Zodiackillersite.com

Do we know if Ross had a nickname or maybe a stage name he used for acting? The reason I ask is because of the "rh" on that desk poem. Ross H____ instead of Ross Sullivan? Might be worth asking Allen Siliphant or Gerald Katz.

Nick, no Nora wrote:Do you all know the watchmaker's analogy? It's another philosophical principle. It's actually an argument for intelligent design of the universe, but you can see its application in other ways. Come to think of it, it's a little like Occam's Razor. Basically, the idea is that you find a watch on a beach. How do you assume it came to be in this form in this place? Do you think, well, this object must have come to be here by nature, the tides interacting with the sand for centuries, etc. until it made this object on the beach? Or do you think it was made by somebody and dropped there?

Sure it could be that some innocent person wrote the desk poem. And that it appears to have happened during the semester that a murder took place outside that same building. And that the handwriting would match letters sent to the police claiming responsibility for the murder. And that years later the handwriting would tie in to a series of murders in the Bay Area, in which the killer also wrote to claim responsibility. But that would have to be one extremely unlucky poet.

In my opinion that analogy doesn't work here. You're looking at a bunch of dots that were connected at one point by people who may have been mistaken. It "appears to have happened during the semester that a murder took place outside that same building" because someone took the poem as a reference to that murder. But that is a leap, right there. It's not a conclusion that follows strictly from the facts. The dots aren't of a nature which makes it necessary, or even logical, to connect them in the way we're talking about here.

The desktop poem is only a striking coincidence if the interpretation some people argue for is the correct one. If the poem doesn't refer to Bates or any other murderous activity or impulse, however, it simply has no bearing on the case – it isn't a striking coincidence, just another red herring, a non-dot that never should have been connected to anything in the first place.

And yes, that implies that LE was too eager to have the Riverside connection confirmed, and that Sherwood Morrill was too eager to please them. Or too sure of his own ability to positively identify Z's writing, or printing, as displayed on all manner of exemplars. The latter is the only remotely tangible link between Z and the desktop: Morril's claim that the handwriting matches. For me, there is nothing else. The poem isn't sick or about murder, and it could have been produced ten years prior to its discovery for all we know. So, you take Morrill's word for it – or you don't.

If we backtrack,how did Zodiac investigators become aware of the Bates case & possible link to Zodiac? RPD contacted them. Any why did RPD contact them? Because Phil Sins kept pressuring them to look into the Bates letters, since the pattern seemed to fit the Zodiac's letter writing demanding to get press coverage. Low & behold, the writing is then matched to Zodiac's. Then, the confession letter uses the words, Shall, misspells twitch/twich ,etc etc
Some of the Bates letters signed with Z like symbol. I think it's clearly obvious that due to all of the above, Zodiac wrote the Bates case letters. The finding of the desktop and it being linked to the Bates case, was just a bonus that placed Zodiac in that Library. If we believe that Z wrote the Bates case letters(I know some people are not convinced)placing him in Riverside, then why is it a stretch to accept the desktop poem as his writing too?

morf13 wrote:...then why is it a stretch to accept the desktop poem as his writing too?

For me it has everything to do with the nature of that poem. It reads like a suicide fantasy (for lack of a more precise term) to me. It reads like something a regular student, most likely female, would have written. It doesn't smack of Zodiac or any other killer whatsoever to me. That's the stumbling block. Now, if you could show me Z's fingerprints on that desktop – or a unique phrase of some sort, or a signature that can't be mistaken – then I have to hold my hands up and say: Alright, so he actually wrote this poem, for who knows what reason, in spite of it looking like it was written by a young, non-murderous woman. But we don't have anything like that.

Some guy discovers a poem he considers morbid, no doubt with the Bates murder still fresh in his mind. He tells the police about it (or his supervisors or whatever, who then inform the police). The police conclude it is morbid too. And tell other departments about it – and then a certain reporter. And then, eventually, the SFPD make sure the morbid poem is photographed – and then our friend Morrill looks at said photograph and says...what? We don't know that, in detail, but what he says confirms what the SFPD want confirmed, because at this point they have embraced the Riverside connection as a whole, they believe that Zodiac is connected to Riverside, that he killed Bates and that he wrote the Confession and the notes: Morrill confirms all this, apparently down to the capital letters on the Confession envelope. But unlike the Confession and the notes, the desktop isn't undoubtedly connected to the Bates case. And the only formal or professional connection is Sherwood Morrill's opinion: No fingerprints, no DNA, no explicit references, no undeniable signature or unique phrases. Just the opinion of a handwriting expert.

Good enough for some, certainly good enough for the SFPD (but seemingly not for other departments) at the time. Personally, I say give me something solid. Until then, it's not confirmed as far as I'm concerned – and as such no theory should rely on it being Z's work. That's the principle I'm working from, others will no doubt disagree and that's more than fine. Some very clever people think it's Zodiac – they could very well be right.

Norse wrote:

morf13 wrote:...then why is it a stretch to accept the desktop poem as his writing too?

For me it has everything to do with the nature of that poem. It reads like a suicide fantasy (for lack of a more precise term) to me. It reads like something a regular student, most likely female, would have written. It doesn't smack of Zodiac or any other killer whatsoever to me. That's the stumbling block. Now, if you could show me Z's fingerprints on that desktop – or a unique phrase of some sort, or a signature that can't be mistaken – then I have to hold my hands up and say: Alright, so he actually wrote this poem, for who knows what reason, in spite of it looking like it was written by a young, non-murderous woman. But we don't have anything like that.

Some guy discovers a poem he considers morbid, no doubt with the Bates murder still fresh in his mind. He tells the police about it (or his supervisors or whatever, who then inform the police). The police conclude it is morbid too. And tell other departments about it – and then a certain reporter. And then, eventually, the SFPD make sure the morbid poem is photographed – and then our friend Morrill looks at said photograph and says...what? We don't know that, in detail, but what he says confirms what the SFPD want confirmed, because at this point they have embraced the Riverside connection as a whole, they believe that Zodiac is connected to Riverside, that he killed Bates and that he wrote the Confession and the notes: Morrill confirms all this, apparently down to the capital letters on the Confession envelope. But unlike the Confession and the notes, the desktop isn't undoubtedly connected to the Bates case. And the only formal or professional connection is Sherwood Morrill's opinion: No fingerprints, no DNA, no explicit references, no undeniable signature or unique phrases. Just the opinion of a handwriting expert.

Good enough for some, certainly good enough for the SFPD (but seemingly not for other departments) at the time. Personally, I say give me something solid. Until then, it's not confirmed as far as I'm concerned – and as such no theory should rely on it being Z's work. That's the principle I'm working from, others will no doubt disagree and that's more than fine. Some very clever people think it's Zodiac – they could very well be right.

We have more than enough debate threads on here about this very topic, so I won't do a long rambling debate,but that poem does not read as male or female to me, nor does it describe a suicide fantasy to me,again, just my personal opinion.
Anyhow, Cheri was in the library where that desk was found on the night she was killed, and that is yet another link to that library. If only we could find a person that looked identical to the Z sketch, was in that library, creeped people out with morbid poems,and later moved on to northern CA

Nick No Nora: A spin-off on one of your replies: Rather than an Intelligent Being creating the Universe, I think the Universe is creating an Intelligent Being. Certainly, the thrust of Evolution suggests this. Almost certainly, there are millions upon millions of worlds in our vast Universe that feature intelligent beings. It takes only a small intellectual step to posit intelligent worlds, like brain neurons, communicating with each other. Presto! A Universal Mind, aka God.

Yeah, I'm starting to warm on Ross again. It's possible that a murder likely involving Zodiac happens right outside where you work. And that the victim will be someone that you are likely acquainted with. And by huge coincidence that three years later there will be a composite of the killer that looks startlingly like you. But that would make you very unlucky.

The Zodiac case, in a nutshell:




What do YOU see?

If only we could find a person that looked identical to the Z sketch, was in that library, creeped people out with morbid poems,and later moved on to northern CA

You're making huge leaps. Morf. You're going from Ross working at the library to killing up north, without any real intervening, connecting facts.


Yes, Ross worked at the library. And yes, Ross supposedly wrote "morbid poems". But does he really look like the sketch simply because they both feature open-mouthed visages?

Do you know for a fact the poem is connected to Bates' murder? Can you say for a fact Ross knew Bates, or was in the area at the time of the crime? Did he work in the library that night?

Did Ross possess an affinity for guns? Was he too fat? Did he live in or around Vallejo at the time of the crimes? Did he own or even drive a car?

You assume all the dots connect without manifesting any missing links. That's akin to supposing the skunk evolved from the giraffe without demonstrating evidence of any intermediate species.

Please don't presume to know what my thoughts are.

The 'Experts' linked Z to the RCC library. The witnesses helped show us what Z looked like via the sketch. Ross is identical to the sketch, sorry those are facts. I've said multiple times that I can't place Ross in Vallejo so therefore, I can't say with certainty that Ross was Z. Then again, if you know of another person who looks identical to that sketch and was in that RCC library, Im all ears