The woman & baby Zodiac terrorized Message Board: Other Possible Zodiac Victims: Kathleen Johns: The woman & baby Zodiac terrorized

By Emmy (Emmy) ( - on Tuesday, August 29, 2000 - 12:14 am:

(I tried posting the below when I first found this site & it disappeared, now that I've got a password I'll hope this gets through)

Forgive me for not knowing her name (my books are packed away) but the girl with the baby whose car was sabotaged and was taken on that long drive by Zodiac and terrorized ...she got away by diving out of his car? ...she came into the police station & saw the composite of Zodiac hanging on the wall & said "That's him!"

She IS one of the very few who saw him up close & personal who survived, and with the instantaneous ID at the police station with just a composite one would think she would be excellent at a photo or a live line-up!

Was she EVER used to try to ID any of the suspects?

By Tom Voigt ( - on Tuesday, August 29, 2000 - 12:21 am:

Why don't you browse the site and find out?

By Emmy (Emmy) ( - on Tuesday, August 29, 2000 - 09:12 pm:

LOL well that's a thought! (Actually I *thought* I did, oops! ;)

By Tom Voigt ( - on Tuesday, August 29, 2000 - 09:15 pm:

Kathleen Johns has her own page. You can find it by clicking on The Victims link.

By Howard (Howard) ( - on Saturday, January 27, 2001 - 02:38 am:

Just thinking about the interview Johnnie Smith and I had with Kathleen Johns where she indicated the man who abducted her seemed to be living out of his car and the interior was extremely messy and yet, he was so neat in appearence.I know this fits my guy perfectly at the time.Also,Family cars had "clothes piles" and yes, just like KJ saw, there would be the Families' children's clothes mixed in with the adults .She told us she distinctly saw kids clothing mixed in with adult clothing.The colored scouring pads Johns saw on the dash were, as she said ,"kitchen things" which seemed out of place-Family car to a T.One little thing she suddenly remembered after all those years-she saw gum wrappers all over the floor of the car.Just a point of interest ,and to show this 'stranger'seemed as though he was someone that was living out of his car and was just tossing ,clothes,books, papers,etc. all over the car.A thought -do the three incidences- in Santa Rosa ; incidences of a young man in a white 62-4' chevy(as seen on Lake Herman road?)following three separate women on the 15th of March 70'between 3:00-4:00 am ;and on March 17th the woman from Vallejo that was in route to Travis AF Base and later reported that a man drove up behind her, at night,and began honking his horn and blinking his lights trying to get her to stop ,but she was able to drive at such speed she lost him.My question is: does this show that Z,if it was him, was seeking out a victim in March of 1970 , and that he did pull up behind KJ in similar fashion to the Travis bound motorist with blinking lights and honking horn trying to get her to pull over and in this case it worked? Does this lend credibility to her story in the light of the aforementioned incidences-and maybe ,the light colored late model car with black bucket seats KJ told me she viewed,and rode in, was of the same make as the car the four women saw and possibly, the same make at LHR-as those makes looked alike in that year range 60-4'.Does the whole thing link? Note to that all were women he was following and then there was KJ on the "One 909"/99.FYI

By Howard (Howard) ( - on Saturday, January 27, 2001 - 02:47 am:

Actually, the One After 909/99...that was 132!;and then the Long and Winding Road.Check out the lyrics sometime-Manson did ,to plan his crimes!See if it fits March 22,1970.FYI. While you're' doin' that check Day Tripper for the LB thing.

By Bruce Monson (The_Adversary) ( - on Saturday, January 27, 2001 - 09:10 pm:

and on March 17th the woman from Vallejo that was in route to Travis AF Base and later reported that a man drove up behind her, at night,and began honking his horn and blinking his lights trying to get her to stop ,but she was able to drive at such speed she lost him.

If this was mentioned before I must have missed it. Howard, can you elaborate on this other story? Was it something reported in a newspaper editorial, or in a police report?

Incidentally, I have always found Johns' mention of the various clothing contents of her abductor's car to be compelling--it doesn't strike me as information one would just make up off-the-cuff.


Bruce Monson

By Jud Johnston (Jud) ( - on Saturday, March 24, 2001 - 08:34 pm:

A few thoughts occur to me on this incident. 1) Pictures I've seen of Bruce Davis don't resemble the Zodiac composite that I assume we're talking about; the one with light hair and glasses. 2) If this composite was such a good likeness for Johns' abductor, why wasn't he I.D'd by other people? (Yes, I know about his statement about his disguise.) 3) It had bothered me that Zodiac would spend so much time riding around aimlessly. Why not go ahead and do his thing? I finally realized that this might represent an escalation of the amount of time spent with the victim. A few minutes at Berryessa. Then a few minutes inside the cab with Stine. Now and hour and a half with Johns. Was this a way of increasing the excitement and pleasure?

By Howard Davis (Howard) ( - on Tuesday, March 27, 2001 - 02:03 am:

Jud-Christina ,Darlene's younger sister, and the last family member to see her alive has testified on tape and on video-which I am the exclusive owner-that the man her sister was "arguing" with at Terry's parking lot(the evening of 7/4/69) looked identical to Bruce Davis.

She has given more details about that night. Christina said that Darlene and her got out of the car and were walking over to this man in a light colored car, but Darlene turned around and told Chris to go back to the car. She was about 20 feet away from the man ,whom she had gotten a good look at, and it was the same man she had seen at least three times in daytime beginning around May of '69.

While Chris sat in the car she did not hear all what was being said between Darlene and the man ,but she heard her sister "cuss him out" for following her around and that she 'was with her sister that won Miss Firecracker and that it was her special night and for him not to bother them.'

When Darlene got back to the car she was "upset", but indicated to Christina that it "was her night" and she wanted it to be "special." Darlene would not talk about the argument and she then took Chris home. Christina admits that she was 'excited about winning the title' and a lot of things were going through her mind that night and while in the car, she was not focused on all that was being said. Her"big sister"was having a serious talk with a man she knew.She figured Dee would tell her about the episode when she got back ,but she wouldn't.

I can already hear some posters trying to discount Christina's testimony and this is their right. Well, the reason she did not communicate all this information is very simple-she was awakened late at night with the news that her idol Darlene was murdered! While being questioned she said she was in a state of shock and could not articulate all she knew.She realizes now the detectives were trying to fit their own spin on the events of that day and Darlene's life,etc. She only realized how important the man in the car was some years later.Contrary to some,she decided not to 'go all over-including talk shows, and to her credit, could have a gotten some celebrity and talked about the murder, but she did not.She had some reasons for this stance at the time .Remember, she was stunned over her sister's murder, but over the years she began thinking more about it and things came back. This is not unusual to be sure.

You can e-mail me and we can discuss it.I believe she is a truthful person and was,unlike the critics that weren't in that lot that night and saw the man in the car during the day time at close range, an eyewitness.Christina is intelligent and is a professional holding a responsible position.Her husband is an intelligent person and knows her story and believes her. I and a detective were privileged to interview her New Years Day 1998 ,and found her to be credible, much more so than a person who claimed to have interviewed her in the past.It does not matter how she reacted and what she has said over the years they will reject her statements. I wish they could talk to her instead of criticizing and judging her.
It can be said that I accept her testimony because she claims that my suspect was the man she saw talking to her sister. Wrong!I would affirm the same things about her character regardless of who she said she saw that night.I just wanted to know details about Darlene and since she was WITH Darlene(unlike the critics!)just a few minutes before her death -about 45 minutes or so,I thought it was worth giving up New Years celebrating for.

We interviewed Kathleen Johns that same day and we all know she leans towards 'Kane' as her abductor 3/22/70, but I still believe she is a good witness regardless of the critics who weren't in the car that night. This is what being a witness is all about -they were THERE and tell what they know and since we were NOT there we decide if we believe their testimony.I will say this though. Kathleen told us after seeing Bruce Davis's pictures that from the side and front too, (she saw the abductor mostly from a profile view as he was driving) he looks very close to the man she was with that night.She also upon seeing Davis's photos said "very interesting"as he looked like the man she was with. You don't have to believe me,I have it on tape and I was with a detective that witnessed her statement also. I will not press this as she is committed to Harvey Hines' suspect and that is fine with me.I will stay by her claims Kane or no Kane. I do have the satisfaction that Davis is the first suspect since her ID of Kane that she found of interest-she has rejected the others out of hand.Again, I HAVE THIS ON TAPE.There is a lot more-you can contact me if you wish.

By Bryan (The_Giant) ( on Tuesday, March 27, 2001 - 07:38 am:

Please email me your site? Also you you have a comparison photo with Bruce Davis and the different skeches? Please instead of giving 20 pages of theory just email me the hyperlinks

By Tom Voigt (Tom_Voigt) ( - on Tuesday, March 27, 2001 - 10:58 am:

Bryan, why don't you visit other pages of my site, such as "Zodiac Killer Links?" Howard has been linked there for months.

By Jud Johnston (Jud) ( - on Tuesday, March 27, 2001 - 12:28 pm:

But Bruce Davis still didn't look like that composite. Neither did Kane, for that matter. I'm really not saying (in this post) that Davis wasn't Zodiac, or that Davis wasn't her abductor. I'm trying to understand the apparent contradiction in Johns' statements. She (supposedly) starts up in fear when she sees the composite on the wall, because it looks exactly like her abductor. Later, she I.D.'s Kane and says Davis is close. Neither resembles the composite, even superficially. So her ID of Kane is in contradiction with her earlier ID of Zodiac. I would like to see this informational conflict resolved.

By Howard Davis (Howard) ( - on Thursday, March 29, 2001 - 12:12 am:

Jud- Zodiac expert Dave Peterson(who was with the case since 12/20/68) thought there was a resemblance and so did his artist wife.

I had an anatomical artist technician -one of the best in a very specialized field who worked for Xerox do transparencies of pictures of Bruce Davis and the Zodiac composites ,and when you overlap them they match almost perfectly! The technician freely admitted the basic bone structure and facial contours were an "excellent match." Like handwriting you don't compare each letter to other letters only ,but one scrutinizes a wide number of points for comparison and the same holds true in this kind of comparative anatomical work.

Zodiac said he looked "entirely different" without his disguise, but even so,there would be some identifiable factors that someone like Johns would notice CLOSE UP with about two hours time to do so. She was trying to remember all she could even though she was terrified at the time. Harnell had the same goal in mind at LB.

The man in the car and the man on the wall looked enough alike to give her notice it was probably the same guy-the crew cut and glasses and overall features lead in this direction.

By Howard Davis (Howard) ( - on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 03:06 am:

In regard to the criticism of Kathleen Johns account of her abduction(3/22/70) and her not giving a picture perfect testimony, I site the following from an article in a local paper,the Modesto Bee (guess it is "Condit country"!),that came out just after the attack and was based on personal testimony from the "officer"-and I use the term loosely- that took Johns report that night at the Patterson PD station.

It is as follows:"Sgt.[Charles]McNatt SAID he had just QUIETED her[Johns] HYSTERICAL CRYING when she[Johns]saw the Zodiac killer drawing on a wall poster and said,"That's the man.That's the man!McNatt said she had several good looks at her captor,since he had walked in front of her headlights"(EMP mine).

Johns said that "she told the man that she was going to be sick and jumped out of the car with the baby in her arms".This -that Johns said she was sick-is a point of interest,but not widely known.A pregnant woman would ,of course, be subject to this common malady and she seems to have used it as an excuse to bail!

Johns,according to McNatt, said that the man hardly said anything and did not threaten her or her baby.

Kathleen told me she did tell the police that the driver did threaten her just as she recounted for Graysmith- and us.Looking back on the scene that night we find she was in a state of "hysteria" and was weeping which I think indicates she was threatened.Also, since she was so emotional she may not have said or expressed correctly,all that happened ,at least to everyone's satisfaction.

This would be due to her trauma at that time.She was 7 months pregnant and holding a 10 month old infant and was tired and hungry.Later,when this wears off over a period of time some facts do emerge.

By Howard Davis (Howard) ( - on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 12:16 pm:

Another add-Kathleen told me she did tell the police that the driver did NOT threaten her during the ride.It was LATER ON ,at least 30 or so minutes, he BEGAN to say -in a flat monotone 'You know you are going to die-you know I am going to kill you...and ...I want to throw the baby out.'She has said her 'head was swimming 'at this point or that she was 'very scared ;so perhaps she never fully brought this very traumatic part of the 'journey out as she should have due to post traumatic factors at THAT TIME.

Hartnell has added details and in some cases omitted them in his testimonies when one views all of them together .In spite of variations they are consistent as to the main points,etc.Talk about "bizarre"!At least the police interviewed him at numerous times so they could get a fuller story- the police ,in Johns case -did not!They are to be faulted.

Imagine someone who seemed to have been abducted by the Zodiac and she was hardly interviewed at all by S.F.(Toschi sent along some photos or mugs all of which she rejected as being too old and not a match.I don't know if Allen was in that batch which I hope he didn't strain himself sending!), Napa,Vallejo or none of the Federal Agencies.

Pathetic.Yet, everyone seems to jump on Kathleen and not a word is said about the poor police work.I hope they weren't turned off because her description did not fit Allen(?).
I think if Johns had given such a story -a man in a hooded costume,etc. she really would have been disbelieved!

Kathleens friend (a fellow nurse)did tell me though that 'Kathleen did tell the police the man threatened her.'She felt that the police just didn't know what to make of the whole -as the Bee called it- bizarre incident.

By Douglas Oswell (Dowland) ( - on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 02:42 pm:

Kathleen appears to be the hysterical type, which doesn't make for a very good eyewitness. The same is true for Hartnell, who speaks in a manner that I can only describe as "schizoid," i.e., his thoughts fly about all over the place. It's no wonder either of the two has been misunderstood and misinterpreted.

By Sylvie (Sylvie14) ( - on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 04:42 pm:

And both of these two are perfectly consistent and coherent when compared to the curious, ever-changing accounts by Mike Mageau.

By Tom Voigt (Tom_Voigt) ( - on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 04:57 pm:

Sylvie, you should put that yellow book down for a while.

Mageau has not been inconsistent.
Ever since he first spoke to the responding officers, then later to the news media, Mageau has stressed that:
1) He didn't get a good look at the shooter
2) It was very hard to see
3) The shooter said nothing
4) He didn't know or recognize the shooter

If you want to lose an arguement, start a new thread. This one is about Johns.

By Howard Davis (Howard) ( - on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 08:05 pm:

Mageau was consistent in this regard and Toms list remains as accurate.He said that the man was about :"about26-30 years old(""young"),was "heavy set","short"or "about 5'8"",between 160 -200+ lbs.,"very large face"("only saw the "profile"),no glasses,clean shaven or no mustache,white male,and further affiant saith not...

By Sylvie (Sylvie14) ( - on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 09:56 pm:

Then he looked at Allen many, many years later and bizarrely shouted "Thats him", when it directly contradicted his own previous testimony.
Sorry, Tom, I thought that was in the VPD report.
Okay, back to Kathleen.