by UKSpycatcher » Sun Feb 14, 2016 10:29 am
Welcome Kim. Personally I have given up on suspects in the Zodiac case, it always ends up in heated arguments. At least you don't sound too defensive, and seem level headed.
You said "There are only a few ways that I would be satisfied that Dennis Rader is not BTK: A specific alibi and if there were at least two complete DNA profiles from different crime scenes that did not match Rader's or two matching fingerprints from two different crime scenes that did not match Rader's. That would satisfy me but not the generic alibi or partial DNA profile. That does little to exclude him".
I would say it is the person who proposes a suspect as Zodiac to produce the evidence of where their suspect was during the relevant timelines, not for other people to disprove the case. In other words you would have to provide some evidence or records to prove Rader was in the vicinity of California during all four attacks, this should be the first step, it should not be for other people to prove he wasn't. A person making a claim is the one who has to prove it, not the other way round.