Zodiackillersite.com

Another short promo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4s6t6dJ2fwk

3 new promos released today:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73PqO3SwXfI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vz7Njh46Hyw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmTWwB9Ei-U

I knew it!

Read the "spoilers" section here if you want to know how it plays out:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-most- ... r?ref=home

"His is a cautionary tale about letting one’s desire for a particular outcome dictate the terms of an investigation..."

Truer words have never been spoken.

doranchak wrote:I knew it!

Read the "spoilers" section here if you want to know how it plays out:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-most- ... r?ref=home

For some reason, The author took down the "spoilers" section... I wonder why?

Nick Schager
Updated Mar. 02, 2020 12:56PM ET / Published Mar. 02, 2020 4:33AM ET

“It puts its primary on-screen subject under a harsh spotlight to entertaining ends—the sight of the once-confident and composed Stewart trying to defend his mistakes, and charade, is enlivening.”

I guess there has been screenings for the press? Maybe more reviews will come out before the show airs on Friday.

I do not relish watching people squirm when faced with the truth. I do not think Stewart added the Zodiac part of the story to make money.
His persistence with what he believes to be the truth, being an articulate person and having a clever story for a big book deal has made him money from the Zodiac case.

Having said that. Stewart does not seem to have enough evidence to have his father convicted for the Zodiac crimes in a court of law.

TV Guide just put up a review:

https://www.tvguide.com/news/the-most-d ... eakingnews

Ouch:

...brings a new type of grossness to the genre — one in which the audience feels shameful simply because viewing the docuseries makes us complicit in stroking the ego of its subject, Gary L. Stewart.

But it's hard to get swept up in Stewart's quest for truth simply because it is so egocentric. He argues with trolls on Zodiac Killer forums, boasting about his booked public speaking engagements. Two of his four ex-wives sadly relay the toll Stewart's obsession with his father took on their marriages. Only once in the docuseries does Stewart express sorrow for the Zodiac Killer's victims, making it clear that getting closure for the people whose loved ones died at the hands of the killer is not a driving force for him. When Stewart's adult son points out that, in a way, Stewart is lucky that he was abandoned by Van Best and instead raised in a loving, adoptive family, Stewart seems unmoved, saying nothing.

...the FX series eventually challenges Stewart's claims in its final and best episode

Gary Stewart gives a video interview with Chedder regarding the new FX docu-series....

https://cheddar.com/media/a-new-docuser ... Skd048Amhs

The woman in the FX Docu-series who says "this is only picture we have of Gary's father and it is a mugshot".

She is the Best family historian named Hattie Best Polk.

Interview with her at this link regarding the FX Docu-series

https://www.themountaineer.com/life/zod ... 42471.html

Thanks for that. Was wondering who she was.

Hi,

Great! Wake me up when the last episode airs!

I don't think this type of public humiliation/ass kicking could ever happen to me because all of my evidence, whether I am right or wrong about KQ being Z, has been thoroughly vetted for years by both amateurs and former or (at the time they viewed it) current LE, is available to the public through my book, and is nearly completely and exhaustively documented. IF I am wrong, I was (and many others were) simply duped by circumstantial and interview (i.e., with KQ--all of his face to face 2006 lies) evidence that is infinitely stronger than what flimsy evidence Stewart has amassed. I did 100% honest research and will hold my head high no matter what the outcome is of the case. I don't think Stewart can say that after his handwriting and reverse bloody fingerprint evidence was dispelled (and Wakshull even apologized to me and admitted I was right and he was wrong!) and he just stayed the course without seeming to blink.

What is perplexing to me is that most people who read my book say I've solved the case. However, there are some people who read the same evidence and call me a nut case and not even close to a solution. Hard to reconcile those two points of view. And then, of course, there are the people who refuse to read my book but still feel entitled to critique it...