Zodiackillersite.com

Sorry Smithy, wasn't deliberately or intentionally avoiding responding to a post or question. Rite, let's see.....

Rite, the post relating to Eric Zelms's widow?

"I seem to recall telling naughty WC that I'm not "clutching at straws" saying that the Diana statement is hearsay." That was naughty, i'll sentence myself to sitting in the corner facing the wall for one hour, suspended for the next 3.

I meant 'clutching at straws' Smithy in relation to your argument for dismissing the idea that Fouke stopped and spoke to Z not by any of the known sequence of events here, or because of some other specific reason or something the statement said that seemed to be questionable, and just attack the entire statement as 'hearsay.'

"Back to the hair.
No, he didn't wear a skin wig (that's silly)."

You think that's silly?? Wait till you hear the many supporters of Lake Berryessa man wearing wig under the hood. What's the first thing armed raiders do before putting a balaclava on to cover their complete head? Of course, they put a wig underneath where it serves absolutely no purpose at all in an attempt to disguise yourself This is obviously needed to explain the hair and fringe difference between Lake B and Presidio attackers.

Now Mr Smith, it has come to my attention that one is fairly quick to question the ideas and posts of others and their specific theories, comments and ideas and that's no probs at all. However, it hasn't escaped my attention that you don't seem to allow yourself to be scrutinized about what you personally believe and opinions oyu may have and this is because you very rarely, if ever, give an opinion on something. In fact, I think the only statement I recall you making that was specific-ish was saying that you wasn't sure, even doubtful, as to Zodiac being responsible for Lake B.

Come on Smithy, no need to be shy and not tell us what your actual belief's and opinions are specifically.

If you give me your opinions in general on the case, who was responsible (If anyone in mind), why he/they did it, you know, just general opinions. If you do that Smity, you can have one of these....

Welsh Chappie wrote:Now Mr Smith, it has come to my attention that one is fairly quick to question the ideas and posts of others and their specific theories, comments and ideas and that's no probs at all.

Smithy doesn't need me to answer for him but just to say .... he isn't. Smithy was the first person I ever recieved a PM from when I started on this case over on ZKF. He has been at this quite a while so to say that he is quick isn't accurate. He's read it all and seen it all so he doesn't just blurt out a thought or make seemingly dismissive comments. He's probably been through these same or similar discussions more often than you've had hot dinners so if he seems curt it's not without good reason.

That's why we encourage members to read as much as you can of the posts that have been made over many years and long before most of us got here.

Welsh Chappie wrote:... That bit never made a whole lot of sense to me either. If i'm a notorious and wanted serial killer who, should I make the slightest error in judgement, will result in a rendezvous with the Gas Chamber in San Quentin, I wouldn't want to be all eager to let everyones, including the police who saw me themselves, that 'I was the man they stopped to speak with on the street that night.' All your doing is confirming that you are the offender that as spotted and/or possibly spoken with that night...

I said the same thing about the Kathleen Johns incident.

smithy wrote:At BRS - Mike (jeez) described the attackers hair as "brown" (it says here) http://www.zodiackiller.com/FerrinMageau.html
At BRS - MIke (jeez) described the attackers hair as "short curly hair, light brown almost blond" (it says here) http://www.zodiackillerfacts.com/Descriptions.htm

Actually, the first link is not to a quote from Mike Mageau. I guess we'd need to ask Tom where he read that.

Here we go, right from the police report - short, curly hair, light brown, almost blond.

http://www.zodiackiller.com/DFR10.html

Light brown, almost blond hair is still brown hair.

Nachtsider wrote:Here we go, right from the police report - short, curly hair, light brown, almost blond.

http://www.zodiackiller.com/DFR10.html

Light brown, almost blond hair is still brown hair.

I'm re-reading the reports on the murders and I'm on that very page as you post that Nacht.

traveller1st wrote:

Welsh Chappie wrote:Now Mr Smith, it has come to my attention that one is fairly quick to question the ideas and posts of others and their specific theories, comments and ideas and that's no probs at all.

Smithy doesn't need me to answer for him but just to say .... he isn't. Smithy was the first person I ever recieved a PM from when I started on this case over on ZKF. He has been at this quite a while so to say that he is quick isn't accurate. He's read it all and seen it all so he doesn't just blurt out a thought or make seemingly dismissive comments. He's probably been through these same or similar discussions more often than you've had hot dinners so if he seems curt it's not without good reason.

That's why we encourage members to read as much as you can of the posts that have been made over many years and long before most of us got here.

Trav, you obviously missed the tongue in cheek undertone to my post to Smithy. Smithy always sarcastically reminds me of my weather vs whether dyslexia, and I could decide if I wanted that I am going to become offended by this but I don't because I can take it when the joke or piss take is as my own expense, and i'll return the compliment now and then. It's not intended with any malice or negativity and to be honest, if I really did believe Smithy was deliberately not saying what his opinions are I'd just tell him that's what I believe. I don't really get either why you seem to suggest I am wrong for questioning Smithy's knowledge on all things Zodiac as I never said anything to suggest his understanding of the case was anything, good bad or indifferent. didn't. I know why I don't know what a lot of Smithy's views are without needing to be informed, its simply because I've not asked him, with the exception of a few specific details such as Lake B and questioning If Z was responsible. Don't assume I am being literal & therefor insulting, Smithy knows that isn't the intent.

I know. If I thought that I would have been shouting again lol. I was gently enforcing the 'not-personal' rule. For everyone's benefit. I understood your intent WC but I don't want other's thinking it's ok to circumvent certain expected standards just by wrapping it up in humour. Well done for not making it personal although I can't attest to the reality that you didn't actually take it that way. Not after expressing your warm feelings concerning children singing carols albeit wrapped in humou......ah, you get the picture lol.

Tahoe27 wrote:

Welsh Chappie wrote:... That bit never made a whole lot of sense to me either. If i'm a notorious and wanted serial killer who, should I make the slightest error in judgement, will result in a rendezvous with the Gas Chamber in San Quentin, I wouldn't want to be all eager to let everyones, including the police who saw me themselves, that 'I was the man they stopped to speak with on the street that night.' All your doing is confirming that you are the offender that as spotted and/or possibly spoken with that night...

I said the same thing about the Kathleen Johns incident. "

Well the Presidio Heights encounter being revealed by Zodiac in Nov of 69 could be due to....

Zodiac was quiet in regards to the encounter issue, just silently waiting for the reports to hit the papers "Officers encounter suspect on Street". And he waited, waited a bit more, and then a big article with subject Zodiac finally appeared in the Chronicle but this time Zodiac had no power and control over what the words would say, nor did he write them. Someone else now spoke in this article that was all about him, The Zodiac. That someone was SFPD Chief Of Inspectors Martin Lee. Zodiac is the focus of the article, but cannot influence what is said and what citizens will read. The control has been taken away from Zodiac and his 'features' are now being written by the other team, and this player on the other team wastes no time telling San Francisco that in his opinion, "Zodiac is a liar, a clumsy criminal, and probably a latent homosexual." This must have hit a nerve with Z because he blasts back with his childish, immature opening of "I have become rather angry with the police for their telling lies about me so I shall no longer announce when I kill..." which is the childish way if declaring "I'm not playing anymore, your nasty!" One of these claims must have embarrassed Z or hit on something he didn't like because he now seems to go out of his way to embarrass the SFPD by now revealing the 'PS, Two cops pulled a goof'

Indirectly Zodiac's own reaction to CChief Lee tells us that Lee had hit on something that Zodiac did not like to hear and seemed embarrassed enough to try and make the SFPD do the blushing by revealing what happened on Jackson.

Was Z's own sexuality something he did not want to confront? Narcissistic personalities can always dish it out, but under no circumstances can the take it back at them. Here is how Psychologist Lynne Namka described the Narcissist and his personality:

"Needy narcissists love an audience and that's your role. Some are charming, funny and the life of the party. Your function in their life is to listen to whatever they have to say for as long as they want to talk. Your job is to give them applause, admiration or reassurance. If you don't, they might get anxious and fish for compliments.
Defensive narcissists can't stand criticism and get their hackles up when corrected when they've done something wrong. They become angry to get you to stop calling them on their stuff. They cannot say "I'm sorry" or admit they are wrong. Their lack of true remorse shows that they did not understand or care how they have hurt you. Denial is the narcissist's middle name-no, that's wrong, it's their first name but of course they deny it. The denial and lying functions so they will feel better in the moment. Ignoring or disagreeing with the criticism gets them out of a hot spot so they don't have to take responsibility to change. They are very protective of their faults and weaknesses and try to hide them from others. To those who have their nardar turned on high, their defences are as plain as a glaring wart on their nose. Entitled narcissists demand special treatment. Other people's rules don't apply to them because deep down they think they are special. This distorted thinking can run from not buying a ticket to get into an event and then bragging about it to stealing the retirement funds of others. They believe they have the right to do whatever pleases them without personal cost."

traveller1st wrote:I know. If I thought that I would have been shouting again lol. I was gently enforcing the 'not-personal' rule. For everyone's benefit. I understood your intent WC but I don't want other's thinking it's ok to circumvent certain expected standards just by wrapping it up in humour. Well done for not making it personal although I can't attest to the reality that you didn't actually take it that way. Not after expressing your warm feelings concerning children singing carols albeit wrapped in humou......ah, you get the picture lol.

Now Trav come on, that was funny and you know it

It was, I agree. Just standing on MY principles as it pertains to maintaining a forum.