Zodiackillersite.com

duckking2001 wrote:wow. I can't imagine reading Zodiac:Unmasked without reading Zodiac first. Aside from the content itself, I found it to be really hard to follow because it jumps around all over the place in the timeline, which is a problem that Graysmith seems to have in his other books as well. Zodiac had a better editor.

At this point I don't know if I would recommend the book to someone who is knowledgeable about the case already, unless you just want to hear things from Graysmith's POV. There probably won't be much in there you don't know about as it is.

At the very least I went into reading Unmasked knowing that much of it was exaggerated. The same will go for reading the "Yellow Book." As someone mentioned above, I feel that I want to experience these books first hand instead of hearing about them - if that makes any sense. I've been told there are falsehoods, but I want to see them for myself.

Shiznats wrote:I feel that I want to experience these books first hand instead of hearing about them - if that makes any sense. I've been told there are falsehoods, but I want to see them for myself.

It does make sense. Same reason I bought them. There may be 'inaccuracies' but with people referencing page this or page that from them it didn't make sense not to own them.

Is there a good list of the falsehoods posted somewhere? The only one I'm aware of is Butterfield's analysis: http://www.zodiackillerfacts.com/graysmith.htm

I wish someone would re-edit the "Yellow Book" with the actual names instead of "Robert Hall Starr," etc...

It makes me schizophrenic to try to keep it all straight, LOL.

-glurk

doranchak wrote:Is there a good list of the falsehoods posted somewhere? The only one I'm aware of is Butterfield's analysis: http://www.zodiackillerfacts.com/graysmith.htm

Not sure. Was there ever a thread on it here or on the old forum?

glurk wrote:I wish someone would re-edit the "Yellow Book" with the actual names instead of "Robert Hall Starr," etc...

It makes me schizophrenic to try to keep it all straight, LOL.

-glurk

I know that you mean Yogi Bears.

Here are some:

http://zodiackiller.fr.yuku.com/topic/1 ... accuracies

Ed Neil made a list further into this thread:

http://www.zodiackiller.com/discus/mess ... 1171011822

Gee...ya think some people had a beef with Graysmith?

Funny thing, right or wrong, and no matter how much of it was bs....most of us would have never heard of Zodiac had that first book not been written. It doesn't make it's falsities ok, but it has made others delve further into this case to seek out facts--and yet still, after all these years, we still find out new facts are not facts at all.

Let me just quote BugsMoran's post at Tom's:

BugsMoran wrote:

"Tracer, I see your point but I think it's a matter of fine lines. I have spent my entire working career in the acadimcal world and I have seen many legitmate scholars pull-out all of the stops when they're tring to prove their thesis statements. Many of them are dangerous foes when they're questioned about their methods. I certainly respect your opinion.

Once a researcher feels so strongly about a theory or a conclusion they may take any short-cut or incredible leaps in order to get other people to get to the same point. When people like Graysmith and Cornwell turn their work into a crusade it becomes vendetta rather than a balanced look.
Once Sam was cleared via the DNA Tom Voight had enough emotional detachment to move on.

What if your research, evidence or proof ponts in another direction? A strong commitment to one answer will lead many (if not most but not all) researchers to ignore, explain away or play with the "facts'.

In my field of study Noam Chomsky is the big guru and he is notorious for finding examples that fits nicely into his theory while simply disregarding the rest.

If Graysmith was utterly convinced ALA was the Zodiac (and he was) and he spent 20 or 30 years of his life proving it (which he did) then the temptation would be their to prove his case at all cost. Tracers, you can do a simple experient: pick-out a few books and keep an eye open for the writer's personal prejudices. Get 2 books on Reagan: one who liked him and one who didn't. See how they put their different spins on the same man."

http://zodiackiller.fr.yuku.com/topic/1 ... dNaaflVhBd (thx doranchak)

I also wonder if it wasn't all Graysmith's choice to push ALA so heavily. For a book about a cold case I imagine a publisher is going to want a new angle...aka. a new suspect. Almost every Zodiac book has been about pushing a suspect. I don't think it's just because that is what the author really believed in. Also it's going to be a big let down to have it turn out not to be the guy in the end. No one wants to hear that. That's what many people were unhappy about with the ending in Fincher's Zodiac.

PS. those ZK links have some good stuff. I had no idea until now that a bunch of stuff in Graysmith came from the fictional Zodiac Killer movie.

duckking2001 wrote:I also wonder if it wasn't all Graysmith's choice to push ALA so heavily. For a book about a cold case I imagine a publisher is going to want a new angle...aka. a new suspect. Almost every Zodiac book has been about pushing a suspect. I don't think it's just because that is what the author really believed in. Also it's going to be a big let down to have it turn out not to be the guy in the end. No one wants to hear that. That's what many people were unhappy about with the ending in Fincher's Zodiac.

I've spoken to Mike Butterfield from time to time, and like him or hate him, he has often said that to get a book published, you HAVE TO name a suspect. No one wants to read facts, or details, etc... Readers WANT a suspect. Sorry state of affairs, IMO.

-glurk

Not to take a stab at Mike B., but I might take the word of an actual author. It's sort of like people who give financial advise when they themselves struggle to pay their bills.

Besides, Graysmith threw out a few suspects--none of which were even named. So...?

The thing is, for me, Allen wasn't pushed so much in Zodiac. There were others in that book that caught my fancy a bit more. In ZU Allen was shoved down our throats to the point I gagged on several occasions.