Zodiackillersite.com

Tahoe27 wrote:

CuriousCat wrote:Maybe he felt the car door and the phone call was enough.

I don't presume to know how or why guys like that do the things they do.

Neither do I, that's why I said maybe. Just offering up possibilities.

CuriousCat wrote:

Tahoe27 wrote:

CuriousCat wrote:Maybe he felt the car door and the phone call was enough.

I don't presume to know how or why guys like that do the things they do.

Neither do I, that's why I said maybe. Just offering up possibilities.

Lots of those with this case.

Tahoe27 wrote:
Lots of those with this case.

We could all be right.

CuriousCat wrote:

Tahoe27 wrote:
Lots of those with this case.

We could all be right.

We could all be wrong.

Tahoe27 wrote:

CuriousCat wrote:

Tahoe27 wrote:
Lots of those with this case.

We could all be right.

We could all be wrong.

LOL, well, there's that possibility too.

When was the "by knife" section on the car door first released to the public.

Richard Grinell wrote:When was the "by knife" section on the car door first released to the public.

I haven't been able to determine when "by knife" was made public but newspaper articles about Zodiac throughout 1970 that I have read do not share the detail. It's quite possible Graysmith was the first to discuss this. One article from 1970 stated regarding the Halloween Card said that police had a definite way of determining that it was authentic but of course did not reveal what that was. On the MK Zodiac site http://mk-zodiac.com/Communication12-16-69Report.html they point out that the first book containing Zodiac information "The California Crime Book" by Robert Colby was published in September of 1971 and did not contain the withheld information. I have not found anything that indicates that the information had been revealed before the October 1970 Halloween card. It is a great question!

[I'm the man who did it][/size]...almost in passing.


If the above does NOT refer to LB ... and therefore Z did NOT mention LB in a letter then I have a question....

If LB was NOT Z ... would he have at least pointed THAT out in a letter?? I have no answer ... just thinking out loud. I wonder if Z would have called that LB fake Z attack out in a letter if it wasn't, in fact, the real Z.

Druzer wrote:

Richard Grinell wrote:When was the "by knife" section on the car door first released to the public.

I haven't been able to determine when "by knife" was made public but newspaper articles about Zodiac throughout 1970 that I have read do not share the detail. It's quite possible Graysmith was the first to discuss this. One article from 1970 stated regarding the Halloween Card said that police had a definite way of determining that it was authentic but of course did not reveal what that was. On the MK Zodiac site http://mk-zodiac.com/Communication12-16-69Report.html they point out that the first book containing Zodiac information "The California Crime Book" by Robert Colby was published in September of 1971 and did not contain the withheld information. I have not found anything that indicates that the information had been revealed before the October 1970 Halloween card. It is a great question!

The reason I ask, is not to prove the author of the Halloween card is Zodiac or not. But primarily for Tahoe- that imagine the author of the Halloween card was a copycat, then if the "by knife" wasn't made public by October 27th 1970, it would mean this copycat was likely the Berryessa attacker and had interjected himself into the Zodiac story one year later. The other possibility is that Zodiac was a policeman or investigator with inside knowledge, or a hoaxer with inside knowledge passing himself off as Zodiac.

margie wrote:[I'm the man who did it][/size]...almost in passing.


If the above does NOT refer to LB ... and therefore Z did NOT mention LB in a letter then I have a question....

If LB was NOT Z ... would he have at least pointed THAT out in a letter?? I have no answer ... just thinking out loud. I wonder if Z would have called that LB fake Z attack out in a letter if it wasn't, in fact, the real Z.

I don't think so. It would be to his benefit, actually. It brings more terror and more for law enforcement to look at which would actually take away from his crimes. If someone else is eventually caught, well, he never actually took credit for it. Which could be why that statement was so vague.