Zodiackillersite.com

Quicktrader wrote:Cecilia Shepard, could not see him because of his mask.

Cecilia Shepard *DID* see him without his mask, pretty clearly by some accounts, and gave no indication whatsoever that she knew the man. Not before the attack, not during it, and not afterwards. And since the killer was hanging around the park and creeping people out all afternoon BEFORE he found Shepard and Hartnell early that evening, there's no way he could have possibly followed them there. There is no evidence that this or any of the other confirmed 1968-69 Zodiac crimes was anything but random.

I largely agree, Pettibon.

To my thinking it's impossible to theorize that Z knew CS without also theorizing that he knew his other victims - and what goes for her, goes for them (only even more so, the more numerous they become): There simply isn't anything solid - or even remotely tangible - to suggest that he did know them.

It's also necessary to presuppose that Z was not the man who creeped out the three girls (which I have less trouble doing, but it will be a deal breaker for many and I can certainly see why).

There is a third possibility here, though (I'm almost afraid to mention it - and I don't subscribe to it myself): The man who attacked BH and CS, and who may possibly, conceivably have stalked them, was not Z.

However, regardless of who he was, his behavior does not jibe with someone who knew his victims. He talked to them, at length. Would he have done that if he was worried about being recognized? And if he was not worried about that, why wear the mask in the first place? And if he was simply worried about having his face seen (by either victims or witnesses), why on earth did he feel compelled to wear that ridiculous costume? He could have used a ski mask or a stocking.

Pettibon Junction wrote:

Quicktrader wrote:Cecilia Shepard, could not see him because of his mask.

And since the killer was hanging around the park and creeping people out all afternoon BEFORE he found Shepard and Hartnell early that evening, there's no way he could have possibly followed them there.

We don't know for sure that Z was the Guy creeping out people all after noon

morf13 wrote:We don't know for sure that Z was the Guy creeping out people all after noon

True, at this point we'll likely never know anything for sure, but the likelihood of two heavy-set, identically-dressed dead-ringers for the Presidio heights composite doing creepy stuff at Lake Berryessa that day is slim-to-none. Perhaps it's a minority opinion, but I'm pretty comfortable in my presumption that the LB stalker, the murderer of Cecilia Shepard, and the Zodiac Killer are all one and the same person.

Pettibon Junction wrote:

morf13 wrote:We don't know for sure that Z was the Guy creeping out people all after noon

True, at this point we'll likely never know anything for sure, but the likelihood of two heavy-set, identically-dressed dead-ringers for the Presidio heights composite doing creepy stuff at Lake Berryessa that day is slim-to-none. Perhaps it's a minority opinion, but I'm pretty comfortable in my presumption that the LB stalker, the murderer of Cecilia Shepard, and the Zodiac Killer are all one and the same person.

It's possible they were the same Guy, but then again, they really do not look much alike

morf13 wrote:It's possible they were the same Guy, but then again, they really do not look much alike

Again, minority opinion, but the Napa and PH sketches share similar eyes, ears, and noses which means the witnesses likely chose the same shapes from the identikit that the artist presented them with. The PH drawing adds some wrinkles to the face and pouts up the lips a bit but apart from a cheap pair of costume glasses and a date with a Flow-Bee, they're a match. (And since I'm on the subject of haircuts, I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that after Paul Stine, our guy went home and buzzed that iconic crew-cut down to a uniform 1/16" post-haste.)

I place a lot of stock in the Napa sketch, as it's the result of a number of witnesses viewing a suspect under optimal (daylight) conditions for an extended period of time. Lake Berryessa was the only daytime crime the Zodiac is known to have committed and it represents the longest period of time he's spent at the scene and thus, the best possibility of usable forensics. Unfortunately, we know now that the crime scene wasn't properly secured, nor traditionally processed. (Do we have any idea what happened to the discarded cigarette butts the hefty weirdo left behind?)

Maybe I'm just being overly optimistic. After all, if all the physical evidence is at best contaminated and at worst gone, there's some solace to be had in believing that the killer at least showed us his face.

Well, the fact the Guy at the lake seen by the Girls,had a light blue car is interesting, as light blue cars have also popped up in the z case

Has anyone looked into a possible comparison between the type of car the creepy guy drove - a late model Chevrolet, as per the girls - and the tracks Z left above the crime scene? We know his tires were mismatched - but do the measurements as such (which I don't have before me, but they're pretty specific, IIRC) match a late model Chevrolet? Is it possible at all to say something meaningful about this?

I have no idea myself - just throwing it out there.

Just struck me again how strange that conversation between Bryan and the attacker is, as per the "reconstruction" in the report. I can't get my head around it at all.

He shows up in a ceremonial outfit, bearing the infamous symbol, yet makes no reference to this - just goes on about being an escaped convict, as though it's perfectly normal for someone in that situation (being headed for Mexico, as he says) to roam around dressed like a cartoon character...I just don't get it.

Then he's partly nervous (hands trembling) and partly completely relaxed (the way he shows Bryan that the gun is loaded, the way he laughs - explicitly referred to as "very relaxed" by Bryan)...again, it's just bizarre, the whole episode. And very hard to judge in any way or direction.

Those images could be representing the same person but tbh if they are they do so woefully and as such very unreliably. We could interpret the hell out them but unfortunately that is what we would have to do if we were going to point out features as being a basis of possible proof.

Lack of glasses, different hairline notwithstanding (I know these things can be 'explained' ... apparently) the unreliable differences in the two images make it almost impossible to even hypothesize let alone come to a reasonable conclusion. IMHO.

Here's what we're dealing with here. Eyes at completely different levels compared to ears. Eyebrows at completely different levels compared to eyes. Eye shapes completely different compared to each other. I'm not going to get into 'the chin'. For me those problems make this very iffy ground indeed if attempting to compare the two composites and as if that wasn't enough I don't think the proportions on the Stine composite are entirely reliable either.

Maybe the initial dispatch for PH was right lol.