"Zodiac: Settling the Score"

Re: "Zodiac: Settling the Score"

Postby EndOfTheWorld » Mon Feb 29, 2016 1:29 am

Kim, I think you are a complete fraud. If you were indeed a detective, you know that the suspect can't be in two places at the same time. Rader was in the military in Japan, and couldn't possibly have sneaked over across the ocean to California for the four attacks and eleven mailings. I think when you made that post stating you didn't write the book for money, that was obviously a bald-faced lie. I suspect you are donating the profits from the book to your favorite charity---your personal bank account.
Posts: 236
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2015 5:14 am

Re: "Zodiac: Settling the Score"

Postby morf13 » Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:33 am

I can't say for sure who Z was, but I would think, whomever z was had to be tied to CA as an absolute bare minimum. To write a book about a suspect who you can't even connect to CA during the Z crimes is pretty lame. Again Kim, nothing personal, but we are brutally honest here, especially after a series of bad books written about this case
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 6560
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 8:48 am
Location: NJ

Re: "Zodiac: Settling the Score"

Postby Norse » Mon Feb 29, 2016 7:30 am

Kim wrote:The reason I posted the Napa Sketch and Rader together is because they are very similar.


Heh - yes. I get that. But this is a matter of principle: You've written a book, claiming that you've identified the Zodiac killer. Certain standards must be met, if you will. A certain methodology is expected.

What you opted for with the sketches isn't sound in that regard. It's a selling point of sorts, not an actually valid point to make in this context. As a former professional you know that sketches are of limited value - you know that a superficial resemblance could be entirely coincidental.

And you also know that the LB sketch depicts a person who could be irrelevant: There is no proof that the man observed by the three girls was Zodiac. The SF sketch, on the other hand, while being just as potentially useless, at the very least depicts the right subject. Yet, you choose to draw the reader's attention to the least valuable (as evidence) of the two sketches.

Just an observation - and no offense intended. As others have said, you seem like a nice person, and you've certainly been a good sport about all of this in this thread.
User avatar
Posts: 1735
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 11:50 pm


Return to Zodiac Books

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest