PinkPhantom wrote:when POIs are based on handwriting alone I turn off. But when there is a suspect that circumstantially fits the bill to the extent that Ross has I think handwriting analysis is then interesting. It shouldn't be evidence of someone's involvement, but suggestive of their involvement in writing the Z letters. It helps build a case so to speak, but it isn't necessarily a credible science that is impenetrable to conjecture - not like DNA or fingerprints or a confession. Yes, Ross was known to use deceptive handwriting techniques or at least rumored to have used them, but I am not going to give him as much credit to say that he could pull it off perfectly without flaws and giving up some telltale signs of his own writing style. But Even then, any variations in the writing Ross presents whether as himself or if he was Z would make a test inconclusive, whether the variations were deliberate or not.
At any rate, it is interesting to study and compare IMHO when looking at a credible POI.
Here's my problem though:
1) LB car door writing shows that one had to write the message on the car door in a relatively quick amount of time for obvious reasons. The handwriting on that door is the same from the letters, so much that the "untrained" eye can see that. It must then be concluded that the other letters were written without the time-constraining obfuscation that would occur when trying to change your handwriting.
2) Therefore, even speculating that Ross (or any other POI) studied handwriting obfuscation is a completely moot point, as Z demonstrated that he doesn't actively partake in it via the door's handwriting.
3)
But when there is a suspect that circumstantially fits the bill to the extent that Ross has
Here's the thing though: Fit what bill? Ross looks like the composite, but how many other POI's look like the composite? In fact, how many individuals could we take out Ross's very own yearbook and say that
they also mirror the composite? I imagine many of us have looked over that same yearbook and many of us can agree that we could find many other people who look like the composite in that yearbook alone, much less all over SoCal at the time.
But what else? CBJ murder is
not a confirmed zodiac murder. In my personal opinion, there's more weight in the idea that Ross killed CBJ than committed the Zodiac killings. However, we still aren't sure of his alibi, but the alibi was apparently good enough for law enforcement.
As far as facts, and not speculation goes, the only
fact of Ross fitting the Z details is the fact that he looks like the composite. That's literally it. We cannot place Ross near any of the scenes or in any of the cities where the murders happened. In fact, as far as we know, Ross may have not even had access to the public in that timeframe. Ross, while an interesting character, doesn't exactly fit any sort of bill as far as Z goes. So far, all evidence that has been accumulated against Ross is nearly all speculation or circumstantial.
Do I think Ross was Z or the killer of CBJ? I'm not sure, because there are definitely parts about him that do need investigation to clear him of being a POI/suspect. I currently don't think there's any sort of evidence whatsoever that he was a participant in any of the events. Do I think that means don't investigate him? Of course not! If there was any evidence that he was in a mental institution at any given time during those murders, then it obviously drops him as a POI/suspect. We don't know if he was there during those times, which is why so many are investigating. However, my assertion is, that too much is invested in all these suspect's handwriting, when it real evidence could be found instead. How many POI's have "similar" handwriting to the letters? On top of that, how many people already believe the zodiac took means to purposefully change his handwriting? There can only be 1, of course. What explains all the similarities in all the other suspects writing with the zodiacs, then? I submit that these similarities are just typical similarities, or the ones people liken to "being very rare" (IE capitalizing CaL in California) are not as rare as people believe.
Again, the above is only my opinion, though, and I don't mean to cause a negative discourse with it
