Zodiackillersite.com

PS - Notice how i started that post?

"Well Kjell is of interest to me..."

I didn't say, nor even imply, "Well Kjell is the Zodiac for me..."

Hi-

If you are going to solve the case based on handwriting, best to include MOH and, significantly, Ted K, whose handwriting is pretty striking, IMO.

If someone is "of interest" to you but not as Z, why are you posting on this board about him?

Mike

mike_r wrote:Hi-

If you are going to solve the case based on handwriting, best to include MOH and, significantly, Ted K, whose handwriting is pretty striking, IMO.

If someone is "of interest" to you but not as Z, why are you posting on this board about him?

Mike

Mr. Rodelli, last night it was mentioned in a chatroom that Mr. X was close friends with the witnesses family. Is that true?

It came off like the witnesses would have recognized Mr. Xvale.

BuckwheatFlowers wrote:

mike_r wrote:Hi-

If you are going to solve the case based on handwriting, best to include MOH and, significantly, Ted K, whose handwriting is pretty striking, IMO.

If someone is "of interest" to you but not as Z, why are you posting on this board about him?

Mike

Mr. Rodelli, last night it was mentioned in a chatroom that Mr. X was close friends with the witnesses family. Is that true?

It came off like the witnesses would have recognized Mr. Xvale.

I have a pending FOIA request to answer that very question. Now that Qvale is deceased, if he is the man mentioned in the FBI document, they should, and probably will, reply by sending me a copy of this document with his name un-redacted.

I sent this latest one on Nov 19, and no response yet which is a good sign. Sent one FOIA for "Lawrence Cane" not too long ago and it was back within about 5, maybe 6 weeks. Then i know it's going to be 'nothing found pertaining to your request' letter response.
The last one that was successful in getting a suspect/POI's name released took six months. So if this one is successful and it is Qvale, I should imagine it would be late Spring time.

Hi-

I beat you to that punch. The FBI said it would not do "research" and un-redact the name of any individual on a form but if you look at that document, you see from the length of the redaction of the birth dates that the man mentioned by the 8 year old was born in a month with a very long name. Like December. That would not fit X.

As for whether or not the kids knew him on the night of October 11, 1969, my money is on no. LR stated that he only met X when he did not wear glasses anymore. That was in the 1970s when he lost the glasses, grew out his hair and let his sideburns grow in. That is why LR nearly lost his lunch when he saw a photo of him with horn rimmed glasses and short hair. He asked us if we had shown him someone else's photo by mistake, LOL. AP said X was not the man in the back seat of the squad car that night, so that whole argument that used to be marshaled to destroy my credibility is irrelevant: RR and her father apparently did not view X in the car. It was rumored to me that the other brother did know the family before 1969 but that was second hand, apocryphal info. And he is not talking. I've tried...

Mike

mike_r wrote:Hi-

I beat you to that punch. The FBI said it would not do "research" and un-redact the name of any individual on a form but if you look at that document, you see from the length of the redaction of the birth dates that the man mentioned by the 8 year old was born in a month with a very long name. Like December. That would not fit X.

As for whether or not the kids knew him on the night of October 11, 1969, my money is on no. LR stated that he only met X when he did not wear glasses anymore. That was in the 1970s when he lost the glasses, grew out his hair and let his sideburns grow in. That is why LR nearly lost his lunch when he saw a photo of him with horn rimmed glasses and short hair. He asked us if we had shown him someone else's photo by mistake, LOL. AP said X was not the man in the back seat of the squad car that night, so that whole argument that used to be marshaled to destroy my credibility is irrelevant: RR and her father apparently did not view X in the car. It was rumored to me that the other brother did know the family before 1969 but that was second hand, apocryphal info. And he is not talking. I've tried...

Mike

"beat you to that punch. The FBI said it would not do "research" and un-redact the name of any individual on a form"

Well then they lied to you because I got the document back with one of the names un-redacted. Robert Hale West. I have put a link to the document the FBI sent me on this site on the News Thread and "I am back with you, and brought a suspect with me." Go have a look at it and you'll see they released the name of a previously redacted Robert Hale West.

This is the document I was referring to. The name Robert H West had been redacted since the Doc was put out publically until I asked for them to release it. They will release names etc once it's established that that person is deceased.

Well, they had a very different response to my request. I am confident that you will find that it is not X. The date box is all wrong. Should have been quite short.

Mike

mike_r wrote:Hi-

As for whether or not the kids knew him on the night of October 11, 1969, my money is on no. LR stated that he only met X when he did not wear glasses anymore. That was in the 1970s when he lost the glasses, grew out his hair and let his sideburns grow in. That is why LR nearly lost his lunch when he saw a photo of him with horn rimmed glasses and short hair. He asked us if we had shown him someone else's photo by mistake, LOL. AP said X was not the man in the back seat of the squad car that night, so that whole argument that used to be marshaled to destroy my credibility is irrelevant: RR and her father apparently did not view X in the car. It was rumored to me that the other brother did know the family before 1969 but that was second hand, apocryphal info. And he is not talking. I've tried...

Mike

Okay. Thanks.

O-Tay!