Very interesting post. It’s frustrating that LE has apparently failed to DNA test the alleged fake letters. Even if they deem a letter fake, attach a name to it . . . and then, who knows?

The stamps here should be more testable than the ones on the authenticated letters, since they are 30 years fresher.

Yes, for anyone who believes the Eureka card to be Zodiac, here is the last "suspected" correspondence in 2001 mimicking not only "901 Mission Street" and "94103", but also being mailed as a greetings card around Christmas/New Year with extremely similar handwriting, yet supposedly the 2001 author was completely unaware of the Eureka card mailing. Highly unlikely and extremely suggest of one sender. So somebody advocating for the Eureka card as Zodiac now has a stamp and sealed envelope only 18 years old, but obviously a sender who would be well aware of DNA too.

after discussing handwriting with some "experts" many years ago i was lead to believe copy cats always failed in the copying of the numerics
the best example i have always looked for in zodiac is the number four … he always always writes it open so it looks like a j on its side…

The difference in this situation is you cannot copycat an unreleased envelope/communication, thereby magnifying the validity of the 2001 card with respect to the Eureka card. The 2001 card effectively came first, because of the belated release of the Eureka card. When the Eureka card was released it effectively strengthened the case that this person is the same author as the 2001 card. Anyone who places the Eureka card in a list of confirmed Zodiac correspondence therefore has to include the 2001 card in this list too.

The difference in this situation is you cannot copycat an unreleased envelope/communication, thereby magnifying the validity of the 2001 card with respect to the Eureka card. The 2001 card effectively came first, because of the belated release of the Eureka card. When the Eureka card was released it effectively strengthened the case that this person is the same author as the 2001 card. Anyone who places the Eureka card in a list of confirmed Zodiac correspondence therefore has to include the 2001 card in this list too.

The question for me is what are your thoughts Richard on the validity of the cards ?

That is a really difficult question to answer Cragle. I suspect most people dismiss the 2001 card because of its mailing date, and with respect to the Eureka card all we really have is the writing on the envelope. So assessing the validity of either is little more than guesswork. I tend to consider them genuine, but only just.

I did notice an interesting connection to a San Francisco Chronicle newspaper article dated July 10th 1974 regarding the Citizen card. This newspaper article was entitled "Zodiac’s Letters to the Editor", which obviously bore a striking similarity to the 2001 envelope titled "Letters to the Editor". Both the 1974 Badlands card and 2001 card both showed a concern for the "citizens" of San Francisco. Only one word was underlined in the 2001 card – the word "never". The Badlands card also had only one word underlined – the word "ever". So we have three plausible connections regarding this newspaper article and 2001 communication. And obviously both were cards, finishing with a question mark.

Thanks for the reply Richard. It does make me wonder if this card was in repsonse to the below article from the 9th January 2001 (SFE and Not the SFC).

Now it does beg the question as to why this would rile the writer of the letter up enough to send card to the SFC. Could the line "Noboby really cares but the relatives of innocent citizens MURDER in our beloved SF" allude to a relationship of some sorts to the person quoted in the article.

Great find Cragle. I can say that almost certainly this was the trigger for the 2001 card. This article was the 9th and the card was the 10th. Can I use this in my article Cragle with attribution. This has opened so many more doors.

Could the line "Noboby really cares but the relatives of innocent citizens MURDER in our beloved SF" allude to a relationship of some sorts to the person quoted in the article? It’s certainly worth consideration.

Great find Cragle. I can say that almost certainly this was the trigger for the 2001 card. This article was the 9th and the card was the 10th. Can I use this in my article Cragle with attribution. This has opened so many more doors.

Could the line "Noboby really cares but the relatives of innocent citizens MURDER in our beloved SF" allude to a relationship of some sorts to the person quoted in the article? It’s certainly worth consideration.

No problem at all, it certainly does provide an interesting line of research.

Cheers Cragle, this story certainly has more legs.
https://www.zodiacciphers.com/zodiac-ne … 1-card-pt2

Cheers Cragle, this story certainly has more legs.
https://www.zodiacciphers.com/zodiac-ne … 1-card-pt2

Your welcome.

Guang Zhan Ouyang
Birth Date: 22 Jan 1916
Birth Place: Guangdong, Peoples Republic of China
Death Date: 7 Jan 2001
Father: Kecan Ouyang
Mother: Zhixi Hu
Last Residence: 94122, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA (Inner/Outer Sunset Districts)

A mile from Laguna Honda Hospital.

I wonder if LE would consider applying forensics to the 2001 letter (if they haven’t already).

That is a good question, because these later communications seem to be readily dismissed simply because they are so distant from the Zodiac Killer’s ‘spotlight’ years. A negativity exists around them, often solely based on their mailing date.

That is a good question, because these later communications seem to be readily dismissed simply because they are so distant from the Zodiac Killer’s ‘spotlight’ years. A negativity exists around them, often solely based on their mailing date.

There are so many hoaxes, but the handwriting comparison makes this one more convincing.