Force, I did not specifically go looking for any at the BX, nor do I recall seeing any. That's not to say they BX's don't carry guns and ammo. Perhaps someone who has access to an Air Force BX could enlighten us?

By Michael (ip150.lancaster5.pa.pub-ip.psi.net - 38.32.27.150) on Monday, August 21, 2000 - 07:25 pm:

Yes indeed AF Bx's did sell guns and ammo. at least in the early 60's they did. One Christmas my dad gifted me with a .22 rilfe from the Travis BX. Michael

By sandy (c531918-a.ptbrg1.sfba.home.com - 24.176.152.45) on Monday, August 21, 2000 - 08:30 pm:

It seems odd to me that the only place these bullets could have came from, was Vandenberg.Or was that the "nearest" place they could have come from? Was all of Calif. checked out? How about Fort Ord or Castle Air force base? Sandy

By Michael (ip119.lancaster5.pa.pub-ip.psi.net - 38.32.27.119) on Tuesday, August 22, 2000 - 01:05 pm:

Ammo is shipped from the factory to dealers or jobbers and records are kept as to what lot numbers went where, I suppose that investigators called Winchester and ask where that lot number was shipped. That would explain why they zeroed (pardon the pun) in on Vandenburg and not say Joes sporting goods.

Michael

By Bill Baker (pool0209.cvx5-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net - 209.178.152.209) on Tuesday, August 22, 2000 - 07:36 pm:

Sandy, in all honesty, since I didn't become involved in the case until late 1970, I'm not sure how wide-spread was the list of retailers that carried that particular lot number. I suspect that the original investigators probably narrowed their focus on "local" sources (the scope of their "vision" was undoubtedly narrow). I can't make excuses for whatever shortcomings that may have (probably) existed in 1963, only strive to work through it. I do know that there was one other store -- in Santa Barbara -- that carried the same ammo lot number, but they individually tagged every box, regardless of whether the boxes of 50 were sold individually or in "bricks" (ten boxes of 50). Ours had no such stickers, nor any residue indicating that stickers had been peeled off. VAFB did not follow this practice, suggesting that the ammo was, in fact, purchased as a "brick," if in fact it was bought there.

I wish I could say that VAFB was the sole source of the ammo, to the exclusion of any other military bases or other retail stores, but I can't.

To answer any other of the posted questions regarding ammo or guns purchased at VAFB, no records of ammo sales were kept at the time, to my knowledge. The Bx supervisor at the time, Summers, died before I inherited the case. And the only "list" I had to work from was that of firearms registered at the base at the time, which was quite extensive, and only limited to AF personnel. Nothing was done, that I recall, to research firearms sales at the base exchange prior to the killings (though these would have likely been among the registered weapons). Hell, I can't even say with any certainty whether the weapon used to kill our kids was a rifle or a pistol. How's that for confidence in our predecessors (and the FBI Lab)? Frustrating, to say the least. But again, we can only hope to rise above and beyond it.

P.S. I'm sorry for my earlier, imprudent, remarks. We all have bad days, but with age, mine are becoming more frequent and less manageable.

Bill

By sandy (c531918-a.ptbrg1.sfba.home.com - 24.176.152.45) on Thursday, August 24, 2000 - 12:40 am:

Thats O.K. Bill, I am doing better I hope? I will be going down to Sants Barbara as soon as I can get away. I look for paper trails on my four suspects. I have one who was a bartender not too far from S.B. I think I have some notes on Donna Lass's room mate coming from S.B. Also a Dr. Donna worked for lived there.If I find anything that might help, you will be the first to know. Thanks, Sandy

By steve (d-13.arch-03.ap.net - 207.44.219.206) on Friday, August 25, 2000 - 06:13 am:

Tom,
I live in Santa Rosa and when I drove down Santa Rosa Avenue last night I looked for Sunset Trailer Park that Allen lived in and didnt find it. I just now looked in the phone book for it and didnt find it there either. Is this trailer park still there?

By Tom Voigt (ac94d9a7.ipt.aol.com - 172.148.217.167) on Friday, August 25, 2000 - 11:31 am:

Steve, I'm not sure.
Ed N. could probably answer that.
I believe he's driven by.

By Michael D. Brown (205.149.107.164) on Friday, August 25, 2000 - 12:45 pm:

Tom,
About Sunset Trailer Park...you might check
Polk City Directories around the time period involved and follow to current time. You can find them at Public Libraries and Universities.
They're cross-referenced by Name/Address/Phone #
you can find out who was where doing what,when.

Also old phone books are handy.
Michael Brown

By Tom Voigt (ac9c8cb0.ipt.aol.com - 172.156.140.176) on Friday, August 25, 2000 - 01:04 pm:

That's what Ed is for. He's excellent at archiving. Plus, he's in the Bay Area and I'm in Portland.

By Ed N. (spider-wn011.proxy.aol.com - 205.188.197.151) on Friday, August 25, 2000 - 09:54 pm:

Allen lived in the Sunset Trailer Court at 2963 Santa Rosa Avenue, space A-7. He was listed as "Leigh Allen," and was there from 1972 to 1974 (possibly 1971, but there was no directory to check for that year). It is located between Hearn Avenue and Todd Road, specifically just south of Court Street, on the west side of Santa Rosa Avenue.

By Ezzy (proxy2-external.santab1.ca.home.com - 24.4.254.49) on Tuesday, August 29, 2000 - 12:09 am:

To Ed N.:

Did Allen's mom ever live in Santa Barbara......like about 15 years ago? Any secondary residence there?

By Ed N. (spider-wd083.proxy.aol.com - 205.188.193.188) on Tuesday, August 29, 2000 - 12:31 am:

Good question, Ezzy, I don't know... she died about 10 or 11 years ago, as I recall, here in the Bay Area. I'd have to check in Santa Barbara to find that out, or perhaps in Sacramento. There's no telling when I can get to either place, my car is almost dead and I'm looking for a new one.

By Ezzy (proxy2-external.santab1.ca.home.com - 24.4.254.49) on Tuesday, August 29, 2000 - 01:47 pm:

Thanks, Ed. The reason for my question was because one day I was delivering a health product to a person who responded to an ad. He stood behind a door, a huge person in a totally darkened room- I couldn't see scarcely any of him because that's obviously the way he wanted it. Mostly just hands handing me a check. He lived with his mother. Later on, the feedback he gave me regarding the health product and it's effects on him were a little ex-rated, and not the type of thing you would say to a lady. Not saying that every weird, perverted-type big man with illnesses could be the "z", but I still just wanted to know if he/they every lived in S.B. as a 2nd. residence. Needless to say, after his follow up feed-back phone call it didn't take any pondering on my part to know if I'd ever sell a product to him again.

By Bill Baker (pool0254.cvx5-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net - 209.178.152.254) on Tuesday, August 29, 2000 - 03:47 pm:

Ezzy, as a former long-time resident (and cop) in Santa Barbara and its environs, I'm curious if you recall in what part of town it was, or, if you remember, the street name.

By Ezzy (proxy2-external.santab1.ca.home.com - 24.4.254.49) on Tuesday, August 29, 2000 - 04:54 pm:

Hi Bill,
I through out the receipt book for that little business venture years ago but it was accessible by one of the main 2 or 3 word spanish sounding names in Montecito. The residence wasn't Montecito, but I remember him telling me to take a Montecito exit, and to stay on one of the main residential roads that is definitely still in Montecito. When I asked him about living in Montecito, he explained that it was very close to the city limits, but the actual mailing address would be Santa Barbara. It was a light colored, very unpretentious looking house, nothing overly large either. He had a malfunctioning immune system (among other things) and he mentioned being allergic to chemicals. He also mentioned that he takes excessive saunas and that they had one at home. I was a somewhat new resident of the area at that time.....sorry I don't have the street name anymore. I could probably find out the name of the street I took to arrive there, though.

By Anonymous (spider-to016.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.204.10) on Tuesday, August 29, 2000 - 07:14 pm:

If I may ask ? Who are we discussing at the old Monticito address? The sauna bit makes me think of a possible player because of the sauna habits! J

By Ezzy (proxy2-external.santab1.ca.home.com - 24.4.254.49) on Tuesday, August 29, 2000 - 09:59 pm:

The person we're discussing was an extremely strange pervert-type guy who lived with his mother. I guess it sounded confusing to you. No one lived in Montecito. It's just how you drive to get to a certain Santa Barbara address, which is right at the border of Montecito, but still in S.B. I originally, natually, thought he lived in Montecito when he explained how to get there. I was just wondering if Allen's mom ever had an additional residence besides having lived in Valejo and I think Napa. I think she had a few bucks from the sound of it (at least she had enough to travel rather extensively) and this particular area I'm speaking of has a high population of "monied" people. The weird guy could hardly be fingered as the "z", he was probably just a weird perverted guy.

By Timmy Turtle (209.162.20.4) on Wednesday, September 06, 2000 - 08:58 pm:

If Allen's mother did live there that would prove a Santa Barbara connection. If I recall right, two teens were murdered on a beach there during(or around) the time of z's reign. If memory serves me right, those murders were compared to z's because of their similarity.

By Tom Voigt (ac994c3c.ipt.aol.com - 172.153.76.60) on Wednesday, September 06, 2000 - 09:19 pm:

Mr. Timmy wrote,
"If I recall right, two teens were murdered on a
beach there during(or around) the time of z's reign. If memory serves me right, those murders were compared to z's because of
their similarity. "

Are you reading the messages posted here?
If not, you should before posting. All of this has been covered.

By Steve (d-05.arch-03.ap.net - 207.44.219.198) on Monday, September 11, 2000 - 09:25 pm:

Ok, I found Sunset Trailer Court and had a look. This brought two questions to mind for me. 1. The trailer in the space Allen lived in is quite old and beat up looking. Im wondering if its possible that this is the same trailer Allen actually lived in? I cant imagine someone moving into a home knowing the #1 suspect for Zodiac lived there and might have left something and could even be coming back for it, so Im guessing it isnt. Was the trailer Allen had in that space one of the trailers he owned? 2. my boss used to work over in that area and told me that Allen worked at the boat yard that is right on the other side of the fence to the rear of the trailer. Is this true?

By Ed N. (spider-tq011.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.201.46) on Monday, September 11, 2000 - 11:36 pm:

Actually, Steve, the public in general did not know Allen was a suspect until May 1991, and he died 15 months later. I don't know if the trailer is the one Allen actually lived in.

As for our second question, I'd never heard that, but I wouldn't be surprised.

By sandy (c531918-a.ptbrg1.sfba.home.com - 24.176.152.45) on Tuesday, September 12, 2000 - 07:46 pm:

I was told about Allen as a suspect on March 23rd 90, by Pam Huckaby, (Darlenes sister)She knew about him before that, how long before I don't know.Who knows how many other people knew? I started my investigating of Allen, as soon as I was given his name. My #1 suspect knew I was looking at Allen.Not long after that, a phone call was made to VPD,from the very area this suspects lives! The person who called, made a claim that Allen told him "he" was the zodiac!I believe he made that call to take the heat off of himself!

By Chrissy Shaw (dial-109.farmtel.net - 209.207.16.109) on Wednesday, September 13, 2000 - 01:16 pm:

Dear Steve:

Go ahead and buy the beat up trailer--if Allen shows up that will be one of the greatest stories of all time. Seriously Steve sir, Arthur L. Allen passed away quite some time ago. I assume that you know that, but was not sure the way it is written.

PS: A laugh can be good for the soul--thanks Steve.

Chrissy

By Anonymous (nick.sfpl.lib.ca.us - 206.14.7.101) on Monday, September 25, 2000 - 02:06 pm:

Tom--The possible connection between the Allen\Spinelli feud and the Count Marco letter is interesting.Was Allen ever known to have written a letter to an editor using his real name?

By Scott Bullock (Scott_Bullock) (spider-ntc-td081.proxy.aol.com - 198.81.17.186) on Sunday, July 28, 2002 - 01:36 am:

Tom: You were right when you said, "Allen was a shade under 6'0" and weighed between 220 and 275, depending on what he had for breakfast."

Personally, I'd say he carried 300 pounds or better depending on the time in his life we are discussing. Hartnell's estimation seems to fit Allen pretty well, especially given the time period.

6'5" and 325 lbs.? Tom, where did you get that info to begin with? I wonder if Hartnell "guesstimated" the Zodiac's weight relying upon his visual sense or his sense of touch? In other words, did he look at the Z and say, "Hell, he looks like 5 pounds of crap in a 2 pound bag," or did he say, "Christ, this bastard's heavy! Is he going to stab me or asphyxiate me?"? Crass? To be sure, but to the point nevertheless.

Tom, Ed, Howard, Sandy, et. al, having seen me in person, what would you guess my height and weight to be? Forget what has been talked about, and tell me what you would think upon first impression.

In a day or two I will post the results according to that of my latest doctor's visit -- it seems that, despite my unwillingness to admit it, I do have the gout! Howard, you won the bet! -- which was on July 25th, 2001. The winner is guaranteed a bid smooch from me on the next trip to the Bay area! (Wear some aftershave Ed!)

Peace all,

Scott

By Sylvie (Sylvie14) (spider-ntc-tc054.proxy.aol.com - 198.81.17.44) on Sunday, July 28, 2002 - 01:46 pm:

I'd say 6'7" and 330 lbs., which happens to be 1 foot and 200 lbs. more than me.
Which is why I've decided to be nice to you.
Careful though, the bigger they come, the harder they fall.

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (214.philadelphia01rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.16.214) on Sunday, July 28, 2002 - 02:27 pm:

Especially with their little "zee-zees." :-)

By Roger Redding (Roger_Redding) (sdn-ap-008txhousp0305.dialsprint.net - 63.188.201.51) on Sunday, July 28, 2002 - 06:09 pm:

Scott:

what would you guess my height and weight to be?...The winner is guaranteed a bid [big?] smooch from me

5'2", 103

Roger

By Scott Bullock (Scott_Bullock) (spider-ntc-td063.proxy.aol.com - 198.81.17.178) on Monday, July 29, 2002 - 07:02 am:

Okay, the results from my physical: 6'10" and 301 pounds. Since you were the closest Sylvie, be prepared for a big ol' smack on the cheek if/when we ever meet!

Doug, I guess I'm going to have to provide proof that my "zee-zee" is in proportion to everything else. I suppose I'm going to have to whip it out at the next get-together so keep back folks!

Roger, just for that you're going to get a big smooch whether you like it or not! Btw, what in the world do we have to do to get you posting more often? You have so much to contribute; it's simply a shame you don't post more often.

I'd still like to know which sense Bryan Hartnell was using when he "guesstimated" the Zodiac's weight. Any ideas?

Scott

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (143.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - 12.90.17.143) on Wednesday, July 31, 2002 - 02:01 am:

Scott, if you do that I'll know there's a real problem involved. However, I think the original "zee-zee" reference was used in a figurative, not a literal sense. Freud was once asked whether the the way a man felt about himself related to the size of his zee-zee. He replied that he preferred to think that the size of the zee-zee related to the way a man felt about himself.

By Scott Bullock (Scott_Bullock) (cache-rp06.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.189.171) on Wednesday, July 31, 2002 - 08:04 am:

Doug,

Interesting response; I honestly did not know that. Personally, I'm more of a Hungian . . . uhm, I mean, Jungian. Besides, exhibitionism is all in the eye of the beholder, so to speak.

Board,

I wrote: "I'd still like to know which sense Bryan Hartnell was using when he 'guesstimated' the Zodiac's weight. Any ideas?"

Well?

By Kendra (Kendra) (pluto.cds1.net - 216.174.197.132) on Wednesday, July 31, 2002 - 01:01 pm:

Scott-I'm so disapointed that I don't get a smooch from you. You posted the results of your physical before I was able to make a guess! Anyway, I was thinking about Bryan Hartnell's weight guesstimation...maybe, just maybe, Bryan was taking in Z's physical description, ei. weight, thinking that, if he survived, he'd have info. to give. I only speculate this because I believe that Bryan contributed to the conversation with Z as a stalling technique. Perhaps Bryan was anticipating (and hoping for) an escape (apparently, Hartnell never thought that the gun was really loaded).
And Scott, be careful with that zee-zee of yours. It sounds like a dangerous weapon.

By Scott Bullock (Scott_Bullock) (cache-rp06.proxy.aol.com - 152.163.189.171) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 07:13 am:

Kendra, you wrote, "I'm so disapointed that I don't get a smooch from you."

Golly shucks, you really mean it? :o}

"...maybe, just maybe, Bryan was taking in Z's physical description, ei. weight, thinking that, if he survived, he'd have info. to give."

So, are you saying that Bryan guesstimated how much the Z weighed by how he looked? I agree that Bryan attempted to gather as many details as possible. I'd wager that if Bryan had seen Z's face this case would most likely be solved. Que sera, sera . . .

I'm just wondering if Bryan may have gotten a sense of how heavy the Zodiac was because of the physical attack itself? In other words, could Bryan's estimation of Z's weight be partially influenced from physical contact? And, if so, how much significance does it have on the "250 pounds" figure?

Scott

By Kendra (Kendra) (pluto.cds1.net - 216.174.197.132) on Thursday, August 01, 2002 - 11:05 am:

Hi Scott- Yes, I think that Bryan's weight guesstimation was based on Z's appearance, not from physical contact. You said, "did he look at Z and say 'Hell, he looks like 5 pounds of crap in a 2 pound bag' or did he say '*****, this guy is heavy! Is this bastard going to stab me or aphyxiate me? If I was lying down and was tied then stabbed like Bryan was, I would, in no way, be wondering "gee. This guy is kinda heavy" or "His stabbing is pretty deep. He must be 250 lbs." My first impression upon seeing Z at LB would be "what the heck? This guy is wearing a hood, has a gun and a knife, and is probably going to kill me." I guess what I'm trying to say is that I think Bryan quessimated Z's weight strictly on appearance because I think his thoughts were at 1)assessing the situation (guy in wierd mask, has weapons, is this guy going to kill me?) and 2) survival tactics. Now, if Z wasn't wearing the hood, maybe Bryan's weight guesstimation would have been from physical contact. I think the hood, unintentionally, caused a major distraction. I guess that's my real point (yes, there really is one). Bryan probably thought "there's a wierd dude in a strange costume who's going to kill us!" and then, took in Z's appearance in the event that he would survive, which of course, he did. I hope this makes sense I just woke up and I'm kinda incoherant at the moment...

By Howard Davis (Howard) (dsl-gte-10407-2.linkline.com - 64.30.209.40) on Monday, August 05, 2002 - 08:46 pm:

In the report it says"I [BH] was really trying to see what he looked like...he had on pleated pants...he had on a...windbreaker...I don't know.Maybe he had something in his pouch(!)...he was stout'cause he looked kinda'[lawyers would have a ball with "looked kinda'"] heavy.I think he was weighing two and a quarter,two fifty,somewhere[!] in there...I looked through his hair...it was brownish...dark brown hair...it was kinda' greasy...And I don't know how tall he was.Maybe 5'8" or maybe 5-10,6 feet,somewhere in there[something for all the suspects to fit!]...Was he as heavy as I[officer] am?Well,I can't say 'cause he wasn't wearing those types of clothes.They were sloppy clothes..he just had on this old pair of pleated pants.I don't know...how tall are you?I'am [officer]about five eleven...BH discusses 'sloppy clothes' again and says...his stomach kind of pouched a bit...I don't know...he could be about the same.It's hard to say.He was so slopply dressed."
Any lawyer can argue either way as to height,weight,etc.and focus on BHs I don't knows,hard to says(constantly says this),kindas,'could be,I think,maybe,I don't know,I'm a very poor judge of height,etc.,etc.
Each suspect oriented Z researcher sees his guy as a possible 'fit',because of BHs imprecise-except for hair color and clothes descriptions-he couldn't remember if the perp had on gloves or what kind of 'shoes'he was wearing.BH did say it seems he was wearing gloves,but he was 'unsure.'And the Zeat goes on!

By Tony (Mahalo) (hnllhi1-ar1-4-65-062-101.hnllhi1.dsl-verizon.net - 4.65.62.101) on Friday, August 09, 2002 - 06:57 pm:

I still feel strongly that Z was wearing a wig under the hood and purposly let it show to throw off a description. Greasy???

By Howard Davis (Howard) (66.59.238.111.lcinet.net - 66.59.238.111) on Friday, August 09, 2002 - 10:21 pm:

Tony,
Wigs don't get 'greasy' as the sebaceous glands only disperse sebum or oil from the glands IN the scalp to the hair.A wig has a synthetic base and it would block this oil transfer to the synthetic hairs.
When one carefully reads ALL the LBPD reports how the hood was constructed it was near impossible to see Zs hair or even his eyes/face for that matter.
BH says that it was only at a certain angle and as the light came through the eye slits(and don't forget the clip on sun glasses!)that he could see that the perps hair was combed and greasy dark brown-the view only being possible because he strained to see his hair.No way was the Z trying to display his hair or any other facial features!The design of the hood was to conceal not reveal!
He thought that when the hooded man left he could give the police all of the details he could,never dreaming he would be attacked.Even so,in spite of BHs careful observations, we get- and I am certainty not being critical-mixed descriptions.The height starts at 5'8"(if the perp was around 6'-the hood, no doubt,had a space from the head surface to the top portion of the hood which could have been three inches or more,then we do have Paul Bunyan or someone shorter with the false top making him appear higher!-and don't forget the boot soles' elevation and if he had lifts...),weight starts at 200(I weigh about 190 and I am not a large person).BH said that this clothes were very baggy and loose fitting so weight was based on appearence to be sure.I note Dougs test with his son wearing baggy clothes showed how you can put false pounds on!Remember his son wasn't wearing a hood so this would distort weight even more.No scales out there!
BH wasn't sure if Z had gloves on or just what kind of shoes/boots he was wearing.Age was possibly 20-25,30 by voice concept(this agrees with Officer Slaights account of the callers voice-"early 20s").The kind of voice could not be determned except that it was a "kind of drawl",but not a Southern drawl(someone with a Southern drawl trying to disguise it?).The ONE thing(except for the costume/knife/gun and general details of the encounter,etc.)BH seems certain about and that was the hair color/condition-"dark brown greasy hair"-inspite of the perps best efforts to conceal his face!
We need to look at all Zangles.