X=Z? Pros and Cons

[themysterymachine]

I am really glad you are chiming in here, Mike, and I am glad that there is a consensus here about what approaches to take or that we have had some of the same ideas.

And I have to say, if I haven't made it clear, that I think Richard Walter is a freaking genius, and it is for this reason that I am turning what I thought I knew about the whole thing and leaving it behind. I saw somewhere- it may have been on this forum- where you had written your criticism of others' attempts at profiling- treating the art as simply some sort of opinion, with people chiming in saying, "well, my profile is....." as if they were sharing recipe cards. I thought your comments on that right on the money.

I always had a feeling of a blank spot- even in the moments that I was SURE it was ALA. I have always had the feeling that Z was bigger than a profile, more ornery, harder to place. He wasn't out of control. I always thought it ironic that his most pleading letter, to Belli, was written so NEATLY. He was monkeying with Belli. You can't blame him. They both loved their media attention. A match made in heaven.

I agree with Norse- you should write a book. And I am horribly remiss in calling this suspect KJ. Please forgive.
Also glad to hear that someone else feels the same about the DNA.

I have gotten just about every book I could find at the library on Norwegian. I know its a horrible way to go about it, perhaps, cherrypicking and whatnot, but one has to TRY. I have always been fascinated with languages anyway so at least I will learn a bit of Norse in the process.
And thanks so much for the info, there, Norse- I can just smell the brains on this thread. I love it. This is why I am here.

Now- what about the brother? Do you think that KQ operated on his own?
ANd I think it is extremely telling, regardless of whether KQ is Z or not, that the crimes stopped after Stine. The CANONICAL, known murders, at least. I think this is terribly revealing, and terribly important. SOMETHING happened after that to make him stop. Now, when I say stop, I don't perhaps mean that he stopped killing. But I think the identity of Z was retired after this crime. Regardless of any letters (which were just sort of blowing on the embers at that point) I think its a reasonable assumption that Stine was the last Z killing.
And you have to wonder why. He was either close to being caught, got his wings singed, so to speak, or was arrested. But SOMETHING happened, something pivotal. Just my opinion, but I think it does stand to reason. And perhaps he knew this, which was why he took the shirt. Something to parcel out in dribs and drabs, something to savor. Either he knew it was his last killing or it became that because the cops got too close. Or for any variety of reasons.

Its also interesting to note that the most savage crimes in history were committed by the upper classes, prior to the industrial age. It seemed more the province of those who had the time and the power to snare their victims, the leisure time to consider these things. Which is interesting and probably counter-intuitive to our modern minds, but true nonetheless. Whether its a matter of the whole "hierarchy of needs" or what, but the most baroque crimes were committed by the upper classes. Til the modern era. Which makes KQ seem almost quaint, almost classical, if indeed he committed these crimes.

It occurred to me today (what with the news telling us that Kominski is the Ripper, WOW, I'll wait on the final verdict before I throw a party) that the Ripper's canonical murders were also five. I am sure that is a coincidence, but being that it is obvious that Z got some inspiration from the Ripper, he would have chuckled to himself about that.

[mike_r]

Hi MM-

If you read The Murder Room, Walter is the shining light of the Vidocq Society. Basically at their meetings, other members will offer opinions and then at the end they all look at Walter and say, "Now what do you think?" To have his endorsement for my work is incredible but it seems to carry little weight on boards like these, as people try to do their own profiling even though they have absolutely zero credentials for doing so.

I wonder if they also try to operate on people with no training as a surgeon.

As far as I know, no other suspect is endorsed by anyone who has solved even one murder in their lives, let alone someone of Walter's track record.

It is hard to say if anyone else from the family is involved. I can make cases for a couple of the brothers, one of whom would have known drafting. Certainly, if Z had a partner, it would be safer if that partner were from his own family. Ever heard of "folie a deux?"

You sound like you may have already read Elliot Leyton's "Hunting Humans." He has a section at the end of his book that talks about the fact that in the Middle Ages serial killers came from the upper classes.

I missed the news about the JTR case. Who is saying that Kosminski was definitely the guy and what is their evidence?

Mike

[AK Wilks]

The news in the Ripper case is that a shawl found near the body of a victim has semen stains that match mtDNA of a Kosminski descendant. So even if the shawl was hers it only shows Kosminski was a client not a killer. And aside from possible contamination over 120 (!) years mtDNA will match to 2-5% of the population.

[snooter]

did X have a boat and what was it name if he did?..i never knew X was into water skiing..no doubt he lied about ever being at LB with the proximity of his his ranch to LB..

mike you explain your reason for X as good as AK wilkes does for TK..my big issue with X is his age..do you think K johns was so traumitized that in her mind Z appeared younger?..of course that is if KJ rode with Z..i dunno..X to me just seems like one must entertain Z conspiracy theories (multiple Z)..X age is just concerning to me is all but I do think he is worthy of poi discussion..i am also not much into profiles of killers as it is subjective (at best educated guess)...after they are caught i find it of great interest to watch interviews and learn whats in there mind..we shall never know what got Z off or what motivations were in his mind and thats just the fact (beyond some really good guess that Z was a prick and enjoyed messing with people)..just my take there-god speed

[mike_r]

Hi-

One thing about KQ that was consistent is that he always looked younger than his years throughout his life.

Mike

[mike_r]

Hi-

I was skeptical about profiling myself until Walter said that Z was a power-assertive killer and he started naming the traits that fall under that umbrella. Aloofness, condescension, superiority, the need to tell someone about his crimes, etc. All of them fit precisely with what people had been saying about z for years. The profile nails Z trait for trait.

Mike

[duckking2001]

To have his endorsement for my work is incredible but it seems to carry little weight on boards like these, as people try to do their own profiling even though they have absolutely zero credentials for doing so.

Well hey, this is supposed to be cons as well as pros, right? And this is not meant in offense, I think you are an honest person and a good researcher; it's just my feelings and might give you insight into why people have been perhaps reluctant to accept that KQ is Zodiac.

It just can't be ignored that Walter endorsed YOUR suspect. Would you have accepted it if he endorsed someone else's? I believe that you would have and you would be upfront about it. But nonetheless he told you what you wanted to hear and confirmed what you had already thought before talking to him. There are a lot of people who are positive their suspect is the right one and they simply cannot be objective about it. That doesn't sit well with the skeptical and suspicious.

The other thing that comes to mind is that John Douglas in his book The Cases That Haunt us pretty much endorsed ALA as the best suspect. He also was honest that he did not work on the case and did not have all the info that investigators possessed, and it seems like he got most his info from Graysmith's book. He's also a respected and professional profiler, so can I really say that I disagree with him? Based on your idea about professionalism, I can't. On the other hand I do because I'm pretty sure that I know more about the Zodiac case than he does. That's no boast, everyone here probably does simply because we have studied it so much as a specialty, which is not how someone involved in LE would. They have other things to deal with.

An opinion is only as good as what it is based on, and none of us besides you have sat down with Richard Walter so we don't really know everything that went through his head to come to the conclusion he did.

Now we've been talking about this Jack the Ripper DNA. It seems like pretty much everyone on here is skeptical about it, and that is because we don't believe everything that we hear in a book. You see what I'm getting at? Ultimately the opinion of LE is the one that I trust the most and I remain skeptical until they publicly reveal their support for a suspect in any cold case.

[themysterymachine]

Hi MM-

If you read The Murder Room, Walter is the shining light of the Vidocq Society. Basically at their meetings, other members will offer opinions and then at the end they all look at Walter and say, "Now what do you think?" To have his endorsement for my work is incredible but it seems to carry little weight on boards like these, as people try to do their own profiling even though they have absolutely zero credentials for doing so.

I wonder if they also try to operate on people with no training as a surgeon.

As far as I know, no other suspect is endorsed by anyone who has solved even one murder in their lives, let alone someone of Walter's track record.

It is hard to say if anyone else from the family is involved. I can make cases for a couple of the brothers, one of whom would have known drafting. Certainly, if Z had a partner, it would be safer if that partner were from his own family. Ever heard of "folie a deux?"

You sound like you may have already read Elliot Leyton's "Hunting Humans." He has a section at the end of his book that talks about the fact that in the Middle Ages serial killers came from the upper classes.

I missed the news about the JTR case. Who is saying that Kosminski was definitely the guy and what is their evidence?

Mike

Yep, I read "The Murder Room". AMAZING. I think the last true crime book that I was absorbed in to the point that I actually had to force myself to slow down was "Beyond Belief" by Emlyn WIlliams. Its right there neck and neck. One of the best books I have ever read, period. Definitely know about "folie a deux" which describes Brady and Hindley (the subject of "BB" for those who don't know) to a T. I actually corresponded with Ian Brady for about 6-7 letters when I was younger, trying to get to the bottom of that whole "folie" thing. Of course he never gives up his secrets. And Hindley wouldn't answer either.

I think armchair detectives like myself want to feel a part of the process, but its really not much of a profile to say "white male, 20-35, probably a local" etc. That's painting with a mighty big brush.

And I understand where Duckking is coming from as well. Skepticism is healthy. I am a big fan of it myself. The tunnel vision that was Graysmith's biggest problem can only hinder anyone trying to solve anything. On the other hand I don't think this can be treated like a typical criminal case. When you have such a variety of prismatic evidence, you can't really depend on where that evidence will lead you, as it can lead you in so many directions. I mean, the BEST evidence I think we have is the letters. It is the ONLY thing that we KNOW he handled, its provenance is assured (apart from the bindings at LB and the bullets themselves). He left us nothing else that we can unquestionably state is Z's. Its fine if you have DNA under someone's fingernails, you find a weapon and you need to compare the ballistics, classical things that most crimes are readily solved with. Sure, follow the evidence. But in this case I think it is understandable that you might have to dig up suspects and see what fits- the reverse of the classical way of doing things. I've been looking at the Alphabet Bomber myself since he was fond of ciphers and messing with the police and writing to the media.

I have seen photos of KQ- couldn't believe he was in his nineties when he died.


I know your website is down- do you have Walter's more complete profile? I would love to hear more of his insights.

[joedetective]

You sound like you may have already read Elliot Leyton's "Hunting Humans." He has a section at the end of his book that talks about the fact that in the Middle Ages serial killers came from the upper classes.

Mike

So weird to hear somone mention an author that literally lives just down the street from me. I took a Criminology course from him many years ago and wasn't impressed. Even he admits that now profilers have to rewrite the books because of the powerful and affluent new serial killers. You can't just assume anymore that a serial killer is middle or lower class.

[AK Wilks]

I agree that Mr. X did look incredibly younger than his actual age, though I still have a problem with a suspect who was 50 years old in 1969. Yes he may have looked 40 to 45, but it is still difficult to explain the majority of Z age descriptions being in the 25 to 35 bracket.

I can confirm much of what Mike R said about the unreliability of the so called DNA evidence SFPD had, and when I spoke to CCCSD Crime Lab Chief Paul Holes he told me he thought Mike R was one of the best informed of the Z researchers he had been contacted by. And I certainly appreciate Mike's efforts in the case, including his recent work on the latest "Daddy was the Zodiac" hoax.

Given his health and youthful appearance, I might temporarily back burner the concern about his age, but his accent is another matter. This thread is called pros and cons remember. In this bank commercial done around 40 years after the Z crimes, he has a distinct and pronounced foreign accent. Born and raised in Norway, I would have to imagine his accent in 1969 would have been even heavier. Yet Hartnell and the police operator never said anything to suggest a foreign accent of any kind. Does Mike or anyone have audio or video of him in the 1960's or 1970's, to confirm or disprove that his accent was heavier than in this recent video? Even if it was the same as in this recent video, none of the Z earwitnesses reported anything like it. That negative should be considered, along with the positive profiling and location info. Every suspect and POI that has positive attributes for being Z also has some negatives.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8RfDK3tUpY