Paul_Averly wrote:Tahoe27 wrote:ONE stamp would not have been sufficient postage when it came to the Bates letters. The sender had to put two.
Sure he did.
I've asked this before, create a thread about your Zodiac copycat "theory," post evidence that supports it, and watch members blast holes through it.
The smallest, most impractical path for a bay area killer to learn of, and copy elements of a crime, is not proof or even a good reason to think a copycat is even a good possibility.
Know what is a good possibility? A mentally ill individual
who matches the Z physical description, and had ties to both areas in the years the crimes took place.
Paul,
When you say Ross "matches the Z physical description," that is simply not true. There is NOT ONE witness who either saw Z or saw someone we think might have been Z, who described someone resembling Ross.
Read the eyewitness descriptions below and tell me who says Z had a crew cut, widows peak, and was 6' 2" and 260+ pounds. Nobody did.
When you and others make the claim that Ross matches the description, the logical gymnastics you have to do is to frankenstein your own description together, by selectively taking pieces you like from various accounts while ignoring those you don't. So you'll say "Ross looks just like the PH sketch, and the guy at Berryessa might've been 225 which is within 40 pounds of Ross, so there it is, Ross could've been Z." Someone using the same logic could say with equal (in)validity that Z looked like the LB sketch, and was 5' 8 or 9 inches tall and weighed well under 200 pounds, matching Mageau and the PH descriptions.
By all accounts, the guy at LB had longish dark brown hair. One of the girls described him as good looking. Does that sound like Ross?
So... I'm looking forward to your explaining your claim that Ross matches the description.
BRS:
viewtopic.php?f=28&t=19ZZ1.jpg
viewtopic.php?f=29&t=2395Norse wrote:Yes - MM is what he is. Or rather he now is what he became.
But back then he stated very clearly that the attacker did not wear glasses. Explicit statement on his part. He may have had a flashlight on him but a flashlight doesn't obliterate a pair of glasses. If he didn't see anything, then presumably that's what he would have said: I don't know whether he had glasses or not, couldn't see his face at all.
That's not what he says, though. He says the guy didn't have glasses - plainly and clearly.
LB:
viewtopic.php?f=29&t=20viewtopic.php?f=29&t=2395ZZ2.jpg
PH:
ZZ3.jpg
LB vs PH sketches:
viewtopic.php?f=29&t=131morf13 wrote:Thanks for the thoughts everyone. The problem is that we dont know for sure if the guy they saw was zodiac. The guy they saw looked nothing like the Stine Zodiac sketch, and looked alot younger,IMO.


By the way... the difference between the LB and PH descriptions and sketches makes it pretty likely, in my opinion, that these are two different guys, which makes picking and choosing details from each and combining them to fit a POI, even more dubious.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.