Zodiackillersite.com

I agree with that, masootz.

It makes Kaczynski a more likely suspect than many others for obvious reasons.

That said, of the many others (and there are indeed many), most are completely useless as suspects in my opinion, so it doesn't take much to be above THAT level

Thanks for the thorough reply, AK!

As mentioned in the desktop thread, I have some problems with the red herring angle: It does indeed make sense to plant a herring here and there to confuse your pursuers - and the general similarity between Ted and Z in that regard is worth pointing out, no doubt.

I just don't see the desktop poem as a very likely herring - that is my main problem here. If the poem was written by Z - as Sherwood Morrill thought - then I have to say the likeliest explanation with regard to provenance is that Z wrote the poem "innocently" rather than as an intended red herring. It makes little sense to me to plant a deliberately misleading clue in a form which can easily be misunderstood (many have regarded the poem as being written by a typical teenager rather than a serial killer) and in a place where it can conceivably remain undetected for decades, not to say forever.

Just my take on it, of course.

masootz wrote:good work mr wilks. you make a compelling argument and i'd like to add a thought i had after reading your post - even if kaczynski is NOT the zodiac, it seems to make sense to put effort into proving/disproving his involvement since we know for a fact he's a serial killer.

a lot of the personal POIs that folks on here have start with "my guy looks like the composite" or "my guy was arrested for something weird and worked near the murder", that type of stuff. with ted k we have someone we already know is a serial murderer and i think that's a rare chance to almost start from the other end for once - instead of trying to prove someone is a murderer, trying to prove a murderer committed a specific set of murders seems worth the effort to me. just my 2 cents.

Thanks very much for the comments!~ I appreciate them.

Yes I think Ted K is the best suspect and is head and shoulders above every other suspect. Ted K is the only major named suspect who is a known serial killer who was free (not in prison) to do all the killings and mailings. And as far as I know, the only major named suspect who - like Zodiac - designed bombs, made bomb threats, created elaborate codes the FBI could not break, used crossed lines inside a circle as a signature and as a mark left at a crime scene, had similar handwriting, shared many words and even phrases, knew of Deer Lodge MT and wrote to newspapers demanding his words appear on the front page or innocents would die.

Unfortunately I remain in the minority! At one point there were several active researchers and posters who had some level of interest in Ted K who frequently posted here - Ricardo, Linda, luke, Jem, Dreamnine, AweShucks and some others come to mind. But it seems lately work, family, other interests and/or lack of new developments in the case have caused most of them to post on Ted K with much less frequently. Darla Jones has brought some new info on Ted K to light and has posted a lot lately, and there are at any given time 5 - 8 others here with some interest in Ted, you will see their posts throughout the Ted K section. Of course Doug Oswell literally wrote the book on Ted as Z and has a great site http://www.unazod.com at which you can read excerpts from the book, order it and discuss all things related to the Unabomber and Zodiac at his message board. I post at the MB over there, as do Kite, Linda and others.

I appreciate all of those who do research on Z generally and Ted specifically, or who make comments and questions, pro, con or otherwise, about the possible Ted K connection to Zodiac, the Midwest murders or Tylenol. I wish more people would seriously look at Ted as Z and do research and post it here. But I am sure people with other POI's feel the same about their POI.

The best thread here to see the evidence for ted as Z is right here: viewtopic.php?f=102&t=938

And the incredible matches on handwriting and shared words and phrase are here: viewtopic.php?f=102&t=250

NORSE: I agree with that, masootz.

It makes Kaczynski a more likely suspect than many others for obvious reasons.

That said, of the many others (and there are indeed many), most are completely useless as suspects in my opinion, so it doesn't take much to be above THAT level

Thanks for the thorough reply, AK!

As mentioned in the desktop thread, I have some problems with the red herring angle: It does indeed make sense to plant a herring here and there to confuse your pursuers - and the general similarity between Ted and Z in that regard is worth pointing out, no doubt.

I just don't see the desktop poem as a very likely herring - that is my main problem here. If the poem was written by Z - as Sherwood Morrill thought - then I have to say the likeliest explanation with regard to provenance is that Z wrote the poem "innocently" rather than as an intended red herring. It makes little sense to me to plant a deliberately misleading clue in a form which can easily be misunderstood (many have regarded the poem as being written by a typical teenager rather than a serial killer) and in a place where it can conceivably remain undetected for decades, not to say forever.

Just my take on it, of course.

AK WILKS: I understand your point. And many agree with you. To me the poem clearly talks about killing someone - watching her blood flow away, someone will find her - and I think that is how the police interpreted it, not as a teen angst suicide poem. And the way it was found was funny IIRC. It seems it was already in storage and someone took it and wrote the poem on the UNDERSIDE of the desktop. So that would not have been a bored student in class. It was more likely someone trying to appear as a student in class. They took the desktop, which was separated from its chair, and by accident wrote on the bottom side. maybe someone can confirm that or disprove it but that is what I remember.

And again Z was smart enough to elude capture. IMO he would not leave such clear clues that he was a student and personally knew Bates - the desk poem, "Bates had to die", the "brush offs" over the years, etc. - if he really was a student and knew Bates. And police and researchers have certainly followed those clues and repeatedly looked at the local angle to no avail.

On a nuts and bolts level, TK does indeed seem to be the most logical candidate. Imho, however, he fails on a more intuitive level; his psychology doesn't align with the Zodiac killings as well. He's more reclusive; socially withdrawn and eschews personal contact when possible. Yes, he was more socially active at the time to the Zodiac killings, but probably only with extreme reluctance and painfully. The Zodiac, while a likely social inept, appears to have had more of a need to vent his anger directly on his victims, even if disguised by night or in costume, and incapable of deriving the same sense of satisfaction by sending bombs through the mail.

valleylife wrote:On a nuts and bolts level, TK does indeed seem to be the most logical candidate. Imho, however, he fails on a more intuitive level; his psychology doesn't align with the Zodiac killings as well. He's more reclusive; socially withdrawn and eschews personal contact when possible. Yes, he was more socially active at the time to the Zodiac killings, but probably only with extreme reluctance and painfully. The Zodiac, while a likely social inept, appears to have had more of a need to vent his anger directly on his victims, even if disguised by night or in costume, and incapable of deriving the same sense of satisfaction by sending bombs through the mail.

Read here viewtopic.php?f=102&t=938 for all the info on Ted as Z.

Read the psychology behind why Ted in 1966 said he was reborn and would now really kill his enemies and people he hated. The people he hated were not just bigshots but included lovemaking couples, promiscuous women and rowdy college students.

Ted did shoot a man at a mining site with a rifle, built a .22 wood gun for "homicide" purposes and wrote about killing a woman with a knife. Also, recall that after almost getting caught in SF, Zodiac did seem to turn away from up close and personal killing and DID get satisfaction by sending bomb and sniper threats in the mail.

Read here viewtopic.php?f=102&t=938 for all the info on Ted as Z.

Read the psychology behind why Ted in 1966 said he was reborn and would now really kill his enemies and people he hated. The people he hated were not just bigshots but included lovemaking couples, promiscuous women and rowdy college students.

Ted did shoot a man at a mining site with a rifle, built a .22 wood gun for "homicide" purposes and wrote about killing a woman with a knife. Also, recall that after almost getting caught in SF, Zodiac did seem to turn away from up close and personal killing and DID get satisfaction by sending bomb and sniper threats in the mail.

Undeniably, there is a compelling case for K as Z, and he remains near the top of my poi list; but I remain unconvinced. Yes, there are many unexplained coincidences, just as there are unexplained coincidences in the case for De Vere's authorship of Shakespeare, but I don't buy that one either.

K certainly had the requisite rage for such acts, and for the right people; was in the right places; right age; used similar words and phrases, at times unusually so; and was more than sufficiently cold-blooded. One could reasonably insist, moreover, that the future change in m.o. referenced by Zodiac in one of his missives, was later manifested in K's mail bombings. Or maintain without great offense to reason that being present at the crime scene was too personal for Z and mailings allowed for him to be one further and necessary remove from the carnage. As if this weren't enough, Z tantalizingly threatened to build bombs whilst K ranted at times about shooting and stabbing people with knives, an interesting overlap. It adds up. And on a purely rational level I can see why so many people believe K is Z.

On the other hand, it just doesn't feel right on an intuitive level. As vicious as both K and Z were, on the psychological level I get the feeling we are dealing with two different personalities. It's like comparing Hitler with Stalin. While each of them was capable of committing and did commit unimaginably heinous crimes, their motives for doing so and their personalities were very different; I get the same sense here. With Ted, it seems less about his desire for notoriety and more about exacting revenge against a society into which he didn't fit. That is, Ted seems to have killed more for a genuine pathological hatred of people and society than the Zodiac did, imo.

Zodiac's killings seem more attention directed/motivated, and betray a likely rational in the absence of a deep psychosis (which I do not believe to be the case) for creating the Zodiac persona. It's a matter of degree, of course. There are strong elements of each of these characteristics in every one of the crimes tied to one or the other of them. That is, I'm sure Ted basked in the attention his crimes brought him and Zodiac was certainly striking out at society, but the motive primary to each of them, imo, differed in this respect.

I like TK as Z in a lot of areas (code ability smarts, proximity, time line, psycho (but I am not sure Z was that crazy) etc)...the one area he falls short on is CJB and domingos/edwards..i am not so sure tk had anything to do with the desktop poem..how much truth I place on Z stating his "riverside activities" is somewhat less than 50 truthfulness...i guess I just do not see any explicit evidence links for TK to riverside and the Z link is not explicitly known either..I do not know how to tie in Z or TK for that matter to D/E..i dunno..TK is a worthy POI..i guess my only negative view on AK is he is probably not as cute as DJ...all you guys have done excellent work on TK...

I guess the one big push for me was that hood found in the cabin of TK..no other POI can claim that

AK Wilks wrote:I understand your point. And many agree with you. To me the poem clearly talks about killing someone - watching her blood flow away, someone will find her - and I think that is how the police interpreted it, not as a teen angst suicide poem. And the way it was found was funny IIRC. It seems it was already in storage and someone took it and wrote the poem on the UNDERSIDE of the desktop. So that would not have been a bored student in class. It was more likely someone trying to appear as a student in class. They took the desktop, which was separated from its chair, and by accident wrote on the bottom side. maybe someone can confirm that or disprove it but that is what I remember.

And again Z was smart enough to elude capture. IMO he would not leave such clear clues that he was a student and personally knew Bates - the desk poem, "Bates had to die", the "brush offs" over the years, etc. - if he really was a student and knew Bates. And police and researchers have certainly followed those clues and repeatedly looked at the local angle to no avail.

I guess we can agree to disagree about the poem itself - to me it reads like a "suicide fantasy" more than anything else. But I can certainly see how it CAN be interpreted differently (and many do agree with your take on it, AK).

As for the placement of the poem and the circumstances in which it was discovered, you make a fair point. It is, however, easy enough to imagine a student (not Z but a regular, innocent student) either flipping the entire desk over after class or coming across it in storage. Plus, if the desktop itself was flippable (which it may have been - I can't remember whether it was or not), it would not have involved much of an effort to scratch the thing on the underside.

Now, lastly, I fully agree that the totality of Riverside (murder, poem, letter and notes) makes it problematic to see "Zodiac, the RCC student" as a plausible candidate. As such, "Z, the outsider who pretended to know Bates" is a better one, regarded in this light.

However, my own thoughts on the various parts of the Riverside equation tend to lead me in a slightly different direction. I think Morrill may have been wrong. But that's another debate - and it certainly doesn't pertain specifically to Ted K.

Norse - Good points. I also think the totality of the evidence points to Bates killer being an outsider. Now if Bates was killed by Z can and has been debated. The handwriting analysis by Morril and our own Trav were convincing to me, plus the use of 3 letters, plus the Z signature, etc.

valleylife - Well I can't really debate feelings. Unfortunately I think a lot of people don't "feel" like Ted is Z, in part because they think Ted was motivated primarily by politics and environmentalism. He was not. He records his urge to kill came from alienation, sexual frustration and a failed bid for a sex change operation in 1966, as I detailed above. He records he will really kill the people he hates, and he states that he hates LOVE MAKING COUPLES & ROWDY COLLEGE STUDENTS. Can it get more Zodiac like than that? For others I think they want Z to be an unknown and the case to be solved in some dramatic way. Ted already being known and locked up is for some anti-climatic.

All I can do is present facts and evidence. rational minds can be changed by compelling facts and evidence. Feelings generally are not changed by facts and evidence. But your feelings are valid to you. I am not going to try to change them. I can't.

Yes Snooter Ted is the only known serial killer, bomb designer, code creator who had a hand made hood in his cabin. To me incredible evidence that has not got enough attention. No major uspects have strong Riverside ties.



Snooter - Yes to me it is amazing that Ted had a flat top hand made hood with horizontal eye slits in his cabin. I don't think we are making too much of it, I think others are not making enough of it maybe. But I have learned over the years all you can do is research and present evidence. people will either find it significant or not. many people find my work on TK interesting and important. others do not. I have spent less and less time on the case, because there have not been any recent major developments and I don't want to feel like I am just repeating myself. People can either look and move on, or read and be inspired to do their own research. I think TK is the best suspect by far, but that is still a minority opinion.

valleylife - Well I can't really debate feelings. Unfortunately I think a lot of people don't "feel" like Ted is Z, in part because they think Ted was motivated primarily by politics and environmentalism. He was not. He records his urge to kill came from alienation, sexual frustration and a failed bid for a sex change operation in 1966, as I detailed above. For others I think they want Z to be an unknown and the case to be solved in some dramatic way. Ted already being known and locked up is for some anti-climatic.

All I can do is present facts and evidence. rational minds can be changed by compelling facts and evidence. Feelings generally are not changed by facts and evidence. But your feelings are valid to you. I am not going to try to change them. I can't.

Yes, I recognize the "anti-climactic" element in positively identifying K as Z and almost mentioned it in my original post. We all must be wary of falling into the trap of "protecting" our pet poi at all cost, yourself included. As far as what motivated K to kill, that is entirely debatable. One must take into account not only K's statements regarding the fact (which for a variety of reasons may conceal his true intentions), but also the nature of the crimes committed. What I'm saying is, that K and Z may only be dimly aware of what motivated them to kill (in spite of their claims or even beliefs to the contrary), beyond that of trying to give focus to their irrepressible rage.

The "feelings" I refer to are more psychological inferences drawn from the known behavior of the killers, not a superficial flight of fancy detached from deeper considerations. My skepticism regarding K as Z, moreover, is rooted more in the lack of incontrovertible evidence firmly tying K to the crimes, not psychological profiling per se; the evidence is compelling, not convincing. And the lack of convincing evidence beyond what may reasonably be assigned to chance linking K to these crimes is as much at the root of my skepticism as is the apparent dissimilarity in their underlying motivations.

What do you see as Ted's motivation vs. Zodiac's motivation?