Kathleen Johns

Zodiackiller.com Message Board: Other Possible Zodiac Victims: Kathleen Johns: Kathleen Johns

By Lapumo (Lapumo) (p97.as2.dungarvan1.eircom.net - on Friday, December 22, 2000 - 04:25 am:

I realise theres a problem with the KJ's identification of that suspect.But is there any reason to doubt her on "the contents" of the suspects car?

By Tom Voigt (Tomvoigt) (ac95247a.ipt.aol.com - on Friday, December 22, 2000 - 10:27 am:

None that I can think of. Why?

By Lapumo (Lapumo) (p84.as2.dungarvan1.eircom.net - on Saturday, December 23, 2000 - 06:08 am:

It may say alot about the individual in question.
As far as I know she said it was fairly "messy",
and included items of children's clothing.As far as Allen,for instance,is concerned,his car was also similarly dishelleved.However what of the children's clothing?In addition(not that the guy who picked her up was a serial killer)it may point to an organized or disorganized individual.
Bundy,for example,kept his car in very good condition because he used it to travel around and abduct women. He was ,initially at least,an organized killer who was able to assume a mask of normality.The state of the car,in this case,may point to someone with more "obvious problems".

By Realtor (Realtor) (1cust98.tnt20.hou3.da.uu.net - on Saturday, December 23, 2000 - 10:00 am:

I once knew a pedophile who loved to collect soiled diapers...I won't go into the details but the children's clothes in the car could be trophies...

Just a thought...


By Tom Voigt (Tomvoigt) (ac897812.ipt.aol.com - on Saturday, December 23, 2000 - 10:46 am:

Geez Realtor, you sure knew some strange pedophiles...

By Realtor (Realtor) (1cust98.tnt20.hou3.da.uu.net - on Saturday, December 23, 2000 - 11:00 am:


Do you know any AVERAGE pedophiles?


By Tom Voigt (Tomvoigt) (aca19dfa.ipt.aol.com - on Saturday, December 23, 2000 - 11:07 am:

I was joking. You knew that, right?

By Realtor (Realtor) (1cust251.tnt20.hou3.da.uu.net - on Sunday, December 24, 2000 - 08:22 am:


Yep. Me too.


By Lapumo (Lapumo) (p161.as1.virginia1.eircom.net - on Sunday, December 31, 2000 - 06:14 am:

In your report on KJ it says that she pulled over because a man gestured that her car wheel was wobbling and offered to fix it.But he only seemed to make it worse.
Is there any more background to this?
I am just wondering if she actually knew she had a problem originally? Did she set out on her journey with this problem? I wonder,if it's a possibility her abductor had actually interfered
with the car earlier!

By Howard (Howard) (1cust204.tnt13.sfo3.da.uu.net - on Monday, January 01, 2001 - 03:56 am:

Lapumo- I interviewed Johns along with det. John Smith(a great interviewer plus)and her statements varied little from her account she gave Gray'.She told us all was well until she saw a car come up behind her and then its driver started blinking its lights and eventually K pulled over and as he crossed her lights she saw that he was about 5' 9" had brown hair in a crew cut and weighed about 166lbs.She told us this man said her right(not left has some have and was left out of the PD report)rear wheel looked loose and that he could fix it.He claimed to have made the repairs and as she drove the wheel came off! You know the rest. The part that has me in a fret is the fact the man handled the hub cap and that it was found laying near where he had torched the car. I won't give all the dope ,but Stockton PD or at least higher ups know of this print/s on the cap. I wrote the Chief of police there and no answer.Nuff said.

By Lapumo (Lapumo) (p36.as1.dungarvan1.eircom.net - on Monday, January 01, 2001 - 04:34 am:

Howard, thanks for the reply.I thought the way the report was worded here that she had an existing problem,or at least it could have been interpreted that way.Very interesting about the hub cap though.

By Lapumo (Lapumo) (p122.as2.dungarvan1.eircom.net - on Monday, January 01, 2001 - 04:58 am:

Pure speculation,but I am wondering since he went to the trouble of torching the car,if he returned to it to try and find out where she lived etc.Had a look around inside and then torched it.Of course the next thing to wonder about was if KJ got any threatening calls thereafter!

By Howard (Howard) (1cust71.tnt9.sfo3.da.uu.net - on Monday, January 01, 2001 - 12:54 pm:

Lapumo-before torching the car he may have gone through her glove box,etc.and found her address as Kathleen told det. Smith and I she did get threatening calls and even a Halloween card(note Paul Avery got one too 10/27/70-the 1 yr. anniversary of my guys release from jail).She said it stated "to the woman(would loved to have found out the spelling -woeman? see Zs Johns ref in his missive 7/24/70 )in the blue station wagon" . I don't think the color of her car had been given to the papers(you may wish to check I will stand corrected if so this detail would have been a significant proof showing it was the same man. If he would have spelled woman/ woeman then we would have something. K told us she sent the card to the late Paul Avery, but he told us he never got it. That card could be in a crank file somewhere!

By Howard (Howard) (pool0944.cvx19-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net - on Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 05:32 pm:

Sorry, but I got a call from Harvey Hines and he told me not to call Kathleen Johns and that he was in charge of who talks to her!lets read Toms' old posts about him and say is Tom far off in his views '!

By Ed N. (Edn) (spider-ntc-tc014.proxy.aol.com - on Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 05:37 pm:

Howard, is he now a lawyer or something??? Or does he not want her to ID someone else and destroy his theory's credibility???

By Tom Voigt (Tomvoigt) (ac87cb54.ipt.aol.com - on Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 06:51 pm:

About a year ago, Hines called me and threatened to "waste" me...or something along those lines.
He's a first-class kook, and anybody that deals with him better be prepared for the worst.

By Esau (Esau) (cc129455-a.rcrdva1.ca.home.com - on Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 07:50 am:

I wonder if Hines is the one that is sending the threatening emails from "hahaha". Can whoever received the emails state the contents?

By Howard (Howard) (dialup- - on Thursday, January 25, 2001 - 02:30 am:

I spoke to a woman that has known Kathleen Johns for some time. This person is bright and is a nurse. She has questioned KJ about the "incident" (3/22/70)on many occasions -and from different angles- over a long period of time ;and fully believes Js story. In fact, she has the highest regard for Ms. Johns.She told me how Kathleen has helped many people with the Z case and always tried to recount as best she could, the events surrounding her abduction and the kidnapping itself. She never requested money and gave freely of her time ,etc.She has gotten very little -if anything for her efforts except cajoling, criticism and yes, some even making light of her. Then there was the incredibly stupid statement that she burned her car that night (3/22/70 )to collect the insurance! There was no collecting anything-that car was all she owned and the things in it that pertained to the "baby" that Z mentioned in his torture letter(Jennifer -whom I have met-now has a baby of her own and has the greatest respect for her mom and her incredible bravery in running -with her -to escape a mad man;lets not forget that KJ was also 7 MOS. pregnant!)and the "woeman" he "...gave a rather interesting ride for a coupple of howers one evening a few months back that ended in my burning her car where I found them".Z must have wanted credit for this incident as he was willing to admit being defeated by a pregnant woman and one that carried a baby to boot!It must have been true considering Zs massive ego!This woman felt that the PD red necks were put off by KJs hippy appearance and really didn't put much credence or interest in her recounting the event of that night. She had been shown great disrespect by being left in a darkened vacant restaurant in early morning ,for hours ,while the officer took off !Imagine leaving a pregnant woman and her baby alone-and we are supposed respect the word of these unprofessional officers in anything they might say about the incident!Not only that , Kathleen had to wait around the 'next day 'at the station 'forever' she says ,as they didn't talk to her for quite some time.Ks husband arrived when he finally got the news and they then went to go see their wagon,which to her sorrow ,was gutted. Incidentally, there was supposed to be a hub cap that Z removed (right rear-not left rear)! I have been unable to get the Stockton PD to affirm or deny. K was very angry with the way she was treated by the PD in that area-I don't blame her! The part of the report that says the abductor did not threaten Kathleen was true as the driver was fairly quiet only occasionally talking in a monotone. AFTER a while (over 30 minutes)he began to say "you know I'm going to kill you" or "I'm going to throw the baby out".This is when she really became terrified! The interviewer,according to my source, really didn't put much stock in this young 'hippy girls' story and put the first part of her statement in while not really getting or caring about the whole story and the EVENTUAL CHANGE in the abductors words later on in the"interesting ride".A lot more paper work and time goes into a 'real' kidnapping and the Feds come in and you have more problems.Remember ,the mind blocks out trauma in some cases ,and this is what could have happened,but Johns told her friend that she did tell the interviewer ,but he did not seem to take her seriously!Sorry, I am not surprised!See my recent posts about how some detectives behave.

By Howard (Howard) (dialup- - on Saturday, January 27, 2001 - 03:23 am:

Lampumo-Your question on KJ.KJ told us that she stopped for gas in Modesto,but she does not remember seeing anyone around the station that looked suspicious-or at least, anyone that stood out. When the car came up behind her car with blinking lights and honking horn(see my recent posts about the follow job some guy was doing with 4 different women that same mo. J got her road visit) she was scared and kept going,but the man pulled along side her car with his window down shouting that her wheel was 'wobbling' or words to that effect. The reason Johns even considered pulling over was because the wagon was a real clunker and she figured something probably was wrong and that this man seemed so concerned .She was still concerned about stopping on a dark lonely road so she drove a little ways to the more travelled 5.This man smiled at her -he looked like a neatly dressed serviceman- and he told her the rear wheel was loose and that he would be glad to tightened the lug nuts for her. He went to his car and got a lug wrench out and went to the right rear-not left rear as has been reported, and appeared to be fixing the problem. He smiled and in a polite way told her it was fixed. As she drove off the tire came loose and she had to come to a stop. The man backed up and jumped out and said it was worse than he thought ,but he would take her to a station and get help(this is what Robin Graham may have experienced-see my posts on her case). He seemed like a trustworthy person and she got out of the car with the baby ,and to this day, Kathleen feels that the man registered surprise she had a baby in the car and that she was obviously pregnant!So that's the wheel deal and a CA moment. As Frank L. Wright said 'God put a bunch of nuts in a box and tilted the box and all the nuts went to California'-we got Zodiac- do you think South Dakota would have gotten Z-no-just CA! we get the Manson's and all the psychos. I wish the other states would take some off our hands. Hey, maybe Oregon-Tom write the gov'!

By Bucko (Bucko) (spider-tk044.proxy.aol.com - on Saturday, January 27, 2001 - 03:34 pm:

Howard wrote"
He seemed like a trustworthy person and she got out of the car with the baby ,and to this day, Kathleen feels that the man registered surprise she had a baby in the car and that she was obviously pregnant!

If this abductor was indeed Zodiac, perhaps he delayed killing her because of the baby, and the fact that she was pregnant. This may have helped save her life.

Howard, do you think this case was the work of Zodiac? Is it possible that this case as well as those of the other 4 women you sited in a previous post, was the work of a Zodiac wanna-be?

By Howard (Howard) (dialup- - on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 01:32 pm:

Bucko-I am inclined to believe KJ was abducted by Zodiac-after all he said so! He would never let "wanna-be"as you state, take his place and take credit for his "thing."He also, in his torture letter wrote-"So I now have a little list[Manson spoke of his list of intended victims],starting with the WOEman[KJ]& her baby[J]that I gave a rather interesting ride for a coupple howers one evening[3/22/70']a few months back that ended in my burning her car where I FOUND them".I will post more later on tonight on your question.

By Howard (Howard) (dialup- - on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 12:25 am:

Bucko-The description Kathleen gave certainly matches. She says she still can still remember those black plastic glasses that the man wore -just like the kind Clark Kent/Superman wore.The crew cut was like the witnesses in S.F. reported. She told me she could clearly see that his hair was dark brown the same as Harnell saw at LB when he would be less likely to dye it as he knew he would have the hood on .Z could easily have dyed his hair blond and put a reddish tint in it. Anti detection books say to dye the hair to "confuse witness descriptions".I feel Zs real hair color was brown to dark brown.This I base on the two incidents where he would not feel the necessity to dye it based on the scenario-like having a hood on,etc.The added detail of those pock marks on his chin(my guy has pocks' on his chin and you can see them to this day;Paul Watkins says that Davis had a disease on his chin/neck area)is an important addition.It was a full moon that night and she was in the car right next to him for about 2 "howers".and could see this facial detail. Remember ,she told us that she did not keep up with current events and when she glanced on the board and saw the Zodiac composite ,she was very startled to see the same man's likeness! She did not know who the Zodiac was,but that desk guy did and he placed her and the baby in a darkened restaurant and fled! Think about this -he had to have had a car and yet he was frightened and left without K and the baby!It wasn't until sometime later that the police arrived-BAD!And every one beats on Kathleen.She told me she was very angry to be left in this situation.Today, they would have been sued for such unprofessional conduct!If we accept that it was Z that disabled Bates' car in 66'(and it is now "popular" to reject this premise)then it would display the same MO in the Johns case further showing it was not an imitator.The Stine 87'was a form of deception as Z posed as a regular fare and gave directions and possibly ,besides directions, made small talk with S to foster the myth he was a service man headed for the Presidio area and ,of course ,he told S to let him off at Washington/Cherry-but instead shot him!Deception was used at LB as Z told the hapless couple that all he wanted was money and a car and that he escaped from prison killing a guard,etc.,but all the while he knew what he was really going to do. How do we know what Z did at LHR? He may have motioned for the girl to roll down the window indicating he had a question .He gets out of his car and comes to her side(just like at BRS) with window down and possibly asks 'do you guys have any weed'? and she says 'no'- then he suddenly dashes around the rear of the car telling them to get out firing those shots into the rear wheel housing and rear window to get them out of the car-then of course, he shot them both. It was certainly a "Run for Your Life Little Girl" that night!It is not impossible Z said he was an undercover officer and ordered them out and when they refused he began his 'procedure'. This is unlikely though.Did Z point out, when Betty Lou opened the window that there was something wrong with their wagon and asked them to come out and look and then upon their refusal he started shooting.The incident I posted concerning the 68' event, where a man comes up and offers to help 2 girls whose car wouldn't start and leaves in a rage when another man offers to help ;it was later found that the distributor wire was pulled,etc.This happened in Berkeley on Telegraph Av.My suspect used to hang out there and was there in Dec. of 68'.Johns recounts how his voice was flat or monotone-no emotion.This is somewhat like Charnel's description of the hooded mans voice intonation. Nancy Slover says in her report that the voice she heard sounded like he was reading from a prepared statement -methodical verbalization.I think it is safe to say it was Zodiac that gave Johns the "interesting ride"and not a wannabe-be.

By Lapumo (Lapumo) (p88.as2.dungarvan1.eircom.net - on Friday, February 09, 2001 - 06:49 am:

Has your recent interview with KJ changed your opinion in any way in relation to this case?

By Peterh (Peterh) (adsl-141-154-78-112.bostma.adsl.bellatlantic.net - on Friday, February 09, 2001 - 02:16 pm:


Sounds like great material from KJ, looking forward to readng more.

I found it particularly interesting that K says she never identified anyone but Kane. Does she confirm or deny the story that she IDd the SFPD composite at the police station? If she confirms it, does she square that with her ID of Kane, who looks like the Napa/LB composite, but certainly not the SFPD's?

By Oscar (Oscar) (pool0938.cvx11-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net - on Saturday, February 10, 2001 - 03:04 pm:

Just curious. Does Johns keep up with the progress (or lack thereof) of the case, ala' Pam Huckaby? Does she visit your site?

By Tom Voigt (Tomvoigt) (ac9010a4.ipt.aol.com - on Saturday, February 10, 2001 - 05:51 pm:

She just started visiting. Her knowledge is pretty dated.

By Sandy (Sandy) (c531918-a.ptbrg1.sfba.home.com - on Monday, February 12, 2001 - 08:03 pm:

Howard, did she say anything about the long scar on the left side of his jaw? The first time he spoke to me I didn't notice his lazy eye,it wasn't until the next time I saw him, and we were nose to nose. He seemed very nervous, or he hated me so much ,he was shaking. Has anyone counted how many nurses were Z like cases? Donna , Kathleen, Judith Hakari, Eva Blau's father was a doctor,Carol Hilburn, Rosa Vasquez. I haven't checked all of the unsolved z like crimes. The other Bates at Riverside collage, first name Sharon,was also a nurse. I am so glad you spoke to Kathleen, I knew she was telling the truth, Bless you !!

By Howard (Howard) (dsl-gte-10407-2.linkline.com - on Monday, February 12, 2001 - 08:15 pm:

Sandy-The detective and I questioned(on TAPE) Kathleen very carefully, and she gave no indication of the feature you describe.The man's hair was brown in a crew cut,etc.We even asked about his hans or any other feature she could remember-we did our best!

By Jake (Jake) (spider-wg053.proxy.aol.com - on Tuesday, February 20, 2001 - 11:31 am:

According to Tom's latest update, Johns has ruled out Allen as her abductor. Was this based on physical girth or facial features? I ask because Allen looks pretty old on the videotape, and I wonder if I would recognize him as the same man in the photos that appear on this site (though I suppose his squeaky Mike Tyson voice might give him away).

Another thing I wish I'd remembered earlier is the Halloween card that KJ described in her interview with Howard and Johnny Smith. She apparently received a card similar to Avery's at about the same time, but it somehow never made Graysmith's book. Tom, did this subject ever come up?

"This is the Zodiac Speaking..."

By Tom Voigt (Tom_Voigt) (aca90578.ipt.aol.com - on Tuesday, February 20, 2001 - 11:49 am:

There was nothing about Allen that resembled her abductor.

She told me the Halloween card she received was forwarded to Paul Avery, and she never heard a thing about it after that. Avery apparently never received it.

If anyone has any questions they'd like me to ask her, just e-mail me. I'll post her answers here.

By Howard Davis (Howard) (ont-cvx1-93.linkline.com - on Thursday, February 22, 2001 - 01:52 am:

Jake-The card's message was "To the woman in the blue station wagon,"or words to this effect.If he spelled woman-woeman -that would match to the torture letter reference; along with similar handwriting and there would be cause to lean towards acceptance.The address portion would have been fertile ground for Morrell at the time.If the card was the same as Avery's Halloween card (a kudo for Kathleen -she didn't do news at that time in her life,and she didn't know Avery got a Halloween card around the same time yet she affirms she got a Halloween card the same month and year!This is like what Bruce brought about John's reference to the clothes pile in the man's car-children's and adult's clothes;it gives her story that ring of authenticity.It would lean -like the tower of Pizza -if it was attired with double postage! I suspect that the card could be in a crank file somewhere as the late Paul Avery told us he never got the card.Worse yet, some clerk tossed it!Or it got lost in the mail-not the U.S. mails-naww.

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (102.philadelphia01rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - on Thursday, February 22, 2001 - 03:53 am:

A tower of Pizza would surely give me heartburn.

By Howard Davis (Howard) (ont-cvx1-68.linkline.com - on Thursday, February 22, 2001 - 11:37 pm:

Doug -I knew you would be the one to "bite" on my Zodiac spelling of Pisa! You are on it!You missed the last word though.Ted would have nailed(better not use that word)me!

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (79.philadelphia01rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - on Friday, February 23, 2001 - 03:34 am:

Howard--Are you aware that Ted once won a proofreading contest sponsored by a local newspaper in Montana? He found over 100 errors including mistakes in spelling and grammar, carefully circling the mistakes and even writing suggestions for improvement in the margins. This kind of dispels the "usual suspect" image of the murderer as a drooling, leering monstrosity.

By Howard Davis (Howard) (ont-cvx1-16.linkline.com - on Saturday, February 24, 2001 - 01:14 am:

Doug-That's why I made the Ted statement! He could be very meticulous as to not only the historicity of a work ,but render careful correction as regarding literary works.The Zodiac did not.All anti detection books of that day enjoined the reader to misspell words and use incorrect grammar,etc.; to hide the writer's real abilities and knowledge.Zodiac -I feel certain- followed the aforementioned advice.My guy had some two years of college,but he did poorly .He had taken several classes in English,etc.,but he would not always follow the "rules"when writing.We know that Z spells words correctly in one place-or letter, and misspells the same word/s in another place/s. I have gone over each one and this is true.This goes for the grammar twooo!The Riverside typed missive displays these factors.

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (111.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - on Saturday, February 24, 2001 - 07:06 am:

Howard, Zodiac displayed a very good eclectic knowledge in all sorts of fields. It's not the breadth of knowledge you'd expect to find in an uneducated lout, so I believe we can assume that the misspellings (not poor grammar, because in no case does Zodiac use poor grammar) were deliberate.

By Howard Davis (Howard) (ont-cvx1-41.linkline.com - on Sunday, February 25, 2001 - 01:45 am:

Doug- Just for starters -Z says that he used his gun sight "...to start MY COLLECTING OF SLAVES".This is "GOOD" grammar?Not according to my teacher friends!It's as clumsey as a dog with three legs!

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (153.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - on Sunday, February 25, 2001 - 08:13 am:

That doesn't sound too bad to me, Howard! But for some really bad usage, how about this line from a recent Kaczynski interview:

"... what boredom mostly is is that people have to keep themselves entertained ...."

Pretty weak, coming from a guy whom you and I both agree is a generally excellent grammarian. But we all make mistakes.

By Howard Davis (Howard) (dsl-gte-10407-2.linkline.com - on Thursday, June 14, 2001 - 07:47 pm:

The car that was used in the abduction of Kathleen Johns was most likely an Oldsmobile Toronado-fit name I'd say- considering the driver!

This came from Johns after looking at photos of this make some time back.

The car that was "closely following" Bates down the alley to the library was an Oldsmobile.FWI

By Howard Davis (Howard) (dsl-gte-10407-2.linkline.com - on Tuesday, July 03, 2001 - 05:38 pm:

Another piece on Johns and her car. She told me that when the man pulled alongside her and 'yelled out'-honking his horn and blinking his lights -that there was a problem with the car she thought that it was a possibility as the car was "old" and was in need of repairs, in spite of the fact,it was able to go fairly long distances.

I had an old car many years ago and if someone would have yelled out that there was something wrong with the car I would have had a tenancy to believe it! The car though, was able to travel fairly great distances without trouble-at times.

This is answer to Lampumo's question of 1/01!

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (90.philadelphia01rh.16.pa.dial-access.att.net - on Tuesday, July 03, 2001 - 06:27 pm:

I've always wondered why, if what Johns told Graysmith was true, she deigned to stop where she did, rather than at the Arco station that was within view of the site?

By Ed N (Ed_N) (spider-ntc-ta043.proxy.aol.com - on Wednesday, July 04, 2001 - 01:08 am:

The Arco (now a Unocal) at Chrisman Road, right by I-580, cannot be seen from the intersection of Highway 132 (Maze Road) and Bird Road, about 2.25 miles east of there.

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (41.philadelphia01rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - on Wednesday, July 04, 2001 - 05:14 am:

That's funny, Ed, because Graysmith wrote: "Kathleen looked over his shoulder at a light down the road. Not more than a quarter mile away was an ARCO service station, brightly illuminated." This, according to Graysmith, before she got into the stranger's car.

Must be another "tall tale" from Graysmith.

By Ed N (Ed_N) (spider-ntc-ta074.proxy.aol.com - on Wednesday, July 04, 2001 - 09:49 am:

Douglas: I think Graysmith (and probably Johns too) was confused on this point. I believe we all discussed last year the possibility that she did not pull over at Chrisman Road a quarter mile from Arco, and Z did not put her tire back on and drive two miles east to Bird Road to burn her car. Rather, she must have pulled over at Bird Road and Z drove her to I-580 and then on to Tracy; the first illuminated anything she would have seen was the Arco, and therefore remembered that she was parked "near" it.

Case in point: I visited some friends a few weeks back, and was told to drive "about ten miles" from the interchange to this particular street they lived off; the distance was actually 20 miles. The one who gave me directions later told me when I pointed out the discrepancy that she's not good with distances. I think it's therefore a strong possibility that Johns wasn't too good with estimating distance either, and didn't realize she had pulled over two miles from Arco; if she didn't look at the street sign, she probably didn't know she was at Bird Road either and not Chrisman Road. I bet Graysmith added the touch about "[looking] over his shoulder at a light down the road."

By Mark Coombs (Mark) (162-125-237-24.anc-dial.gci.net - on Wednesday, July 04, 2001 - 10:33 pm:

Ed N-It makes sense to me, the first "landmark" she sees after she gets into Zodiacs car got lodged in her memory. This theory that Z drove her car elsewhere to burn it doesn't make alot of sense. He's got to walk back to his vehicle as well as pick up the hubcap and redeposit it-not likely. I love these "writer's embellishments",
the more discrepancies I read about in regard to Graysmiths book I think a new comprehensive book needs to be written.

By Ed N (Ed_N) (spider-ntc-ta071.proxy.aol.com - on Wednesday, July 04, 2001 - 11:05 pm:

I wrote a little about it on Monday, October 16, 2000 - 02:45 pm. I did a keyword search on "Bird Road" and turned up about three references. I know there was much discussion about it last year, but it might have been before Tom changed the format of the board... and unfortunately, all the old posts were lost.

By Howard Davis (Howard) (dsl-gte-10407-2.linkline.com - on Friday, March 22, 2002 - 12:23 pm:

This the anniversy(3/22/70)on the supposed Zodiac attack and abduction of Kathleen Johns.When we interviewed her on New Years Day in 1998 she seemed to be very humble and sincere.When we got to the abduction she became quite emotional and we stopped recording for a bit so she could take a breather.She added only one detail about the interior of the car,while confirming the known information of other interviews,and that was that there were gum wrappers on the floor of the car.Insignificant,but it shows she was,as she said,trying to notice everything she could about the perp and his car.BH did the same according to PD reports.Another bit of info was that it was the right rear tire,not the left,that the perp 'worked' on!The revelation about the fact she had,in '70, received a Halloween card which on the inside said 'To the woman or lady in the blue station wagon.'was new to us.She said she sent this card to Paul Avery,but when we spoke to him he had no remembrance of such a card.It was this card,and some harrassing calls(second rev'!),purportedly from the perp,that caused her to go underground as it were.Going back to night of the abduction ,KJ also said that she now believes that the driver was surprised that she was pregnant and carrying a baby-it took him aback to some degree ,as he probably expected a young single female that was alone.Could this have been, at least,one of the reasons that he took her on that terror ride which Zodiac called a "rather interesting ride?Was it "interesting"(strange choice of words-does it show someone who had an 'interest' in the reactions of others under stress?) to him,because of her observed emotions and reactions and what she said during those "coupple of howers?"Her pregnancy may have saved her to a degree, as she told the driver that 'she was going to be sick'when he came to a stop at one point in the ride,and jumped out of the car.This gave her a few extra seconds to run across the road to the field and hide with the baby.I met this "baby" Zodiac mentioned in his letter.She is now a mother herself and that was rewarding ,in that her mom came very close to death and may have been the only person to have escaped from the Zodiac without harm,physical harm,that is, as the emotional scars are still visible at times.

By Ed N (Ed_N) (acc056bf.ipt.aol.com - on Tuesday, March 26, 2002 - 03:38 pm:

I just got back yesterday from LA (been gone since Thursday) and drove past the KJ site. There used to be orchards or something similar along the north side of Highway 132/Maze Road by Bird Road, where KJ was abducted, but they are gone now. I was surprised to see the Unocal sign (that was an Arco back in 1970) from that intersection as I drove by, I had never seen it before (as the trees blocked the view). Presumably then, the orchards had much smaller trees (or had not yet been planted) and she was able to see the Arco from where she pulled over (assuming the sign was elevated as high as the present Unocal sign is). I measured the distance once again, and Bird Road is one mile west of I-5, and two miles east of Chrisman Road and I-580. It is also located between the Delta Mendota Canal to the east and the California Aqueduct to the west (plenty of water for those who think that's significant). I still think that KJ pulled over at Bird Road and not by the Arco, and mistakenly believed she was two miles farther west than she actually was. I don't see Z replacing the tire, driving her car from Chrisman Road to Bird Road, then walking/running two miles back to his car to take off. He was a coward and would not have risked taking so much time to do those things.

By Chrissy Shaw (Chrissy_Shaw) (dialup- - on Sunday, October 06, 2002 - 08:30 pm:

Tom sir:

Yes I have a couple questions I would like to ask of Ms. Johns. The first is at what point during her abduction did she notice that the abductor noticed her child and what manner of reaction did he display? The second would be, did he at any point during his driving around with Ms. Johns and her baby did he seem to genuinely know where he was at. Lastly, did he at any point, prior to her evacuation of this fellows vehicle, act as though he were nervous or out of control. Thank you to you and Ms. Johns in this regard.

By Tom Voigt (Tom_Voigt) (12-224-139-118.client.attbi.com - on Sunday, October 06, 2002 - 08:40 pm:

Chrissy maam, you might want to check the rest of the site once in a while. Johns died last April.

By Tom Stout (Tom_Stout) (dialup- - on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 04:15 pm:

I find it odd that Zodiac can handle a grown man and woman at Lake B, but an eight month pregnant women with a infant/toddler?
That proved too much to tackle!
How exactly did she escape again?

By Tom Voigt (Tom_Voigt) (12-224-139-118.client.attbi.com - on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 04:36 pm:

Tom, please search for answers before posting questions. That info is widely available.

By Tom Stout (Tom_Stout) (dialup- - on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 04:56 pm:

I'm sorry I have heard several different versions.
Was it that Zodiac drove up a wrong way ramp and she jumped out with her toddler?
Or was it the one where he got stuck in the drainage dip and the family jumped out leaving the poor, hardened experienced serial killer in the dust?
She must have looked like Barry Sanders running away from Z while carrying her kid!
Did a trucker rescue her or not?
How do you think her inconsistent story would hold up on a wittness stand? Any cross examiner worth their salt would have her for lunch!
No need to respond with the facts. I accept the penalty flag! I'll research.
To be continued...

By Tom Voigt (Tom_Voigt) (12-224-139-118.client.attbi.com - on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 05:15 pm:

You're right about the contradictions in her story, or at least what made it into the police reports.

By Tom Stout (Tom_Stout) (dialup- - on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 05:30 pm:

Did her baby need any diaper changes or cry for food during this two-hour kidnapping?
Gee..the crying of the baby must have driven Zodiac nuts!

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) (161.philadelphia04rh.15.pa.dial-access.att.net - on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 06:50 pm:

Babies don't necessary spend all their time crying, Tom. It all depends on their temperament and the degree to which they have their parents trained. My three were great on trips. They still are--only now we tell jokes and recite episodes of "The Black Adder" verbatim, much to the annoyance of their Mom!

By Tom Stout (Tom_Stout) (dialup- - on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 06:53 pm:

I too am a father of two young kids. I have made my share of diaper changes!
Did your kids ever go through a kidnapping ordeal?

By Howard Davis (Howard) ( - on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 05:58 pm:

The late Kathleen Johns told me that Jennifer(I was able to meet her later in the same day)was a 'crying baby',but for some reason, she didn't cry during the some two "howers" abduction.She thought about this as we were talking and I saw she had tears in her eyes and then she said 'Someone up above must have been watching over us that night.'
She felt that the driver would have attempted to kill her if there would have been any sudden moves or screams on her part,so she well knew how important a silent Jennifer was that night!
Any thought of insurance fraud is. She and her husband had no insurance as they could not afford it.All of her childs things were in the car,including personal items belonging to her.
As she said,it would have been a lot easier to just have set fire to the car in the San Bernedino area where she lived if she wanted insurance money.The car 'wasn't worth anything' in her view anyway!

By Tom Stout (Tom_Stout) (dialup- - on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 06:42 pm:


Thank you for your response. I suppose after handling over a thousand automobile claims and investigating over a hundred fraudulent claims, I remain skeptical of her story. I don't believe she was ever abducted, nor do I believe her account of the torching of her car. I am sure if you ask claims examiners from your insurance company how many times they have heard "if I wanted to torch my car, I could have done it somewhere else," I am confident they will tell you "all the time". It is as common as a police officer hearing "I've only had a couple of drinks". People torch their cars all the time only to find they do not have comprehensive coverage. Can you confirm that her car had no liability insurance?

Even if you remove the insurance card, we are still left with glaring inconsistencies in her story which has had the luxury of never being cross-examined in front of a jury. Can you imagine what a defense attorney like Johnnie Cocran would have done to her on the witness stand?

By Tom Stout (Tom_Stout) (dialup- - on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 07:01 pm:

You posted, "She and her husband had no insurance," and then you go on to write, "As she said, it would have been a lot easier to set fire to the car in the San Bernardino area where she lived if she wanted the insurance money" What good would that have done if she didn't have any insurance?

By Howard Davis (Howard) ( - on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 11:23 pm:

Whether she did or didn't have insurance, why go to 132 late at night,seven montns pregnant with a seven month old infant,torch an old beat up car to get a couple of hundred dollars?It just does not fit.This includes removing the right rear tire too!And for what?This is something a young pregnant girl really didn't need to do.
I think that is all you see because of your background-your conscious and subconscious mindset, based on the people that do such things.It should not apply to everyone.
Detectives become hardened too, as they have so many people lie to them and they must deal with people that are not the best examples of mankind,but they will tell you some do tell the truth and what happened to them was real.
You jumped to conclusions without ever interviewing KJ or really learning all you could about this event.
When she told her story to the detectives they did NOT take notes.They were very unprofessional.
Compare the interviews done by the Napa PD and their follow ups.No comparison actually!
They left her in a deserted roadside type diner most of the night and with a hungry baby!See my posts on these lazy red necks.
She was 'hysterical,'said the desk Officer, when she came in to his unkempt little station.She and the baby had been dropped off by some people that found them by the roadside(good place for a pregnant woman with an infant at that late hour in the cold-but,of course,when you torch your junker,including all the babies clothes, no sacrifice is too great!)he told a reporter for the Modesto Bee and that he had to 'calm her down.'But,when she saw that wanted poster(the second picture) of Zodiac,according to the Officer, she literally 'screamed and wept' that that was the man who abducted her.
You simply can't expect a witness to get every detail correct and in the exact order in this kind of a situation.That can take awhile.
I was the first to get the PD reports through a detective who lived and worked in the area for many years,and I can only say,if he doesn't kill me(!),that they did not conduct professional interviews(I do wish I could have gotten the desk Officers 'report'though).
KJ told me they left certain things out she told them and I can say this-they did NOT want to upgrade to a kidnap for various reasons.You can believe what you wish.
The main facts are in the reports(I have read them dozens of times),even though there are well placed gaps that leave it appear that it may not have been a kidnap.
"I now have a little list,starting with the woeman & her baby that I gave a rather interesting ride for a coupple howers one evening a few months back that ended in my burning her car where I found them."

By Tom Stout (Tom_Stout) (dialup- - on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 06:37 am:

Any good cross examiner would pounce on the contradiction!
"She and her husband had no insurance"
"as she said,it would have been a lot easier to torch the car in the San Bernadino area where she lived if she wanted the insurance money"
Did she have insurance or not?
It would have mattered to a jury!

She did such a good job looking around her abductors car for 2 hours, she saw kids clothing
gum wrappers and scowering pads.
Did she see a can of gasoline?
A gun? A gun with a flashlight taped to it?
Rope? A knife? Gloves?
If it was Z, I guess he's slipping with experience.

How about baby Jennifer?
The "crying baby". Because they were so lucky that someone was watching over them that night
she never cried after being taken out in the middle of the night, with her pregnant mother holding her close to her heart, running for her life and her kids life in the middle of the pitch black night on uneven ground? That baby didn't feel her mommies heart racing with fear for their lives? Her baby didn't start crying?

Where was Kathleen's husband and father of her kids during this time?
Following them in another car perhaps?

By Tom Stout (Tom_Stout) (dialup- - on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 08:02 am:

BTW: A jury often decides if a defendant should live or die, without ever having a chance to interview them first.

By Julia (Julia) (user-2ivfnpf.dialup.mindspring.com - on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 10:32 am:

Well, Tom, if I were a potential kidnapper/murderer/arsonist, I do believe I'd keep my more obvious tools of the trade in the trunk. Especially cans of gasoline. Makes it a little easier going if the CHP pulls you over.

Not to mention--I don't know about you, but I can't see what's tucked behind my seat very easily from the passenger's perspective. But the driver can reach whatever's there if he needs to, though.

So--rather than discussing this endlessly, here's what I think. It could have been a scam. Or not. You were an insurance investigator; you know how the biz works, and you probably still have contacts and/or know how to investigate a case, even a cold one like this. So, how would you go about checking Kathleen out? Is it possible? Because we can haggle till the cows come home, but I'd like to know, at least, if she had insurance and if she tried to file a claim. Is this something you'd be able to find out?

By the way, unless you've raised a kid and have firsthand experience it's a little pointless to theorize. They often do not behave the way you'd expect. Until my best friend had a child a couple of years ago and I became very much involved from the first, I'd never had any experience of infants or small kids. No siblings, nieces, nephews, NOTHING.

I've seen my goddaughter, when confronted with a threat, go extremely quiet and watchful--yet I'd have guessed she'd start screaming, as she's very noisy normally. Kids also can sleep really hard. Even when she was an infant, you could practically set a bomb off in the next room and I swear, she would not wake up. Just FYI...I seem to recall KJ said the baby was sleeping.

This is totally irrelevant, but there's one thought that's always perversely amused me about this whole scenario. Small infants need to nurse fairly frequently and don't usually sleep for more than several hours straight. Now, even today, many folks are made uncomfortable by the sight of a woman breastfeeding her baby. If that really was Z, I'd think HE would've been thoroughly disturbed and squidgy even at the mere possibility.

By Tom Stout (Tom_Stout) (dialup- - on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 11:22 am:

You wrote "Unless you've raised a kid and have first hand experience, it's a little pointless to theorize".
I agree with this statement 100%
You have experience with your best friend's kid.
I am a Father of a 7 year old girl and 4 year old boy. I bet I have changed a few thousand more diapers then you have.
P.S. Did Zodiac keep his gun in the trunk?

By Julia (Julia) (user-2ivfnpf.dialup.mindspring.com - on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 12:31 pm:

No idea about the gun--I didn't ride with him. Obviously sometimes he had one within reach! But in KJ's case, just because she did not see one does not mean it wasn't there.

Yes, I noticed you said you're a father. I'm very happy that you, not I, have been the changer of thousands of diapers! But I don't care if you agree with my statement or not--my point is, are all these questions you're throwing out here getting at something, or are you wanting to debate for debate's sake?

You may have the time to do that, but I don't, alas.

Can't speak for others, but I'm perfectly happy to question Kathleen's story already. So, your efforts to poke holes and point out inconsistencies are unnecessary. It's easy to debate; I'd like to see you demonstrate, illustrate, elaborate. Whenever you're ready to do that, I will be your enthusiastic audience.

And now...back to work. Ugh.

By Tom Stout (Tom_Stout) (dialup- - on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 06:22 pm:

Hi Julia!

I wouldn't have traded my diaper changing job with you for the world. Chalk it up to experience.

I also work full time while raising two kids with a lot of help from my wife so I know what you mean. When I find the time, I promise I will post my "theoretical synopsis" of the KJ "abduction" story from a claims examiner's angle.

And now . . . back to football! Yeah! (I'll work on Monday.)

By Classic (Classic) (cache-dr05.proxy.aol.com - on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 03:27 pm:

Regarding the verascity of K.J.'s story. If her story wasn't true, wouldn't that have ticked of z? Having some interloper horn in on his hard earned famed and all? After all z didn't like it when people made up stuff about him. He said so much in his letters. And it is possible that he shot Stine to prove that he could kill males after that had been brought into question.

And in the position K.J. was in, in life, why would she risk ticking off a still at large psycho killer? Classic

By Dave Juday (Dave_Juday) (h-64-105-36-66.snvacaid.covad.net - on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 08:22 am:

Kathleen Johns told only one story to the Sherrif's department on the morning of March 23, 1970. It makes sense to me, and I believe it. The reason is that it fits very well with the other cases. I know that she changed her story later, possibly several times.

She did not out run Zodiac. She didn't have to. He didn't come after her. On page one of the sherrif's report, it says that he closed the door and drove away. On page 4 it says " He did not leave the vehicle nor did he chase her. "

So, if there was no pursuit, why not? In BRS, Mageau says that Zodiac walked " casually " back to his car. On leaving the scene, he drove off at a high rate of speed, according to Mageau and another witness.

In LB, he walked " slowly " across the penninsula after the stabbings, according to RG's Zodiac. This must come from the footprints.

Now consider Pacific Heights. According to RG's Zodiac, he walked from the cab, he did not run. Even according to Eduard Versluijs' website, he walked " slowly " from the cab. This must come from the three teenagers.
Jake Wark's website quotes Officer Foukes, "Subject at no time appeared to be in a hurry walking with a shuffling lope..." He was in a hurry, but he appeared not to be in a hurry. This was one of the times when it was much better to have luck than ability. If he had been running, the cops probably would hve stopped him. But the shuffling lope was as fast as he could go.
Both Eduard Versluijs and Jake Wark are strongly anti-Allen. They should read up on Allen. If they do, they will find that Arthur Allen had bad feet.

By Lapumo (Lapumo) (p51-72.as1.clm.clonmel.eircom.net - on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 09:55 am:

I'm not so sure about John's but excellent point Dave,especially when we consider what happened after the Stine murder.According to the witnesses Zodiac looked up at them.He knew he was seen. They report him walking slowly away.
Yet when he turned the corner on Cherry st (out of sight)his pace apparently did not increase.
He hadn't the ground covered by the time the officers seen him.

By Howard Davis (Howard) ( - on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 12:16 pm:

Right,but wrong.Zodiac actually CHASED Betty Lou Jensen and shot her about 28 feet from the car!
If Z was involved at SB,or det.Bills case(and believe he was)then we have another example of Z chasing his victim/s.Evidence that Bill has presented on this site in the past seems to show that the killer ran after his victims down the stream bed and shot both of them.
So why couldn't he run after KJ just as she told me he did?
You are trusting detectives that didn't bother to even take simple notes when she was being interviewed!And they didn't bother to follow up on anyhing except for a man who tried to wave down two locals off the road near where Johns was abducted and near the same time as the event.
They never found this mysterious man.

By J Eric (J_Eric) (dsl081-238-156.lax1.dsl.speakeasy.net - on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 12:36 pm:

I feel that Z was somewhat unprepared for the KJ episode, that it was an "afterthought" following other events he had done in the area that day. Perhaps that's how the story played out as it did. He wanted to "mark" the fact he was on Route 132, not necessarily kill KJ, which presumably he could have done just where he stopped her car.

By Lapumo (Lapumo) (p51-180.as1.clm.clonmel.eircom.net - on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 02:54 pm:

How has it been established that Zodiac actually CHASED Betty?

By Tom Voigt (Tom_Voigt) (12-224-139-118.client.attbi.com - on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 01:33 am:

Unfortunately, even if Kathleen was telling the truth, there is still no proof that the Zodiac was her abductor...despite what he wrote a few months later.

By Tom Stout (Tom_Stout) (dialup- - on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 08:51 am:

It's my understanding that Zodiac only told what was reported in the media. No inside info on the tools used for this "crime" such as name brand of gum wrappers, or sizes of kids clothing.

I do understand why Z would take credit for this. It's risk free, free advertisement. I'm still out there! I'm still your boogyman! Z knew that whoever this flake is that made this up, could never finger him in a police line up. Why is there no composite sketch of Kathleen's "abductor"?
It is an alibi handed to him on a silver platter.

J Eric,
Now there's a plan for a wanted serial killer! Pick up an EYE witness, drive her around for a couple of hours so she can stare at your face and then drop her off to go to the police!
If Z wanted to "mark" his spot on HWY 132 he would have been better off peeing on a tree on the side of the road.
Wish I had more time,
Gotta run!

By Mike (Oklahoma_Mike) ( on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 08:57 am:

In regards to chasing or not chasing in the various "Zodiac" crime scenarios let us remember that over 2 yrs. passed between LHR and Kathleen Johns, and over 6 yrs. between the Santa Barbara killings (I'm with you onthis Howard, I strongly suspect it was Zodiac). Health in regard to being able to run can change drastically in the sametime period. One of my knees went bad so fast that in 2 yrs. I went from running a half-marathon (13.1 mi.) in 2 hrs. 4 min. to having arthroscopic surgery just so I could walk at a fairly fast walk without limping. Z, especially if he was heavy, certainly had time to develop health problems with feet or legs that would have prevented a chase in one instance when he had chased with deadly effect in the earlier crimes. (For the record, I know Ms. Johns is only a possible Zodiac victim, but as it is not ruled out I keep an open mind),

By Scott Bullock (Scott_Bullock) (cache-ntc-af07.proxy.aol.com - on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 10:18 am:

I'm going to chime in with the KJ detractors on this one. Abducting a lone woman with a baby, driving her around for 2-3 hours, then allowing her to escape unscathed doesn't resemble Zodiac's MO or signature in the slightest. That he would take credit for it via the media, on the other hand, does reek of Zodiac's signature.

For the record, I'm not saying that KJ and her baby weren't abducted that night; just that if she was, THE FACTS do not support the notion that Zodiac was her abductor.

By Dave Juday (Dave_Juday) (h-64-105-36-66.snvacaid.covad.net - on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 01:11 pm:

I think Zodiac deliberately altered his mo in order to confuse and suprise the cops. Also, K. Johns is similar to Riverside, in that the perp disabled a single woman's car at night and then offered to help her. (I ralize that a lot of people don't agree that Zodiac was responsible for Riversied. I believe that he was - " rh " means " Arthur " .)

As to Zodaic chasing Jensen, she may have been shot and then run the 28 feet where she dropped.

By Scott Bullock (Scott_Bullock) (cache-ntc-af07.proxy.aol.com - on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 01:40 pm:

"I think Zodiac deliberately altered his mo in order to confuse and surprise the cops."

Can you think of a single other instance in which Zodiac allowed a female he attacked to live? When Z took credit for the incident, why didn't he provide facts that 'only he and the cops would know' like he did with LHR and BRS? Instead, everything he took credit for had been published in the paper prior to his taking credit for it. Sorry, but it just doesn't add up. The Zodiac didn’t abduct KJ, not if we glean what we can from the facts as they stand.

By Ed N. (Ed_N) (acc3364b.ipt.aol.com - on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 02:11 pm:

I don't want to be picky, Mike, but it was 15 months between LHR and KJ...

By Tom Stout (Tom_Stout) (dialup- - on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 07:12 pm:

Can someone explain to me why there is no composite sketch of Kathleen's "abductor"?
Or is that another tough question to be ignored?

The composite sketch that Kathleen identified as her "abductor" looks to me like Mr.Potato head without the hat and mustache.

By Tom Voigt (Tom_Voigt) (12-224-139-118.client.attbi.com - on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 07:24 pm:

Tom, your questions aren't being ignored because they are tough. In fact, many can be answered by doing a bit of research.

Your latest question is rather easy to answer: since Kathleen identified her "attacker" from the existing Zodiac sketch, there was no reason to draw him again.

By Tom Stout (Tom_Stout) (dialup- - on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 07:44 pm:

I find it hard to believe that she couldn't get any extra details after staring at his face for two hours while the kids in the window and the two cops in SF who saw him for seconds were able to provide detailed information.

Tough questions? Go to the scam thread and tell me if you think that scenario is POSSIBLE.

By Tom Stout (Tom_Stout) (dialup- - on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 07:54 pm:

Ah, sorry Tom
Don't mean to sound "snotty"
My apologies

By Linda (Linda) (208-59-124-192.s192.tnt1.frdr.md.dialup.rcn.com - on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 10:43 pm:

I think that if KJ was abducted by the Zodiac, he was taken aback by the fact that she carried a baby and was pregnant...something I doubt he expected when seeing her in the car. Once she and the baby were in the car with him, he wasn't really quite sure he knew what to do or how to exactly handle the situation (with the baby there), so he just hesitated and continued to intimidate her for a couple of hours. Then she bravely made her move to get out of the car. He followed and called to her only to hear someone nearby (the truckdriver); he departed then. He was probably actually pleased that someone else came along to get him out of a situation he may not have been completely sure how to handle. I doubt that KJ would have lived very long had she been alone and without the baby. If this was Z, I do think KJ's extra little "packages" may have saved her life. Does it mean the Z had some compassion did motherhood throw a wrench in his plans? Hmmm... just another speculative thought...

By Nick (Nick) ( on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 12:30 am:

How could Zodiac go from dispassionately blowing folk's brains out to giving a care about this woman's paternal situation? It doesn't seem to fit. Then again, Zodiac could be a grand exception to the rule.

By J Eric (J_Eric) (dsc02-ahi-ca-4-109.rasserver.net - on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 01:26 am:

Again, not perhaps the best source but: there is NO MENTION of a weapon in Zodiac's possession by Graysmith in the Johns abduction. Did Z even show KJ a weapon? He may have spent the "couppla howwers" driving around thinking of just how to do her in. If it was an intent to murder--it was bungled from the start, not the usual Z way of handling things. Hence my thought that there was an ulterior motive going on here.

To Tom Stout: your comment (1/14/03 8:51 AM)bears merit, but, hey, letting KJ look at his face for 2 hours didn't get Z caught by the police, did it?

By Lapumo (Lapumo) (p51-29.as1.clm.clonmel.eircom.net - on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 03:17 am:

At this time or shortly thereafter Bruce Davis came under suspicion. There were also wanted posters out for his arrest.The Manson story were all over the papers.One has to ask why it took years later for her to identify him.

By Muskogee (Muskogee) (216-19-219-89.getnet.net - on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 07:35 am:

I've been away for over a week, so let me address a couple of issues.

First of all, eyewittnesses OFTEN change their stories over time, especially over years. Ask any investigator (Bill?).

There was a psychology study done in San Francisco right after the '89 earthquake (I learned this back in undergrad, so I appologize that I don't have a reference here). They asked people where they were during the 'quake a week after it occured. They asked the same people again a year later and the MAJORITY of people asked had changed their location (and swore by it)!

Second, it is NOT uncommon to stare at someone while being abducted and fail to notice every detail! Again, any investigator will tell you this has happened in at least some of the cases he/she worked.

By Tom Stout (Tom_Stout) (dialup- - on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 07:40 am:

In regards to my Kathleen Johns "scam/hoax" theory, I'm only throwing it out there for consideration. I have no idea what happened that night. Kathleen Johns was the only one who really knew what happened that night.
In my opinion, she has so many accounts for all her accounts that all her accounts are bankrupt.

By Mike (Oklahoma_Mike) ( on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 05:32 pm:

Nick, regarding your question, and I paraphrase, "how could Z go from blowing brains out to feeling compassion for a pregnant woman with a kid?", the answer is quite easily. In one of John Douglas' books about serial killers he describes just such a case in which a killer hijacked a car with a single woman (intended victim and typical MO for this killer) only to find her preschool child was asleep inthe back. He let them go, and this was a break in the case leading to his capture. He told Douglas he knew if he went through with his plan and killed the mother he would have to kill the child and could not do that! As strange as it may sound, such idiosyncratic thinking is not rare among criminals, as the pecking order in prison has those who harm children on the bottom. A person who did all manner ofhorrors to adults will proudly proclaim, "I AIN'T NO CHILD MOLESTER OR KILLER".

By Mike_D (Mike_D) (cache-dr05.proxy.aol.com - on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 08:49 pm:

I also wondered about an insurance hoax by KJ but don't think it's likely.Something about her obvious emotional and alchohol problems in later life makes me wonder if this incident left deep psychological scars.Just a feeling on my part,but I think she told the truth.
By the way has it ever occured to anyone that Z might have planned to not only burn her car but KJ herself.Perhaps a murder"by fire".
This a particularly sadistic act called a "torch murder".If anyone wanted to inflict pain AND get public attention thats one way to do it.
This actually happened to a woman carjacked in England a few years back,and a woman in Boston some years ago.Z might have found the idea of killing he and her child too much even for him!
Still burning the car might have eased his frustratons.
David Berkowitz lit more than 1500 fires in his day-could Zodiac have been a pyro?

By Nick (Nick) ( on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 12:52 am:

Mike, I'm aware of this. If you randomly studied 1000 stone-cold killers, I'll bet 999 would be repulsed at the thought of harming a child. There's always that one, however, who just seems to be genetically flawed. Zodiac just doesn't seem to be the type of individual who possessed a great deal of emotional sensitivity. In his writings, Zodiac seemed to have a pre-occupation with the wholesale massacre of children. He seemed to put a lot of time into designs and diagrams on how to carry this out. While it may have been a front to shock and confuse, he does exhibit signs of having a deep-seated hatred of children. If there had been a child in the car at LHR or BRS, I wonder if the outcome would have been any different.

By Linda (Linda) (208-59-124-222.s222.tnt1.frdr.md.dialup.rcn.com - on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 03:10 am:

I tend to disagree with the thought that Zodiac was pre-occupied with the massacre of children and with the probablility he was totally heartless. Yes, he indeed threatened about picking kiddies off the school bus, but I definitely agree that it was designed to inflict fear to the general public by threatening the most precious of subjects and the ones that would create the most horror and panic. But remember, he retracted this statement saying, "...if you cops think I'm going to take on a bus the way I stated I did, you deserve to have holes in your heads."

Coincidentally, this is something that Kaczynski himself did; his letter to the San Francisco Chronicle, June 27, 1995, threatened to blow up a plane, "The terrorist group, FC, called unabomber by the FBI is planning to blow up an airliner out of Los Angeles International Airport some time during the next six days..." and then retracted his statement just two days thereafter in a June 29th correspondence, "Since the public has a short memory, we decided to play one last prank to remind them who we are. But no, we haven't tried to plant a bomb on an airliner (recently)."

By Howard Davis (Howard) ( - on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 06:54 pm:

I am reminded of Mansons statement to certain of his followers saying,'we will have to start killing children and infants for Helter Skelter.'

By Howard Davis (Howard) ( - on Saturday, January 18, 2003 - 08:17 pm:

KJ said that there were childrens clothes in the car and colored cleaning pads and a rubber grip flashlight on the dash.
I think that if she wanted to depict someone like the Zodiacs car,she could have that gun on the dash(see my statetment below),no childrens clothes and instead of a messy interior with books and papers strewn in front and back-describe the driver as sloppy too.
Instead she described the driver as being neat and clean shaven with Navy style clothing.She could easily have the inside of the car match his dress and general appearence-or messy or sloppy.She did think to herself that 'the car is so disorganized, but he is dressed so neat.'
I think that he,like Zodiac at the Stine hit,carried his gun on his person.Why would you be occuppied with driving and allow your victim to grap a gun on the dash?Nope.

By Howard Davis (Howard) ( - on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 10:14 pm:

The loctions seem very tight as per our witness KJ.She says, "But,I didn't stop because it was dangerous out there[132 there's some good info on 132 on Goggle].I waited till I got to the freeway,then I stopped BY 5."GS says she pulled to the "edge of Maze Road near Interstate 5."
After he "fixed" her tire, "He went ahead and pulled back ON the freeway."
She then says after she got out of her wagon to inspect the wheel the stranger comes up and says, "I'll give you a ride to THE service station"[ARCO].
"Kathleen looked over his shoulder[good view of his height!]at a light down the road.Not MORE than a quarter of a mile away was an ARCO brightly illuminated ."
This matches her story to the detective and I.
Then she says,"I sat there in the dark cafe and explained to him where my car was,by the ARCO station...the sheriff radios back there was NO car there...They kept searching and then just a little while later it came back over the radio the car had been found on this OTHER road[Byrd Rd.],but all burned up."
I want to get back to 132 in March and gain a better perspective.I hope you can join me.
For some reason his remark about 'helping people and then they no longer need any more help' caused me to think of Rose Tashman (5/15/69).See my site under possible victims.

By Ed N. (Ed_N) (acacda6b.ipt.aol.com - on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 11:08 pm:

Howard, I suggest she was a little confused as to location, etc, mainly because I don't see Z (if he was acting alone, and that's the assumption I always go under) going to the trouble of putting her tire back on and driving east 2 miles from Chrisman Road to Bird Road. What I conclude then is that they stopped at Bird Road (which is about a mile west of I-5), and I believe from there, one can see the Unocal over at Chrisman. Since they at one point apparently drove through Tracy, I figure that her abductor (Z or not) drove west towards Chrisman and I-580, and then turned north. The Arco would have been the first thing she remembered passing, and after the 2-3 hour traumatic ordeal she and her daughter had just survived may have put the two events together, ie, stopping (at Bird Road) by the Arco (at Chrisman Road).

In support of this idea is that, if RG's account of her interview is to be trusted (and I bet he didn't go to the site to check it out firsthand or even bother to consult a map), and KJ stopped by I-5, then she couldn't possibly have been 0.25 miles from the Arco. She had to be at Chrisman Road to be at that distance from Arco. Perhaps she was confused as to the freeway designations, and what she meant is that she pulled over by I-580 and not I-5, but, if that was the case, why didn't she just continue the extra quarter mile to Arco in the first place? All this tells me is that she was simply mistaken as to the spot she pulled over, and if that's the case, I won't fault her for that error after her harrowing experience.

By Ed N. (Ed_N) (acc2c7ce.ipt.aol.com - on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 08:10 pm:

I found this today: The Nearby Cafe. Check out the 16th entry, that starts out with "The desk sergeant..."

By Mike (Oklahoma_Mike) ( on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 08:51 pm:

Re: Nearby Cafe--Now that may be more than Zynchronicity. When I mentioned the theory well over a year ago that Zodiac may have seen himself as a supervillian al la comic books those are the exact same supervillians I mentioned! Is the author quoted on that Nearby Cafe site one of us?

By Ed N. (Ed_N) (acbf805b.ipt.aol.com - on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 10:40 pm:

Mike: in all probability, I'd say it's you. I did a keyword search for "octopus" (I figured it wouldn't occur as many times as, say, "Allen"), but there were unfortunately no results.

By Howard Davis (Howard) (host-66-81-180-10.rev.o1.com - on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 11:56 pm:

I am open to both scenarios and defer to KJs account at this point.If there be one reason Zodiac would remove the car ,which was very near the freeway,it was to take it to a more remote area to burn ("By Fire")it as an act of revenge.
I deeply regret that we could not arrange for KJ to meet us at 132, as she said she would show us where the incident transpired and she allowed for us to film.It would have been quite an experience.As was her 'policy' she didn't want any money for it and nor did she request anything when we interviewed her on New Years day.She gave up time with her family to do the interview with us.On the same day Darlene Ferrins youngest sister, Christina, did the same.They were both very unselfish with their time.
In his Torture letter Zodiac says he is going to 'even the score'(even with his fantasy slaves)starting with the "woeman and her baby" and ,as you know,had a "list"(like CM)of victims he wanted to kill.
Interesting find on the cafe.Leave it to you!
I am in contact with a history buff in Patterson and she is checking on the incident.Her husband spoke to the late desk Officer that is mentioned on the site you pointed out.I think I mentioned this already!

By Roger Redding (Roger_Redding) (sdn-ap-008txhousp0299.dialsprint.net - on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 04:58 am:

The Octopus quote comes from www.crimelibrary.com (author Jake Wark).

By Howard Davis (Howard) ( - on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 09:54 pm:

Also,I think of CJB, when the driver told KJ in response to her question,'Do you always go around helping people like this?Then he says,'When I am through with them, they don't need any help.'
Those 'shiny' military dress shoes Kathleen saw the driver wearing ,also reminds me of the heel prints in the alley area at RCC that indicated the shoes worn by the perp were military dress shoes!Along with a military Timex from a PX in ol' Great Britain.