The Car Door

[Nachtsider]

Don't buy a copycat killer, he would also just have to be a copycat killer with writing so similar to Zodiac, that he fooled writing expert, Sherwood Morrill. The odds of 2 serial killers in the small 30 square mile stretch, with very similar writing are slim to none

He didn't just write like Zodiac, he LOOKED like Zodiac, too.

What are the odds?

[Norse]

LB stands out as strange/exceptional no matter what twist one puts on it, I think - not least in terms of Z's subsequent actions.

It was Z: He never mentions it. Dresses up like an executioner, a fact which is soon known - adding to the "character" in a way which must have appealed to him, I can't imagine anything else - yet he doesn't milk it at all.

It was not Z: He never mentions it. It's his biggest "hit" to date, front page stuff, precisely the sort of thing he should be doing...but he didn't, it was someone else, pretending to be HIM. I don't know - but I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that he would have reacted negatively to an imposter. He might even have regarded him as competition - someone who tried to steal his persona.

[Nachtsider]

I don't know - but I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that he would have reacted negatively to an imposter. He might even have regarded him as competition - someone who tried to steal his persona.

Reacted negatively?

He would've gone ballistic, lol.

[BillRobison]

I've read every page of the available files. Not one of them mentions Morrill's opinion of the handwriting on the car door. Graysmith claimed that Morrill said it was a match, but Graysmith claims a lot of things that are flat untrue.

Tom Johnson said the prints from Berryessa appeared to match prints from Stine's cab. How could he say that, if they were from "different hands?" I don't understand your reasoning. His fingerprint expert told him that they appeared to match. Was his fingerprint expert lying? An idiot who couldn't tell his right from his left? Was Johnson lying? Please explain your conclusion that the prints on the phone booth were from a right hand. We know from the SFPD files that the prints on Stine's drivers door were from a left hand because it clearly says so in the files. If the prints on the pay phone in Napa were of a right hand, then how did Johnson's fingerprint expert match them up with the prints on the cab? You've lost me.

I know Avery and Graysmith claimed that prints of a right hand, supposedly in blood, were found in various locations in the cab. But if so, then these right hand prints ALSO don't match the "right hand" prints you assume were on the pay phone. If the prints on the payphone were of a left hand, then they don't match the prints of a left hand on the drivers door of the cab. If they were the prints of a right hand, then they don't match the prints of a right hand that Graysmith claimed were on the pillar between the doors, nor the prints of a right hand that Avery claimed were on the dash. Who was lying? Johnson? Snook? Hamlet? Graysmith? Avery? The FBI fingerprint expert? All of them?

Hamlet thought that the (partial) left ring finger on the cab door matched a corresponding area of a left ring finger print on the little list letter. Why didn't any of the right hand prints on that letter match your "right hand" prints on the Napa phone booth? I don't get it. Did Zodiac have three hands?

I don't mean to pick on you. The person I mean to pick on is the person who lied to Johnson. It wasn't the FBI. I don't think it was Hamlet. Who else could have lied to him about those fingerprints "matching?" There is a photo of Napa deputy Hal Snook looking at the fingerprints through a loupe. Did he lie to Johnson? Or did he just lie about his credentials? Graysmith claims that Snook "confessed" to him that he "botched" the prints on the phone booth. But according to the FBI report, there was no problem with them. Did Snook lie to Graysmith? Graysmith lies a lot about "quotes" from a lot of people. So maybe his story of Snook's "confession" is a lie.

Of course, the SIMPLEST explanation is quite simply that the person who made the phone call to Napa police was not the person who shot Stine or wrote the Zodiac letters. What is so "impossible" about that? You have to admit its POSSIBLE.

[Norse]

The fingerprints just confuse the hell out of me every time I try to make sense of what is on file, who has it, what it is - and whether it was compared to anything, by anyone, for whatever purpose...in short, I can't make much sense of this. To me it seems they have very little which they are certain about, i.e. which can be positively traced back to the Zodiac killer. That goes for both prints and DNA - or so it seems to me, at least.

I too once sought for Morrill's statement regarding the car door in the available reports/documents...but found nothing. It's always been gospel to me that he did identify the door writing as belonging to Z (and I have no doubt that he did), but I don't think I've ever seen a positive statement by either himself or an LE representative to this effect.

[BillRobison]

Norse:

There are two FBI latent case files, one covering BRS, Stine, and the letters, and the other covering Berryessa. On October 23, the FBI print lab typed a report stating that they had compared all the prints from both latent cases to each other and found zero matches. In July 1970, Hamlet sent a report to the FBI print lab stating he had noticed a match between the left ring finger tip on the drivers door of Stine's cab and the corresponding left ring finger print on the little list letter of that month. The common area between the two prints was not large enough for a legally conclusive match. But no other prints on that letter matched any other prints from any other crime scene or phone booth.

When Avery "discovered" the desktop poem photos, he took them and copies of the Bates Had To Die letters, etc, to Sacramento. He SAID he showed them to Morrill, and he SAID Morrill declared that they matched Zodiacs writing. Riverside police said they got "a phone call" confirming this, but not a written report. In 1981, Riverside police issued a press release stating that there was no link between Bates and Zodiac, and that claims of a link were pure media hype. So they must not have ever received a WRITTEN report from Morrill. Just "a phone call."

There is a report in the available files that photos of the car door were submitted to Morrill, but no copy or mention of Morrill's analysis. For some reason.

[Tahoe27]

Don't buy a copycat killer, he would also just have to be a copycat killer with writing so similar to Zodiac, that he fooled writing expert, Sherwood Morrill. The odds of 2 serial killers in the small 30 square mile stretch, with very similar writing are slim to none

He didn't just write like Zodiac, he LOOKED like Zodiac, too.

What are the odds?

You know what he looked like?

Hair doesn't match and apparently voice and since there are no facial characteristics to go by, I don't think we CAN say he "looked" like Zodiac.

If you go by the general looks at the time of the killings--between them and LB, they were simply NOT the same....coloring and cutting hair later withstanding.

***

What this thread is about, since we so many in regards to his looks, is the car door. I simply don't think the writing on the car door offers enough to 100% unequivocally say LB was committed by the same man who committed the other crimes attributed to Zodiac.

I also know LE would consider other men as well. They have to. They cannot simply dismiss leads because the guy couldn't have been Zodiac.

[smithy]

What this thread is about, since we [have] so many in regards to his looks, is the car door. I simply don't think the writing on the car door offers enough to 100% unequivocally say LB was committed by the same man who committed the other crimes attributed to Zodiac.

Tahoe - thanks for that.

My opinion - I think the same person who wrote the first "two" letters wrote on the car door at Lake Berryessa. That's it.
I'm definitely not going to say who murdered whom!
Does that mean you and I agree?

[BillRobison]

Anyone else? If you were summoned to jury duty and asked to judge some wheezy old geezer for the Shepard murder, no other Zodiac murders, just the Shepard murder, and the only evidence the prosecutor had was some handwriting samples, forget the Zodiac letters, just some diaries or letters or something, nothing but handwriting, which seems to be all we have in the Shepard case, could you send said wheezy geezer to the gas chamber based on that? That was, IIRC, the question on this thread, right? Is the handwriting on the car door enough to be considered evidence?

Suppose said geezer's fingerprints matched the prints on Stine's cab and the little list letter. But they don't match the prints on the phone booth, obviously. Is that enough to ACQUIT said geezer for the Shepard murder? Let's say he still had his old pair of Wing Walkers knocking about in a closet. Let's say he decorated his bathroom with Zodiac crosshair symbols. Let's say he had an impressive collection of homemade knives. Let's say he made Halloween costumes, including Zodiac Killer costumes, as a hobby. Let's say he had a receipt for a hot dog with mustard and a root beer from the AW stand at Lake Berryessa dated September 27, 1969 at 3:30 pm. Let's say he typed a fantasy novel about stabbing Bryan and Cecelia, but it only contained facts published in the newspapers, or details that police have no way of confirming. Let's say he had an old roll of hollow core plastic clothesline in the garage. Let's say he was 5'10 and 205 pounds in 1969, with brown wavy hair. No DNA match, because it's been 45 years, etc. But his finger and palm prints match the ones on Stine's cab and the little list letter, no question.

Then what? Suppose you're a judge and it's your job at a preliminary hearing to decide whether or not to proceed to trial. Would you?

[Norse]

Anyone else? If you were summoned to jury duty and asked to judge some wheezy old geezer for the Shepard murder, no other Zodiac murders, just the Shepard murder, and the only evidence the prosecutor had was some handwriting samples, forget the Zodiac letters, just some diaries or letters or something, nothing but handwriting, which seems to be all we have in the Shepard case, could you send said wheezy geezer to the gas chamber based on that? That was, IIRC, the question on this thread, right? Is the handwriting on the car door enough to be considered evidence?

Suppose said geezer's fingerprints matched the prints on Stine's cab and the little list letter. But they don't match the prints on the phone booth, obviously. Is that enough to ACQUIT said geezer for the Shepard murder? Let's say he still had his old pair of Wing Walkers knocking about in a closet. Let's say he decorated his bathroom with Zodiac crosshair symbols. Let's say he had an impressive collection of homemade knives. Let's say he made Halloween costumes, including Zodiac Killer costumes, as a hobby. Let's say he had a receipt for a hot dog with mustard and a root beer from the AW stand at Lake Berryessa dated September 27, 1969 at 3:30 pm. Let's say he typed a fantasy novel about stabbing Bryan and Cecelia, but it only contained facts published in the newspapers, or details that police have no way of confirming. Let's say he had an old roll of hollow core plastic clothesline in the garage. Let's say he was 5'10 and 205 pounds in 1969, with brown wavy hair. No DNA match, because it's been 45 years, etc. But his finger and palm prints match the ones on Stine's cab and the little list letter, no question.

Then what? Suppose you're a judge and it's your job at a preliminary hearing to decide whether or not to proceed to trial. Would you?

Well...this is a bit academic. If such an old geezer came up, he would be considered as having played a part in the whole series, surely. If his prints didn't match the phone booth, one might conclude that the phone booth print was incidental, not related to the case. That's just one possibility. One could also conclude that he had an accomplice. One could conclude this or that - but one could not simply overlook the fact that his prints did match the Stine scene. So, the old geezer would hardly be sent back home either way.

No old geezer would be convicted based on the door writing alone, though - that is obvious. Unless he had Lionel Hutz to represent him.