Zodiackillersite.com

Ages ago I asked my wife, who knows Pitman shorthand, what the symbol at the bottom of the Riverside "Bates had to die there will be more" letters said.
She told me they don't mean anything and to stop obsessing.

I still am though - and I really quite like this explanation not just of the possible derivation of that signature. (This web site doesn't actually "parse" it for us, but it gives us the clues we need).
It also may well shed some light on the whole of the mans writing style, in my humble opinion. It didn't make me shout "Eureka", but it nearly did.
Shorthand (phonetic) -> Letter.

http://crack-proof.com/zodiac-killer/spelling/

You've seen it already?
Thoughts?
Sounds a bit two-stage doesn't it? Makes me wonder about the 340.

The circumstantial evidence is confirmed by the Zodiac himself in an extraordinary way: he uses Gregg outlines to claim not one but two victims… and he claims them by name.

What does this refer to? Did I miss it in the article itself?

Anyway - this is very interesting stuff (thanks for the heads-up, smithy!) and much of what is said here seems very plausible to me.

The "little list" comments are of particular interest to me. For some time now I've been of the opinion that the Mikado quotes are significant, not because of the content but because Z's mistakes here make no sense whatsoever as an attempt to come across as illiterate (or anything of the sort):

All children who are up in dates and implore you with im platt.

All people who eat pepermint and phomphit in your face,

And that nice impriest...

How do we explain these? It's nonsense - the man hasn't grasped what is being said, pure and simple. As the article suggests - he's out of his depth. Genuinely so - that is what I believe. And if this is correct - it says a great a deal.

...and just to add a few comments:

I've never believed that Z was simply trying to fool his pursuers into thinking he was illiterate. If that's what he was doing, he wasn't half as intelligent as some think. A genuinely illiterate (there are degrees of illiteracy, of course, but someone who genuinely struggles to express himself in writing - let's put it like that) person usually has a hard time making himself understood - there will be, as the article points out, "gaps" in the very communication. None such are to be found in Z's missives - his meaning is crystal clear.

I don't think he was dyslexic either. Dyslexics often struggle with the same thing (as mentioned above), i.e. making themselves clear - they tend not to misspell words as much as involuntarily getting their letters mixed up, which may lead to "vctimis" as much as "victoms".

Norse-

As smithy found long ago, Z's version was VERY LIKELY based on a phonetic hearing of the Groucho Marx version. See here:

http://zodiackillertruth.forumchitchat. ... on-5093740

Zodiac: All children who are up in dates and implore you with im platt.
G.Marx: And all children who are up in dates and floor you with 'em flat,

Zodiac: All people who eat pepermint and phomphit in your face,
G.Marx: And the people who eat peppermint and puff it in your face,

EDIT: Doranchak has already done a full comparison, here: http://www.zodiackillerciphers.com/?p=86

-glurk

Thanks, glurk - yes, I know about the Groucho version and I agree that it's very likely this was the version Z listened to.

My main interest is what he does when transcribing the lyrics: In his rendering the words in question aren't misspelled - they are pure gibberish. It would seem that he hasn't understood what the writer (or rather singer) is saying. Regarded as an attempt to fake illiteracy, this is too elaborate to be believable. It comes across as genuine, in short - as an honest mistake, if you will. And that is significant, I think.

To clarify: I'm not pointing out a discrepancy between the standard version and Groucho's version. What I'm getting at is that Z seemingly doesn't understand what Groucho is singing - which means that certain phrases end up as pure nonsense when he writes them down.

And the latter is interesting enough in itself. It's a common enough phenomenon to mishear lyrics in a song - but that normally means that you think the singer says B (a meaningful word or sentence) when in fact he or she says A (a different meaningful word or sentence). This is not what Z is up to, however. He mistakes "nisi prius nuisance" (a meaningful, albeit pretty obscure sentence) for "impriest" (which doesn't mean anything as far as I know).

Same thing with "floor you with 'em flat" which becomes the nonsensical "implore you with im platt".

So, unless Z attaches a particular meaning to "impriest" or "im platt", what he's doing is to transcribe words whose meaning - in fact - escapes him. It's quite odd, actually. He could have left out the parts he didn't understand. Anyway, before I start to ramble on endlessly here, the point would be that as an attempt at faking illiteracy these particular "misspellings" don't fit the bill at all. Not for me - not on any level. And if he isn't faking it here - well, perhaps he isn't faking it at all.

Norse wrote:Same thing with "floor you with 'em flat" which becomes the nonsensical "implore you with im platt".

So, unless Z attaches a particular meaning to "impriest" or "im platt", what he's doing is to transcribe words whose meaning - in fact - escapes him. It's quite odd, actually.

This is very interesting. I've been stuck on "impriest" and "im platt" for years, thinking that they could be the string that unravels the mystery of Z. After reading through this, it is pretty conclusive that this is just phonetic misrepresentation from the Groucho version. Great analyses, everyone!

great discussion by everyone and important in my humble opinion because anything that eliminates "clues" works for me as well as anything that binds them together. knowing that he likely misinterpreted the groucho mikado version eliminates the idea that he was giving us clues in his representation which closes a road of theories to allow everyone to focus on better ideas. good stuff.

Norse - the "claimed names" bit is on the next page of the web site from the one we're talking about.... here:
http://crack-proof.com/zodiac-killer/li ... t-victims/
I've deleted two posts I made on this thread while I'm reading it and thinking about it!
Is it real or a little bit of pareidolia? Hmm. Good and interesting theories can be stretched too far I think. Or maybe not. Still reading.,

Hm. Seems like well argued points to me, not being an expert on shorthand - at all.

I'd be interested to hear if anyone can think of a different (obvious or less obvious) explanation for these "doodles". They look like a "2" and an inverted "2" at first glance. Could they have been written on their respective pages prior to Z using said pages for his letter?

Norse wrote:Hm. Seems like well argued points to me, not being an expert on shorthand - at all.

I'd be interested to hear if anyone can think of a different (obvious or less obvious) explanation for these "doodles". They look like a "2" and an inverted "2" at first glance. Could they have been written on their respective pages prior to Z using said pages for his letter?

his posts seem to be well researched and thoughtfully laid out although the shorthand theory still suffers from the fact the author acknowledges several times - shorthand is contextual, it only has to make sense to the writer. thus trying to determine which character is represented becomes a guessing game.