Harvey F. Colliver

[relentlessz]

Curiouscat, thank you for your help. The things you found still have me wide-eyed. I knew more pieces to the puzzle were in those docs that I couldn't see. You and many others here have brought many things to the light. I know there has to be more we aren't comprehending just yet.

It just seems too coincidental to me that 10 years ago I saw those symbols on those film cases and today we've discovered that he lines up with so many other facts of this case. Not theories. Plain facts.

[Medebbie]

The Dr. Oz show today is about Zodiac.

[CuriousCat]

I don't know, i bid a farewell to all.

Yeah, sure, you said that before and didn't. Do you have an address on Harvey when he lived in Santa Maria?

[CuriousCat]

Curiouscat, thank you for your help. The things you found still have me wide-eyed. I knew more pieces to the puzzle were in those docs that I couldn't see. You and many others here have brought many things to the light. I know there has to be more we aren't comprehending just yet.

It just seems too coincidental to me that 10 years ago I saw those symbols on those film cases and today we've discovered that he lines up with so many other facts of this case. Not theories. Plain facts.

Well, I still don't think he was the Zodiac, but who the hell knows. He's a better POI than many of the well known ones.

[StitchMallone]

Harvey reminds me more of Hunter S Thompson then Zodiac. All though I wouldn't be surprise if either was Zodiac.

[Bill-Bailey]

Holy cow, reading through all that was a grind.

I love seeing new suspects come into play. It's much more interesting to investigate new guys than just going over ALA and Sullivan for the 837th time.

But man, no offense to the two people pushing this guy so hard....it really seems like ya'll are trying to "fit" things that barely have a relation to what is known about the Zodiac into being compelling clues that tie it to Harvey. And every time somebody brings up this point about one of your pieces of evidence, they get a bit of a snarky comment back or "you just haven't seen all that I've seen" and told they need to spend the next 3 years investigating his paperwork and then it will be magically evident that Harvey is the zodiac. Again, not personally attacking anybody. I'm just sharing my opinion after reading these 44 pages and seeing the evidence presented so far.

For example - things like him sleeping with his mother. That has zero to do with him being the zodiac. Hating abortion - nothing to do with the zodiac. Or the convo about t he letter opener. Somebody pointed out why would he sharpen a letter opener instead of just using a real knife, and somebody commented something like "well, we don't know what the laws were in california"......seriously, that's just a huge stretch and to be honest, it's what a LOT of people do when trying to hype their favorite suspect.

Like the Gaikowski fanatics. One sticking point is whether Richard was out of the country during one of the attacks. Most think he was as he was working as a journalist and has a story, with a byline where he specifically says he is in that country during a specific event. But the Gaikowski fanatics will say "Well, he could have flew back before. And he was probably lying in his story. You can't prove he wasn't here on that date." It's just these huge reaches to try and backup their theory. It's hilarious the jumps they make.

Again, sorry if this offends anybody. That isn't my intent. And again, I LOVE people bringing new suspects to the table. But for me, and maybe people don't agree, I think the building blocks to weeding out (or building up) a suspect has to be on actual FACTS and not on these huge stretches that are usually just very slim coincidences.
For example: "I found a pair of size 10.5 wing walkers in the attic. And he lived a block away from one of the victims. He was known to spend a lot of time at Lake Berryessa. Several volumes of code making books were found in his library." Those are things you can use to start tying a suspect to the case. But things like "He made a symbol that looks like the zodiac symbol in a doodle once. And none of his writing looks like the zodiac, but his capital B and his lowercase M look a lot like Zodiac's. And the zodiac made a reference to baseball once and my suspect loved the Oakland A's."

To be brutally honest, if you took every male aged 25-35 that lived within a 100 mile radius of the crimes, you could literally tie the zodiac to a thousand men by using coincidences if you dug through their entire life. This guy went to the same college as one of the victims, plus he owned multiple cars, and he hated the police and owned a knife.

Anyway. Thank you for bringing a new suspect to the table. The constant "wait until you've read what I've read" line of reasoning is very off putting to me.

Why not just pour over the files and then come here with your list of the 10-20 best clues? That's how most people would do it.

Speaking of that.
is there a list where the 10 best "clues" are listed???

[relentlessz]

Speaking of that.
is there a list where the 10 best "clues" are listed???

I try to keep it updated with the new findings...
https://relentless1.net/zodiac/

[Simplicity]

I'm still looking here out of general curiosity though i wish to stand aside.

What i've stated before about harvey is that we only get to at look about 1% of his total documents.. certainly can highlight the aspects regarding proximity to the known and thought to be crimes of zodiac, Which to my understanding he at least matches by proximity better to all the known crimes than any other suspect.

With that said, psychological wise he displays a clear cut mischievous demeanor with all the sadness of a writer wishing to be known for something somewhere, again a better match. The relevance regarding the relationship with his mother is substantial but not important to the case at hand, it is a important aspect for it accurately displays that this man was entirely outside the realms of normal society.

For further relevance, it is a quintessential unmistakable remnant of the Zodiacs writing that the zodiac saw himself entirely outside the realms of normal society and that his actions were seen as being entirely justified to himself. We know this because of the terminology used by the Zodiac, he didn't refer to himself as "the shooter" "the vigilante" "the criminal" etc. no, he refered to himself as the murderer nothing less and nothing more.

The terminology matches harvey's own manifesto regarding murdering and unfortunately the narative i see is one where harvey sees himself as being justified to become a murderer, it's very important for harvey to label himself as one in his quasi bid to understand murder undertaken by abortionist and teens daily with out repercussions. That is the level of mindset harvey is at.

If not the Zodiac killings then which ones did he commit?

[Simplicity]

I understand it might look like there is a desire to fit harvey to the case but that's simply not true. The narrative i suggest should be taken as a "if" if he were the zodiac this is my interpretation my views as to why and that rational is easily displayed in all his documents.

I think that's the word not used nearly enough by myself "if"...

I feel it's a way of thinking that no one has had the luxury to explore with any other Z suspect and it's blowing people's minds as it's seen as being improper... it's not improper, what's improper is having a dump load of information about the main suspects and after years still having zero rational as to why they would do such crimes in such a manner. ZERO.... (maybe manson family if your into that theme)

Should start a post asking for the rational as to why any of the main suspects commited the crimes in that particular manner, it will be one sentence wonders and *crickets*

[Simplicity]

Name any main suspect and give me 1 paragraph displaying a actual tangible motive, a suspect with known proximity.

*crickets*